DEQ-CFW_00049754

From: Grzyb, Julie [/O=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDI BOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECI PI ENTS/CN=75D1654D45154C2ABB08596A2C9AF282-JAGRZYB]
Sent: 6/27/2017 5:57:32 PM
To: Sink, Marla [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=14436cdf33f147acad62db9cb7dcf81b-Marla.Sink]; Kritzer, Jamie
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=cee93c49d01445a3b541bb327dcdc840-jbkritzer]
CC: Munger, Bridget [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=c54elf650cea49968a5aba689c204f61-bcmunger]; Culpepper, Linda
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=73d475cbae324a29687e1711dc9a79c5-ImcuIpepper]; Brower, Connie
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=7ee8db84d956431c9a1f781f5597ba62-cubrower]; Rodriguez, Teresa
[[e-mail]]
Subject: RE: Vaughn: answers to your questions
Connie and I are struggling with what is GenX verses what is a HFPO monomer. I have asked Mike Johnson to call us.
In the meantime to rephrase our answer since Vaughn wants some clarification - I have added the information in red
below.
Julie
From: Sink, Marla
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 11:05 AM
To: Kritzer, Jamie <[e-mail]>
Cc: Munger, Bridget <[e-mail]>; Culpepper, Linda <[e-mail]>; Grzyb, Julie
<[e-mail]>; Brower, Connie <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Vaughn: answers to your questions
I have canceled today's phone call.. but Vaughn is going to run the story based on the answers given last week.
He wants to confirm that his interpretation of our response to #2 below is correct.
" Based on p. 33 of the renewal application, the information given constitutes our knowledge that Chemours disclosed it
is releasing the substance now known as GenX and other novel substances under its NPDES permit and the Clean Water
Act."
Chemours disclosed the potential to be releasing the HFPO Monomer and Vinyl Ether monomers. The application stated
all wastewaters generated from the Chemours Polymer Processing Aid manufacturing area (GenX) are collected and
shipped off -site for disposal. As part of the NPDES permit renewal the Division is asking for a detailed description of each
waste stream and the possible contaminants contained in the wastewater that is treated and discharged through Outfall
002. In addition, we are researching and working with Chemours to understand the different uses for the HFPO
Monomer and how it breaks down in the wastewater.
Marla Sink
Public Information Officer
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
919 707 9033 office
Marla.Sin 5ncdenr.r ev
DEQ-CFW 00049754

512 North Salisbury Street
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1611
From: Kritzer, Jamie
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 5:47 PM
To: Vaughn Hagerty <yauEh€ ha erty$:_ €I. o€ >
Cc: Kritzer, Jamie <I�ID]j 3..kritzer t :J.x '>; Sink, Marla < arla.Sink@1.1� d�.,, x .>; Munger, Bridget
<bri(Jpet,r.) ii � K@[e-mail]- �r.aov>
Subject: Vaughn: answers to your questions
Vaughn,
Please see the answers to your questions below.
Sorry for the delay. Staff are working on a lot of fronts right now.
Jamie
All
As I indicated to Marla yesterday afternoon, I'm writing a story today regarding Chemours' NPDES permit.
I had a fairly extensive conversation yesterday with a former EPA attorney who teaches environmental law
focused on regulations and policy. He also has written a number of texts and course materials for teaching this
subject. So, he seems to be pretty knowledgable.
He essentially said that Dupont and now Chemours would have to have mentioned GenX (perhaps using a
different name) in its applications for NPDES permits in force since 1980 regardless of whether it is a
"regulated substance." The company has said GenX HFPO dimer acid [call me on this correction] is
discharged at its point source, which the permit covers.
If Chemours or DuPont has not listed GenX, then that may constitute violations under the Clean Water Act.
The company also should have listed the "novel" substances mentioned in Sun, et al., on the permit
applications. My understanding is that, based on sampling above and below the Fayetteville Works, those
appear to be emanating from the Fayetteville Works. Chemours holds the permit governing those discharges
and, as such, is responsible for such reporting.
1) Does DEQ agree with this assessment? If not, please let me know which parts are incorrect and what the
correct interpretation should be.
&e arrs ,er to question r/2; they did notifi> us.
2) Has GenX ever been mentioned as part of the Fayetteville Works NPDES permit or permit application?
i'r'te perinit application r escrihe:sfive Ali ferent r�c��zr�facturing areas. In that description, the*1) recce ni ed the
production of H1-,PO monomer (which is being r ekr�recl to as �tenA 1 and the vinyl ether rnonorr ei- in the
ivasteivater•. The �raste�rater generated as a result of these processes is seat to the nvaslenvater treatrnentplant,
according to the permit application. Me �t%ere hilforrued that the Cheniours' poljmer processing aid (additional
GenX compounds) mauu/acturhr g area is a closed loop system. In other words, the waste generated during
these processes is captured on -site and not discharged to the river.
DEQ-CFW 00049755

3) What about any of the "novel" substances listed in Sun, et al.? Have they ever appeared in the company's
NPDES permit or permit application? If so, when and how were they mentioned? If not, why not?
]hey itvre all idenl�fied in the 2016 application and all pre iious apl-)hcalions as 11FT'O n7onomer (ivhich are
being re.krred to as GenA) and the i4ny1 ether monowei-s.
4) GenX does not appear in the April 2016 permit renewal application. Can you confirm that and help me
understand why it does not and what that means in terms of that application?
7he 20 16 rene�val application does n7enfion JITPO monomer 6vhich is beinre ferred to as Gen.V) and the
L'iqvl Eller' monomers in the ii,aweii,aler.
5) If what I describe above is correct, then according to Section 402 of the CWA, the state is bound to "abate
violations of the permit or the permit program, including civil and criminal penalties and other ways and means
of enforcement." Please let me know how the state plans to proceed in this case.
PTI-hat you described is incorr-ect. Please see ansiA� ei-s abo iv.
Again, I'm writing this story today. In fact, I'll have most of it finished before noon.
Regards,
Vaughn Hagerty
DEQ-CFW-00049756