RCRA WATCHDOG – ARTICLE 4

THE DUPONT CAPE FEAR NORTH CAROLINA

HAZARDOUS WASTE SUPERFUND SITE

PART 4 of a 5-PART SERIES

The Story Behind the Neighboring DuPont Hazardous Waste Site By

by Don Gordon, January 10, 2023
Updated August 20, 2023

Update: There are now (September 8, 2023) eight articles in this series culminating in
an August 7, 2023 RCRA Recommendation for Action to Elizabeth S. Biser, Secretary
of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Control (NCDEQ). Go here for
URLS for all articles and the best use of Scribd:
https://www.scribd.com/document/665800151/RCRA-Watchdog-DuPont-vs-RCRA-
Overview

Subject: DISCUSSION OF REPLY FROM MANAGER, BBTB REAL PROPERTIES –

PINEHURST, NC, December 2023

Mr. Talbot responded by email to Parts One, Two, and Three of the DuPont Series
on January 5, 2023

To: Mr. Gordon, From: Doug Talbot BBTB Real Properties (The Bluffs Developer
General Manager and Real Estate Broker) “After receiving your assessment of the DAK
America [DuPont Cape Fear Facility] site I requested our environmental consulting firm
[Davey Resource Group] to prepare the attached memo. We feel very confident in our
assessment of the facility and our ability to develop the Bluffs. In addition the state and
federal permitting for the Bluffs boat launch required additional review of the DAK
facility.”

Don Gordon response to Doug Talbot on January 10, 2023:

Thank you, Doug, for providing me a copy of the Memorandum (16 pages) by The
Davey Resource Group, Inc, Wilmington, NC (hereafter Davey), the environmental
consulting firm used by your real estate organization BBTB Real Properties – Pinehurst,
NC and Texas.

In their report, the Davey Resource Group explained the danger from the 5-acre DuPont
Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 54 located within 250 feet of the planned, but
not yet county permitted, thirteen proposed home lots, on River Park Way near the boat
launch. You also mention state and federal permits. Those permits as you know
pertain to protection of wetlands from The Bluffs and have nothing to do with SWMU 54.

Page 1 of 6
These are my assessments of the Davey December 6, 2022 Memorandum about
SWMU 54.

The Davey Memorandum provides exactly the same findings as do my reports

distributed to The Bluffs residents September-November 2022: “The Story behind the
Neighboring DuPont Hazardous Waste Site.” They use the same NCDEQ source
material.

Davey’s conclusion (page 15 of their assessment, a copy of which can be requested

from Mr. Talbot or the BBTB real estate office) is that in Davey’s opinion “the only
portion of the Bluffs Residential Subdivision that may have the potential to be impacted
by the Ash Landfill [SWMU 54] leachate is the extreme northeastern tip/corner of the
subject property along the Cape Fear River.” That is also the conclusion in my report.
That is also where The Bluffs plans to permit about thirteen residential lots on River
Park Way. The wide “dotted course through the map below is a swale that runs from the
NCDOT Mitigation Area next to Strawberry Hill Road, through the Bluffs directly to
SWMU 54. See Plat Map below:

Page 2 of 6
It is imperative that the fourteen remediation recommendations in Part 2, pages 6 and 7,
“The Story behind the Neighboring DuPont Hazardous Waste Site,” be reviewed
and acted upon. Mr. Talbot should join with the residents of The Bluffs to request that
SWMU 54 be further tested, preferably demolished and removed by DuPont before the
site is allowed to close in 2025 or whenever, or that The Bluffs not develop the thirteen
residential lots within 1,000 feet of SWMU 54 as explained by The Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) guidance – subject: protecting residents and
recreational users protection.

Davey explains that the original 1968 EPA permit required DuPont to test SWMU 54
semiannually every year, beginning at construction in 1968, for hazardous material
leaking using four test wells until the SWMU was certified closed by DuPont to NCDEQ.

Page 3 of 6
Davey neglects to explain DuPont did not test in full compliance between 1968 and
2020 when a new permit was issued. During that period the test requirement was
changed to every two years. DuPont did not due that either. In fact DuPont reported in
2017 that SWMU 54 demolished and removed in 2007. That is also incorrect, it was not
demolished. These are the only years for which test results exist and none semiannual:
1997, 98, 99, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22. Do you see the large gaps?
Davey reports the test drilling at the direction of BBTB by Mid Atlantic Drilling. Davey
neglects to provide the depth of the drilling. Is it correct that the US Army Corps of
Engineers were “disturbed by the drilling depths”? Are depths of 200 feet correct? How
deep?

Davey states after examining some DEQ reports: (1) Since 2016 the number of
hazardous chemicals detected on the [only one – there are four] perimeter of SWMU 54
by DEQ is increasing. (2) The volume of hazardous chemicals is increasing. (3) The
amount of chromium exceeds the toxic level during one test. (4) Some other chemicals
are barely below the toxic level. (5) At the present time leaching would most likely
migrate directly into the Cape Fear River which is not tested by DEQ or any other RCRA
enforcer. I add arsenic was detected in the MW4 test well during Phase II and III testing.

While Davey explains that there has been no significant leaching increase since 2004
there was also practically no further testing of SWMU 54 from 2000 to 2022. The 2022
testing showed the same chemicals but absent arsenic which can also occur naturally.

