?
Need
to
return
call
by
/
at/
between
and
.
Signature:
Project
No.:
0172.02.005.052
 
DISTRIBUTION
Page
___
of
_

Project
Name:
304(
m)

TELEPHONE
CALL
RECORD
Outgoing
Call
Date:
2/
28/
05
Time:
5:
00
pm
Company
Name:
DuPont
And
DuPont
Edge
Moor,
DE
New
Johnsonville,
TN
Contact
Name:
Ken
Wood
Phone
No.:
(
302)
774­
8023
e­
mail:
Kenneth.
N.
Wood@
USA.
dupont.
com
Name:
TJ
Finseth
Eastern
Research
Group
GENERAL
SUBJECT
:
DuPont's
Edge
Moor,
DE
and
New
Johnsonville,
TN
releases
in
TRI
2002
TOPICS
DISCUSSED
AND
ACTION
TAKEN
On
Monday
January
24,
2005
at
3:
00
pm
I
left
a
message
with
Gerald
Byars,
(
931)
535­
2111,
the
TRI
public
contact
with
the
New
Johnsonville
facility,
and
asked
him
to
call
me
back.

On
Wednesday
February
2,
2005
at
11:
30
pm
I
left
another
message
with
Gerald
Byars
asking
him
to
call
me
back.

On
Wednesday
February
2,
2005
at
1:
50
pm
I
called
(
302)
761­
2298,
the
number
listed
in
TRI
for
Leonard
Fasullo,
the
TRI
public
contact
for
the
DuPont
Edge
Moor
facility,
but
the
answering
machine
was
for
someone
else.
I
left
a
message
requesting
that
the
person
call
me
back
with
Leonard
Fasullo's
number.

On
Thursday
February
3,
2005
at
1:
00
pm
I
called
the
Edge
Moor
facility
direct
line,
(
302)
761­
2218,
and
asked
to
speak
to
Leonard
Fasullo,
and
the
security
guard
told
me
that
Mr.
Fasullo
no
longer
worked
for
DuPont.

On
Friday
February
4,
2005
at
10:
00
am
I
called
the
Edge
Moor
facility
again
and
asked
to
be
connected
to
the
Environmental
department.
The
security
guard
told
me
that
he
could
not
connect
me
if
I
didn't
have
a
name.

On
Monday
February
7,
2005
at
2:
55
pm
I
contacted
Mr.
Byars
and
he
told
me
that
he
had
asked
someone
to
contact
me.
Mr.
Byars
told
me
that
he
would
call
the
person
right
now
and
have
him
call
me.

On
Monday
February
7,
2005
at
3:
15
pm
I
was
contacted
by
Mr.
David
Alexander
from
DuPont
New
Johnsonville,
(
931)
535­
7316.
I
asked
Mr.
Alexander
questions
about
the
facility's
TRI­
reported
releases.
Mr.
Alexander
told
me
that
he
would
try
to
get
the
information
for
me
in
a
couple
of
weeks.

On
Friday
February
11,
2005
at
8:
30
am
I
left
a
message
with
Ken
Wood
asking
him
if
he
knew
who
I
should
contact
at
the
Edge
Moor
and
New
Johnsonville
facilities
for
information
about
TRI­
reported
releases.
?
Need
to
return
call
by
/
at/
between
and
.
Signature:
On
Monday
February
14,
2005
at
3:
00
pm
I
contacted
Mr.
Wood
and
asked
if
he
could
find
out
who
I
needed
to
talk
to
for
information
about
TRI­
reported
releases.

On
Tuesday
February
15,
2005
at
11:
15
am
Mr.
Wood
contacted
me
and
explained
that
both
facilities
are
currently
in
a
transition
period
for
the
personnel
that
I
needed
to
talk
to.
I
gave
Mr.
Wood
the
questions
that
I
had
and
he
told
me
that
he
would
be
able
to
get
the
information.

On
Friday
February
18,
2005
at
1:
00
pm,
Mr.
Wood
contacted
me
and
told
me
that
Mr.
Alexander
and
he
were
unclear
as
to
what
questions
needed
to
be
answered
and
Mr.
Wood
thought
it
would
work
best,
if
I
were
to
send
him
an
e­
mail
with
all
the
questions
that
I
had
for
the
two
facilities.

