NC0004308_Other Correspondence_20220806

Duke
UNIVERSITY
Box 90360 • Durham, NC 27708-0360
Telephone: [phone] • Toll Free: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
ENVIRONMENTAL
LAW and POLICY CLINIC
August 6, 2022
Mr. Richard Rogers
Director, Division of Water Resources
Mr. Michael Scott
Director, Division of Waste Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
Via email to Mr. Richard Rogers, [e-mail], and Mr. Michael Scott,
[e-mail]
RE: Request for Public Hearing and Substantive Recommendations for Alcoa's
Badin Business Park Renewed NPDES Permit (NC0004308)
Dear Mr. Rogers and Mr. Scott:
The Duke Environmental Law and Policy Clinic respectfully submits these comments on behalf
of the Yadkin Riverkeeper Inc. ("YRK") ahead of Alcoa's Badin Business Park's ("BBP")
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit renewal in October 2022
for the Alcoa Badin Works facility. We have reviewed stipulations of the current permit, BBP's
compliance history, BBP's permit renewal application, the contaminants of concern at the site,
and NPDES permits issued to other aluminum smelting facilities. In our review, we have
identified several ways in which BBP's renewed permit could do more to protect the water
quality in Badin, North Carolina. Given the importance of Little Mountain Creek and Badin Lake
for drinking water, wildlife habitat, ecological health, recreational uses, and the aesthetic value
of the area, we urge the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality ("NC DEQ") to
incorporate these recommendations into the renewed permit. Additionally, this permit clearly
represents a matter of significant public interest. We therefore request a public hearing pursuant

to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(c)(3) and 15A N.C. Admin. Code 02H
.0111(a)(1)-(2), as well as the Clean Water Act.
The recommendations in this letter serve to strengthen water quality monitoring and to limit
pollutant discharges while awaiting a final clean-up remedy. We do not support NC DEQ
renewing NDPES permits in perpetuity as a long-term solution. Instead, the Division of Water
Resources ("DWR") in conjunction with the Division of Waste Management ("DWM") must
work towards eliminating hazardous constituents in discharges from Alcoa Badin Works through
full remediation of the site and the unlined dumps. The NPDES permit is for eliminating
pollutant discharges (as it stands for "National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System")
(emphasis ours) and to control point sources of pollution. Renewing NPDES permits continually
avoids these requirements by merely tracking pollutants, rather than eliminating them.
Our recommendations for BBP's next NPDES permit fall into six distinct categories, outlined
below:
1. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to test for cyanide and fluoride at regular
intervals, as well as more frequently. We recommend weekly testing for cyanide and
fluoride.
2. The new permit should specifically require Alcoa's BBP to use certified laboratories with
testing methods and instruments sensitive enough to detect violations for all
contaminants, including cyanide down to five micrograms per liter ("µg/L").
3. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to monitor for a wider range of
contaminants, including Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons ("PAHs"), Polychlorinated
Biphenyls ("PCBs"), and metals. The new permit should also set limits for aluminum
4. The new permit should not allow Alcoa's BBP to divert discharge from Outfall 005 into
Little Mountain Creek as a solution to meet permit limits, nor should it allow the use of
any mixing zones.
5. The new permit should eliminate Outfalls 012 and 013 from discharging into the public
access and swimming area on Badin Lake.
6. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to remove the source material for the
hazardous pollutants prior to submission of any permit applications in the future. In 1998,
the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("US EPA") banned spent potliner
from land disposal absent treatment, and standards for treatment of spent potliner include
2

the contaminants found in discharges covered by this permit.1 The next permit term
should motivate Alcoa to remove its buried hazardous wastes from the site, thereby
reducing the ongoing discharge of pollutants to Little Mountain Creek and Badin Lake.
Background on BBP's Current Permit and Surface Water Quality in Badin,
North Carolina
Alcoa's BBP has a combined stormwater and wastewater NDPES permit (NC0004308) to
discharge contaminated water into Badin Lake and tributaries of Little Mountain Creek through
11 outfalls. These outfalls drain land that is storing thousands, and potentially hundreds of
thousands, of tons of untreated spent potliner (hazardous waste code K088) from Alcoa's former
aluminum smelting operations. This permit expires October 31, 2022, and NC DEQ must
seriously consider ways to make the new permit as protective as possible for the people and
ecological resources that rely upon Badin's waterbodies.
The community values Badin Lake and Little Mountain Creek, but the legacy of Alcoa's
aluminum smelting operations threatens these resources, which are already impaired. Badin Lake
is a popular fishing, swimming, and boating destination, and a drinking water source for the
Town of Albemarle and beyond.2 It is also under a PCB advisory, issued by the Department of
Health and Human Services in 2009.3 Little Mountain Creek flows into Lake Tillery. Lake
Tillery is Montgomery County's drinking water supply4 and soon will provide water to Union
County.5 Little Mountain Creek is also listed as an impaired waterway (for benthos)6 and is
especially susceptible to contamination due to its proximity to the Alcoa Badin Landfill. Though
Little Mountain Creek is listed as impaired upstream of the site, adding pollution to an already
vulnerable waterbody is undesirable. Regardless of the causes of impairment, the waterbodies in
Badin need additional protection, not additional stress.
BBP's current NPDES permit is insufficient to protect the water quality in Badin Lake and Little
Mountain Creek. Despite the extensive list of contaminants associated with spent potliner, the
only specific chemicals required by the permit to be tested for are cyanide, fluoride, and
1 US EPA, Land Disposal Restrictions; Treatment Standards for Spent Potliners From Primary Aluminum
Reduction (K088), Federal Register, Vol. 63, No. 185 (September 24, 1998), available at
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1998-09-24/pdf/98-25643.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
2 Stanley County Utilities 2014 Drinking Water Quality Report, available at https://www.stanlycountync.gov/wp-
content/upLoads/2015/03/2014%20Drinking%20Water%20Report.pdf (accessed June 20, 2022).
3 NCDHHS, Fish Consumption Advisories, available at https://epi.dph.ncdhhs.gov/oee/fish/advisories.html
(accessed July 29, 2022).
4 Montgomery County, Public Utilities, available at https://www.montgomerycountync.com/departments/public-
utilities/operations (accessed July 29, 2022).
5 Yadkin Regional Water Supply, Yadkin water for Yadkin needs: Union County, NC, available at
http://www.yadkinwater.com/about.html (accessed July 29, 2022).
6 NCDEQ, North Carolina 2020 303(D) List, available at
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2020/NC 2020 Category5 303dlist.pdf
(accessed May 3, 2022).
3

