DEQ-CFW_00013420

From: Sink, Marla [/O=EXCHANGELA8S/OU=[XCHANGEADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYD|BOHF2]SPDLT)/CN=REOP|ENTS/CN=1443GCDF33F147ACADG2D89C87DCF81B-yWARLA.5|NK]
Sent: 6/22/I0I73:I2:37PW1
To: 6oyb,Julie [/h=ExchangeLabs/ou=ExzhanXeAdministrative Group
(FYD|8OHFZ33PDO)/cn=Redpient$cn=75d1654d45154cZabbO8596aZc9atIQI-jaXrzyb]
CC: Brower, Connie [/6=ExchanXeLabs/ou=ExchangeAdministrative Group
(FYD|8OHFZ33PDO)/cn=Redpient$cn=7ee8db84d956431c9a1f781f3597ba6%-cubrower]
Subject: RE: Vaughn: answers toyour questions
Sure thing. Connie, are you available tomorrow or Monday to talk with Vaughn about the questions/answers we
discussed with Bridget on Tuesday?
am
Marla Sink
Public Information Officer
Department ofEnvironmental Quality
Division ofWater Resources
9197079033 office
K8edu.eink@nodoncgov
512North Salisbury Street
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699'1611
Fnmrn:Grryb Julie
Sent: Thursday, June JJ,Z01711:1lAM
To: Sink, K4ada<Mar|[e-mail]>
Cc: Brower, [onnie<connie.brovver@ncdenr.0ov>
Subject: RE: Vaughn: answers toyour questions
Marla,
| think Connie should bepresent aswell.
| am available from 8'9 or]:3O~4:]Oon Friday or Monday. Sorry, but | have scheduled all my performance reviews
during the next 3-4days.
Also, can you supply me with those questions and the answers that were sent to him before the call?
Julie
From: Sink, Marla
Sent: Thursday, June Z2,ZU171l:O5AK8
To: Grryb,Julie
Subject: FW: Vaughn: answers to your questions
Vaughn can't talk today — maybe tomorrow orMonday? Hejust wants todiscuss the questions and responses xve
submitted acouple days ago.
Let me know what day works for you and I'll set something up.
Thanks, Julie,
Marla
Marla Sink
Public Information Officer
OEQ-CFVV_00013420

Department ofEnvironmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
9197079033 office
512North Salisbury Street
1G11Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699'1611
From: Vaughn Hagerty
Sent: Thursday, June Z2,ZU171l:O3AK8
To: Sink, Maria
Subject: Re: Vaughn: answers to your questions
loon't doiLtoday. I'm onthe road, mntomorrow or What lwant totalk about are the questions I've
already submitted and DEQ's responses.
OnJun 22, 2017 at9:30 AM Sink Marla wrote:
HiVau8hn,
Julie isinmeetings until after 1p.m. Can you send the questions? She'll research them and then she
should be able to talk to you later this afternoon.
Maria Sink
Public Information Officer
Department ofEnvironmental C>un|Uy
Division ofWater Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1611
From: Vaughn Hagerty
Sent: Thursday, June JJ,Z0177:JZAK4
To: Kritzer, Jamie
Cc: Sink, Maria ; Munger, Bridget
Subject: Re: Vaughn: answers to your questions
Jamie,
[d like to discuss these responses in a phone conversation, ideally with someone from Julie
Grzyh'uoffio:nrsomeone who can address issues related 0oNPD4BSpermits. lwant tomake
sure we're all talking about the same thing.
lsthere otime either Friday or If not, please suggested adav/time that works.
OEQ-CFVV_00013421

Vaughn Hagerty
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Kritzer, Jamie <jamie.kritzerLa)ncdenr.gov> wrote:
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 dim
acid [call one 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.
DEQ-CFW-00013422

See ansuver to question ;'2; they did notify us.
2) Has GenX ever been mentioned as part of the Fayetteville Works NPDES permit or permit
application?
The permit application iioa deca ibs di `c�rca t r aana, zcuris - areas. In that description, they
recognized the production (#111 O monomer (khich is being reler°recl to as GenX) and the
vinv,l ether monomers is the ivasteivater. the �vaste�vcater° generated as a result qf these
processes is sent to the �vaste�vater treatment plant, according to the permit application. Me
ivere irrfc)rwed that the Oierr onr:s' polymer processing aid (a&i`itional Gen.V compounds)
manq/acturhr g area is a closed loop system. In other 1vords, the ivaste generated during these
processes is captured on -site and not dischar wed to the river.
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?
1'e'zel; were all identified in the 1016 applica ion card all previous applications as li'T PO
ra onower 6t,hich are being rekr r ed to as GenX) and the vinj4 ether monomers.
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?
The .1016 rene-gal application sloes mention HFTO monomer (-which is beiiW r�f�rred to as
Gent_V) and the Vinyl Ether monomers in the ivasteivater.
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.
41hat you described is incorrect. Please see aus�vers above.
DEQ-CFW 00013423

Again, I'm writing this story today. In fact, I'll have most of it finished before noon.
Regards,
Vaughn Hagerty
DEQ-CFW-00013424