On
Friday
February
18,
2005
at
3:
55
pm,
I
sent
Mr.
Wood
the
questions
via
e­
mail.
The
questions
are
attached
to
this
telecon.

On
Thursday
February
24,
2005
at
1:
35
pm
Mr.
Wood
contacted
me
to
tell
me
that
he
had
collected
all
of
the
New
Johnsonville
information,
but
was
having
trouble
getting
the
Edge
Moor
information.

On
Friday
February
25,
2005
at
6:
00
pm
Mr.
Wood
left
me
a
message
telling
me
that
they
had
collected
all
the
data
for
both
facilities
and
that
it
was
being
reviewed
and
should
be
sent
to
me
on
Monday
afternoon.

On
Monday
February
28,
2005
at
4:
50
pm
Mr.
Robert
Reich
sent
me
an
e­
mail
with
an
excel
file
attached
that
contained
the
responses
for
the
two
facilities.

Edge
Moor
Dioxin:
The
facility
analyzed
its
wastewater
for
dioxin
once
in
1999
and
two
times
in
2002.
The
facility
used
a
weighted
average
for
the
three
values
to
obtain
an
average.
All
but
one
of
the
congeners
were
not
detected
in
2002
(
only
OCDF
was
detected).
For
the
measurements
that
were
not
detected,
½
the
detection
limit
was
used
to
calculate
the
average
concentration.

Hexachlorobenzene:
The
facility
analyzed
its
wastewater
for
hexachlorobenzene
once
during
2002.
Hexachlorobenzene
was
not
detected,
and
the
discharge
was
estimated
by
using
½
the
detection
limit
of
10

g/
L.

Pentachlorobenzene:
The
facility
analyzed
its
wastewater
for
pentachlorobenzene
once
during
2002.
Pentachlorobenzene
was
not
detected,
and
the
discharge
was
estimated
by
using
½
the
detection
limit
of
3

g/
L.

Manganese:
The
facility
did
not
monitor
for
manganese
in
2002,
but
did
in
2000.
The
manganese
release
was
based
on
measured
concentrations
from
2000
and
the
total
annual
flow
for
2002.

Polychlorinated
Biphenyls:
The
facility
monitored
its
wastewater
for
PCBs
seven
times
in
2002.
The
facility
monitored
its
stormwater
for
PCBs
three
times
in
2001.
Each
time
the
facility
monitored
for
PCBs
in
the
wastewater,
it
was
detected.
The
average
wastewater
concentration
was
281.6
pg/
L.

New
Johnsonville
Dioxin:
The
facility
analyzed
its
wastewater
for
dioxin
once
in
2000.
The
facility
monitored
for
all
17
congeners
and
detected
four
congeners.
The
facility
added
all
the
concentrations,
using
½
detection
limit
for
the
13
congeners
that
were
not
detected.
This
summed
concentration
was
multiplied
by
the
annual
flow
rate
to
calculate
the
grams
per
year
of
dioxins
reported
released
in
2002..
?
Need
to
return
call
by
/
at/
between
and
.
Signature:
Hexachlorobenzene:
The
facility
analyzed
its
wastewater
for
hexachlorobenzene
once
during
2002.
Hexachlorobenzene
was
not
detected,
and
the
discharge
was
estimated
by
using
½
the
detection
limit
of
1

g/
L.

Pentachlorobenzene:
The
facility
used
an
empirical
ratio
of
PeCB
to
D&
DLC
found
at
another
site
to
estimate
its
pentachlorobenzene
discharge.

Nickel:
The
facility
analyzed
its
wastewater
for
nickel
once
a
week
during
2002.
Nickel
was
detected
every
time
that
it
was
monitored
and
had
an
average
concentration
of
32.6

g/
L.
The
weekly
samples
were
multiplied
by
monthly
discharge
flows.

Chromium:
The
facility
analyzed
its
wastewater
for
chromium
once
a
week
during
2002.
Chromium
was
not
detected
every
time
that
it
was
monitored.
The
average
concentration
of
the
53
samples
is
17.4

g/
L.
The
weekly
samples
were
multiplied
by
monthly
discharge
flows.

Attachments
The
e­
mail
that
ERG
sent
to
Mr.
Ken
Wood
with
the
questions
for
the
two
facilities.
The
e­
mail
response
to
the
questions.
The
excel
file
containing
the
answers
to
the
questions.