aluminum, and, in some cases, Trichloroethylene ("TCE") and Total Residual Chlorine.' Not all
these contaminants have set limits. Additionally, the testing frequency for these contaminants is
minimal; typically, Alcoa's BBP is only required to collect one sample per month or one sample
per quarter, depending on the outfall and the contaminant. While the requirements of the current
permit are lenient, Alcoa's BBP still struggles to meet them. Since August 2019, Alcoa's BBP
has violated the permit conditions for fluoride sixteen times and cyanide five times, suggesting
we are far from a reality where Alcoa's buried waste is no longer contaminating the surrounding
environment.
We urge NC DEQ to restore and protect the water quality of Badin Lake and Little Mountain
Creek by tightening the monitoring requirements and permit limits. The upcoming permit
renewal provides the opportunity to remedy the current permit's shortcomings by incorporating
the following recommendations.
New Permit Recommendations
1. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to test for cyanide and fluoride at
regular intervals, as well as more frequently. We recommend weekly testing for
cyanide and fluoride.
The current permit requires that Alcoa's BBP monitor cyanide monthly at Outfalls 005, 011,
012, and 013 and semi-annually at Outfalls 002, 004, 017, 018, 019, 020, and 022. It also
requires fluoride testing monthly at Outfalls 005 and 011, quarterly at Outfalls 012 and 013, and
semi-annually at 002, 004, 017, 018, 019, 020, and 022. This frequency of sampling falls below
both Federal and North Carolina regulations that require that all samples be "representative" of
the wastewater they are measuring.8 To qualify as representative, monitoring must take place at
locations where the pollutants are well mixed in the effluent but before they are diluted by any
other body of water.9 The sampling must be done at a time that reflects the monitored activity, in
this case the release of wastewater,10 and sampling must be conducted frequently enough to
accurately characterize the effluent quality and detect events of noncompliance."
Alcoa's BBP has no mandated monitoring schedule, which is another reason their monitoring is
not representative. At the choice of its contractor, samples are taken at varying intervals
7 The permit also requires testing flow, total suspended solids, pH, acute toxicity, and chemical oxygen demand.
8 See 40 C.F.R. 122.41(j)(1); 15A NCAC 02B .0503.
9 The US EPA NPDES Permit Writers Manual states that the sampling location must not be at a weir where
pollutants will settle, but before it is discharged into a larger waterbody (unless specifically a mixing zone). See
Chapter 8 of US EPA, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Writers' Manual,
available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/pwm 2010.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
See also 40 CFR 122.4(h)(2).
'See 40 C.F.R. 122.41(j).
11 See Chapter 8 of US EPA, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Writers' Manual,
available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/pwm 2010.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022)
4

seemingly unrelated to specific dates or to flow parameters. The infrequent and irregular
sampling regimen does not reflect the typical conditions when considering the variable flow due
to rainfall events. Given the increasing severity and frequency of hurricanes expected due to
climate change,12 and given the significant rainfall and flooding experienced in Stanly County
from Hurricane Matthew (2016)13 and Hurricane Florence (2018),14 regular testing of each
outfall should also capture unusual storm events. Even though such measurements may not
reflect the contaminant levels regularly released by outfalls, it is still important to capture these
releases in monitoring efforts. The new NPDES permit should require Alcoa to test at more
frequent, regular intervals for cyanide and fluoride, so the samples are truly representative of the
discharged water.
The lack of terms on when to sample has allowed Alcoa's BBP too much leeway. Without
regulated "regular" testing, Alcoa's BBP has determined the schedule at will. Alcoa's BBP does
sometimes collect more than the minimum of one sample, but usually does this when the
additional samples bring down the monthly average and thwart noncompliance. Below is an
example of how Alcoa's BBP devises their sampling scheme to evade violating the monthly
average effluent limits.
• When cyanide was measured at 37 µg/L in December 202115 at Outfall 013, which flows
directly into the public swimming area, eight more samples were taken later that month.
Those eight samples were all reported as <6 µg/L (and were converted to 0 µg/L for
calculating the monthly average). It is not coincidental that 37 µg/L divided by 9 is 4.11
µg/L, just below the monthly permit limit of 5 µg/L. Cyanide was also elevated at Outfall
005 in December 2021, with three samples exceeding the monthly limit of 5 µg/L. After
those three samples were taken, six more samples were taken to lower the average below
the monthly limit.
We recommend weekly testing for cyanide and fluoride at least in Outfalls 005, 011, 012, and
013. NC DEQ should also consider increasing the testing frequency at the stormwater outfalls
due to their proximity to Solid Waste Management Units ("SWMUs"). Alcoa's BBP should be
required to test more frequently for cyanide and fluoride based on its history of noncompliance
for these parameters. (Since August 2019, Alcoa's BBP has violated the permit conditions for
12 North Carolina, Climate Risk Assessment and Resilience Plan (June 2020), available at
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/climate-change/resilience-plan/Executive-Summary-and-Key-Findings.pdf (accessed July
29, 2022).
13 24 Hour Look at Rain Totals Across NC From Hurricane Matthew, published in WFMY News 2 (October 9,
2016), available at https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/weather/24-hour-look-at-rain-totals-across-nc-from-
hurricane-matthew/83-332333941 (accessed June 20, 2022).
14 King, D., Hurricane Florence floods Stanly County, published in the Stanly County Journal (September 19, 2018),
available at https://stanlyjournal.com/2018/09/19/hurricane-florence-floods-stanly-county/ (accessed June 20, 2022).
15 See December 2021 Discharge Monitoring Report for Badin Business Park LLC, available at
https://files.nc.gov/deq/documents/2022-02/NC0004308%20DMR%20Dec2021 0.pdf (accessed July 29, 2021).
5

cyanide five times, and for fluoride sixteen times.) US EPA guidance says that a facility's
compliance history may be a reason to require more frequent monitoring, and that "[a] facility
with problems achieving compliance generally should be required to perform more frequent
monitoring to characterize the source or cause of the problems or to detect noncompliance."16
We would be remiss to ignore the fact that this implies a more regular, frequent testing of
outfalls at the facility, not simply taking multiple samples in an attempt to manipulate the
monthly average. The key is that frequent monitoring implies regular monitoring, unencumbered
and unbiased by the whims of a sample collector, but rather, beholden to scheduled testing.
Finally, NPDES permits have required aluminum industries to sample for cyanide and fluoride
more frequently than once per month. For example, in Massena, New York, environmental
regulators require Alcoa's Arconic, Inc. to measure for cyanide and fluoride weekly in
wastewater flowing directly into surface water from spent potlining piles.17 We recommend that
NC DEQ mandate a similar sampling frequency.
2. The new permit should specifically require Alcoa's BBP to use certified laboratories
with testing methods and instruments sensitive enough to detect violations for all
contaminants, including cyanide down to five µg/L.
Federal and state law, as well as the current NPDES permit, require Alcoa's BBP to use a
laboratory with a testing method that is "sufficiently sensitive," meaning that the equipment used
by the laboratory can detect and report pollutant concentrations at or below the permit leve1.18
Alcoa's BBP has used laboratories with reporting limits for cyanide higher than those required
by the permit. Non -detected cyanide concentrations are listed as "< 6 µg/L" in discharge
monitoring reports when the current maximum monthly average effluent limit is 5 µg/L for
Outfalls 005 and 013. Reporting results in this way hides exceedances between the limit of 5
µg/L and 6 µg/L.
Further, Alcoa's BBP does not provide quality assurance/quality control information with their
discharge monitoring reports, or at least such reports have not been made publicly available.
Method detection limits and recovery results are imperative for understanding how well BBP's
contracted laboratories can measure the results. For example, if the laboratory's method
detection limit(s) are extremely high, blank -corrected values can seemingly be deflated to "non -
detects," as the method is only able to measure high values. This context is crucial in
16 US EPA, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Writers' Manual, available at
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/pwm 2010.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
17 See requirements for Outfall 001 in New York Department of Environmental Conservation, State Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit (NY0001732), available at
https://www.dec.ny.gov/data/IF/SPDES/NY0001732/Permit.IndSPDES.NY0001732.2018 -10-
01.Modification x.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
18 40 C.F.R. 136.1(c); 40 CFR 122.44(i)(1)(iv) (defining sufficient sensitivity).
6

