## Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature: ___________________________ Project No.: 0172.07.005.506 DISTRIBUTION

Page _1 _ of __1

_



### Project Name: 304(m) Annual Review

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD

Outgoing Call Date: 9/2/2010 Time: 4:45 pm

Company Name: Mohawk Industries

( 

## GA0024104 and SC0001996 

## ) Contact Name: Denise Wood, Mohawk Industries

Phone No.: 706-428-8118

Name: Lauren Wingo and Elizabeth Sabol Eastern Research Group , Inc.

GENERAL SUBJECT : Mohawk Industries’ 2008 Sulfide and Flow Data in DMR



# TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

Communications between Denise Wood, Mohawk Industries and Lauren Wingo, ERG:

I called Denise Wood on September 2, 2010 at 4:45 pm. Ms. Wood asked that I send her an e-mail with the requested information to denise_wood@mohawkind.com

.

I called Denise Wood on September 7, 2010 at 4:15 pm and asked if I could also e-mail her about the Oak River facility and she agreed.

I called Ms. Wood on September 9, 2010 at 4:30 pm to follow up on the e-mails I had sent her. Ms. Wood said that she has contacted facility engineers at each of the two facilities but has not received the information from them. I notified Ms. Wood that EPA was hoping to have th e information by Friday, September 10, 2010 but Ms.

Wood indicated that she would not have the information un til next week, most likely.

I left a message for Ms. Wood on September 15, 2010 at 4:05 pm asking that she reply all in her response to my e-mail, since I would be out on vacation the following w eek.

Communications between Denise Wood, Mohawk Industries and Elizabeth Sabol, ERG:

I called Ms. Wood on Wednesday, September 22 at 9:30 a.m., to follow up with her regarding the Mohawk emails sent September 7 requesting information for two faci lities: Oak River and Lyerly Plants. Ms. Wood stated that the information in the e-mail for the Mohawk Lye rly Plant was correct and that she would send an e-mail confirming the data. Ms. Wood also stated that she would c ontact the Oak River Plant to request the data be confirmed and sent as soon as possible.

I called Ms. Wood back to get insight on where the sulfi de in the wastewater was originating. Ms. Wood stated that sulfide is present in the wastewater due to boiler cleaning chemicals and chemicals used to treat intake

water for hardness.

Please see the attached e-mails and documents for furth er information.From: Denise Wood <Denise_Wood@mohawkind.com>

To: <Elizabeth.Sabol@erg.com>, "Lauren Wingo" <Lauren. Wingo@erg.com>

CC: "Jessica Wolford" <Jessica.Wolford@erg.com>, <swie tlik.william@epa.gov>

Date: 9/22/2010 3:54 PM Subject: Re: DMR Clarification Needed for GA0024104

Good afternoon,

The Mohawk Lyerly facility's discharge permit limit s for sulfide are 25 pounds/day daily average and 50 pounds/day daily ma ximum, to be sampled 4 times per year. The sulfide concentration is < 1ppm and most likely is coming from boiler and water treatment chemicals us ed at the facility.

Sincerely...Denise

Denise A. Wood, CHMM

Senior Director of Environmental Services Mohawk Industries, Inc. Phone: (706) 428-8118 FAX: (706) 428-8120

"Lauren Wingo" <Lauren.Wingo@erg

.com> To <denise_wood @mohawkind.com>

09/07/2010 03:34 cc PM <swietlik.wi lliam@epa.gov>,

"Jessica Wol ford"

<Jessica.Wol ford@erg.com> Subject

DMR Clarific ation Needed for

GA0024104

Dear Ms. Wood,

Thank you for taking the time to speak with me the other day. I am writing to follow up on our conversation regarding Mohawk I ndustries' Lyerly Plant (GA0024104) and explain more about the information I am looking to collect. I work for Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) as a contractor to EPA under EPA Contract No. 68-C-02-095. Here is a background of what this information is being used for.

EPA reviews publicly-available DMR data to fulfill its review obligation under Section 304(b) of the Clean Water Act. The CW A requires EPA to annually review and, if appropriate, revise its wat er pollution control technology-based regulations, called effluent limit ations guidelines or "effluent guidelines, that limit the discharge of p ollutants to waters of the U.S. from various categories of industrial faci lities. EPA is currently conducting its 2010 annual review of exis ting effluent guidelines and potential industrial guidelines which may need to be included (see http://www.epa.gov/guide/304m/ for further informat ion). EPA will discuss

this review and the results in its 2010 Effluent Gu idelines Program Plan scheduled for publication in the Federal Register i n December 2010. As part of the 2010 annual review, EPA is evaluating the da ta in discharge monitoring reports from 2008 and needs further info rmation to complete the

review.

