NC0003760_Permit (Issuance)_20030310

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING 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:
March 10, 2003
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reYerse side

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
March 10, 2003
Mr. L.H. Hamilton
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 800
Kinston, North Carolina 28502
NCDENR
Subject: NPDES Permit NC0003760
Kinston Dacron® Plant
Lenoir County
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
In accordance with your application for permit renewal, received on July 30, 1998, and updated on
June 29, 1999, the Division is forwarding herewith the subject NPDES permit for the Kinston
Dacron® Plant. This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute
143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994.
The Division received two comments during the public review period and has made the following
changes as the result of those comments:
• Facility Description. Mr. James Proctor of DuPont - Kinston noted that the permit's
description of the treatment facility was inaccurate. The final permit includes the corrections
Mr. Proctor suggested.
• OCPSF Limits, Condition A.(2.). Ms. Dee Stewart of EPA Region 4 noted that the Monthly
Average and Daily Maximum permit values for the OCPSF parameters were reversed in the
draft permit. This is corrected in the final permit.
In addition, the final permit includes the following changes:
• The reporting requirements for Outfall 001 have been revised to include Total Monthly Flow,
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), and Nitrate -Nitrate Nitrogen as monitoring parameters. These
parameters are already determined in the course of monitoring Total Nitrogen loads; the
permit simply requires that these interim results be reported on the facility's Discharge
Monitoring Reports as well. The Division is adding same parameters to all NPDES permits in
the Neuse River Basin to better enable us to verify the cumulative nitrogen discharge by the
point source facilities.
• The draft permit included two special conditions regarding Total Nitrogen. These conditions
are in the process of being updated, so the permit also included a re -opener clause allowing
the Division to update them at a later date. The final permit includes an updated version of
these conditions.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer On the Internet at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES

Kinston Dacron® Plant
NPDES Permit No. NC0003760
If any parts, measurement frequencies, or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within
thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition,
conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of
Administrative Hearings, Post Office Drawer 27447, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7447. Unless
such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding.
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division of Water
Quality. Part II, E.4., addresses the requirements to be followed in case of change in ownership or
control of this discharge. The Division of Water Quality may require modification or revocation and
reissuance of the permit.
This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by
the Division of Water Quality, the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act, or
any other federal or local governmental permit.
If you have any questions concerning the draft permit or the other requirements for your facility,
please call me at [phone], extension 541.
Sincerely,
C;a621/A---
an W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosures: NPDES Permit No. NC0003760
cc: Mr. James Proctor, Environmental Manager, DuPont - Kinston
Roosevelt Childress, EPA Region 4
Washington Regional Office / Water Quality Section
Point Source Compliance Enforcement Unit
Aquatic Toxicity Unit
NPDES Files
Central Files

•
Permit No. NC0003760
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Kinston Dacron® Plant
on NC Highway 11
northeast of Kinston
Lenoir County
to receiving waters designated as Neuse River in the Neuse River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts
I, II, III, and IV hereof.
The permit shall become effective April 1, 2003
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on December 31, 2007
Signed this day March 10, 2003
41e-Z
Itei
le\i6n W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management
Commission

,r'
Permit No. NC0003760
f
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate the existing 3.6 MGD wastewater treatment facility located on NC Highway 11,
northeast of Kinston, in Lenoir County; and consisting of:
• influent catch basin with "Muffin Monster" solids grinder,
• two (2) - one million gallon retention ponds;
• one (1) - 3.6 million gallon aeration basin with two (2) 45HP aerators and thirteen (13) 25HP
floating aerators,
• two (2) - 90 ft. diameter secondary clarifiers,
• two (2) sludge return lift stations,
• chlorine contact basin (operation optional),
• effluent flow measurement with recorder,
• six (6) sand drying beds; and
2. Discharge from said treatment facility through an effluent diffuser into the Neuse River (Outfall
001), and discharge into an unnamed tributary to the Neuse River (Outfall 002) and into Beaverdam
Branch (Outfall 003), all of which are Class C NSW waters in the Neuse River Basin, at the locations
specified on the attached map.

Sr
Discharge Point
Outfall 003
Discharge Point
Outfall 002
O , • *-
SF ter- . vw
.a
.'- -a• — -t' -`a-a
•
•
ter. -�r.. - -w.
,
-- ' `•- - .
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Discharge Point
Outfall 001
Lat. 35° 19' 29"
Long. 77° 27' 56"
•� -.D.— _ _ esti. - - -.I:1 ., .
.44
-`t- .---..r ;..-: '` -r: L G° f 4
VICINITY MAP
N
SCALE
1:24,000
(1" = 2000')
DuPont Fibers - Kinston NC0003760
DuPont Wastewater Treatment Plant
Receiving Stream: Neuse River
Stream Classification: C NSW
River Basin: Neuse
Sub -Basin #: 03-04-05

Permit No. NC0003760
4
6
A.(1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
— Outfall 001
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee shall be authorized to discharge treated process and sanitary wastewaters, remediated
groundwater, and non -contact cooling water from Outfall 001 subject to the effluent limitations and
monitoring requirements below and in Condition A.(2.) of this permit:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Parameter
Units
Parameter
Code
Monthly Daily
Average Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location t11
Flow
MGD
5ooso
3.6
Continuous
Recording
E
Total Monthly Flow
MG
Monitor & Report
Monthly
Calculated
E
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
lb/day
00310
193.8 497.3
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Suspended Solids
lb/day
00530
337.1 1,057.9
Weekly
Composite
E
TKN
mg/L
00625
Monitor & Report
Weekly
Composite
E
NO2-N + NO3-N
mg/L
00630
Monitor & Report
Weekly
Composite
E
TN (2)
mg/L
00600
Monitor & Report
Weekly
Composite
E
TN Load (3)
Ib/mo
lb/yr
Monitor & Report
35,193
Monthly
Annually
Calculated
Calculated
E
E
Total Phosphorus (4)
mg/L
00655
2.0 (quarterly average)
Weekly
Composite
E
pH
S.U.
Shall be within the range of 6.0 to
9.0 standard units at all times
Weekly
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
#/100
mL
31616
Weekly
Grab
E, U, D (5)
Temperature
°C
o0o10
Weekly
Grab
E, U, D (5)
Dissolved Oxygen
mg/L
00300
See Footnote (6)
Weekly
Grab
51, U, D (5)
7 NH3-N
mg/L
00610
Monthly
Composite
E
Chromium
ug/L
01034
Quarterly
Composite
E
Copper
ug/L
01042
Quarterly
Composite
E
Lead
ug/L
most
Quarterly
Composite
E
Nickel
ug/L
00940
Quarterly
Composite
E
Zinc
ug/L
01092
Quarterly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity
P/F
TGP38
See Footnote (7)
Quarterly
Composite
E
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Footnotes:
1) Sample locations: I - Influent, E — Effluent, S1 - Chlorine contact chamber or other approved location, U —
Upstream, 100 yard above outfall, D — Downstream,1 mile below outfall.
2) For a given wastewater sample, TN = TKN + NO3-N + NO2-N, where TN is Total Nitrogen, TKN is Total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and NO3-N and NO2-N are Nitrate and Nitrite Nitrogen, respectively.
3) TN Load is the mass quantity of TN discharged in a given period of time.'See Special Condition A.(4.),
Calculation of Total Nitrogen Loads. The annual TN Load limit shall become effective with the calendar year
beginning on January 1, 2003. Compliance with the limit shall be determined in accordance with Special
Condition A.(5.) bf this permit, Annual Limits for Total Nitrogen.
4) The quarterly average for total phosphorus shall be the average of composite samples collected weekly during
the calendar quarter (January -March, April -June, July -September, October -December).
5) Stream samples shall be taken three times per week during the months of June, July, August and September, and
once per week during the remaining months of the year.
6) The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 2.5 mg/L at the sampling point.
7) Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 1.9%; January, April, July, and October; see Condition A.(7.), Chronic
Toxicity Permit Limit.
Part I, Page 1 of 8

Permit No. NC0003760
A.(2.) ADDITIONAL EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
- Outfall 001
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee shall be authorized to discharge treated process and sanitary wastewaters, remediated
groundwater, and non -contact cooling water from Outfall 001 subject to the effluent limitations and
monitoring requirements below and in Condition A.(1.) of this permit:
PARAMETER
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Methyl Chloride
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Acrylonitrile
Anthracene
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
2-Chlorophenol
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethylene
1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene
2,4-Dichlorophenol
1,2-Dichloropropane
1,3-Dichloropropylene
Diethyl phthalate
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Dimethyl phthalate
4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachloroethane
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
2-Nitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Monthly Daily Daily
Average Maximum Maximum
(Ibs/day) (ibs/day) (ug/L)
0.868
0.228
0.725
2.352
0.481
1.602
0.185
0.185
0.809
0.185
0.312
0.152
0.126
0.877
0.177
0.261
0.649
0.261
0.126
0.185
0.573
0.135
0.177
0.329
1.290
0.245
0.683
0.152
0.160
0.658
0.599
0.953
2.150
0.270
0.211
0.185
0.169
0.177
0.337
0.185
0.228
0.346
0.607
0.185
0.126
0.211
0.497
0.497
2.040
0.497
1.147
0.320
0.236
2.260
0.388
0.826
1.374
0.371
0.236
0.497
1.779
0.211
0.455
0.944
1.939
0.371
1.712
0.304
0.396
2.336
1.037
2.403
5.405
0.911
0.573
0.497
0.2097
0.413
0.455
0.750
0.497
0.573
0.582
1.046
0.497
0.219
0.565
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Measurement Sample Sample
Frequency (2) Type Location (1)
Quarterly Grab E
Quarterly Grab E
Quarterly Grab E
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Annually
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Part I,Page 2of8

Permit No. NC0003760
PARAMETER
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
(Ibs/day)
Daily
Maximum
(Ibs/day)
Daily
Maximum
(ug/L)
Measurement
Frequency (2)
Sample
Type
Sample
Location (1)
Tetrachloroethylene
0.185
0.472
Annually
Grab
E
Toluene
0.219
0.675
Annually
Grab
E
Total Chromium
9.359
23.356
Annually
Grab
E
Total Copper
362.1
Annually
Grab
E
Total Cyanide
3.541
258.7
Annually
Grab
E
Total Lead
2.698
5.818
Annually
Grab
E
Total Nickel
14.250
33.558
Annually
Grab
E
Total Zinc
8.853
22.007
Annually
Grab
E
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
0.573
1.180
Annually
Grab
E
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
0.177
0.455
Annually
Grab
E
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
0.177
0.455
Annually
Grab
E
Trichloroethylene
0.177
0.455
Annually
Grab
E
Vinyl Chloride
0.877
2.260
Annually
Grab
E
Total PAHs (2)
8.44 (3)
Annually
Calculated
E
Benzo(a)anthracene
0.185
Annually
Grab
E
3,4-Benzofluoranthene
0.194
0.514
Annually
Grab
E
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
0.185
Annually
Grab
E
Benzo(a)pyrene
0.194
Annually
Grab
E
Chrysene
Annually
Grab
E
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Annually
Grab
E
Indeno(1,2,3-ed)pyrene
Annually
Grab
E
Footnotes:
1) Sample location: E - Effluent
2) In the event that the analysis for any of these parameters equals or exceeds its Practical Quantitation Limit, the
monitoring frequency for that parameter shall immediately increase to once per quarter. When 12 consecutive
quarterly samples using appropriate laboratory methods do not detect the parameter, the monitoring frequency
for that parameter shall immediately return to once per year. Also see Footnote (3).
3) Total PAHs are comprised of Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, 3,4-Benzofluoranthene,
Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Chrysene, Dibenz (a,h) anthracene, and Indeno (1,2,3-ed) pyrene. The sum of
concentrations of these parameters shall not exceed the stated Total PAH limit. In the event that the monitoring
frequency for any of these parameters changes per Footnote (2), the change shall apply to all of the Total PAH
parameters.
Part I, Page 3 of 8