understanding chemical results. Without this information, it is impossible to know if the method
used is unreliable, if the laboratory is encountering human error, or if the instrument is not
sensitive enough. Similarly, if recovery standards are regularly below 50%, then the laboratory
or the method may only be measuring 50% of the total value of any sample.
Both method detection limits and recovery values are commonly required in scientific results
reporting, and NC DEQ should require Alcoa's BBP to provide these quality assurance/quality
control records with their discharge monitoring reports (and make them publicly available).
Testing results for each outfall should include raw values, blank corrected values, method
detection limits per chemical and per laboratory run, and recovery values for spiked standards
used in laboratory testing.
In summary, the new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to use a laboratory that can report
results at least down to the maximum monthly average. Additionally, Alcoa's BBP should not be
allowed to convert "< 6 µg/L" to "0 µg/L" for purposes of calculating the monthly average. One
scientific practice is to average in non -detects as half of the reporting limit. So, for example, if a
laboratory's reporting limit was 6 µg/L for cyanide, all non -detect values would be averaged in
as 3 µg/L rather than 0 µg/L.
3. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to monitor for a wider range of
contaminants, including PAHs, PCBs, and metals. The new permit should also set
limits for aluminum.
Cyanide and fluoride are not the only contaminants associated with spent potliner or Alcoa's
industrial activity. Other contaminants of concern at this site include PAHs, PCBs, and metals,
all of which have known detrimental effects to the environment and human health. To limit the
discharge of these contaminants into Badin's waterbodies, NC DEQ should require Alcoa's BBP
to monitor monthly for these constituents in at least Outfalls 005, 012, 011, and 013. NC DEQ
should also consider monitoring for these constituents in the stormwater outfalls due to their
proximality to SWMUs.
Eurofins TestAmerica lists their capabilities of testing PCBs and PAHs on its website,19 so
additional samples may not even be required; it is common for a single, larger sample to be
collected and sent to the laboratory where it will be split into fractions upon arrival for testing of
each chemical class. PCBs and PAHs should be measured in unfiltered grab samples or in
sediments, as PCBs and PAHs are known to partition into solids in water. An accredited EPA- or
state -certified laboratory should be used to measure PAHs, PCBs, and metals, and effluent
19 Eurofins, Water/Wastewater, available at https://www.eurofinsus.com/environment-
testing/services/waterwastewater/ (accessed June 20, 2022).
7

limitations, if set, should be at levels which can be measured by an outside, certified laboratory
with the capabilities to report quantification with proper sensitivity.
The below subsections detail our recommendations for chemicals that should be tested for at
Alcoa Badin Works under the new permit.
a. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to monitor for PAHs. NC DEQ
should consider including monthly average and maximum daily effluent limits
for PAHs.
PAHs are of high concern due to their toxicity to aquatic life and their effects on human health.
The EPA has recommended that monitoring for certain PAHs should be a "starting point" in
developing discharge standards for NPDES permits.20 The following is a list of PAHs commonly
found in spent potliner21 that are high priorities of concern for the US EPA:22
• Acenaphthene
• Anthracene
• Benz(a)anthracene
• Benzo(a)pyrene
• Benzo(b)fluoranthene
• Benzo(k)fluoranthene
• Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
• Chrysene
• Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
• Fluoranthene
• Indeno( 1 ,2,3 -cd)pyrene
• Phenanthrene
• Pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene is a PAH of particular concern due to the severity of short and long-term effects
from human exposure, which occurs when skin comes in contact with contaminated surface
water, soil, or sediment.23 It is of utmost importance that Alcoa's BBP provide evidence that
recreation sites like the swimming area are safe for the Badin community. In the short-term, skin
and eye irritation with redness and burning can occur. Long-term health effects are also severe.
Like many PAHs, benzo(a)pyrene is a probable carcinogen and exposure has been linked to
cases of skin, lung, and bladder cancer.24 NC DEQ should require Alcoa to test for the presence
of the above listed PAHs, but at a minimum they should require the testing of benzo(a)pyrene
due to its known toxicity in humans and the environment, as well as its carcinogenicity.
20 US EPA, Priority Pollutant List, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/priority-
pollutant-list-epa.pdf.
21 US EPA, Land Disposal Restrictions; Treatment Standards for Spent Potliners From Primary Aluminum
Reduction (K088), Federal Register, Vol. 63, No. 185 (September 24, 1998), available at
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1998-09-24/pdf/98-25643.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
22 US EPA, Priority Pollutant List, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/priority-
pollutant-list-epa.pdf.
23 US EPA, Consumer Fact Sheet on: Benzo(a)pyrene, available at
https://archive.epa.gov/water/archive/web/pdf/archived-consumer-factsheet-on-benzo.pdf (accessed August 1,
2022).
24 Ibid.
8

