HomeMy WebLinkAboutDEQ-CFW_00078448From: Kritzer, Jamie [/D=[XCHANG[LAB5/OU=EXCHANGEADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYD|BOHF2]SPDLT)/CN=REOP|ENTS/CN=C[E9]C49D01445A]B541B8327DCDCD4O-JBKR|TZ[R]
Sent: 6/16/I0I710:36:47PM
To: Holman, Sheila [/h=ExchangeLabs/ou=ExchanXeAdministrative Group
(FYD|8OHFZ33PDO)/cn=Redpient$cn=94a3f59574d34b769b3bd834a97IO5c5-scho|man];Culpepper, Linda
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=ExchangeAdministrative Group
(FYD|8OHFZ33PDO)/cn=Redpienl=73d475cbae3Z4a29687eI7IIdc9a79c5'|mcu|pepper];Zimmerman, Jay
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=ExchangeAdministrative Group
(FYD|8OHFZ33PDO)/cn=Redpient$cn=56]d8I453bd54ebf8587IIa7b]1d6cdf-sjzimmerman]
Subject: FVV: One more question regardingGpnX
What I sent back to the reporter. Maybe we can look at this a bit on Monday.
Jamie Kritzer
Communications Director
N.C.Department ofEnvironmental Quality
919'707'8602
£oa
8�r�r�aro��a�u��o�acun�aLas/andn�aybeo�oo�aa��a�b���erb��
From: Kritzer, Jamie
Sent: Friday, June 16,2D176:31PM
To: Vaughn Hagerty «vau8hn.ha8erty@8maiicom>;Munger, Bridget <brid8et.mun8er@ncdenr.8ov>
Cc Sink, Mar|a<Mar|a.Sink@ncdenr.gov>; Kritzer, Jamie /jamie.kritzer@ncdenr.8ov>
Subject: RE: One more question regarding GenX
Jamie Kritzer
Communications Director
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality
03110YA���
En�J ����m��a�d�a �au���0, e
From: Vaughn Hagerty [mailto:vaughn.hagerty@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 8:48 AM
To: Munger, Bridget <bridget.munger@ncdenr.gov>
Cc: Kritzer, Jamie <jam ie.kritzer@ ncdenr.gov>; Sink, Maria <Marla.Sink@ncdenr.gov>
Subject: Re: One more question regarding GenX
Hi, guys. So, since Chemours *does* say this applies and I'm going to be writing a story about this with a
deadline of this afternoon, I thought I'd take another shot at seeing if DEQ wants to comment. Just to be clear,
we're talking about a situation where EPA insists that Chernours keep 99 percent of GenX from entering the
environment when it manufactures it but has no such requirement when it is produced as a byproduct in a
separate operation. Both of those are occurring at Cherriours Fayetteville Works plant, according to the
company.
Does DEQ agree with Chernours that the exemption applies in this case?
Regards,
Vaughn Hagerty
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:5 8 AM, Vaughn Hagerty <vau ghn. hageLty(2( gmail. com> wrote:
Thanks, Bridget. I have asked EPA, but they generally take several days to get back on specific questions. The
exception I quoted is part of what EPA calls a consent order boilerplate. I'm guessing it's part of most, if not
all, consent orders, so I assumed DEQ staff comes across it on occasion in other consent orders.
Is that not the case? Does DEQ not deal with EPA consent orders in any way? I'm asking those questions
mainly because I get the impression that the one governing the GenX manufacture is going to come up quite a
bit, at least for the next several days. Knowing how DEQ is and is not involved in them will probably save
both of us a lot of time.
Regardless, on this specific question, the other reason I asked is that I'm guessing DEQ staff deal with this sort
of language in general, especially those in the CFR citations, which I suspect are key in interpreting this. I'm
just trying to avoid making a stupid mistake and misinforming people.
So, without referencing GenX or Chernours specifically, could staff there say whether this exception, which is
part of the EPA boilerplate, applies to a fairly narrow set of circumstances in which byproducts might occur
(which, if this is boilerplate, seems plausible)? And, if so, could they at least summarize what those
circumstances are? If not, is it fairly broad? Or is this just an instance where DEQ doesn't know?
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Munger, Bridget <bridget.munger@)ncdenr.Rov> wrote:
me=
I've checked in with DEQ staff who agree that this is a question for the EPA as their agency issued the consent order.
EPA staff would be most familiar with the intent of that provision of the document.
DEQ-CFW-00078449
Fan leffarlTreTro IRWITIVOIR1=2
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
Division of Water Resources
F•S�!>wi+�lyd�E:ilriTil
bridget.munger@ncdenr.gov
1612 Mail Service Center
0
PC11"111 U I I
R
From: Vaughn Hagerty [mailto:vaughn.hagerty@gmaii.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 12:10 PM
To: Munger, Bridget <bridget.munger@ncdenr.gov>
Subject: One more question regarding GenX
Hi, Bridget. I'm wondering if DEQ could help me interpret one more thing. I apologize for the long preamble,
but like everything else in this story, it's complicated. I'm hoping to get this online later today and into
tomorrow's paper. I have asked EPA, but nothing as of yesterday morning.
As you probably know, Chemours manufactures GenX under an EPA consent order that stipulates various
things Chemours must do, including how efficient it needs to be in preventing releases to the environment.
It also includes this exception (which is apparently part of EPA's boilerplate for these documents):
(3) Byproducts. The requirements of this Order do not apply to the PN/fN substances when they are produced,
without separate commercial intent, only as a "byproduct" as defined at 40 CFR 720.3(d) and in compliance
with 40 CFR 720.30(g).
DEQ-CFW-00078450
Here are those federal reg entries:
40 CFR 720.3(d) Byproduct means a chemical substance produced without a separate commercial
intent during the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of another chemical substance or mixture.
40 CFR 720.30(g) Any byproduct if its only commercial purpose is for use by public or private
organizations that (1) burn it as a fuel, (2) dispose of it as a waste, including in a landfill or for
enriching soil, or (3) extract component chemical substances from it for commercial purposes. (This
exclusion only applies to the byproduct; it does not apply to the component substances extracted from
the byproduct.)
One major unanswered question we have is, how is GenX getting into the Cape Fear River, especially since
the process they describe which appears to be the GenX manufacture states that wastewater is *not*
discharged.
One possibility we're looking at is whether it is a byproduct of other processes whose wastewater is
discharged.
uestion is:
COM
Vaughn Hagerty
DEQ-CFW-00078451