Permit No. NC0003760
A.(3.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
— Outfall 002
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee shall be authorized to discharge non -contact cooling water, steam condensate, and stormwater
runoff from Outfall 002 subject to the following effluent limitations and monitoring requirements:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Parameter Units Parameter
Monthly Daily
Average Maximum
Measurement Sample Sample
Frequency Type Location t�}
Flow MGD 50050
Monthly Instantaneous E
pH S.U. ooa�
Shall be within the range of 6.0 to
9.0 standard units at all times
Weekly Grab E
Temperature °C o0010
See Footnote (2)
Monthly Grab E
Total Residual Chlorine ug/L 50060
17.0 (3)
Monthly - Grab E
Total Cadmium ug/L 01027
2.0
Monthly Composite E
Total Chromium ug/L 01034
50.0
Monthly Composite E
Total Copper ug/L 01042
Monthly Composite E
Total Lead ug/L omos,.
25.0
Monthly Composite E
Total Mercury ug/L 71900
0.012
Monthly Composite E
Total Nickel ug/L 01067
88.0
Monthly Composite E
Total Selenium ug/L 01147
5.0
Monthly Composite E
Total Silver ug/L omon
Monthly Composite E
Total Trnc ug/L 01092
Monthly Composite E
Total Nitrogen mg/L o060o
Quarterly Composite E
Total Phosphorus mg/L oo6ss
2.0 (quarterly average) (4)
Quarterly Composite E
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
There shall be addition of chromium, zinc, or copper to the cooling water systems except as
components of pre -approved biocidal compounds. See Condition A.(8.).
Footnotes:
1) Sample location: E — Effluent.
2) The temperature of the effluent shall not cause an increase in the temperature of the receiving stream of more
than 2.8 °C nor at any time cause the ambient water temperature to exceed 32 °C.
3) The effluent limitation for Total Residual Chlorine shall become effective January 1, 2004.
4) The quarterly average for total phosphorus shall be the average of composite samples collected during the
calendar quarter (January -March, April -June, July -September, October -December).
Part I, Page 4 of 8

Permit No. NC0003760
A.(4.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
— Outfall 003
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee shall be authorized to discharge non -contact cooling water and steam condensate from Outfall
003 subject to the following effluent limitations and monitoring requirements:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Parameter
Units
Parameter
Monthly Daily
Average Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location t��
Flow
MGD
50050
Monthly
Instantaneous
E
pH
S.U.
0040o
Shall be within the range of 6.0 to
9.0 standard units at all times
Weekly
Grab
E
Temperature
°C
00010
See Footnote (2)
Monthly
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine
ug/L
50060
17.0 (3)
Monthly
Grab
E
Cadmium
ug/L
01027
2.0
Monthly
Composite
E
Chromium
ug/L
01034
Monthly
Composite
E
Copper
ug/L
01042
Monthly
Composite
E
Lead
ug/L
c osi
25.0
Monthly
Composite
E
Mercury
ug/L
71900
0.012
Monthly
Composite
E
Nickel
ug/L
01067
88.0
Monthly
Composite
E
Selenium
ug/L
01147
5.0
Monthly
Composite
E
Silver -
ug/L
01077
Monthly
Composite
E
Zinc
ug/L
01092
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Nitrogen
mg/L
00600
Quarterly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
mg/L
00655
2.0 (quarterly average) (4)
Quarterly
Composite
E
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
There shall be addition of chromium, zinc, or copper to the cooling water systems except as
components of pre -approved biocidal compounds. See Condition A.(8.).
Footnotes:
1) Sample location: E — Effluent.
2) The temperature of the effluent shall not cause an increase in the temperature of the receiving stream of more
than 2.8 °C nor at any time cause the ambient water temperature to exceed 32 °C.
3) The effluent limitation for Total Residual Chlorine shall become effective January 1, 2004.
4) The quarterly average for total phosphorus shall be the average of composite samples collected during the
calendar quarter (January -March, April -June, July -September, October -December).
Part I, Page 5 of 8

Permit No. NC0003760 `
A.(5.) CALCULATION OF TOTAL NITROGEN LOADS
(a.) The Permittee shall calculate monthly and annual TN Loads as follows:
(i.) Monthly TN Load (lb/mo) = TN x TMF x 8.34 .
(b.)
where:
TN = the average Total Nitrogen concentration (mg/L) of the composite samples
collected during the month
TMF = the Total Monthly Flow of wastewater discharged during the month (MG/mo)
8.34 = conversion factor, from (mg/L x MG) to pounds
(ii.) Annual TN Load (lb/yr) = Sum of the 12 Monthly TN Loads for the calendar year
The Permittee shall report monthly Total Nitrogen results (mg/L and lb/mo) in the discharge
monitoring report for that month and shall report each year's annual results (lb/yr) in the
December report for that year.
A.(6.) ANNUAL LIMITS FOR TOTAL NITROGEN
(a.) Total Nitrogen (TN) allocations and TN Load limits for NPDES dischargers in the Neuse River
basin are annual limits and are applied for the calendar year.
(b.) For any given calendar year, the Permittee shall be in compliance with the annual TN Load limit
in this Permit if:
(i.) the Permittee's annual TN Load is less than or equal to said limit, or
(ii.) the Permittee is a Co-Permittee Member of a compliance association.
(c.) The TN Load limit in this Permit (if any) may be modified as the result of allowable changes in the
Permittee's TN allocation.
(i.)
Allowable changes include those resulting from purchase of TN allocation from the
Wetlands Restoration Fund; purchase, sale, trade, or lease of allocation between the
Permittee and other dischargers; regionalization; and other transactions approved by the
Division.
(ii.) The Permittee may request a modification of the TN Load limit in this Permit to reflect
allowable changes in its TN allocation. Upon receipt of timely and proper application, the
Division will modify the permit as appropriate and in accordance with state and federal
program requirements.
(iii.) Changes in TN limits become effective on January 1 of the year following permit
modification. The Division must receive application no later than August 31 for changes
proposed for the following calendar year.
(iv.) Application shall be sent to:
NCDWQ / NPDES Unit
Attn: Neuse River Basin Coordinator
Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
(d.) If the Permittee is a member and co-permittee of an approved compliance association, its TN
discharge during that year is governed by that association's group NPDES permit and the TN
limits therein.
(i.) The Permittee shall be considered a Co-Permittee Member for any given calendar year in
which it is identified as such in Appendix A of the association's group NPDES permit.
Part I, Page 6 of 8

4
Permit No. NC0003760
(ii.) Association roster(s) and members' TN allocations will be updated annually and in
accordance with state and federal program requirements.
(iii.) If the Permittee intends to join or leave a compliance association, the Division must be
notified of the proposed action in accordance with the procedures defined in the
association's NPDES permit.
(A) Upon receipt of timely and proper notification, the Division will modify the permit as
appropriate and in accordance with state and federal program requirements.
(B) Membership changes in a compliance association become effective on January 1 of the
year following modification of the association's permit.
(e.) The TN monitoring and reporting requirements in this Permit remain in effect until expiration of
this Permit and are not affected by the Permittee's membership in a compliance association.
A.(7.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 1.9%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in
the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or
subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.The tests will be performed during the months of
January, April, July, and October. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES
permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV below the
permit limit, then multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of the two
following months as described in "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test
Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the
highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest
concentration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of
"detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and further statistical methods are
specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -
February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter
code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3
(original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch no later
than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all
concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate
signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if
chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test
Part I, Page 7 of 8

•
J �
Permit No. NC0003760
form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of the
report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to
the Environmental Sciences Branch at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required,
monitoring will be required during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism
survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an
invalid test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month
following the month of the initial monitoring.
A.(8.) BIOCIDES
The Permittee shall not use any biocides in its cooling systems except those approved by the Division of
Water Quality in conjunction with the permit application. The Permittee shall notify the Director in
writing not later than ninety (90) days prior to planned use of any additional biocide which may be toxic
to aquatic life, other than those previously reported to the Division. Such notification shall include
submittal of a completed Biocide Worksheet Form 101 and a map locating the discharge point and
receiving stream.
A.(9.) INSTREAM MONITORING
Instream monitoring requirements in this NPDES permit shall be provisionally waived so long as the
Permittee remains a member of the Lower Neuse Basin Association and the Association continues to
function as approved by the Division and the Environmental Management Commission. If the Permittee
does not participate in the Association or if the Association ceases to function, the instream monitoring
requirements in this permit become effective immediately; and the Division may reopen this permit by
administrative letter to establish additional instream monitoring requirements it deems necessary to
adequately characterize the effects of the discharges on water quality in the receiving stream.
A.(10.) NON -DETECTION REPORTING AND DETERMINATION OF COMPLIANCE
When pursuant to this permit a pollutant analysis is conducted using an approved analytical protocol
with the appropriate minimum detection level and a result of "non -detectable" or "below quantitation
limit" is obtained, the Permittee shall record that result as reported. For the purpose of determining
compliance with a permit limit for the pollutant, the numerical value of that individual analytical result
shall be zero.
Part I, Page 8 of 8

Fact Sheet - NPDES Permit
ATirA
- E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
NCDENR Kinston Dacron® Plant
NORTH GROUNA DEP JTrHENT OF
EN`n RONMENT ANDNiURAU RESOURCES NPDES No. NC0003760
FACILITY INFORMATION I RECEIVING STREAM
Facility Name: Kinston Dacron® Plant j Receiving Streams: Neuse River, etc.
Permit Flow (MGD): 3.6 j Subbasin: 030405
Facility Class: IV Biological Index No.:
Facility Status: Existing Stream Class: C NSW
Permit Status: Existing 303(d) Listed: Y (TMDL completed)
County: Lenoir Use Support:
Regional Office: Washington Drainage Area (mi2): 2,552
USGS Topo Quad: F29SW Summer 7Q10 (cfs) 283.1
(Grifton, NC) Winter 7Q10 (cfs): 291.6,
3002 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs): 1,514
IWC (%):
L
1.9
PROPOSED ACTION
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., has applied for renewal of NPDES Permit No. NC0003760 for
its Dacron® Fiber Plant in Lenoir County near Kinston, NC.
The facility's current NPDES permit was issued May 20,1994, and expired January 31,1999. DuPont
applied for renewal on July 30,1998, as required, and updated the application on June 29,1999.
Because the original application was submitted at least 180 days prior to permit expiration, the
permit was administratively extended and continues to govern discharges from the facility.
The Division found DuPont's application to be acceptable and made a tentative determination to
reissue the facility's permit with certain revisions. Public notice of the draft permit was published
and comments were received. The Division made corrections and minor revisions in response to the
comments received and is issuing the final permit with these corrections.
To conform with the permitting schedule for the Neuse River Basin, the new permit would
normally expire less than one year from the proposed issuance date The Division is instead re-
issuing the permit for a near -five-year term.
PERMITTED FACILITY
DuPont's Kinston Plant manufactures Dacron® polyester resin and fibers (SICs 2821 and 2824).
Operations include:
• manufacture of polyester resin;
• extrusion of resin for the manufacture of Dacron and other synthetic fibers; and
• melting and re -extrusion of polyester fiber.
IL

FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
The facility has been in operation since 1952; it currently includes 12 production lines (approx.),
varying in age, water consumption, and wastewater characteristics. In 1999, DuPont modified one
of its production lines to manufacture a new resin. The raw materials, end product, and resulting
wastewater are similar enough to the original process that the process change did not require
modifications to the permit.
Process wastewaters from the facility include those from polymerization, spinning, drawing, and
finishing processes, from the on -site power facility, and from contact cooling water systems.
Process wastewaters and sanitary wastes from the plant are treated in the existing 3.6 MGD
treatment facility. Treatment includes rough screening, aerated flow equalization, aeration,
clarification, sludge return, chlorination (operation optional), effluent monitoring, and sludge
thickening/ conditioning/ drying. Discharge is to the Neuse River at Outfall 001, which is adjacent
to the plant site.
Waste sludge from the treatment plant has been thickened in recent years with a belt filter press; the
plant recently returned to using sludge drying beds for thickening. Thickened solids are landfilled
at a local Subtitle D facility.
All influent flows to the wastewater treatment plant are monitored continuously for TOC and pH.
When the system detects high -strength or other off -spec wastewaters, it automatically diverts these
to an emergency holding pond so they can be fed into the treatment plant at a controlled rate.
Process wastewater discharges from the Kinston Plant are subject to federal effluent guidelines for
the Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) category under 40 CFR Part 414:
Subpart C, Other Fibers; Subpart D, Thermoplastic Resins; and Subpart I, Direct Discharge Point
Sources That Use End -of -Pipe Biological Treatment.
Non -contact cooling water, steam condensate, and stormwater runoff are discharged with little or
no treatment to two small tributaries to the Neuse River at Outfalls 002 and 003. Best Management
Practices (BMPs) are employed to limit the amount of pollutants in these wastestreams.
RECEIVING WATERS
In order to protect the designated uses of its surface waters, North Carolina has classified each of its
stream segments according to the established use(s) and has adopted water quality standards to
provide the necessary level of protection for each. Where more than one standard exists (such as for
multiple uses), the most stringent standard for a given parameter applies, in order to protect for all
designated uses.
The receiving waters for the Kinston Plant are the Neuse River (Outfall 001), an unnamed tributary
to the Neuse River (Outfall 002), and Beaverdam Branch (Outfall 003). All are designated as Class C
Nutrient Sensitive Waters (C-NSW). The designated uses of Class C waters are aquatic life
propagation and maintenance of biological integrity, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
No additional uses are associated with the supplemental NSW classification.
Water quality standards for Class C waters are specified in T15A NCAC 2B .0211. General
requirements for NSW waters are defined in 2B .0223. In December 1997, the state adopted specific
requirements to address the basin's NSW designation. The point source rule (2B .0234) establishes
total nitrogen and total phosphorus limits for many dischargers in the Neuse River Basin, including
DuPont.
The entire Neuse River Basin has been listed on the state's 303(d) list of impaired waters, due to
nutrient impacts from point, nonpoint, and natural sources on the Neuse River estuary. In 1997 the
state adopted as rule a nutrient management strategy to restore water quality in the basin; and in
7
• .(
-2-
1

, FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
1999 and 2002, the US EPA approved Total Nitrogen TMDLs for the basin. The 2000 303(d) list again
includes the basin but notes that the TMDL has been approved and is being implemented.
CURRENT PERMIT AND FACILITY PERFORMANCE
Permit Overview
The current permit sets limits at Outfall 001 for flow, BOD, TSS, total phosphorus, dissolved
oxygen, pH, chronic toxicity, and OCPSF organics. The BOD, TSS, and most of the OCPSF organics
limits are production -based limits based on the federal OCPSF guidelines. In addition to these
parameters, monitoring is required for ammonia, temperature, total nitrogen, fecal coliform,
chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc.
The permit sets limits at Outfalls 002 and 003 for temperature and pH. It requires monitoring for
flow, total residual chlorine (if chlorine is used), and, with the last renewal, several metals: arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, and zinc. The Division has
approved the use of certain biocides in the plant's cooling systems. The permit prohibits the
addition of chromium, copper, and zinc except as components to approved biocides. The permit
requires monitoring but sets no limits for these metals on the condition that the plant not use
biocidal compounds containing these metals.
Instream monitoring is required at Outfall 001 for temperature and D.O.; and at Outfa11003 for
temperature. DuPont is a member of the Lower Neuse Basin Association (LNBA), a coalition of
dischargers that, by agreement with the Division, conducts instream monitoring for its members.
The instream monitoring requirements in the permit are minimal with the understanding that
DuPont will remain an active member of the LNBA, which will perform additional monitoring as
agreed. The permit includes a special condition to this effect.
Other special conditions in the current permit include:
• A standard requirement that the permittee employ only those biocides approved (by the
Division) for use in its cooling systems.
• An option to reduce the monitoring frequency of OCPSF parameters if three years' data
justify it.
• Clarification of compliance with permit limits when analytical results are "below detection."
• A requirement that DuPont prepare and submit an engineering analysis by February 1,
1997, evaluating treatment alternatives and the feasibility of upgrading to tertiary treatment
(required due to limited assimilative capacity in this portion of the river).
Compliance History
A review of effluent data from January 1998 through April 2002 indicates that DuPont has
consistently complied with its monthly average permit limits. It also passed all 18 whole effluent
toxicity tests during that period.
The Division penalized DuPont for an apparent phenols violation in January 1999; however, that
penalty was retracted when the lab results were questioned (DuPont had not detected phenols in
the discharge in recent memory).
On January 28,1997, DuPont submitted an engineering analysis as required in the special condition
of its permit. It concluded that the existing WWTP provides near -tertiary treatment; but that the
cost of ensuring consistent treatment to 5.0 mg/L BOD would be disproportionately expensive.
The current permit has no limit for fecal coliform. However, effluent values have been erratic and at
times unexpectedly high (including one greater than 60,000/100 mL ).
-3-

FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
Requested Changes in Permit Requirements
In its July 1998 application, DuPont requested several changes in the existing permit requirements:
• reduction of OCPSF monitoring to once per year (Outfall 001),
• elimination of metals monitoring where results show no water quality impact (all
outfalls),
• reduction of toxicity testing to once per year (Outfall 001), and
• elimination of instream monitoring given DuPont's participation in the Lower Neuse
Basin Association.
PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
The Division has developed effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and special conditions
for the proposed permit based on the following:
• federal effluent guidelines for the OCPSF industry; specifically, 40 CFR Part 414,
Subparts C, D, and I;
• federal requirements for secondary treatment of municipal wastewater, 40 CFR Part 133;
• North Carolina water quality standards, including the Neuse River Basin Nutrient
Management Strategy;
• USEPA water quality criteria;
• previous wasteload allocations;
• the existing NPDES permit requirements and anti -backsliding considerations.
The current and proposed permit requirements are described below and summarized in Table 2.
Effluent Limitations - Outfall 001
Flow Limitations
The current permit includes a monthly average flow limit of 3.6 MGD. The new permit maintains
this limit.
Production- and Technology -Based Limitations for BOD, TSS, and pH
The federal effluent limitations guidelines for OCPSF facilities (40 CFR Part 414) require that permit
limits be calculated using the facility's process wastewater flows. Where the process flows are
variable, long-term average flows may not be the most appropriate measure of production, and
EPA guidance recommends that the permit writer use discretion in selecting a representative flow
value. EPA suggests that a maximum 12-month value from recent years may be appropriate under
these circumstances. This approach is consistent with DWQ's policy for production -based limits at
industrial facilities; under this policy, the production level for permitting purposes is based on the
highest calendar -year production level.
Table 1 shows the estimated flows for Outfall 001, from DuPont's 1998 permit application, and the
percent contribution of each. Except for the addition of a small amount of treated groundwater,
these are the same flows requested in the previous application (1993).
-4-

• FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
•
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
The estimated process flow in the application is 1.719 MGD. The actual flows at Outfall 001 have
been significantly lower than the estimated value for this outfall for the past four calendar years:
Year Flow (MGD)
1998 1.429
1999 1.479*
2000 1.453
2001 1.300
* Does not include September flows, which
were high due to Hurricane Floyd.
Table 1 also shows the breakdown of the maximum calendar year flow of 1.479 MGD, using the
same proportions as proposed. Based on these calculations, the OCPSF process flow to be used in
setting production -based limits is 1.011 MGD .
Table 1. Projected and Permitted Flows - Outfall 001
Wastestream Flows
Long -Term Monthly Average Monthly Average
(per Application) (for Permit Limits)
(MGD)
(%)
(MGD)
Total - Outfall 001 2.515 100 1.479
Process (OCPSF) 1.719 68 1.011
Sanitary 0.114 5 0.067
Non -contact Cooling Waters 0.673 27 0.396
Pretreated Groundwater 0.009 <1 0.005
The federal guidelines, 40 CFR Subparts C and D, set mass limits for BOD and TSS, to be based on
the following concentrations and the process flows under each subpart:
c_Z1s2,1+ SiCat2r,3
SUBPART C SUBPART D
Mo. Avg. Daily Max.
(mg/L) (mg/L)
Mo. Avg. Daily Max.
(mgn-) (mgn-)
BOD 18 — 48
TSS 36 . - 115
24 (' 64
40 � 130
DuPont indicates in its permit application that its process wastewater flows are evenly split
between the fiber processes and the resins processes.
Subpart C, 40 CFR 414.30:
Based on process flow of 0.5055 MGD (50% of 1.011 MGD):
Mo. Avg. Daily Max.
(lb/day) (Ib/day)
BOD 75.9 202.3
TSS 151.8 484.8
-5-

FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc. .
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
Subpart D, 40 CFR 414.40:
Based on process flow of 0.5055 MGD:
Mo. Avg. Daily Max.
(lb/clay) (lb/day)
BOD 101.2 269.8
TSS 168.6 548.0
Sanitary wastes, 40 CFR 133.102:
The proposed BOD and TSS limits for sanitary wastes are based on a level of treatment
typically required for similar wastes at publicly owned treatment works: 30 mg/L BOD and
TSS. Based on an estimated sanitary flow of 0.067 MGD:
Mo. Avg. Daily Max.
(lb/day) (lb/clay)
BOD 16.8 25.2
TSS 16.8 25.2
Total wastewater:
The sum total of these component limits is:
Mo. Avg. Daily Max.
(lb/day) (lb/clay)
BOD 193.8 497.3
TSS 337.1 1,057.9
pH:
All process and sanitary wastewaters are subject to a pH limit of 6.0 - 9.0 standard units.
Production- and Technology -Based Limitations for Organic Compounds and Metals
Subpart 1, 40 CFR 414.91:
40 CFR 414.91 establishes technology -based effluent limits for a specific organic compounds and
metals. These limits apply to OCPSF facilities with end -of -pipe biological treatment, including this
facility. The limits are expressed in mass units and are calculated from process flows and parameter
concentrations set in the rule. All of the parameters listed in this rule are included in the permit.
Water Quality -Based Limitations
OCPSF Organics and Metals. State water quality standards also exist for some of these same OCPSF
parameters. The Division determined the maximum allowable effluent concentrations necessary to
meet the applicable standards. In all cases, the technology -based limits were more stringent than the
water quality -based is included in the permit as a daily maximum concentration limit.
- 6 -
k

FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
Nutrients. In 1997, the Environmental Management Commission adopted as rule the Neuse River
Basin Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy - Wastewater Discharge Requirements (T15A
NCAC 2B .0234). The permit includes limits for Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Phosphorus (TP) as
prescribed in the rule. These are 35,190 lb/yr TN, effective beginning in calendar year 2003, and 2.0
mg/L TP (quarterly average), effective with the permit.
The Strategy allows dischargers to work collectively as a Compliance Association to reduce TN
discharges to the Neuse estuary. DuPont has indicated its interest in joining such an Association.
The permit includes a re -opener clause in the special conditions so that the Division can incorporate
conditions related to the Association once those are developed (projected for late 2002).
Toxicity. Consistent with Division policy, the permit includes a quarterly limit for whole effluent
toxicity: chronic test, pass/fail, using Ceriodaphnia, at a waste concentration of 1.9%.
Metals. An analysis of effluent monitoring data (1998 through 2001) for Outfall 001 indicates there is
reasonable potential for the discharge to cause exceedances of water quality "action levels" in the
receiving streams for copper and zinc. Because the Division has not adopted standards for these
parameters, and because the discharge has passed the last 18 toxicity tests, the permit requires
continued monitoring but does not set limits for these metals. Chromium, lead, and nickel are
routinely detected in the discharge but not above allowable concentrations; as with copper and zinc,
the permit requires continued monitoring but sets no limits.
Proposed Monitoring Requirements - Outfall 001
2H .0500 establishes minimum monitoring requirements for discharges to surface waters, based on
SIC of the discharging facility. Additional monitoring is required based on the effluent guidelines
for OCPSF facilities.
From January 1998 through May 2002, DuPont detected only four of the OCPSF organic
compounds: bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (4 times), di-n-butyl phthalate (3 times), methyl chloride (3
times), and phenol (once, attributed to lab irregularities). None have been detected since October
1999. The draft permit maintains the current quarterly monitoring frequency for the first three
parameters. Monitoring frequencies for phenol and the remaining organics are reduced to once per
year; in the event a parameter is detected, quarterly monitoring resumes until such time that twelve
consecutive samples are "non -detects."
Refer to the draft permit for specific requirements.
Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements - Outfalls 002 and 003
Wastestreams at Outfalls 002 and 003 consist of non -contact cooling water and steam condensate.
Discharge is to a zero -flow stream and a minor stream, both tributary to the Neuse River. Potential
pollutants of concern include temperature, total residual chlorine, several metals (arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, selenium, and zinc), and pH.
Flow. Because of the relatively low strength of the wastestreams and the variability in flow rates,
the permit does not include a flow limit for these discharges.
Water Quality -Based Limitations
Temperature. According to the water quality standards for Class C waters, the discharges cannot
cause the temperature in the receiving stream to increase more than 2.8 °C and in no case shall they
cause it to rise above 32 °C for lower piedmont and coastal waters. The permit includes this
limitation for each outfall.
Total Residual Chlorine. Chlorine is commonly used a control bio-fouling of cooling water systems. A
review of TRC data for the past three years indicates that the discharges often exceed the 28 ug/L
-7-

FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
action level. Therefore, the permit includes limits for TRC at each of these outfalls, to become
effective January 1, 2004 (approx. 12 months after the effective date of the permit).
Metals. DuPont has indicated that it will not use biocidal compounds containing chromium, copper,
or zinc. Assuming this to be the case, the current permit does not include limits for these metals and
specifically prohibits the use of such biocides. Other metals have been detected or are suspected to
be present in the discharge, and the current permit established monitoring requirements to
determine their significance.
An analysis of effluent monitoring data (1998 through 2001) for these outfalls indicates there is
reasonable potential for the discharges to cause exceedances of water quality standards in the
receiving streams for cadmium, chromium (002 only), lead, mercury, nickel, and selenium. The
permit includes limits equal to the maximum allowable concentrations for each metal.
0. The pH of the discharges must remain within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 standard units in order to
maintain water quality standards for Class C waters.
Refer to the draft permit for specific requirements.
REQUESTED CHANGES IN PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
In its July 1998 application, DuPont requested several changes in the existing permit requirements:
• reduction of OCPSF monitoring to once per year,
• elimination of metals monitoring where results show no water quality impact,
• reduction of toxicity testing to once per year, and
• elimination of instream monitoring given DuPont's participation in the Lower Neuse
Basin Association.
Monitoring Frequency: OCPSF Parameters. Only three of the OCPSF organic compounds have
been detected in quarterly monitoring since January 1998: bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, di-n-butyl
phthalate, and methyl chloride. The permit reduces monitoring for these parameters to once per
year except for the three that were detected. If any of these is detected, quarterly monitoring
resumes until twelve consecutive samples are "non -detects."
Monitoring Frequency: Metals. Metals have been detected regularly in all three outfalls. Of these,
only arsenic at Outfall 001has been found at low enough levels to warrant reduced monitoring and
is therefore removed from the requirements. At Outfalls 002 and 003, monitoring frequencies are
increased due to addition of effluent limits for metals.
Monitoring Frequency: Toxicity. The Division's policy requiring quarterly toxicity monitoring for
all major and complex discharges is well established. The Division holds that quarterly testing is
necessary to demonstrate that wastewater discharges consistently meet the toxicity limits
established to protect the receiving streams.
Monitoring: Instream. The minimal instream monitoring requirements already take into account
that DuPont is an active member of the Lower Neuse Basin Association (LNBA). The draft permit
maintains the monitoring at existing levels.
PROPOSED SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Total Nitrogen. As described above, the permit includes a re -opener clause so that the Division can
add special conditions pertaining to the Compliance Association when those conditions are
developed (late 2002). The permit also includes a condition describing how Total Nitrogen mass
loads are to be calculated.
-8-