Incorporating PAH monitoring into the permit would align the requirements of Alcoa's BBP's
permit more closely with the requirements of permits at other aluminum industrial sites. Some
examples of requirements for testing PAHs at those locations are detailed below. In addition to
monitoring, NC DEQ should also consider setting monthly average and maximum daily limits
for PAHs to better protect the Badin community and environment.
• For wastewater flowing directly into surface water from spent potlining piles and landfill
leachate, New York environmental regulators require Alcoa to measure benzo(a)pyrene
twice monthly and "individual PAHs" monthly.25
• For stormwater runoff from the former Reynolds Metal Co, New York, environmental
regulators require Alcoa to measure "individual PAHs" twice monthly, monthly, or
quarterly, depending on the outfa11.26
• Regulators in Washington State require Alcoa to monitor for benzo(a)pyrene semi-
annually and "priority pollutants" annually at Alcoa Wenatchee Works.27
b. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to monitor for PCBs. NC DEQ
should consider including monthly average and maximum daily effluent limits
for total PCBs.
PCBs harm the environment and human health due to their ability to bioaccumulate in tissue. In
humans, PCBs are probable carcinogens and can have negative effects on the immune system,
the reproductive system, the neurological system, and the endocrine system.28 Alcoa's BBP has
suggested that because there was no emulsification operation, Alcoa Badin Works did not
produce PCBs. However, this fails to acknowledge that PCBs were used in the facility's
electrical transformers, making areas such as the old electrical switchyard an area of concern for
PCBs as indicated in the Superfund Site Investigation Report.29 PCB -impacted soils were also
25 See requirements for Outfall 001 in New York Department of Environmental Conservation, State Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit (NY0001732), available at
https://www.dec.ny.gov/data/IF/SPDES/NY0001732/Permit.IndSPDES.NY0001732.2018 -10-
01.Modification x.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
26 See requirements for Outfalls 001, 003, 008, and 010 in New York Department of Environmental Conservation,
State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit (NY0000132)(April 30, 2019), available
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hz3 spt98h4d88ue/AAASTP6jPaR1 CfBaM6obBub3 a/Region%206/IndSPDES/NY000
0132%20Alcoa%20East%20 %20Reynolds?d1=0&preview=Permit.IndSPDE S.NY0000132.2019 -05-
01.Modification_x.pdf&subfolder_navtracking=1 (accessed August 2, 2022).
27 See monitoring requirements for Outfalls 001 in State of Washington Department of Ecology, National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (WA0000680) (October 21, 2021), available at
https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/paris/DownloadDocument.aspx?id=385997 (accessed August 1, 2022).
28 US EPA, Learn about Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), available at https://www.epa.gov/pcbs/learn-about-
polychlorinated-biphenyls-pcbs (accessed May 3, 2022).
29 See page 15 of Site Inspection (SI) Report from Stuart Parker, Hydrogeologist, Superfund Section, DWM-
NCDEQ to Carolyn Calihan, RPM, Region IV Superfund Section (June 14, 2016).
9

found in the area of SWMU 35 (Former Waste Oil Storage Area), which was used to store
various waste motor oils, lubricating oils, and transformer oils possibly containing PCBs from
the 1920s to the 1970s.30 These PCB -laden wastes, likely disposed of onsite, have contaminated
several areas associated with Alcoa Badin Works. Badin Lake is currently subject to a fish
consumption advisory due to PCB contamination,31 and Alcoa has capped areas in Badin Lake
where PCBs were elevated in lake sediments. PCBs have also been found in the floodplain
adjacent to the Alcoa Badin Landfill.32
The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to monitor for PCBs at least monthly.33 We also
recommend requiring measurement of total PCBs, rather than PCB Aroclors, since PCBs break
down over time. The PCB Aroclors commonly tested at the site have half-lives of approximately
5-40 years in the environment, with longer half-lives typical in soil and sediment.34 As a result,
the identical PCB Aroclor signatures may no longer be detectable at Alcoa Badin Works, but
individual PCBs have been documented as being present. In addition to monitoring, NC DEQ
should also consider setting monthly average and maximum daily limits for PCBs.
Finally, testing for PCBs would align the requirements of BBP's permit more closely with the
permit requirements at other aluminum industrial sites.
• For wastewater flowing directly into surface water from spent potlining piles and landfill
leachate, New York environmental regulators require Alcoa to measure for PCB Aroclors
weekly in an outfall discharging directly into the Grasse River and monthly in outfalls
that discharge into other outfalls.35
30 SWMU 35 PCB Removal Interim Measures Work Plan for the Corrective Measures Study, Prepared for Alcoa, Inc
by Environeering, Inc (2012), available at
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/WasteManagement/0/edoc/678548/NCD003162542 Alcoa CALM 20120406-
OCR%20(2).pdf (accessed August 2, 2022).
31 NCDHHS, Fish Consumption Advisories, available at https://epi.dph.ncdhhs.gov/oee/fish/advisories.html
(accessed July 29, 2022).
32 Site Inspection (SI) Report from Stuart Parker, Hydrogeologist, Superfund Section, DWM-NCDEQ to Carolyn
Calihan, RPM, Region IV Superfund Section (June 14, 2016).
33 Table 1.6 in the permit renewal application details an "RL" of 1 µg/L for several PCBs, but the US EPA is
capable of measuring to an MRL of 0.26 µg/L. This again raises questions about the reliability of the laboratory
being used by Alcoa's BBP.
34 Sinkkonen, S. and J. Paasivirta, Degradation half-life times of PCDDs, PCDFs, and PCBs for environmental fate
modeling, Chemosphere, Vol. 40 (9-11), P. 943-949 (2000).
35 See requirements for Outfall 001, 01A, and 01D in New York Department of Environmental Conservation, State
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit (NY0001732), available at
https://www.dec.ny.gov/data/IF/SPDES/NY0001732/Permit.IndSPDES.NY0001732.2018 -10-
01.Modification x.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
10

• For stormwater runoff from the former Reynolds Metal Co, New York, environmental
regulators require Alcoa to measure PCB Aroclors weekly, once every two weeks, or
quarterly depending on the outfa11.36
• Regulators in Washington State require Kaiser Aluminum to test PCB Aroclors semi-
annually in discharges to the Spokane River.37
c. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to monitor for metals that are
known constituents of spent potliner. NC DEQ should consider including
monthly average and maximum daily effluent limits for these metals.
Several metals, including antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, lead,
mercury, nickel, selenium, and silver are associated with spent potliner.38 It is possible that these
metals are being discharged through outfalls but are not being detected due to the lack of testing.
Sediment testing from the 2016 Superfund Site Inspection Report identified chromium, arsenic,
barium, and lead in sediments above US EPA Ecological Sediment Screening Values.39 Even
though water values were measured at MRLs, the presence of metals in the sediments indicates
that releases are likely occurring. Additionally, discharge monitoring from 2021 indicates high
levels of aluminum are being discharged from some outfalls (discussed in more detail in the next
subsection). The geochemical conditions that would lead to high levels of aluminum in the
discharges could also lead to the leaching of other metals.
In our review of permits issued at other sites, we found that it is common for other aluminum
industrial sites to test for metals in their discharges. For example:
• New York environmental regulators require Alcoa to measure copper, iron, nickel, and
zinc for wastewater flowing directly into surface water from spent potlining piles and
landfill leachate.4°
36 See requirements for Outfalls 001, 003, 005, 008, and 010, New York Department of Environmental
Conservation, State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit (NY0000132)(April 30,
2019), available at
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hz3 spt98h4d88ue/AAASTP6jPaR 1 CfBaM6obBub3a/Region%206/IndSPDES/NY000
0132%20Alcoa%20East%20%20Reynolds? d1=0&preview=P ermit.IndSPDES.NY0000132.2019 -05-
01.Modification x.pdf&subfolder nav tracking=1 (accessed August 2, 2022).
37 See requirements for Outfall 0001 in Washington Department of Ecology, Permit Number WA0000892, available
at https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/paris/DownloadDocument.aspx?id=408532 (accessed July 29, 2022).
38 U.S. EPA, Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BDAT) Background Document for Spent Aluminum
Potliners—K088 (2000).
39 Site Inspection Report from Stuart Parker, Hydrogeologist, Superfund Section, DWM-NCDEQ to Carolyn
Calihan, RPM, Region IV Superfund Section dated June 14, 2016.
4o See requirements for Outfall 001 in New York Department of Environmental Conservation, State Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit (NY0001732), available at
https://www.dec.ny.gov/data/IF/SPDES/NY0001732/Permit.IndSPDES.NY0001732.2018 -10-
01.Modification x.pdf (accessed July 29, 2022).
11