If SWMU 54 was exclusively a coal ash landfill, which it is likely not, (of note, coal ash is
classified as both dangerous, toxic, and alternately hazardous by the EPA because of
the chemicals ash alone creates) then would not SWMU 54 also have traces of non-ash
hazardous chemicals found in the other 80 SWMU and Areas of Concern (AOC) within
the DuPont facility?

No one, not EPA, DEQ, DuPont, Davey, or Mr. Talbot knows what is in SWMU 54. The
first DuPont landfill is now 55 years old. What is the containment life expectancy beyond
55 years? It is a mystery because there are no construction task, condition, or standard
requirements for SWMU 54. This is a 5-acre site, 49 feet high. It is not trivial. Worse
there are essentially no records from 1968 to 1976 when SWMU 54 was in full use. It is
reliably estimated to contain 195,000 tons of coal ash.

After an exhaustive FOIA eight-month search of records at the behest-request of our

local Congressional representative and the EPA Office of Regional Counsel, only 14
mostly blank pages among 32 total pages provided pertained to SMWU 54 during 1968
to 1976 when it was closed.

Full RCRA reporting compliance should provide hundreds of pages. Of the 32 pages
provided by DuPont, 18 pages pertain to a similar but different DuPont hazardous waste
site, also a Dacron© manufacturing facility. The Kinston Plant is located 90 miles away
in Kinston, NC. The Kinston pages do, however, illustrate the type of report required
albeit missing for the DuPont Cape Fear Facility whose pages unfortunately are mostly

Page 4 of 6
blank. Those few pages with pencil entries are stamped: “PORTIONS OF THIS
DOCUMENT MAY BE UNREADABLE.” The blank pages strongly suggest there are no
records of the content in or the construction of SWMU 54. My research suggests that
all and any waste was dumped into the first landfill built in 1968, which is today called
SWMU 54.

In the absence of required records I suggested, as an alternative, that DEQ direct

DuPont to drill into SWMU 54 from the top and provide core samples of the contents.
DEQ explained that was not required by the RCRA. It is not prohibited either. We expect
state and federal employees to do more than pro forma in the absence of mandated
RCRA CFR 40 recordkeeping.

New information: The Davey Resource Group advised that The Bluffs hired a contractor
to dig three test wells in 2016. The wells were dug along a line between SWMU 54 and
the Bluffs property. There is no indication of how deep the test wells were. The test
results showed no chemical leaching into The Bluffs. The BBTB wells have not been
retested since 2016, perhaps because they were capped and are no longer accessible.
The wells are not registered with DEQ. The Davey report, dated December 6, 2022, is
the first public acknowledgement of the existence of these wells. No report that the test
wells met RCRA-DEQ standards

Conclusion: Davey explains on page 15 of their report that they contacted the NCDEQ-
HWS site manager for the DuPont Cape Fear Facility and asked if there are any other
hazards or threats that the SWMU 54 poses to the adjacent Bluffs Residential
Subdivision. The HWS manager responded succinctly by email: “No” on December 2,
2022. Case closed. (Name deleted for privacy.)

Not so fast, similarly, the same HWS manager responded to me by email earlier on
November 17, 2022: “Thank you very much for this in-depth and comprehensive review
of the DuPont Cape Fear facility [parts 1,2,and 3 noted previously herein on Scribd]. I
have passed this information onto DuPont and will discuss with them [in conjunction
with the final Corrective Measures Study (CMS) the subject of full remediation (removal)
vs. risk-based negotiation]. I will also upload the information to the NCDEQ Laserfiche
database to ensure that it is included in the public record during the final approval
process. This information will be brought forward as final remedy selection takes
place.”

It is concerning that Mr. Talbot’s reply illustrates a lack of acknowledgement regarding

this issue and the need to support the residents in this matter. We live here.

I recommend that Mr. Talbot and BBTB Real Properties support full remediation
(removal) of the DuPont Facility's SWMU 54 and the adjacent millions of gallons water
retention pond for all the reasons explained in my November 11, 2022 report and which
has been filed and accepted with the NCDEQ with information copies to the EPA and
Brunswick County. Mr. Talbot’s response does not respond to the full report. A
reasonable person would believe that SWMU 54 requires comprehensive testing and

Page 5 of 6
appropriate action. Is it safely compatible within 250 feet of a residential community?
This is DuPont’s RCRA requirement to prove, not the public’s.

SWMU 54 at five acres is small by comparison to the Duke Energy coal ash disaster
(browser search: Sutton Lake coal ash disaster) in 2018, one mile down the Cape Fear
River. No need for that to happen here. DuPont created SWMU 54, cannot explain it, it
is 55 years old, the safest solution is total removal. You do not risk-based negotiate
safety involving a residential and recreational facility. The RCRA strongly encourages
public involvement in every step of remediation. Time for BBTB Real Properties to get
involved and not ignore the reality of SWMU 54. By the way, SWMU 54 is located in a
state approved conservation trust, the NCCLT. (Does not matter that DuPont owns the
land, they ceded the Trust as compensation.)

END

Post script (August 14, 2023): FEMA advises that SWMU is inside a Regulatory
Floodway and surrounded on three sides by a FEMA AE Flood Zone. See Parts 1,2,
and 3 for more information and maps. (The approved math calculating a hundred year
FEMA AE Zone flood is explained, citing the FEMA Brunswick County Flood Manual in
a letter to the Secretary NCDEQ. It is much less than once every 100 years)

Page 6 of 6