•
• FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
FINAL NPDES No. NC0003760
Biocides. The permit again includes a typical special condition requiring prior approval by the
Division for the use of any new biocidal compounds, such as those used in the plant's cooling
systems.
Detection Limits. The permit includes language explaining that monitoring results less than the
method detection limits must be reported as numerical results (for instance, "<0.2 ug/L"). However,
for compliance purposes, a zero value is used whenever analysis at the appropriate detection level
gives a "non -detect" result.
Instream Monitoring. The permit explains that the amount of instream monitoring is limited due to
DuPont's membership in the LNBA and that typical requirements will be added to the permit
should DuPont leave the group.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The Division received two comments on the draft permit during the public review period and has
made the following changes in the final permit as the result of those comments:
• Facility Description. Mr. James Proctor of DuPont - Kinston noted that the permit's description
of the treatment facility was inaccurate and provided an accurate description. The final permit
includes the corrections Mr. Proctor suggested.
• OCPSF Limits, Condition A.(2.). Ms. Dee Stewart of EPA Region 4 noted that the Monthly
Average and Daily Maximum permit values for the OCPSF parameters were reversed in the
draft permit. This is corrected in the final permit.
In addition, the final permit includes the following changes:
• The reporting requirements for Outfall 001 have been revised to include Total Monthly Flow,
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), and Nitrate -Nitrate Nitrogen as monitoring parameters. These
parameters must already be determined in the course of monitoring Total Nitrogen loads; the
permit simply requires that these interim results be reported as well. The same parameters will
be added to all NPDES permits in the Neuse River Basin and will enable the Division to
evaluate the cumulative discharge of nitrogen by the point sources in the basin.
• Two special conditions in the draft permit contained preliminary language regarding
calculation of TN loads and determination of compliance with TN limits; and a re -opener clause
allowing the Division to incorporate the final language at a later date. The final permit includes
the updated version of these conditions.
-9-

a�tEo sr J444,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
�4" eh r REGION 4
o ��� Q ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
s�z 61 FORSYTH STREET
Tq( eclat ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
October 23, 2002
Mr. Dave Goodrich, Supervisor
NPDES Unit
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
OCT 2 8 2002 u_)
S}^ y.,;;CE bi:il {i
SUBJECT: Review of Draft Permit - E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
NC0003760
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
In accordance with the EPA/NCDENR Memorandum of Agreement, we have completed
our review of the draft permit referenced above which was received by EPA on October 3, 2002,
and have no objections to the proposed permit conditions. We request that we be afforded an
additional review opportunity only if significant changes are made to the permit prior to issuance,
or if significant comments to the permit are received. Otherwise, please send us one copy of the
final permit when issued. If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone] or at
[e-mail].
Dee Stewart
NPDES and Biosolids Permits Section
Permits, Grants and Technical Assistance Branch
Water Management Division
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)

Subject: permit update
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 15:48:55 -0400
From: "James R Proctor"<[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Mike the new permit had a problem around the Supplement cover sheet. I
have corrected with present equipment on site.
Thaks,
James Proctor
252-522-6443(See attached file: new permit update descrip.doc)
This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail, in whole
or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly and
conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a
contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers
of data to third parties.
Francais Deutsch Italian Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean
http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html
new permit update descrip.doc
Name: new permit update descrip.doc
Type: WINWORD File (application/msword)
Encoding: Base64
Download Status: Not downloaded with message
Subject: Re: Update to new permit
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 13:16:05 -0500
From: "James R Proctor" <[e-mail]>
To: "Mike Templeton <mike.templeton" <[e-mail]>
Mike
It is a solids grinder that is manufactured by Muffin Monster. Thats right Laugh I know it was funny when you read it.
Thanks
James Proctor
This communication is for use by the intended redpient and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail, in whole
or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly and
conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a
contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers
of data to third parties.
Francais Deutsch Italian Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean
http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disdaimer.html

E.I. DuPont Kinston Plant
James Proctor
P.O Box 800
Grifton NC, 28502
Mike Tempelton
1.Continue to operate the existing 3.6 MGD wastewater treatment facility located on NC Highway 11,
Northeast of Kinston, in Lenoir County; consisting of:
• Influent catch basin with muffin monster.
• Two (2) Million Gallon Retention Ponds.
• One 3.6 million gallon aeration basin, consisting of (2) 45 H.P aerators and (13) 25 H.P. floating
aerators.
• Two 90ft. Secondary clarifiers.
• Two sludge return lift stations.
• Chlorine contact basin (operation optional).
• Effluent flow measurement with recorder
• Six sand Beds.
Mike 002 and 003 are ok
Thank You
James Proctor

NC0003740 ELDuPont
1.<
Subject: NC0003760 El DuPont
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 08:36:12 -0400
From: [e-mail]
To: Mike Templeton <[e-mail]>
Mike,
EPA received the permit for El DuPont on October 3. I have no comment,
the RPA was very thorough, but the package did not have an application.
I plan on sending a no comment letter, but could you please forward a
copy of the application to me for the file.
Thanks,
Dee
-�1
1 of 1 10/24/2002 9:59 AM

NC0003740 - El DuPont
•
Subject: NC0003760 - El DuPont
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:39:34 -0400
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Mike,
EPA received the above referenced permit on October 3, 2002. It appears
that the daily maximum and monthly average values in the effluent
limitations page are interchanged. Per our conversation on 10/23/02,
EPA understands that this will be changed in the final permit issuance.
Additionally, EPA does not have a copy of the application for our file.
I was able assess RP with the information submitted with the fact sheet,
but will need the application for the file.
A no comment letter dated 10/23/02 has been mailed to the State.
Thanks
Dee Stewart
404/562-9334
1 of 1 10/24/2002 9:59 AM

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Time Period Jan 1998 - May 2002
Cow (MGD) 3.600
7Q10S (cfs) 283
7Q10W (cfs) 291.6
3002 (cfs)
Stream Flow, OA (cfs)
Rec'ving Stream UT to Neuse River
WWTP Class IV Biol.
(WC (%) @ 7010S 1.9
12 7010W 2
@ 3002 WA
CO QA N/A
Stream Class C NSW
DuPont - Kinston Plant
NC0003760, Outfall 001
PARAMETER
TYPE'
STDS. &
CRITERIA "
PQL
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
PREUM. RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC 1V0S
(Chronic)
Acute /
14 FAV
n
a Dec
Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Chromium
NC
50
1,022
5
18
17
63
Acute 1,022
--Chronic---2,587------------
REMOVE?
---------------------------•-----
REMOVE?
Maintain quarterly monitoring.
Copper
NC
7
(AL)
7 3
2
18
17
3510
Acute 7.3
_ --------------------------------•----------------
Chronic362.1
DAILY MAX. LIMIT
WK. AVG. LIMIT
Maintain quarterly monitoring.
Lead
NC
25
338
5
17
14
22
Acute 33.8
Chronic 1,293.4
MONITOR
--•--- ----------
REMOVE?
Maintain quarterly monitoring.
------------------------ — —
Nickel
NC
88
26i
5
18
14
100
Acute 261
_
-- ------
Chronic
MONITOR
------------------------------•---
REMOVE?
Maintain quarterly monitoring.
— — — - — - — -
Zinc
NC
52
(A1.1
,J7
10
18
18
Acute 67
156
------Z
Chronic.587
DAILY MAX. UMIT
--------------------------------'------------
REMOVE?
Maintain quarterly monitoring.
• Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
" Freshwater Discharge
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, rpa_001
09/113/2002

If.IMYMW U1aM
<
MM••Ylnh�l
K•�IiO.YM
_ _ . ..
. 1 . 11.4
ti
s.+.s
,,,.,,r_.___
......•'flu,:;,..C,,.....

•
• REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
NC0003760.001
Parameter=
Chromium
POL = 5
n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10.0 5.0 Std Dev. 4.50
2 Feb-1998 Mean 5.3
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.843
4 Apr-1998 12.9 12.9 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 MO Factor =
7 Jul-1998 3.0 3.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 4.4 4.4
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 5.3 5.3
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 1.5 1.5
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 2.6 2.6
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 2 2.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 3 3.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 4.6 4.6
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 4.8 4.8
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 3.1 3.1
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 2.7 2.7
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 3.4 3.4
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 3.7 3.7
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 8 8.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 6.1 6.1
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar•2002
52 Apr-2002 20 20.0
53
54
55
3.17
20.0 pg/I
63.4 pgll
Parameter =
Copper
POL = 2
n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.0 Std Dev. 85.44
2 Feb-1998 Mean 33.4
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 2.555
4 Apr-1998 375 375.0 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Muft Factor =
7 JuI-1998 9 9.0 Max Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 15 15.0
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 21.5 21.5
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 5.3 5.3
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 13.6 13.6
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 13 13.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 12 12.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 19 19.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 7 7.0
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 16 16.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan•2001 13 13.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar•2001
40 Apr-2001 9.5 9.5
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 JuI-2001 28 28.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 14 14.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 17 17.0
50 Feb•2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 9 9.0
53
54
55
9.36
375.0 ag/1
3510.0 WI
•
•
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls. data_001
- 1 - 09/18/2002

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter
Lead
POL = 5
n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 5 2.5 Std Dev. 1.69
2 Feb-1998 Mean 1.8
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.928
4 Apr-1998 6.10 6.1 n 17
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mult Factor =
7 JuI-1998 LT 3 1.5 Max. Vatue
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 2 2.0
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 2.1 2.1
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 3 3.0 '
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 5 5.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 LT 0.2 0.1
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 0.5 0.5
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 0.4 0.4
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 0.4 0.4
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 0.2 0.2
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 0.64 0.6
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul•2001 0.49 0.5
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 2.5 2.5
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 1.5 1.5
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 2 2.0
53
54
55
3.56
6.1 pgll
21.7 pgll
Parameter=
POL = 5
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.0 Std Dev. 6.03
2 Feb-1998 Mean 6.0
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.004
4 Apr-1998 27 27.0 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 JuI-1998 LT 2 1.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 5.3 5.3
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 6 6.0
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 5.4 5.4
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 3.1 3.1
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 3 3.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 LT 2 1.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 4 4.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 LT 2 1.0
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 6 6.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 4 4.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 3.3 3.3
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 4.7 4.7
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 13 13.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 5.3 5.3
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 10 10.0
53
54
55
3.72
27.0 pgfl
100.4 pg/l
03760 rpa 001 002 003.x1s, data_001
- 2 - 09/18/2002

• REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter
Zinc
POL = 10
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 18 18.0 Std Dev. 15.49
2 Feb-1998 Mean 32.8
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.472
4 Apr-1998 15.5 15.5 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 JuI-1998 29 29.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 76.9 76.9
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 48.1 48.1
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 28.2 28.2
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 32.8 32.8
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 22.3 22.3
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 22 22.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 12 12.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 20 20.0
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 38 38.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 36 36.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 41 41.0
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 38 38.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 28 28.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 52 52.0
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 33 33.0
53
54
55
2.03
76.9 pgll
156.1 jail
•
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_001
- 3 - 09/18/2002