• New York environmental regulators require Alcoa to measure arsenic, copper, nickel, tin,
zinc, and selenium at the former Reynolds Metal Co, New York.41
• Regulators in Washington State require Kaiser Aluminum to test for lead, zinc, arsenic,
and cadmium in discharges to the Spokane River.42
d. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to meet standards for aluminum
discharges. NC DEQ should set effluent limitations for aluminum in Alcoa's
BBP's renewed NPDES permit.
Alcoa's BBP is discharging aluminum at a significant rate. In BBP's January 2022 Discharge
Monitoring Report, total aluminum was reported between 450 µg/L and 8,900 µg/L at monitored
outfalls.43 However, NC DEQ states that "the EPA Nationally Recommended Water Quality
criteria for total aluminum is 87 µg/L for waters with a pH within the range of 6.5 to 9.0 standard
units."44 Elevated levels of aluminum in surface water can be fatal to some aquatic species. A
small amount of aluminum can enter the human body through skin contact if present in surface
water. Therefore, the new permit should set effluent limitations for aluminum.
The current permit requires that Alcoa's BBP conduct quarterly or semi-annual monitoring of
aluminum discharges at all outfalls. BBP's current permit sets "bench values" of 750 µg/L for
aluminum discharges from some outfalls; however, discharges greater than that amount are not
considered violations. In 2021, Alcoa's BBP reported aluminum discharges as high as 2,300 µg/L,
exceeding the benchmark value and likely exceeding US EPA's recommended discharge limits
for aluminum. In January 2022, Alcoa's BBP reported elevated aluminum levels at four outfalls:
at Outfall 005, 930 µg/L was recorded, at Outfall 011, 450 µg/L was recorded, and at Outfall
013, 650 µg/L was recorded. Most concerning is Outfall 012, where 8,900 µg/L of aluminum
was recorded. For context, the US EPA sets a Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for
41 See requirements for Outfalls 001 and 003 in New York Depat linent of Environmental Conservation, State
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit (NY0000132)(April 30, 2019), available
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hz3 spt98h4d88ue/AAASTP6jPaR 1 CfBaM6obBub3a/Region%206/IndSPDES/NY000
0132%20Alcoa%20East%20 %20Reynolds? d1=0&preview=Permit.IndSPDES.NY0000132.2019-05-
01.Modification x.pdf&subfolder nav tracking=1 (accessed August 2, 2022).
42 See requirements for Outfall 0001 in Washington Department of Ecology, Permit Number WA0000892, available
at https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/paris/DownloadDocument.aspx?id=408532 (accessed July 29, 2022).
43 See BBP's January 2022 Discharge Monitoring Report (NC0004308 DMR Jan2022.pdf).
NC DEQ, Fact Sheet NPDES Permit No. NC0036196, at 6 (Mar. 18, 2021), available at
https: //edocs. deq.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocV iew. aspx?id=1831287&dbid=0&repo=WaterResources&searchid=4
aeflac4-30bb-42e8-b2dd-cab8ddf21740 (accessed August 3, 2022) (stating nearby ambient water monitoring
stations reported a pH of 7.2 standard units). Notes that EPA updated its water quality criteria for aluminum in 2018.
The updated criteria calls for consideration of the chemical makeup of a water to set the water quality standard. The
updated criteria requires consideration of the water's pH, dissolved oxygen, and hardness in order to determine the
bioavailability (risk of toxicity) of aluminum.
12

aluminum at 50-200 µg/L, and both the World Health Organization and Health Canada set
guidelines for aluminum at 100-200 µg/L.45
North Carolina does not have a water quality standard for aluminum; however, this does not
prevent NC DEQ from setting discharge limits for aluminum at the Alcoa Badin Works facility.
US EPA has published a recommended water quality standard that NC DEQ can apply in this
case to limit BBP's aluminum discharges. NC DEQ has used US EPA's water quality criteria to
set effluent limitations in the state and should apply the same criteria in this case.46
US EPA's 2018 recommended water quality standard for aluminum provides water standards
that are protective of aquatic life. The standards are based on the chemical makeup of the
receiving water, specifically the water's pH, dissolved organic carbon, and total hardness.47
Depending on these three parameters, the allowable concentrations of aluminum range between 1
µg/L and 4,800 µg/L for acute toxicity, and between 0.63 µg/L and 3,200 µg/L for chronic
toxicity.48 US EPA provides a "Criteria Calculator"49 where one can input the chemistry of the
receiving water and the allowable concentration, from which effluent limitations can be set, is
determined. NC DEQ should use US EPA's recommended standard and calculator tool to set
aluminum discharge limitations that are based on the pH, dissolved organic carbon, and total
hardness in Badin Lake and Little Mountain Creek.
4. The new permit should not allow Alcoa's BBP to divert discharge from Outfall 005
into Little Mountain Creek as a solution to meet permit limits, nor should it allow
the use of any mixing zones.
In a memo to Sushma Masemore dated May 27th, 2022, Alcoa's BBP discussed its proposal to
divert contaminated water that typically discharges through Outfall 005 so that it instead
discharges directly to Little Mountain Creek.50 The document suggests that Alcoa's BBP could
still meet North Carolina Water Quality Standards for cyanide and fluoride in Little Mountain
Creek if allowable effluent flow remains below 80% of upstream flow. We do not support this
proposal because of its potential to further impair Little Mountain Creek. Additionally, Alcoa's
45 Water Quality Association, Aluminum in Drinking Water, available at https://wqa.org/learn-about-
water/common-contaminants/aluminum (accessed June 20, 2022).
46 See NC DEQ, Final NPDES Permit Renewal, Permit NC0036196, Clark Creek WWTP (June 4, 2021), available
at
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=1831354&dbid=0&repo=WaterResources&searchid=4
aeflac4-30bb-42e8-b2dd-cab8ddf21740 (accessed August 2, 2022).
47 Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum in Freshwater, 83 Fed. Reg. 65,663, 65,664 (Dec. 21,
2018).
48 Id. at 65,663.
49 US EPA, Aluminum Criteria Calculator V2.0 (2018), available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-
12/aluminum-criteria-calculator-v20.xlsm (accessed August 2, 2022).
5o Memo to Sushma Masemore from Robyn Gross, Badin Business Park LLC, March 9, 2022, Technical Meeting
(May 27, 2022).
13