We would like to verify the information we have on record for the averagesulfide discharge. Our records show the following:

Outfall 0A1:

- Jan 08: 6.08 kg/day - Apr 08: 8.31 kg/day - Jul 08: 7.61 kg/day - Oct 08: 2.93 kg/day

Average flow range: 0.723 MGD to 1.659 MGD

We appreciate your help in confirming the above dat a are accurate and if any of the data were reported as non-detect. We wou ld also like information

on the measured sulfide concentrations for 2008 and on the source of sulfides in the wastewater. Also, what is the basis for the sulfide permit limit? Can you provide the sulfide concentration th at was used to calculate the sulfide quantity limit?

We appreciate your help in verifying this data and answering our questions. You may return the requested to me via email or by phone at (703) 633-1692. If you would like to speak with EPA directly with r egarding this request, you may contact William Swietlik by phone at (202) 566-1129 or by e-mail: swietlik.william@epa.gov.

Thanks,

Lauren Wingo

Lauren Wingo Civil Engineer Eastern Research Group, Inc. 14555 Avion Parkway, Suite 200 Chantilly, VA 20151 (703) 633-1692From: Denise Wood <Denise_Wood@mohawkind.com>

To: <Elizabeth.Sabol@erg.com>, "Lauren Wingo" <Lauren. Wingo@erg.com>

CC: "Jessica Wolford" <Jessica.Wolford@erg.com>, <swie tlik.william@epa.gov>

Date: 9/22/2010 4:46 PM Subject: Re: DMR Clarification Needed for SC0001996

Good afternoon,

The Mohawk Oak River plant's December 2008 AVG and MAX toxaphene discharge concentrations were both <0.0005 (DL).

This chemical is not used as a raw material or in a ny other chemicals used at the facility, so the origin is unknown during th e few months when present above the 0.5 ppb detection limit.

Sincerely...Denise

Denise A. Wood, CHMM

Senior Director of Environmental Services Mohawk Industries, Inc. Phone: (706) 428-8118 FAX: (706) 428-8120

"Lauren Wingo" <Lauren.Wingo@erg

.com> To <denise_wood @mohawkind.com>

09/07/2010 04:41 cc PM <swietlik.wi lliam@epa.gov>,

"Jessica Wol ford"

<Jessica.Wol ford@erg.com> Subject

DMR Clarific ation Needed for

SC0001996

Dear Ms. Wood,

Thank you for speaking with me again over the phone today and offering to help verify information for the Oak River Plant (SC 0001996), in addition to the information you are verifying for the Lyerly Pl ant. This information will be used for the same purpose under EPA Contrac t No. 68-C-02-095.

EPA reviews publicly-available DMR data to fulfill its review obligation under Section 304(b) of the Clean Water Act. The CW A requires EPA to annually review and, if appropriate, revise its wat er pollution control technology-based regulations, called effluent limit ations guidelines or "effluent guidelines, that limit the discharge of p ollutants to waters of the U.S. from various categories of industrial faci lities. EPA is currently conducting its 2010 annual review of exis ting effluent guidelines and potential industrial guidelines which may need to be included (see http://www.epa.gov/guide/304m/ for further informat ion). EPA will discuss

this review and the results in its 2010 Effluent Gu idelines Program Plan scheduled for publication in the Federal Register i n December 2010. As part of the 2010 annual review, EPA is evaluating the da ta in discharge monitoring reports from 2008 and needs further info rmation to complete the

review. We would like to verify the information we have on record for the average and maximum toxaphene discharges. Our records show the following:Outfall 001:

Average Toxaphene Concentration: - Jan 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Feb 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Mar 08: <0.0015 mg/L - Apr 08: 0.0012 mg/L - May 08: 0.0005 mg/L - Jun 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Jul 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Aug 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Sep 08: <0.05 mg/L - Oct 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Nov 08: <0.0005 mg/L

Maximum Toxaphene Concentration: - Jan 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Feb 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Mar 08: <0.0025 mg/L - Apr 08: 0.0025 mg/L - May 08: 0.0005 mg/L - Jun 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Jul 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Aug 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Sep 08: <0.05 mg/L - Oct 08: <0.0005 mg/L - Nov 08: <0.0005 mg/L

Average flow range: 0.070074 MGD to 0.164852 MGD

We appreciate your help in confirming the above dat a are accurate. We would also like to know if the April and May 2008 toxaphe ne concentrations were below the detection limit? Also, we do not have tox aphene or flow data for December 2008. Were they measured? If so, can you p rovide the data for December 2008? Additionally, we would like to know the source of the toxaphene in the wastewater.

Again, we appreciate your help in verifying data an d answering questions for both the Oak River and Lyerly plants. You may r eturn the requested information to me via email or by phone at (703) 63 3-1692. Again, if you would like to speak with EPA directly with regardin g this request, you may contact William Swietlik by phone at (202) 566-1129 or by e-mail: swietlik.william@epa.gov.

Thanks,

Lauren Wingo

Lauren Wingo Civil Engineer Eastern Research Group, Inc. 14555 Avion Parkway, Suite 200 Chantilly, VA 20151 (703) 633-1692