N. ••
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Time Period Jan 1998 - May 2002
Ow (MGD) 0.025
7010S (cfs) 0
7Q10W (cfs) 0.0
3002 (cfs)
Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 0
Rec'ving Stream UT to Neuse River
VWYTP Class IV Biol.
/WC (%) @ 7Q10S 100.0
7010W 100
3002 N/A
QA 100.0
Stream Class C NSW
DuPont - Kinston Plant
NC0003760, Outfall 002
PARAMETER
TYPE*
STDS. &
CRITERIA "
POL
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
PREUM. RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NCWOS
(Chronk)
Acute/
l4 FAV
n
,
IDot ?Aix Prod CI, AllowableCw
Arsenic
NC
50
18
5
26
Acute N/A
_ _ _ _ -
Chronic 50 __---------------Coptquarterlymanitor[ng•-----------
#VALUE!
MONITOR
_ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ •
No limit
Cadmium
NC
2
15
1
18
15
19
Acute 15.0
.—__ _ ---__ ---
Chronic 2.0
DAILY MAX_UMIT—•
—Monthly
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_--_ _--- _-------•--------
monitoring
Weekly average limit = 2.0
Chromium
NC
50
1,022
5
18
14
55
Acute 1,022
Chronic 50
REMOVE?
WK. AVG. LIMIT
Monthly monitoring • — - — - — - — - —
Weekly average Itmit = 50.0
Copper
NC
7
(AL)
7.3
2
18
18
87
Acute 7.3
_ _ _ _ _
-- __----------•—------------- Chronic — 7.0
--- DAILY MAX. OMIT
WK. AVG. UMIT
_ _ _ _ _ _ --
Continuequarterly monitoring
No Itmit -action level parameter
Lead
NC
25
33.8
5
18
16
70
Acute 33.8
—__ _ --_ _ _---
Chronic 25.0
DAILY MAX. LIMIT—•_
WK. AVG. UMIT
_ _-- _ _----•_ ----_-----
Monthly monitoring
Weekly average limit = 25.0
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.2
18
4
5
Acute N/A
_ _ _ _ ---- _-_
Chronic
- #VALUE!
---------•—•---
DAILY MAX. LIMIT
_ _ _ _ _ —•—•-----
Monthtymonitoring ---------
Weekly average limit = 0.012
Nickel
NC
88
261
5
18
13
269
Acute 261
Chronic 88
DAILY MAX. UMIT
WK. AVG. LIMIT
Monthly monitoring
Weekly average limit = 88.0
Selenium
NC
5.0
18
12
167
Acute N/A
_ _ _ _ _
Chronic------•---•---------MoMhlymonitoring
#VALUE!
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ _ _ _ _ ----- •------------
Weekly average limit = 5.0
Sliver
NC
0.06
(AL)
1.23
5
18
8
57
Acute 1.23
___ _ __ _ _
Chronic— 0.06
__ DAILY _MAX. UMIT
__ _
- -
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ _____
Continue quarterly monitoring -
No limit - action Level parameter
Zinc
NC
50
(AL)
67
10
17
17
2,240
Acute 67
DAILY MAX._UMIT _ _
Chronic 50
r--------------- WK.AVG. LlMIT
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
--------
Continue quarterly monitoring
,Noltmtt-acttonlevelparameter
• Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
" Freshwater Discharge
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, rpa_002
09/18/2002

••
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
NC0003760.002
Parameter.:
Arsenic
POL
n Date Data BDL_12DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.0 Std Dev. 2.42
2 Feb-1998 Mean 4.0
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.601
4 Apr-1998 LT 10 5.0 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 Jul-1998 LT 5 2.5 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 11 11.0
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan•1999 6 6.0
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 6 6.0
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 8 8.0
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 4 4.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 LT 5 2.5
26 Feb•2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 LT 5 2.5
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 LT 5 2.5
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 5 2.5
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 LT 5 2.5
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 LT 5 2.5
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 LT 5 2.5
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 LT 5 2.5
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 LT 5 2.5
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 5 2.5
53
54
55
2.40
11.0 pg/l
26.4 /rg4
Parameters
Cadmium
PQL= 1
n Date Data BDL_12DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.00 Std Dev. 1.51
2 Feb-1998 Mean 1.50
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.012
4 Apr-1998 LT 1 0.25 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 Jul-1998 1 1.00 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 3.8 3.80
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan•1999 LT 10 5.00
.14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 2.2 2.20
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 1 1.00
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 1 1.00
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 0.66 0.66
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 1.1 1.10
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 0.4 0.40
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 0.5 0.50
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 0.7 0.70
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 0.6 0.60
41 May-2001
42 Jun•2001
43 Jul-2001 0.7 0.70
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 0.5 0.50
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 1.1 1.10
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 1.4 1.40
53
54
55
3.75
5.0 pgf
18.8 pgR
•
•
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_002
-1 - 09/18/2002

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter =
Chromium
PQL = 5
n Date Data BDL=12DL Results
1 Jan-1998 2.9 2.9 Std Dev.
2 Feb-1998 Mean
3 Mar-1998 C.V.
4 Apr-1998 16.7 16.7 n
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mult Factor =
7 Jul-1998 3.7 3.7 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 5.8 5.8
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan•1999 LT 1 0.5
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 1.3 1.3
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 6.3 6.3
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 6.7 6.7
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan•2000 11 11.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 8 8.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 LT 0.7 0.4
32 Aug•2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 1.1 1.1
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 1.9 1.9
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 LT 0.7 0.4
41 May-2001
42 Jun•2001
43 Jul-2001 3 3.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 5.3 5.3
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 6.8 6.8
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 10 5.0
53
54
55
iiiPammeter
Copper
n Date Data
• 4.21 1 Jan-1998
4.8 2 Feb-1998
0.875 3 Mar-1998
18 4 Apr-1998
5 May-1998
3.28 6 Jun-1998
16.7 pg/l ; 7 Jul-1998
54.8 pgf ;; 8 Aug-1998
9 Sep-1998
• 10 Oct-1998 38.3 38.3
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 3.8 3.8
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr 1999 8.6 8.6
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 11.6. 11.6
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 32.4 32.4
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 9 9.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 15 15.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 9 9.0
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 22 22.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 11 11.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 5.7 5.7
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 JuI-2001 17 17.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 13 13.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 19 19.0
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 27 27.0
53
54
55
POL= 2
BDL_12DL Results
22 22.0 Std Dev. 9.17
Mean 16.4
C.V. 0.560
16 15.7 n 18
MO Factor = 2.28
15 14.9 Max. Value 38.3 pgO
Max. Pred Cw 87.3 pg11
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data 002
- 2 - 09/18/2002

A. • •
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter
Lead
PQL = 5
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 5 2.5 Std Dev. 4.23
2 Feb•1998 Mean 4.1
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.024
4 Apr-1998 LT 5 2.5 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 JuI-1998 3 3.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 10 10.0
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 2.3 2.3
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 2.1 2.1
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 5.1 5.1
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 18.6 18.6
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 3.6 3.6
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 3.5 3.5
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI.2000 2.4 2.4
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 2.6 2.6
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 1 1.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 0.6 0.6
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 JuI-2001 2.6 2.6
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 1.5 1.5
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 6.8 6.8
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 3.6 3.6
53
54
55
3.79
18.6 pgO
70.5 pg11
Parameter=
111
Mercury
PQL = 02
n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 0.2 0.1 Std Dev. 0.21
2 Feb-1998 Mean 0.2
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.315
4 Apr-1998 LT 0.2 0.1 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mult Factor
7 JuI-1998 LT 0.2 0.2 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 0.1 0.1
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 0.1 0.1
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 1 1.0
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 0.1 0.1
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 0.1 0.1
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 LT 0.2 0.2
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 LT 0.2 0.1
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 LT 0.2 0.1
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep•2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 0.2 0.1
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 LT 0.2 0.1
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr•2001 LT 0.2 0.1
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 LT 0.2 0.1
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 LT 0.2 0.1
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 LT 0.2 0.1
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 0.2 0.1
53
54
55
4.84
1.0 pgll
4.8 pg/I
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xts, data_002
- 3 - 09/18/2002

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
• 1
Parameter =
Nickel
PQL = 5 Parameter.
n Date Data BDL_12DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.0 Std Dev.
2 Feb-1998 Mean
3 Mar-1998 C.V.
4 Apr•1998 LT 10 5.0 n
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mult Factor =
7 Jul•1998 4 3.6 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 7.5 7.5
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 6 3.0
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar•1999
16 Apr-1999 7.6 7.6
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 3 3.0
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 3.1 3.1
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 4 4.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 4 4.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 LT 2 1.0
32 Aug•2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 50 50.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 5 5.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr•2001 3 3.0
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 7 7.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 3.9 3.9
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 15 15.0
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 10 5.0
53
54
55
11.02
7.5
1.461
18
5.38
50.0 pgfl
269.0 pg/l
Selenium
POL =
n Date Data BDL_12DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 5 2.5 Std Dev. 8.82
2 Feb-1998 Mean 7.0
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.263
4 Apr-1998 LT 5 2.5 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mult Factor
7 Jul-1998 LT 5 2.5 Max. Value
8 Aug•1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 0 0.0
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 1 0.5
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 4.6 4.6
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 19.3 19.3
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 5 5.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 4.4 4.4
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 LT 0.3 0.2
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 LT 5 2.5
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 7.3 7.3
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 15 15.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar•2001
40 Apr-2001 5.4 5.4
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 3 3.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct•2001 36 36.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 10 10.0
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 5.1 5.1
53
54
55
4.65
36.0 AO
167.4 pgll
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_002
- 4 - 09/18/2002

•
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter =
Silver
PQL = 5 ::: Parameter=
n Date Data BDL_1RDL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 2 1.0 Std Dev. 1.83
2 Feb-1998 Mean 0.95
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.931
4 Apr-1998 LT 0.5 0.25 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mult Factor = 7.11
7 Jul-1998 LT 1 0.5 Max. Value 8.0 pg/I
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw 56.9 pgfl
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 1 1.0
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 1 0.5
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 2 2.0
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 8 8.0
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep•1999
22 Oct-1999 1 1.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 0.1 0.1
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 0.1 0.1
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 LT 1 0.5
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 1 0.5
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 LT 1 0.5
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 0.1 0.1
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 0.6 0.6
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 LT 0.04 0.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 LT 02 0.1
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar•2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 0.5 0.3
53
54
55
Zinc
PQL = 10
n Date Data BDL_1f2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 11.8 11.8 Std Dev. 189.61
2 Feb-1998 Mean 228.9
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.828
4 Apr-1998 99.6 99.6 n 17
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mult Factor =
7 JuI-1998 258 258.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 514 514.0
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 319 319.0
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 250 250.0
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 152 152.0
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 88.7 88.7
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 310 310.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 360 360.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 92 92.0
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 100 100.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 410 410.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 150 150.0
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 JuI-2001 5 5.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 71 71.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 700 700.0
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 --
53
54
55
3.20
700.0 pg/l
2240.0 pg/l
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xts, data_002
- 5 - 09/18/2002

•
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Time Period Jan 1998 - May 2002
Ow (MGD) 0.015
7010S (cfs) 0
7010W (cfs) 0.0
3002 (cfs)
Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 0
Rec'ving Stream Beaverdam Br.
WWTP Class IV Biol.
!WC (%) @ 7010S 100.0
@ 7Q10W 100
3002 N/A
Cal QA 100.0
Stream Class C NSW
DuPont - Kinston Plant
NC0003760, Outfall 003
PARAMETER
TYPE'
STDS. &
CRITERIA"
POL
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
PRELIM. RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC VMS
Prank)
Acute /
* FAV
n
I Det. Max Prod Cw Allowable Cw
Arsenic
NC
50
17
3
17
Acute N/A
___ _ ______`_____#VALUEI
Chronic 50
_____
MONITOR
_ _-_._ ___ _ —_______-_-_
Continue quarterly monitoring
No limit
Cadmium
NC
2
15
1
18
13
28.1
Acute 15.0
_ _ _-_ ______
Chronic 2.0
DAILY MAX. UMIT
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ ___ _ ___.___-_-_-___-___-
Monthly monitoring
Weekly average limit = 2.0
Chromium
NC
50
1,022
5
18
13
•
27
Acute 1,022
___ _ ______
Chronic 50
REMOVE?
MONITOR
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __________
Continue quarterly monitoring
No limit
Copper
NC
7
(AL)
7.3
2
18
17
206
Acute 7.3
___ _ _____ �__
Chronic 7.0
DAILY MAX. UMIT___
rConttnue
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ ____ _- _ _.____________
quarterly monitoring
No limit - action level parameter
Lead
NC
25
33.8
5
18
15
82
Acute 33.8
_ __ _
--Chronic 25.0—_____—______Monthlymonitoring
--- DAILY MAX. UMIT
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ _ _ _ _ -------_---_--_---
Weekly average limit = 25.0
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.2
18
5
0.314
Acute N/A
___ _ _ _ _ _____
Chronic 0.012
_#VALUEI _-___
DAILY MAX. LIMIT
_ _ _ _ _______-_______ ____
Monthly monitoring
Weekly average limit c 0.012
Nickel
NC
88
261
5
18
8
16.1
Acute 261
_ _ ________
Chronic 88
REMOVE?_.__
REMOVE?
_ _ _ _ _-_________-________
Monthly monitoring
Weekly average limit = 88.0
Selenium
NC
5.0
17
9
77
Acute WA
-_
Chronic 5.0
#VALUEI
_-__ ___._
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ ___ _ ___-________________
Monthly monitoring
Weekly average limit = 5.0
Silver
NC
0.06
(AL)
1.23
5
18
8 58
Acute 1.23
___ _ ___ _
Chronic 0.06 ~
__ DAILY MAX_ LIMIT_-_
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ _-___ ___ _ _-___-________
Continue quarterly monitoring
No limit - action level parameter
Zinc
NC
50
(AL)
67
10
17
!
17 939
Acute 67
___ _ __________
Chronic 50
DAILY MAX. LIMIT__ +
WK. AVG. LIMIT
_ _____ ___ _ ___ ___-_______
Continue quarterly monitoring
No limit - action level parameter
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, rpa_003
09/18/2002