BBP needs to eliminate the sources of the contamination at the outfalls, not dilute these
measurements through mixing zones.
BBP's consultants calculated the assimilative capacity of Little Mountain Creek only using data
for two contaminants: fluoride and cyanide, which does not provide the full picture of the
potential environmental health consequences of this proposal. For example, 930 µg/L total
aluminum were measured in Outfall 005 in the January 2022 Discharge Monitoring Report.
Additionally, Outfall 005 could very well be discharging additional contaminants that Alcoa's
BBP has not been required to monitor for under their current NPDES permit, such as PAHs,
PCBs, and other metals. For instance, in the 2018 Investigative Report for the Little Mountain
Creek Area, BBP's consultants reported PCBs in surface waters of the Eastern Drainage Ditch
above the limit set in North Carolina's 15A NCAC 2B Surface Water Standard for total PCBs.5'
Under their proposal, Alcoa's BBP could be diverting waters with a more complex chemistry
than just elevated cyanide and fluoride directly to Little Mountain Creek. US EPA guidance
suggests that mixing zones are not appropriate "where a discharge contains bioaccumulative,
pathogenic, persistent, carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic pollutants."52 Metals and PCBs,
for instance, are highly bioaccumulative.
BBP's proposal to divert Outfall 005 into Little Mountain Creek was accompanied by three
example permits for mixing zones in Region IV. These examples should not be used to inform
BBP's permit for several reasons. First, the industries/entities represented — Packaging
Corporation of America, King America Finishing, and the City of Adel — are not relevant. They
have different wastes and different chemicals of concern. For example, the Packaging
Corporation of America permit established a mixing zone for dissolved oxygen, specific
conductance, chronic whole effluent toxicity, pH, turbidity, total ammonia nitrogen as N, total
recoverable lead, transparency, and oil and grease. Additionally, in the three provided examples,
permittees are allowed a discharge flow of no more than 8-25% of stream flow, far below the
80% discharge flow Alcoa's BBP has suggested in their proposal.
For the reasons stated above, we do not support the use of Little Mountain Creek as a mixing
zone, nor do we support the use of any of Badin's waterbodies as mixing zones. Outfall 012
currently discharges to a mixing zone in Badin Lake that is in the vicinity of a popular swimming
area. We urge NC DEQ to eliminate Outfall 012 to protect to health of Badin Lake and those
who use it for swimming, fishing, and boating.
If NC DEQ does not eliminate Outfall 012, it should at least require stringent and comprehensive
testing. This includes testing for PAHs, PCBs, and metals and keeping the testing requirements
51 Investigative Report for the Little Mountain Creek Area, Prepared by Environeering, Inc. for Badin Business Park
LLC (December 5, 2018).
52US EPA, Water Quality Standards Handbook. See Chapter 5: General Policies, p. 9.
14

for Trichloroethylene ("TCE"). In their permit renewal application, Alcoa's BBP requested that
the current TCE monitoring requirements and reporting limits be removed.53 However, TCE has
been detected in groundwater upgradient from Outfalls 011 and 012.54 In 2018, TCE levels from
four monitoring wells were above the 15A NCAC 2L Groundwater standard of 0.003 mg/L
(MW4 0.0085 mg/L, MW9 0.0661 mg/L, MW16 0.0086 mg/L, and MW 110 0.0065 mg/L).
The proposal detailed in the May 27th, 2022 memo implicates the water quality and the larger
environmental health of Badin. A proposal such as this needs to meaningfully engage the
community and affected stakeholders. This is unfortunately not the first time that Alcoa's BBP
has failed to hold public meeting or facilitate community involvement in the clean-up and
monitoring activities at the site. For example, in October 2021, 2,000 tons of contaminated soil
were removed from the Alcoa Badin Works site in an attempt to reduce outfall contaminant
levels, though the community was only notified on October 11, 2021, during a meeting of a
single community group (Better Badin, Inc.) with Alcoa's BBP. Without advanced notice, the
whole community was not able to participate. Many of the residents living within the vicinity of
the hazardous waste dump sites have had few opportunities to "participate in decisions about
activities that may affect their environment and/or health" as the US EPA encourages.55 We ask
that, moving forward, NC DEQ provides consistent opportunities for concerned residents and
stakeholders to meaningfully participate by hosting public meetings in neutral and easily
accessible locations that serve to solicit input prior to proposal development. Meetings should
also be held at times that are convenient to the affected communities.
5. The new permit should eliminate Outfalls 012 and 013 from discharging into the
public access and swimming area on Badin Lake.
In addition to eliminating Outfall 012 and ceasing use of Badin Lake as a mixing zone, we
recommend NC DEQ eliminate Outfall 013. Both Outfalls 012 and 013 discharge near the
popular public swimming area, and Outfall 013 has previously discharged cyanide in violation of
the permit.56 The risk of human exposure to industrial contaminants through ingestion or dermal
absorption of sediments and water warrants elimination of these outfalls as soon as possible.
53 In Table 1.1 of the permit renewal application, Outfalls 011 and 012 are reported as having 16 and 33 data points
collected, respectively, with no observed maximum, minimum, or average (all zeros). Additionally, the draft permit
states "TCE has never been detected at either outfall." Without method detection limits, it is difficult to make sense
of these data and conclusions.
54 Groundwater Sampling Report for the Badin Business Park Facility, prepared by Environeering, Inc for Badin
Business Park LLC (September 11, 2018).
55 US EPA, Learn About Environmental Justice (last updated Sept. 22, 2021), available at
https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental justice (accessed July 20, 2022).
56 In March, 2020, Outfall 013 discharged 16 µg/L cyanide. The limit is 5 µg/L. See
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=1180614&dbid=0&repo=WaterResources (accessed
August 2, 2022).
15

