DEQ-CFW_00079134

�d&Ia
N.
Thanks, Marla.
Kritzer, Jamie [/O=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=CEE93C49D01445A3B541BB327DCDC840-JBKRITZER]
6/22/2017 6:25:14 PM
Sink, Marla [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=14436cdf33f147acad62db9cb7dcf81b-Marla.Sink]; Culpepper, Linda
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=73d475cbae324a29687e1711dc9a79c5-ImcuI pepper]
Munger, Bridget [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=c54elf650cea49968a5aba689c204f61-bcmunger]; Grzyb, Julie
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=75d1654d45154c2abb08596a2c9af282-jagrzyb]; Brower, Connie
[/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=7ee8db84d956431c9a1f781f5597ba62-cubrower]
RE: Vaughn: answers to your questions
Jamie Kritzer
Communications Director
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-8602
T1G111188 IG�.
R,.._,.. E_ a b._ s.
From: Sink, Marla
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:12 PM
To: Kritzer, Jamie <[e-mail]>; Culpepper, Linda <[e-mail]>
Cc: Munger, Bridget <[e-mail]>; Grzyb, Julie <[e-mail]>; Brower, Connie
<[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Vaughn: answers to your questions
EM
We have set up a phone call with Vaughn Hagerty from the "Wilmington Star News" on Monday to review the questions
sent to him earlier this week (See below for questions and responses). Primarily, he has NPDES permitting questions.
The call will take place at 11:15 a.m. Monday in Julie's office.
Thanks,
Marla
DEQ-CFW 00079134

Maria Sink
Public Information Officer
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
919 707 9033 office
.... ... ... ...
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
........... .2g.�j . ..................
Cc: Kritzer, Jamie Sink, Maria <[e-mail]@ncderr, gov>; Munger, Bridget
<brid;[e-mail]>
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 HFP0 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 cin,siver to question #-2; theyP did notifj, us.
2) Has GenX ever been mentioned as part of the Fayetteville Works NPDES permit or permit application?
The Pei -grit qfyhe alion describesfitv diffierent nunnifacluring cnvas. In that descrifwion, they recognized the
jvoduction (?1'HFT-'0 nioncry er (which is bein-
, i-elfei-red to as GenX) and the vinid ethet• nionomei's in the
DEQ-CFW-00079135

ivcrsteivcrter, The ivcasteivcater yenercrte�I as cr result q'f these processes is sent to the �v aste�v ater trecrti�nent,t�lcrnt,
according to the ,hermit qjy&cation. Tf%e iver��e igfor-mecl that the Chemours ' polymer l?rocessin - aid (aclditional
Gen V coinj)ounds) manufacturing- area is a closed lool) :sy .a em. In other ivords, the iv aste generated &1ring-
these processes is captured on -site and not discharged 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?
hej, were all identified in the 2016 qj-AlphcWi€ n and all previIoils al-)Pliccrtic. ns as HI -TO monomer Ovhich are
ein� r erred to as Gen.Y) and the vinyl 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?
"I_he 2016 reneivral crl�j-)licration does mention HF1'O monower (which is being, referred to as GenX) and the
Dny1 Ether monomers in the wastewater.
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.
Tf7irat you described is incorrect. Please see crn,sivers above.
Again, I'm writing this story today. In fact, IT have most of it finished before noon.
WSM
Vaughn Hagerty
DEQ-CFW 00079136