•
ti
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
NC0003760.003
Parameter=
Arsenic
PQL
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.0 Std Dev. 1.69
2 Feb-1998 Mean 3.4
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.505
4 Apr-1998 LT 10 5.0 n 17
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Muff Factor =
7 Jul-1998 LT 5 2.5 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 ---
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 3 1.5
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 6 6.0
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 8 8.0
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 4 4.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 LT 5 2.5
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 LT 5 2.5
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 LT 5 2.5
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 5 2.5
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 LT 5 2.5
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 LT 5 2.5
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 LT 5 2.5
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 LT 5 2.5
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 LT 5 2.5
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 5 2.5
53
54
55
2.15
8.0 pgll
17.2 pg/I
Parameter =
Cadmium
PQL= 1
n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.00 Std Dev. 1.14
2 Feb-1998 Mean 0.75
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.525
4 Apr-1998 LT 0.5 0.25 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 Jul-1998 LT 1 0.50 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 1 1.00
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 1 0.50
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 1.7 1.70
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 1 1.00
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 1 1.00
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 0.3 0.30
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 0.3 0.30
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 0.3 0.30
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 0.3 0.30
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 0.2 0.20
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 0.1 0.10
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 0.4 0.40
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 0.1 0.10
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 0.26 0.26
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 0.5 0.25
53
54
55
5.61
5.0 pgll
28.1 All
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_003
-1 - 09/18/2002

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
e
Parameter =
Chromium
POL = 5
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10.0 5.0 Std Dev. 2.24
2 Feb-1998 Mean 3.3
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.684
4 Apr-1998 LT 5.0 2.5 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 Jul-1998 3.0 3.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct•1998 5.4 5.4
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 1 0.5
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 1 1.0
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 3.4 3.4
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 2 2.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 10 10.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 3.7 3.7
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 3.5 3.5
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 0.7 0.4
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 2.2 2.2
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 3.7 3.7
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 3.2 3.2
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 1.3 1.3
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 3.1 3.1
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 10 5.0
53
54
55
ii Parameter=
•
2.65
10.0 pgll
26.5 pgll
•
Copper
POL = 2
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 S.0 Std Dev. 14.85
2 Feb-1998 Mean 15.0
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.988
4 Apr-1998 5 5.3 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 Jul•1998 15 15.1 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 21.1 21.1
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 2.2 2.2
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 5.2 5.2
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 12.6 12.6
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 3.5 3.5
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 8 8.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 12 12.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 56 56.0
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 8 8.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 28 28.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 4.9 4.9
41 May-2001
42 Jun•2001
43 Jul-2001 47 47.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 14 14.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 13 13.0
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 9.5 9.5
53
54
55
3.67
56.0 pgll
205.5 pg/I
•
-2-
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_003
09/18/2002

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter
Lead
PQL = 5 c; c Parameter =
n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 5 2.5 Std Dev. 5.69
2 Feb-1998 Mean 6.2
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.915
4 Apr-1998 LT 5 2.5 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 JuI-1998 7 7.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 5 5.0
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 2 1.0
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 3.4 3.4
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 6.8 6.8
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 5.5 5.5
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 4.8 4.8
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 8.2 8.2
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 8.4 8.4
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 8.4 8.4
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 0.9 0.9
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 2.1 2.1
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 24 24.0
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 0.79 0.8
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 15 15.0
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 5.6 5.6
53
54
55
3.41
24.0 p9/I
81.8411
Mercury
PQL = 0.2
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 0.2 0.1 Std Dev. 0.03
2 Feb-1998 Mean 0.1
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.291
4 Apr-1998 LT 0.2 0.1 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor=
7 Jul-1998 LT 0.2 0.2 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 0.1 0.1
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 0.1 0.1
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 0.1 0.1
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 0.1 0.1
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 0.1 0.1
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 LT 0.2 0.2
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 0.2 0.1
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 LT 0.2 0.1
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 0.2 0.1
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 LT 0.2 0.1
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 LT 0.2 0.1
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul•2001 LT 0.2 0.1
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 LT 0.2 0.1
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 LT 0.2 0.1
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 0.2 0.1
53
54
55
1.57
0.2 pg/I
0.3 /rg/1
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_003
- 3 - 09/18/2002

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter =
Nickel
PQL = 5
n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 10 5.0 Std Dev. 1.81
2 Feb-1998 Mean 2.8
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.653
4 Apr-1998 LT 10 5.0 n 18
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 JuI-199B 2 2.0 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998 5.7 5.7
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 6 3.0
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar•1999
16 Apr-1999 4.8 4.8
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 JuI-1999 2 2.0
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 3 3.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec•1999
25 Jan-2000 2 2.0
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 LT 2.0 1.0
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 Jul-2000 LT 2.0 1.0
32 Aug•2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 2.0 1.0
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 LT 2.0 1.0
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 LT 2.0 1.0
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 Jul-2001 2.7 2.7
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 LT 2.0 1.0
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 6.3 6.3
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 5 2.5
53
54
55
2.56
6.3 pg/I
16.1 pg/I
Parameter=
Selenium
POL =
n Date Data BDL=112DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 5 2.5 Std Dev. 3.81
2 Feb-1998 Mean 3.1
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.237
4 Apr-1998 LT 5 2.5 n 17
5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor =
7 Jul-1998 LT 5 2.5 Max. Value
8 Aug-1998 Max Pred Cw
9 Sep-1998
10 Oct-1998
11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 1 0.5
14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 5.6 5.6
17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999
19 Jul-1999 16.4 16.4
20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 5 5.0
23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 LT 0.3 0.2
26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 0.3 0.3
29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 LT 5 2.5
32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 0.8 0.8
35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 1.4 1.4
38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 LT 0.3 0.2
41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001
43 JuI-2001 4.1 4.1
44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 1.8 1.8
47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 3.6 3.6
50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 5 2.5
53
54
55
4.72
16.4 pg/I
77.4 pgn
•
-4-
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_003
09/18/2002

•
0. • •
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter
Sliver
POL = 5 Parameter =
Zlnc
POL = 10
n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results n Date Data BDL_1/2DL Results
1 Jan-1998 LT 2 1 Std Dev. 1.97 1 Jan-1998 50 50.0 Std Dev. 83.01
2 Feb-1998 Mean 1.01 2 Feb-1998 Mean 106.8
3 Mar-1998 C.V. 1.961 3 Mar-1998 C.V. 0.778
4 Apr-1998 LT 0.2 0.1 n 18 4 Apr-1998 30.1 30.1 n 17
5 May-1998 5 May-1998
6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor = 7.22 6 Jun-1998 Mutt Factor = 3.03
7 Jut-1998 LT 1 0.5 Max. Value 8.0 pg/I iii 7 Jut-1998 122 122.0 Max. Value 310.0 Pg/t
8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw 57.8 pgll ; 8 Aug-1998 Max. Pred Cw 939.3 pg/I
9 Sep-1998 • 9 Sep-1998 •
10 Oct-1998 1 1 10 Oct-1998 168 168.0
11 Nov-1998 11 Nov-1998
12 Dec-1998 12 Dec-1998
13 Jan-1999 LT 1 0.5 13 Jan-1999 56.1 56.1
14 Feb-1999 14 Feb-1999
15 Mar-1999 15 Mar-1999
16 Apr-1999 2 2 16 Apr-1999 82.2 82.2
17 May-1999 17 May-1999
18 Jun-1999 18 Jun-1999
19 Jut-1999 8 8 19 JuI-1999 167 167.0
20 Aug-1999 20 Aug-1999
21 Sep-1999 21 Sep-1999
22 Oct-1999 1 1 22 Oct-1999 37.6 37.6
23 Nov-1999 23 Nov-1999
24 Dec-1999 24 Dec-1999
25 Jan-2000 0.02 0.02 25 Jan-2000 130 130.0
26 Feb-2000 26 Feb-2000
27 Mar-2000 27 Mar-2000
28 Apr-2000 LT 0.01 0.005 28 Apr-2000 160 160.0
29 May-2000 29 May-2000
30 Jun-2000 30 Jun-2000
31 JuI-2000 0.01 0.01 31 JuI-2000 150 150.0
32 Aug-2000 32 Aug-2000
33 Sep-2000 33 Sep-2000
34 Oct-2000 LT 0.01 0.005 34 Oct-2000 49 49.0
35 Nov-2000 35 Nov-2000
36 Dec-2000 36 Dec-2000
37 Jan-2001 3.6 3.6 37 Jan-2001 20 20.0
38 Feb-2001 38 Feb-2001
39 Mar-2001 39 Mar-2001
40 Apr-2001 LT 0.01 0.005 40 Apr-2001 34 34.0
41 May-2001 41 May-2001
42 Jun-2001 42 Jun-2001
43 JuI-2001 0.013 0.013 43 JuI-2001 230 230.0
44 Aug-2001 44 Aug-2001
45 Sep-2001 45 Sep-2001
46 Oct-2001 LT 0.04 0.02 46 Oct-2001 19 19.0
47 Nov-2001 47 Nov-2001
48 Dec-2001 48 Dec-2001
49 Jan-2002 LT 0.2 0.1 49 Jan-2002 310 310.0
50 Feb-2002 50 Feb-2002
51 Mar-2002 51 Mar-2002
52 Apr-2002 LT 0.5 0.25 52 Apr-2002 - ---
53 53
54 54
55 55
03760 rpa 001 002 003.xls, data_003
- 5 - 09/18/2002

ti
)\)\1 ttl6
-4)
9Iroy
rkik.s
1-h.3 tsc.„ Lpi
c►� R.p�'c c� ;yr was
Wt.&

Rj
tk •03 ,0335 , , 67 ,1 , 0)l , 01 ,o 1 , n" ,a1 .cx7 ,oZ 1 , 0 _
.6% ,043 .011 .05
T ,or-i- •1Y5 o3i A1134: ,04c) rro3 ,0031p,001 ;, 5 (. S ,Mt: Ca 4110 , 07- 4,401 .003 41'51 ,00. Z.00
, .o.6, ,wsv`•tpl &mc.S..01 ,' Z,0,oh, .0)3 ,01- •0035; .)A 00 <'. ' 0Ate` o t.rE WV
ti\ ,0% ,0S
�J �J
±171
,OL ,0114.0t .0Z9 .0747600F4io1o4.sot'c,n1 4405<,0aoZ,11.8
%ono ,10
,013,0�
,o po 4.0
.,osS <. ,Yam.
4,01 &,vl 005 <,DI toot 4,01 !440S-Cooarl?.. ,053
J ,o35 .01 I.,t231 4.001 .003 az3 Goo.4061 4,0o1 Lo 1 , �1) ,013 ,off 4,001 <401 ,00zz .00t.601ip (.001 C,(7o3 4,001 <,QO (,n5.1
,\ ,o 15 ,ob
,002Z ,0013',7)86, . 0Z1 ,cb% ,00Z ,00, ,014b cool +ZS ,01Z. ,13 ,001 401 . „..t0M--,fig',coZ.. ,00 ,ci f, ,0001
,og ,�1"� ,11
,0? , 04 , oot I ,0(1 ,0151 , 0o3 ,006 , , 0193 , ajo l ,016 , l ,001 ,o034-,01t1,P 6b ,O ax ,00a ,)1?4,' 1 , v44
,o3S , 11 ,01
C)� , 03S , O 1 , Oo1 ,o 041., 33,4 ,O t° ,teD3 1 s )) . ` `o0S , 1 ,.190 .013 in .001 ,V- I.Tr sA , ow) a ,00S .1110t , 0
,035 ,05 .01t... -
,05: .11_ ,dog ,I4)

-7 0
0
D
.o4-3
.04
43'5
%IQ
,03
lo
5
0
.01
Io , oS"
.043
.0Z4 .01
, or:4 OS
la) oZ,
fj
,03I 1
itavlb 4.051
,cotf
icce
,(1.1711
.0011
(JA:1
, 04Z
oa')
o
%Olt .00,
,0Z.S"
.03
, 024- .04:
rnh 4:053
(J-1-
.014) .0b
,O\
,t03
,o1 o t4-
,13
.ons. ,13 Da31
. Ito
,o17 .13
.o13 ,00l3
, 012_ , )1
, 3 (t:.
,24 ,coms
5
. to
(o
, \ CV73b
,14-
,t 1
,S3 0007
.19
.0B
0
.cob
AX04-
.0035,0%
,oco7
,C05
4012,0-06
m31
xot3
.047-
sot 4-
ir
:„133
:,+2)
,0054)
.cdt
4 407...,co
‹,005 .0013
<41„
ATLI ,OC,Z. (4W1‹.
.014-
.009
z.)01.9
(
<,
014-ort.
40)3 OIL
'OA
4,c497..
14
:040
•03.12--
4)0