6. The new permit should require Alcoa's BBP to remove the source material for the
hazardous pollutants prior to submission of any permit applications in the future.
A fundamental goal of the Clean Water Act ("CWA") is to eliminate the discharge of pollutants
into navigable waters. As stated on the US EPA website, "the CWA aims to prevent, reduce, and
eliminate pollution in the nation's water in order to "restore and maintain the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of the Nation's waters," as described in CWA section 101(a)."57 In
accordance with this goal, Alcoa's BBP should not be granted NPDES permits in perpetuity
without making good -faith efforts to eliminate the discharge of pollutants altogether. The US
EPA created NPDES permits to "track and control point sources of pollution" (emphasis ours).58
Many closed aluminum industrial sites do not have surface water quality permits,59 as they have
been properly remediated and are no longer discharging contaminants.
Chapter 21 of Article 143 of the North Carolina General Statutes requires NC DEQ to deny a
permit when the discharge of wastes into a water is too close to a water supply intake.60 In
addition, Article 21 require that any applicant prove that it: "Has substantially complied with the
effluent standards and limitations and waste management treatment practices applicable to any
activity in which the applicant has previously engaged, and has been in substantial compliance
with other federal and state laws, regulations, and rules for the protection of the environment."61
With BBP's track record of NPDES permit violations alone, the DWR should have dug further to
see what other environmental laws and rules Alcoa has broken. The record is devoid of any such
inquiry.
a. Full remediation of the site and the unlined dumps would remove the source of
the contaminants and remove the need for a water quality permit.
The proper response to a violator needing a new NPDES permit is for NC DEQ to commence
enforcement actions to require Alcoa to eliminate its discharges and clean up the damage done to
the environment by its past violations.62 DWR and DWM should work to eliminate the need for
BBP's NPDES permit by removing the sources of hazardous waste contamination prior to
57 US EPA, Clean Water Act (CWA) and Federal Facilities, available at https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/clean-
water-act-cwa-and-federal-facilities#:—:text=The%20CWA%20aims%20to%20prevent,CWA%20section%20101(a)
(accessed June 20, 2022).
'NC DEQ, History and Water Quality Overview, available at https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/water-resources-permit-guidance/npdes-industrial-stormwater/history-water-quality-overview (accessed
August 2, 2022).
59 As far as we are aware, none of the following aluminum industrial sites have NPDES permits: Ormet Corporation
(Hannibal, OH), Alcoa (East St. Louis, IL), Alcoa (Vancouver, WA), Martin Marietta (The Dalles, OR), TRC
Environmental Corporation (Ravenswood, WV), and Reynolds Metal Company (Troutdale, OR).
6o N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-214.1 (a2).
61 N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-214.1 (b)(4)(b)(2).
62 See United States v. Alcoa Inc., 98 F. Supp.2d 1031, 1039 (N.D. Ind. 2000) (Upholding power under CWA for
government to enjoin Alcoa and require clean-up of contamination related to prior NPDES violations).
16

submitting any future permit renewal applications. Alcoa has proven elsewhere that it can fully
remediate a smelting site, such as in Massena, New York. This raises the question as to why
Alcoa is unwilling to fully remediate the Badin site.
The temporary measures taken to reduce contamination from the unlined, low-lying dump sites
do not protect environmental and human health in Badin or its groundwater or surface waters.
Under US EPA regulations, landfills are required to have a liner, cap, and leachate collection
system.63 Under North Carolina law, hazardous waste landfills are required to be well above the
water table.64 State and federal requirements are designed to ensure that water from the landfills
does not reach surface water without being treated first. Spent potliner was dumped at three large
sites at Alcoa Badin Works without being treated to meet the requirements for that hazardous
waste listing for land disposal. Excavating the spent potliner and other hazardous wastes from
these dumps and treating them would remove the source of the groundwater and surface water
contamination. It would also increase public confidence that NC DEQ is acting to ensure that
both Alcoa Badin Works and BBP's management of the site is protective of the community.
Another aluminum smelting facility operated by Alcoa in Massena, New York, is similarly
situated in a relatively small, rural town like Badin. However, both Alcoa and the US EPA have
implemented remediation strategies that were successful in cleaning up the spent potliner in
Massena under Superfund. In contrast, the continued issuance of NPDES permits to Alcoa's
BBP has done nothing to remediate the smaller Alcoa site in Badin. Similar contaminants
leached from the hazardous waste sites at both locations. However, only in Massena has Alcoa
excavated spent potliner and transferred it to an on -site secure landfill.65 Dredging and capping
work in the Grasse River took two years to complete at Alcoa's Massena location.66 The site is
expected to be properly protective of human health and the environment upon full completion of
the remediation in 2022.67 In Massena, Alcoa is expected to spend $243 million to complete the
clean-up remedy selected by the US EPA.68 In Badin, however, Alcoa has only committed
financial assurance up to $2 million for remediation.
63 40 CFR (§265.301).
64 NCAC § 130A-294.
65 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Documentation of Environmental Indicator
Determination RCRA Corrective Action Environmental Indicator RCRIS code (CA750), available at
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2017-08/documents/alcoa750.pdf (accessed August 2, 2022).
66 US EPA, Alcoa Aggregation Site Massena, IVY: Cleanup Activities, available at
https://cumulis.epa. gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.cleanup&id=0201690#Status
(accessed August 2, 2022).
67 US EPA, Region 2, First Five -Year Review Report for Grasse River (aka Alcoa Aggregation) Superfund Site St.
Lawrence County, New York, available at https://semspub.epa.gov/work/02/609929.pdf (accessed August 2, 2022).
68 US EPA, Case Summary: Alcoa, Inc. to conduct $243 million cleanup at Grasse River Superfund Site in New
York, available at https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/case-summary-alcoa-inc-conduct-243-million-cleanup-grasse-
river-superfund-site-new-york (accessed August 2, 2022).
17

Alcoa has demonstrated their capability, resources, and willingness to fully remediate a former
smelting operation in a similar town, though the question remains why they are unwilling to do
so in Badin, North Carolina.
b. As an environmental justice community, the citizens of West Badin deserve
justice for the prolonged exposure to hazardous waste produced by Alcoa and
their subsidiaries since 1917.
The combination of ongoing contamination from Alcoa's hazardous waste and community
demographics makes Badin an environmental justice community. With just over 2,000 residents,
the town's population is 59% White and 34% Black, and 37% of the residents make $25,000 or
less annually.69 The percentage of Black residents in Badin is three times greater than that of
Stanly County as a whole.70 These divisions are even more distinct in the areas immediately
surrounding the Alcoa Badin Works plant, where hazardous materials are buried. The Census
blocks immediately adjacent to Alcoa Badin Works are comprised of over 80% Black residents.
The residents of West Badin have been left in the dark about what is going on at Alcoa Badin
Works and will continue to be put at risk until the site is fully remediated.
Alcoa invested significantly more resources into achieving clean closure and remediation goals
for its hazardous waste dumps in Massena compared to what it is willing to do in Badin, even
though both locations had similar smelting processes and waste profiles. One key difference
between the two communities is their demographics. West Badin is in the 73rd percentile for
percent people of color and is in the 55th percentile of block groups for percent low-income
populations (compared to all Census block groups in North Carolina). In stark contrast,
Massena's population is predominantly white and generally more affluent than Badin. Massena
sits on indigenous lands of the Mohawk First Nation and was first established in 1792 by
colonial settlers. Today, of Massena's population of 10,091 people, only 0.1% are African
American and 8.1% are non -white and/or Hispanic. US EPA's EJScreen Tool indicates no block
group immediately surrounding the Alcoa Massena Operations exceed the state's 20th percentile
for percent minority population. The percent of residents making $25,000 or less annually is
three times lower than the percentage of Badin residents.
Another key difference is Alcoa's political power over the Town of Badin. Badin, North
Carolina was established as a racially segregated planned worker settlement in 1913, and
subsidiaries of Alcoa purchased the town along with the dams and other infrastructure from a
French firm in 1915. In 1920, the Tallassee Power Company, an Alcoa subsidiary, published the
69 US Census Bureau, Profile for Badin Town, North Carolina, available at
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/profile?g=1600000US3702960 (accessed August 2, 2022). Data derived from the
2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimates; See Table S2001 for "Earnings in the past 12 months" and
Table DP05 for "Race and Ethnicity".
70 Calculated using US Census Bureau data.
18

Badin Bulletin, which served as the local newspaper, providing news of the plant and advertising
the benefits of the company and its town.71 In March of 1920, Tallassee Power Company
published a special issue to tout all aspects of its Badin operations, including the company town
itself and the area referred to as the "Negro Village or North Badin."72 Startup involved
construction of the smelter and a carbon plant which manufactured carbon blocks and parts from
tar and calcined coke for use in the smelting process. The initial carbon plant production efforts
were fraught with errors.73 From 1917 - 2007, Alcoa's various subsidiaries operated an
aluminum smelting plant and associated industrial processes in the town.74 Studies of workers in
the plant showed disparate exposures to black workers from hazardous working conditions by
working in the pot rooms.75
Only in 1989 did the North Carolina General Assembly ("NCGA") make a move to convert
Badin from a company town to an incorporated municipality. Before doing so, they created a
study committee composed of two Alcoa representatives, two representatives of Better Badin,
Inc., and three representatives to be appointed by the other four.76 Later that summer, the NCGA
set conditions for the incorporation of Badin in a subsequent law.77 Per those conditions, the
town was divided into two electoral districts, West Badin and East Badin. One city council
member each was to be elected from these districts, with three more members elected at large.
West Badin as defined in this statutory incorporation provision included all of the area referred
to as the "Negro Village" or "North Badin" in the 1920 Badin Bulletin, as well as two of Alcoa's
three large, unlined dumps. West Badin, as defined, remains the electoral district where most of
the black workers and their heirs lived and where most of the hazardous waste dumps are
located. In the language of gerrymandering, placing a voting district line to concentrate power in
one district is referred to as "packing." In this way, voting power representing the black residents
was packed into the West Badin District by the NCGA in 1989. Alcoa's political footprint on
Badin is dominant.
If Alcoa's BBP is unwilling to invest in protecting the Badin community, it does raise questions
as to why this discrepancy with Alcoa's approach in Massena, New York exists. Correction of
environmental injustices in Badin is severely overdue. To protect Badin's community health and
71 See Badin Bulletin issues from 1918 to 1820 archived online here: https://www.digitalnc.org/newspapers/the-
badin-bulletin-albemarle-n-c/ (accessed June 16, 2022).
72 See Badin Bulletin issue archived online beginning at this page and the following pages:
https://lib.digitalnc. org/record/105294#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=20&r=0&xywh=-273 %2C-1 %2C7630%2C4637
(accessed June 16, 2022).
73 See Badin Bulletin issue from September of 1920 archived online beginning at this page and the following pages:
https://newspapers.digitalnc.org/lccn/2014236802/1920-09-01/ed-1/seq-3/ (last accessed June 16, 2022).
74 Town of Badin, A Brief History of Badin (Sept. 25, 2014), http://www.badin.org/about badin.html (accessed
August 4, 2022).
75 See generally Elizabeth S. McClure, Cancer and Non -Cancer Mortality Among Aluminum Smelting
Workers in Badin, North Carolina 63 Am J Ind Med. 755 (July 10, 2020)
76 See 1989 N.C. Sess. Law 419
77 See 1989 N.C. Sess. Law 894
19

environment, federal and state environmental regulators must ensure that Alcoa's BBP
implements immediate and effective remediation of the hazardous waste. Yet, NC DEQ has
failed to hold Alcoa accountable to timely Corrective Action as required by law under RCRA,
and this pattern of repeated NPDES permits seems to further inaction.
As Alcoa continues to delay finalizing clean-up remedies and alternatives, toxic contaminants
from the facility and its waste dumps continue to leach into Badin's community and waterways.
By repeatedly authorizing these hazardous waste discharges, the NPDES process is eviscerating
the purpose of RCRA's listing of spent potliner in the first place: to prevent leaching of
hazardous chemicals from RCRA facilities into the environment. The stark demographic and
political differences between Massena and Badin and the disparate clean-up outcomes between
the two Alcoa sites further highlight the failure of NC DEQ's programs to work together to
ensure that any final clean-up decision is adequately protective of Badin's people, fish, wildlife,
and biological health. The residents of Badin and the former employees of Alcoa deserve to exist
and flourish in their own homes and community without fear of exposure to hazardous wastes.
Conclusions
NC DEQ has issued permits for the Alcoa Badin Works facility that are too loose to
meaningfully protect the water quality and environmental health of the area. NC DEQ needs to
protect the surface waters, not create permits that allow compliance by manipulating the
sampling system. The impact of cyanide, fluoride, and hazardous waste on groundwater and
surface water is the reason that the US EPA listed spent potliner as K088 and prohibited land
disposal without treatment. NPDES should not be used to create a de facto unlimited hazardous
waste disposal system in the state's waters from dumps that do not meet US EPA and North
Carolina standards.
Implementing our recommendations would provide greater protection to Badin Lake and Little
Mountain Creek, as well as increase public confidence in the efforts being made to clean up the
hazardous waste around Alcoa Badin Works. Given the potential long-term, negative impacts on
water quality and public health, we urge NC DEQ to seriously consider our recommendations
when drafting Alcoa's BBP's renewed NPDES permit. Thank you for your work and your
service to North Carolina. We look forward to the public hearing on this matter.
Sincerely,
/s/ Ryke Longest, Co -Director
/s/Nancy Lauer, PhD, Lecturing Fellow
/s/ Jessica Levasseur, Stanback Fellow
Duke Environmental Law and Policy Clinic
20

/s/ Chandra T. Taylor -Sawyer, Senior Attorney
Environmental Justice Initiative Leader
Southern Environmental Law Center
/s/ Edgar Miller, Executive Director/Riverkeeper
Yadkin Riverkeeper, Inc.
/s/ Macy Hinson
/s/ Richard Leak
Concerned Citizens of West Badin
/s/ Jennifer Caldwell
/s/ Colleen McDaniel
Protect Badin Lake
cc:
Elizabeth Biser, Secretary, NC DEQ, [e-mail]
Sushma Masemore, Assistant Secretary, NC DEQ, [e-mail]
Joy Hicks, Senior Director for Governmental Affairs and Policy, NC DEQ,
[e-mail]
Robert McDaniel, Hydrogeologist, NC DEQ, [e-mail]
William Hunneke, Program Supervisor, NC DEQ, [e-mail]
Daniel Blackman, Administrator, US EPA Region IV, [e-mail]
Brian Holtzclaw, Community Engagement Coordinator, US EPA Region IV,
[e-mail]
Lilian Dorka, Director, External Civil Rights Compliance Office, US EPA, [e-mail]
Craig Hesterlee, Environmental Engineer (NPDES Permitting), US EPA Region IV,
[e-mail]
Robyn Gross, Director, Americas, Alcoa Transformation/Asset Planning & Management,
[e-mail]
Jason Mibroda, Remediation Manager, Americas, Alcoa Transformation/Asset Planning &
Management, [e-mail]
21