/00
'37
c�;
;,n(¢ : , to ,00tt ,o0bta ,019 toot,1)",0I5 :4,o3oL,<,00Stot << ,T0
v
07 , t, .cog- CA1 , ott ,003b (, o
2; a)
OM- ,16 MA. 4031 ,013 ,oc' !,00,3 2C,cou ,0031 .31
,nlq .off
i I
.col 12_13 4,o036-<•41 . . b(.00S <.o ( t. --
.or ,o)

Q...
.
k.•
,
1
."--1
—,—,--)
,____,
_____'.3
c7-1
,......—.
j-7
---
i,t3A-4-1.05k6
113.3
llobA
44-
\ZO
z3,$)
,..,74
!,36
S.3
131
)1,1
ioo,14.
4,tA
yy
.. 1,313
4?,L
54
i'x),I.
r;4.)
•-•'--
7-420
),s71:
...:4
?
..
.0AS
io$k.k.
,ots
.01A
1M0
PAo
t7.,,t)1
1-1;,.6,-
-900.0
,-...,Gi_
640
1,tA.
.4-1
1-14
4q,,o
4A
'r•A
NIP,,,,6
1,c4
313
‘1,?,..
11Z:o
isG,(
e-,4
2_So
3,1-3
o,4-1
Pe-.001
4 ovi.
,oG
. 00)
04
1.30
Tt-,0
75.
c),0,0
(3?,z,
,1c.
3.8o
1,3
'4
'51,4-
')1,,,
115,1
.11
0.)9
z.15
s18
37,1
.45,1
"01,0
6t-,\
.4445
)-1)
1 'S.
st)
P
iootol
.Qt:i-
.0119
I31-
:8,o
Colo
6il.
(74,1
ill
14-0
41
,LE5
1,93
tr,g,
113,7.
1Z1,1,6
18),5":,oet
4115
-0,3
3,ZD
Pi)
Isc,\•
h)4,0
l44
tiVe,(,04
lzo
-.t.,
),1
4..oci
4.,ot
<.ol
(031
.otB
7.
(J35
!'L1-.1
(.04-
4-1-
1:+.6
IttS
P
soot
ow.
An3
.021
,r431
0 sA
7',,,0
51,1-
7Z,9
%.1
44
12.°
95.
0.65
, t.,t)Z..t),it..
_
-43
-7.a.
P,,t,,,i
14
124.0
30,3
Sl,9
'51...
6(4-
Vi-o
Z-c-
,z1.
P
,0(2.1
pc r - A
iools'
,o3S3
40Z.6
1,57.
-
315
513
63,10
14,
‹,o4-
fact)
LS
L.*
1,1zA
ii/e)
Sc).9
134
81-5
14,2.
151,1
1•94
25t,
4S.
4,,
4,.‘
3
(04.
11,z3
2..
,00l
,0)31
.o
,oi3_
, i,
,otti:
.....____
7,03
9X,9
la •
9‘);1-
174f,S
.t.
43
(o3
Ai)
P
ovS
sa33
AR.
,o13
114-
(4C`,4.
%,9
I3V,
R1.0
4,04.
790
7..,41
,35
- 1,S4
ice.A
IsB,
,z
545
its
59
104
.0.
_____

•
f
_b
•
1►16 t03, ,1615. 1 {- '- �. 4, 1048 to,9S ,39 (7 <,awZ .,avZ,a93
1,r+ 1g)e) I3ZO' t ,t
i\1\ t 1'� 1 l 354,04 3' 0 ! ), ,`)ta
M 1,9.. 13,41- 1 too „* 3so-
(,' o %.1 43,1 89,3 15'4►3 4 ,off.11-Z. 11,1 44-
1,` ,' 59,3 go 4Z. Z4b 353" C ,4. Io9D Z,38 Z 12 P ,ate , oz.
159 C,34.614- 5 ILA Z. 440 Z ,t2.
J35' .441 5 4.o4 ( , `)4 , �9
I ,1Z. 5.04 N-, IZ3 ,1; c,04-, 141 Z ,3 .`
40
.; .wt 631 .016 •0%.
Zop
5 " 12+ 415,E T5 S t 8o4 C, 04 (pi< l ,)(
P 1,33 ' ;:5 bl.,) 356 c (,off G.4o )43
ik 131 3,u"),+ ¶ A,o OZ. G,,o 1 1,03
a ,. 4Sa? .53 t 0 M03
• t I II- ' 113 ' 31,'3 : S'86 ,1; ( ,
S- 1,: 7-1),S 93,0 i55 &,04-3 30,to
S 39,5 93 4-10fV99 <, o4- 14,cw
,r .0IZE
1o13 ,cab ,olA .off,

1.
..)
6.----
,
.
it())
117-8
zz-7.
1?$
'5S-F--
.0)
65D
11%
,S-+
,9o15"
. coS3
.006t
.011-
toS2
( ,oa
(MA-
1111
tel
4;.14
,05
two
4-,it
ho
p
1io5
44,-+
(06,?...
'IV
9¢,t
4,oJoz.3,5
.55
105
Z-S.1-
4S-.0
efrod
LI I.
44,
190
17,14
,ek-
?
,00L
,to
/,05
l4,1
3
Z.9.40
43,s
4.04
Zio
2Z-,t
$9
•

erk ,
\.
414WWW.. WivC . e.ck --'
CAVI
C
1 L f t. G37f4::) g', 673 ,
0,,9- (n.005)
,
)4)
171&-L.0.4A
va)
Aver g9 �.� ��► nt_-))
,o4)
41-1S ,0:1-43)
'005)) ?
� � x

PROJECT NOTES
1.
PAGE
PROJECT: boPO"t k " I J" Tor4 RPA RIVER BASIN: NOAS E
PERMIT NO.: N C-'3O0 344, O
COUNTY: LENA 0 R. -
_NL/9q__
cF M.JA)—C-z4-) DU Ns.,--C E. _ ���^^--� LC2—.-^..WI,-) e-k, h''T. \klaA 1,4. i4;"latj ,
W`stolA oill''':%4
4-f3o
kszt..,...44.1 f1/41 b
031,1/4.- ..__ o,..e� ('�1,�,1
- SIL o--skPo,e.^-k. OCPSF
V0.1k A,v-k-o..: t
Vic. . ___
10_(05
—
...__CCF
(.._w.
p,..,,,,(.S
n'�., �.�1.
4,..1k rs.o '%".-cAA.e4.4.... i,.-1�
w� w. 'Z,urtOtta . Ro.„- ate.., w+s-1
A...ad..)
jch.- 1
iciza
LVM lu.
"(',lw4" w-$ earauiw,_. tiu.r t

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Self -Monitoring Summary August 16. 2(
FACILITY REQUIREMENT
YEAR JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Dupont De Nemours Perm chr lim: 3.3 % 1998 — Pass — Pass
NC0003573/001 Begin:9/I/1996 Frcqucncy: Q P/F + Feb May Aug Nov NonComp:Single 1999 — Pass — ••• Late
County: Bladcn Region: FRO Subbasin: CPFI6 2000 — late Pass •- Pass
PF: 17 Special 2001 — Pass PassPass — Pass
7010: 791.0 IWC(%)3.3 Order: 2002 — Pass — — Pass
Pass
Pass Pass
Pass ••• Pass
Pass --- Pass
Pass --- Pass
Durham Co. -Triangle WWTP Perm chr lim: 90% Y 1998 — Pass — — Passsig
NC0026051/00I Begin:7/1/2002 Frcqucncy: Q Fcb May Aug Nov + NonComp:Single 1999 — Pass — Pass
County: Durham Region: RRO Subbasin: CPF05 2000 — NRJPass — — Bt
PF: 6.0 Special 2001 — Pau — — Pass
7Q10: R0 IWC(%):100 Order: 2002 — Pass — — Pass
Pass
Pass -- — Pass
Pass NR/Pass
Pass Pass
Pass — Pass
Durham-Northside WWTP Penn chr lint: 90%.
NC0023841/001 Begin:11/1/2000 Frcqucncy: Q Jan Apr Jul Oct
County. Durham Region: RRO Subbasin NEU01
PF: 20.0 special
7010: 0.075 IWC(%)99.5 Order:
+ NonComp:Singlc
Y 1998 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — —
1999 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — Pass —
2000 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — —
2001 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — —
2002 Pass — — Pass Pass — Pass
E. 1. Dupont De Nemours/Kinston Fac. PERM CHR LIM: 1.9% 1998 Pass — — Pass — Pass• — — Pass
NC0003760/001 Bcgin:7/1/1994 Frequency: Q P/F + Jan Apr Jul Oct NonComp:SINGLE 1999 Pass — — Pass — Pass Pass
County: Lenin Region: WARO Subbasin: NEU05 2000 Pass — — Pass — Pass Pass
PF: 3.6 Special 2001 Pass — — Pass — Pass — Pass
7010: 283.1 IWC(%):1.9 Order: 2002 Lnle Pass — Pass —
Easco Aluminum Penn chr lim: 2.4% (Grab)
NC0086231/001 Begin:10/1/1998 Frequency: Q P/F + Mar Jun Scp Dec
County. Hcrtfonl Region: WARO Subbasin CHO01
PF: 0.024 Special
7Q10: 3.0 IWC(%):2.4 Order:
+ NonComp:Single
1998 — — — — .- -. — N -- N
1999 — Pass — — Late Pass Late Pass — NR
2000 NR/Pass Pass — Pass — Pass — Pass
2001 — Pau -- — Pass NRJPass NR/-I
2002 — li H
Eaton Corp/001 Perm 24hr LC50 ac monit cpis Ithd
NC0003379/001 Bcgin:5/I/2000 Frequency: 50WD/A
County. Person Region: RRO Subbasin: NEU01
PF: NA Special
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%):100.0 Order:
NonComp:
1998 —
1999 —
2000 —
2001 —
2002 >100
>100 — — — — — — — —
Ecusta Division Perm chr lim: 21% (Grab)
NC0000078/001 Begin:10/1/1995 Frcqucncy: Q P/F + Jan Apr Jul Oct
County: Transylvania Region: ARO Subbasin: FRBOI
PF: 27.5 Speo.al
7Q 10: 154 IWC(%) 21 Order:
NonComp; Single
1998 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — Pass
1999 Pass — Pass Pass Pass
2000 Pau — Pass — Pass Pass
2001 Pass — Pass -•- Pass --- Pau
2002 Pass — Pass — Pau
Eden WWTP/Mebane Bridge Penn chr lim: 6% 1998 — Pass Pass Pasa — Pass
NC0025071/001 Begin:711/1997 Frequency: Q P/F + Mar Jun Sep Dec + NonComp:Single 1999 — — Pau •- Pass — Pass — Pass
County. Rockingham Region: WSRO Subbasin: ROA03 2000 — Pau -- •- Pass Pass — Pass
PF: 13.5 Special 2001 — Pass Pass — Pass — -- Pass
7010: 386 IWC(%):6.3 Order: 2002 — Pass -- •-- Pass
Eden -Dry Creek WWTP Perm 24hr p/f ac Jim: 90%; upon exp 1.0MGD chr lim 0.4% 1998 — Pass -- Pass — -- Pass -- Pass
NC0025151/001 Begin:6/1/2002 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Scp Dec + NonComp:Single 1999 — Pass Pass -- Pass — -- Pass
County: Rockingham Region: WSRO Subbasin: ROAOJ 2000 — Pass — Pass — — Pass --- ••- Pass
PF: 0.5 Special 2001 — — Pass — — Fail Pass Pass Pass -- Pass
7010: 313 IWC(%):0.24 Order: 2002 — Pass — — fail.Fail Pass
Ekstam. Gibbs. & Roebuck LLC Perm chr lim: 58% 1998 — H — — H — — H — — H —
NC0051195/00I Begin:3/1/2000 Frcqucncy: Q Fcb May Aug Nov + NonComp: Single 1999 — NR NR NR H -- H — H
County Martin Region: WARO Subbasin: TAR06 2000 — H — — NR/H — H H
PF: 0.30 Special 2001 — H — — NRJH NR/11 — — H
7010:034 IWC(%):58.0 Order: 2002 — H — -- H —
Y Pre 1998 Data Available
LEGEND:
PERM = Permit Requirement LET= Administrative Letter - Target Frequency= Monitoring frequency: Q. Quarterly; M• Monthly; BM- Bimonthly; SA- Semiannually: A- Annually; OWD- Only when rischarging: D- Discontinued momtonng requirement
Begin = First month required 7Q10 = Receiving stream low now criterion (els) += quanedy monitoring increases to monthly upon failure or NR Months that testing must occur - ex. Jan. Apr. Jul. Oct NonComp = Current Compliance Requirement
PF = Permitted flow (MGD) IWC% = Instrealn haste concentration P/F = Pass/Fail test AC = Acute CHR = Chronic
Data Notation: f- Fathead Minnow; • - Ceriodaphnia sp.; my - Mysid shrimp; ChV - Chronic value: P - Mortality of stated percentage at highest concentration; at • Performed by DWQ Aquatic Tox Unit; bt - Bad test
Reporting Notation: --- = Data not required: NR • Not reported Facility Activity Status: 1 - Inactive. N - Newly Issucd(Tu construct): 11 - Active but nut discharging: $•More data available far mouth u, question. • OR(' signature n ecded
19

' 000.
The miracles of science'
TDaA10
doO'�tG�
Mr. Schuster, Supervisor, NPDES Group
Division of Water Quality
3800 Barrett Drive
Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
Dear Mr. Schuster:
DuPont Dacron®
P.O. Box 800
Kinston NC 28502-0800
Tel. [phone]
August 29, 2001
The attached letter of delegation is intended as an update to your existing file
on this subject. If you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
la..4-4-e->44.1
Louis Barrow
SHEA Manager

41P010
The miracles of science'
Mr. Ken Schuster, Supervisor, NPDES Group
Division of Water Quality
3800 Barrett Drive
Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
Dear Mr. Schuster:
DuPont Dacron® Filament
P.O. Box 800
Kinston. NC 28502-0800
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
August 29, 2001
In accordance with DuPont procedures and pursuant to 40CFR270.111 and
40CFR12222 and all applicable state regulations, I delegate my authority to sign all
reports required by permits and other information that you may request to James Proctor
and Lily Zhang of the Environmental Affairs Section.
The delegation of this authority is in line with the normal responsibilities of
the Plant Environmental organization.
Sincerely,
iftte
Robert C. Amos
Plant Manager

4
MEMO TO FILE
From:
Subject:
Mike Templeton
NPDES Unit
Proposal for New Process Line
DuPont Kinston Facility
NPDES Permit No. NC0003760
Lenoir County
Neuse River Basin
Date: July 1, 1999
Mike Gell, DuPont Engineering, called about DuPont's plans to make a new product at the Kinston plant.
The new product is still secret. MG said it represents a major breakthrough in synthetic fibers, comparable to
the release of Dacron. They hope to have it in operation by year's end. He was calling to let us know about
the plans and to find out what we will require of them.
The new product is a polyester resin similar to some already made at the plant. It is made with
essentially the same chemical process they already use; the key difference is that propylene
glycol is the main feedstock instead of ethylene glycol. They will be able to use an existing
process line with only limited modifications.
DuPont made some pilot runs and then ran treatability and chemical tests on the resulting
wastewater. They didn't find major changes in the wastewater characteristics, treatability, etc.
They did find propylene glycol in the wastewater, as expected, and "small amounts" of acrolein.
Both seemed readily degradable (not too surprising because the WWTP mixed liquor is well
acclimated to the other process wastewaters).
MG is preparing a written proposal for the project and will send that to Dave G. in the next week to ten days.
After reviewing that, we will probably want to set up a site visit and meet with DuPont to hear more about
the proposal and discuss DWQ requirements. By that time, we may know more about the schedule for
getting the Neuse permits reissued.
Other notes:
The new process still falls under the polyester resin requirements in the OCPSF rules, so their permit limits
should not change much, if at all. The permit does not have a limit for acrolein, so we may need to add one.
They will not need an additional flow allowance.
Nitrogen may be a big issue for the plant. The process wastewaters are nitrogen -poor, except for the small
amount of sanitary wastes they have, and they have to add 5-7 lb N per 100 lb BOD. With 12 product lines
and the intermittent tank washings (high -strength wastes), the influent wastewater strength is highly variable,
meaning that controlling the N addition to minimize the excess is very difficult. In the last year, they have
exceeded their monthly allocation and/or equivalent TN concentration in eleven months. A reduced
allocation will be tough to meet and will not be well received by the company.
Wastewater flow is down significantly, due to water conservation efforts at the plant. This makes meeting
the OCPSF concentration limits more difficult.

dPOIt
DuPont Fibers
June 29, 1999
To: David Goodrich
NPDES Unit Supervisor
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Subject: Modification of NPDES Permit Application
E.I. DuPont Co. Inc. Kinston Plant
NPDES Permit # NC0003760
Lenoir County
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
DuPont Fibers
P.O. Box 800
Kinston, North Carolina 28502-0800
Phone: [phone]
The E.I. DuPont Co. Inc. manufacturing plant located at Highway 11 north, Kinston, NC in
Lenoir county requests a change to it's NPDES permit application which was presented to
the State in August, 1998. Since the permit application for Permit # NC0003760 was
submitted in July, 1998 the plant has been informed that it may be the manufacturing for a
new polyester resin. We do not believe any major modifications will be necessary to
accommodate this new product since it is a polyester resin/fiber and falls in the Organic
Chemicals , Plastics and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) Categorical effluent guidelines.
While the plant is not currently capable of manufacturing the new product we expect that the
manufacturing area projects will be complete in the next 12 to 24 months. Since the process
chemistry is slightly different for the new resin there may be some organic chemicals in the
wastewater that are currently not present. To address this the plant has conducted bench
scale wastewater treatment testing that confirms the wastewater from the new process is
compatible with the plant treatment system, and that the site can meet the current permit
discharge limits while manufacturing this new product. We have included under a
confidential business information heading the information on the projected loading of the
new organics and bench scale treatability study data.
We would like to discuss the permit application and the status of the new manufacturing
process with you at your office or at the plant, whichever is convenient for you. Since you
have not visited the site it may be an opportunity to become more familiar with the DuPont
manufacturing site at Kinston, NC.
Confidential Page 1 06/30/99
® Printed on Recycled Paper
E I du Pont de Nemours and Company R-12003•K

1
If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at [phone] or by email at
Clifford.O.Lee@ usa.dupont.com.
Sincere y,
1
Clifford O. Lee
Environmental Manager
DuPont, Kinston Plant
Enclosures:
7/1/1997 Biodegradability assessment of Acrolein and Allyl alcohol utilizing Kinston
Biomass and Electrolytic Respirometry.]
Confidential Page 2 06/30/99

DuPont Confidential
Wastewater and Predicted Organics to Treatment from the 3-GT process:
MATERIAL FLOW BOD5 FLOW % Composition CAS
lbs./hr lbs./lb. lbs./yr.
Water 2279 0.00 17093077 99.962%
Propyleneglycol 0.8054 1.08 6040 0.035% 57-55-6
Propionaldehyde 0.0136 0.63 102 0.001% 123-38-6
Acrolein 0.0136 0.43 102 0.001% 107-02-8
Allyl alcohol 0.0136 1.79 102 0.001% 107-18-6
HED* 0.0041 NK# 31 0.000% 5465-07-6
3-HMT** 0.0041 NK 31 0.000% 14774-36-8
Isopropanol 0.0039 1.53 29 0.000% 67-63-0
Acetone 0.0039 0.85 29 0.000% 67-64-1
Acrylic Acid 0.0001 0.83 0.000% 79-10-7
Ethanol 0.0001 2.11 0.000% 64-17-3
* HED = hydroxy ethyl dioxane
** 3-HMT = 3-hydroxy methyl tetrahydropyran
# not known
Confidential
Page 3 06/30/99
a •

To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
SOC Priority Project: Yes No X
If "Yes", SOC No.
Attn: Mike Templeton
Date: August 28, 1998
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Permit No. NC0003760
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
RECEIVED
WATER QUALITYSECTION
SfP ' 1998
Non -Discharge Permitting
1. Facility and Address: E.I. DuPont Kinston Wastewater Treatment Facility
P.O. Box 800
Kinston, NC 28502
2. Date of Investigation: Site Visit -August 14, 1998
Conference Call to discuss permit -August 28,1998
3. Report Prepared by: Brad Shaver
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Mr. Jan Kneib
[phone]
5. Directions to Site: The facility is located approximately 0.05 miles
south of the intersection of NC 11 and SR 1802 in Lenoir County.
6. Discharge Point(s); List for all discharge points:
Point #001 - Latitude: 35°19'29"
Longitude: 77°27'56"
Point #002 - Latitude: 35°19'28"
Longitude: 77028'57"
Point #003 - Latitude: 35020'20"
Longitude: 77028'30"
Attach USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and
discharge point on map.
USGS Quad No. USGS Quad Name: _Grifton_
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application? Yes X No
Land is available for expansion.
If "No", explain:
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included):
Relatively flat +- 10 feet above sea level.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: The nearest building other than building
owned by DuPont is approximately 0.5 miles.

10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Neuse River
a. Classification: Class C, NSW
b. River Basin and Sub -basin No.
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
Fish Propagation, fishing, boating
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater to be Permitted: 3.6 MGD
b. Current Permitted Capacity: 3.6 MGD
c. Actual Treatment Capacity: 3.6 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction allowed by Authorizations to Construct
issued past two years: N/A
e. Description of existing or substantially constructed wastewater
treatment facilities: The existing facility consists of a
emergency holding pond, a 3.6 million gallon aeration basin, dual
secondary clarifiers, chlorine contact chamber, sludge dewatering
press, and backup sludge drying beds (outfall 001); noncontact
cooling water, steam condensate and storm water runoff (outfall
002); and noncontact cooling and steam condensate waters (outfall
003) .
f. Description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities:
No construction proposed.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
DuPont is in the business of textile fabrics which there are a
number of metals and other organics which could theoretically pose
a threat to surface waters.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
In development Approved
Should be required
Not needed X
2. Residuals Handling and Utilization Disposal Scheme
a. If residuals are being land applied, specify DEM permit number:
Residuals Contractor: BFI Waste Industries
Telephone Number:
b. Residuals Stabilization: PSRP PFRP Other
c. Landfill:
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (specify):
3. Treatment Plant Classification (attach completed rating sheet): IV

d
4
4. SIC Code(s): 001 - 2821 & 2824
Wastewater Code(s): 001 - 36
002 - 14
003 - 14
Main Treatment Unit Code: 050 3
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are
any public monies involved (municipals only)? No
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests:
Quarterly Aquatic Toxicity Testing.
3. Important SOC, JOC, or Compliance Schedule dates (indicate): N?A
Activity Date
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
4. Alternatives Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated all of the
non -discharge options available? Provide Regional perspective for each
option evaluated. N/A
Spray Irrigation:
Connection to Regional Sewer System:
Subsurface Disposal:
Other Disposal Options:
5. Other Special Items:
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
**Please note the highlighted treatment units under Part II No. 1(e), these
units should be included in the new permit language.
E.I. DuPont has requested six changes and comments concerning the permit
renewal process. These requests are outlined and stated in the permit renewal
package.
(1) DuPont has asked for a reduction of OCPSF monitoring to one per year as
required by federal statutes. They do not feel that there is just cause
for more frequent monitoring based on the data compiled in the renewal
package.
(2) DuPont has asked to eliminate monitoring on metals where results show no
WQ impact. According to the most recent DMR data all of the metals they
have asked to eliminate are below freshwater water standards except for
copper. In the month of April copper was at a level of 375 ug/1. All of
the metals requested to be eliminated should be considered for exclusion
except for copper, which has shown to be significantly higher than the
freshwater standard.
(3) DuPont has asked to reduce the Aquatic Toxicity monitoring requirement to
once per year. The regional Office does not support this request for
waters entering the Neuse River, which is nutrient sensitive.
(4) DuPont has asked for a mass limit for Phosphorous and discharge limits
for Nitrogen be eliminated since their involvement with the Lower Neuse

•
River Nitrogen Association. These concerns should be handled by the new
Neuse River Management Strategy.
(5) A review of the fecal coliform discharge levels from DuPont',s most recent
twelve-month period is of concern to the Regional Office. The following
is representative of the number of colonies DuPont routinely discharges
to the Neuse River.
Aug '97 - 210 Sept '97 - 320 Oct '97 - 900 Nov '97 - 420 Dec '97 -
320 May '98 - 5000 Mar '98 - 140 Feb '98 - 410 Apr '98 - 170 Jun '98
- 380 * Based on these numbers from DuPont's discharge, the Regional
Office recommends a fecal coliform limit be replaced on the discharge
permit.
** DuPont has made it very clear that they would like to have the permit
writer to visit the facility before the draft permit is issued. During the
last permit renewal process in 1994 DuPont entertained the permit writer and
found their experience to be rewarding. DuPont would like to have a similar
situation during this permit renewal process.
It is recommended that this permit be reissued.
NPDES Permit Staff Report
Version 10/92
eid
Signature of report preparer
a,,,- Wa er Quality Re Tonal Supervisor
Date