Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019.07.15_CCO.p28_Consent Order Progress Report for Second Quarter 2019Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Submissions to the State of North Carolina and Cape Fear River Watch The following table identifies Consent Order submissions by Chemours for the period of April 1, 2019 through the end of the second quarter on June 30, 2019.1 CO Section Submitted To Title Submitted Date Other NCDEQ Southeast Perched Zone Investigation Report 04/10/2019 12 NCDEQ Cape Fear River PFAS Mass Loading Model Scope of Work 04/11/2019 Other NCDEQ Post Hurricane Florence PFAS Characterization Report 04/13/2019 8 NCDAQ VE-N Carbon Bed Stack Test Report 04/15/2019 8 NCDAQ Division and Blower Stack Test Report 04/15/2019 8 NCDAQ Monthly Emissions Report 04/22/2019 8 NCDAQ VE-N Carbon Bed and Division Stack Test Report 04/22/2019 24 NCDEQ Drinking Water Compliance Plan 04/26/2019 28 NCDEQ Consent Order Quarterly Progress Report 04/30/2019 11 NCDWR Table 3+ Standard Operating Procedures - Eurofins 05/06/2019 11 NCDWR Table 3+ Standard Operating Procedures - TestAmerica 05/06/2019 11 NCDWR Updated PFAS Characterization Sampling Plan and Responses to Comments 05/06/2019 26 NCDEQ Total Organic Fluorine - Sampling Plan 05/06/2019 26 NCDEQ Total Organic Fluorine Proposal - Request for Approval 05/06/2019 14 NCDEQ Responses to Laboratory Questions - Charles River 05/09/2019 14 NCDEQ Responses to Laboratory Questions - EAG 05/09/2019 12 NCDEQ Old Outfall 002 Remedial Options Plan 05/20/2019 8 NCDAQ Monthly Emissions Report 05/21/2019 12 NCDEQ PFAS Mass Loading Model SOW Response to Comments 05/31/2019 11 NCDWR Outfall 002 Sampling Data and Letter 06/10/2019 11 NCDWR TestAmerica Technical Memorandum regarding DFSA 06/10/2019 23 NCDEQ Consent Order Paragraph 23 Notification 06/10/2019 Other NCDEQ Results of Temporary Perched Zone Groundwater Pumping 06/17/2019 11 NCDWR Follow-up Letter re MTP, MMF, DFSA, and PPF Acid 06/18/2019 11 NCDWR TestAmerica Technical Summary for MTP, MMF, DFSA, PPF Acid 06/18/2019 11 NCDWR Lancaster Technical Summary for MTP, MMF, DFSA, PPF Acid 06/18/2019 8 NCDAQ PPA and VE-S Stack Test Reports 06/21/2019 8 NCDAQ Monthly Emissions Report 06/21/2019 27 NCDEQ Fate and Transport Study 06/25/2019 1 Consent Order submissions by Chemours from lodging of the Proposed Consent Order in November 2018 through March 31, 2019 were presented in the 1st quarter report. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Replacement Drinking Water Actions (Actions below represent replacement drinking water actions from November 20182 - June 30, 2019.) Bottled Water Residences Eligible for Bottled Water Eligible and Declined Eligible and Vacant Eligible and Already on Public Water Eligible Residences Receiving Bottled Water 754 12 0 3 739 GAC Residences Eligible for GAC Number of residences that have Responded to GAC Offer Number of residences that have NOT Responded to GAC Offer GAC Residence Response Rate Connected to Public Water Public Water Readily Available Public Water Feasible 191 67 124 35% 3 13 36 GAC Systems to Install Initial Interviews Conducted Total Sheds Dropped Total Systems Completed & Online Initial Sampling Complete GAC Change Outs 139 67 51 47 47 7 RO Eligible (including houses that share a well) Number of residences that have Responded to RO Offer Number of residences that have NOT Responded to RO Offer RO Residence Response Rate Declined Offer Systems Installed RO Systems to Install 210 356 37% 566 8 127 431 Drinking Water Data to State Sample Delivery Group (SDG) Emailed or Uploaded Percentage Within 7 days of Final Data 212 100 Drinking Water Data to Residents Sample Results Percentage Within Timeframe (7 or 30 days) Delivered or Attempted 1,038 100 2 The date the proposed Consent Order was lodged. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Consent Order Progress Details This section summarizes the activities that have been undertaken by Chemours pursuant to the Consent Order Compliance Measures for the period from April 1, 2019 through the end of the second quarter of 2019 (June 30, 2019). Paragraph 7 - Control Technology Improvements Paragraph 7c - Thermal Oxidizer (see inset photos) · Chemours construction activities continue on schedule for completion of installation and startup of the thermal oxidizer by December 31, 2019. Foundations are poured at the facility, and construction of the equipment continues offsite by the supplier for delivery and installation later this year. Paragraph 8 - GenX Emissions Reduction Milestones · As required under the Consent Order, monthly emissions reports were submitted on April 22, 2019, May 21, 2019, and June 21, 2019. The reports provide the details of emissions to date to meet the Consent Order requirements of 82% and 92% for plant-wide interim reductions of air emissions of GenX Compounds. · Emissions testing of the first product campaigns in 2019 have been conducted for all products except for EVE and IXM CR. The first product campaigns for EVE and IXM CR will occur later in 2019 and will be tested then. Paragraph 10 - No Discharge of Process Wastewater from Chemours' Manufacturing Areas · Chemours continues to not discharge its process wastewater and to ship all of its process wastewater offsite for disposal. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Paragraph 11 - Characterization of PFAS in Process and Non-Process Wastewater and Stormwater at the Facility Paragraph 11a - Test Methods and Lab Standards · Comments from NCDEQ and USEPA on the non-targeted analysis plan were received and addressed. On May 6, 2019, Chemours submitted a response to comments table alongside updated TestAmerica and Eurofins Lancaster Table 3+ standard operating procedures. On May 30, 2019, Chemours provided updated TestAmerica and Eurofins Lancaster 537 standard operating procedures to NCDEQ. · On June 18, 2019, Chemours submitted a letter to the State notifying of continued development of analytical methods for Table 3+ compounds. · Chemours collected Chemours process water samples for non-targeted analysis during its first sampling event pursuant to Consent Order paragraph 11c on June 27, 2019. Paragraph 11b - Sampling Plan · Comments from NCDEQ, USEPA and Cape Fear River Watch on the sampling plan were received between March and April 2019. · On May 6, 2019, Chemours submitted a response to comments table and a revised workplan to NCDEQ and Cape Fear River Watch for review. · On June 24, 2019, NCDEQ approved the paragraph 11b sampling workplan. Paragraph 11c - Initial Characterization · Chemours completed planning for the first round of initial characterization sampling, including the purchase of auto-samplers, coordination with analytical laboratories, and refining sample collection methods. · The first initial characterization event occurred during the week of April 22, 2019. This event was conducted during a period where there was no rain, so no stormwater only samples were collected. · The second initial characterization sampling event occurred on June 27, 2019. There was insufficient rain to collect stormwater samples so no stormwater only samples were collected. The next sampling event is planned to occur in August 2019. · Chemours contractors did collect stormwater grab samples from 24 locations during a relatively brief storm event on June 5, 2019. These samples were collected to support Paragraph 12 deliverables due August 26, 2019. · The paragraph 11c quarterly report will be submitted under separate cover by July 31, 2019. Paragraph 11.1 - Characterization of PFAS Contamination in Downstream Raw Water Intakes · Chemours’ contractors Geosyntec and Parsons sampled the Cape Fear River in May and June 2019 at sampling locations adjacent to the water intakes of Bladen Bluffs and Kings Bluff Intake Canal. This sampling was completed in parallel with paragraph 12a activities. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Paragraph 11.2 - Characterization of PFAS Contamination in River Sediment · Chemours’ contractor Geosyntec is preparing a workplan pursuant to paragraph 11.2. Paragraph 12 - Accelerated Reduction of PFAS Contamination in the Cape Fear River and Downstream Water Intakes Paragraph 12a - Accelerated Reduction of PFAS Contamination in the Cape Fear River and Downstream Water Intakes · Chemours’ contractors Geosyntec and Parsons are implementing tasks described below that support preparing a plan outlining PFAS reductions from the facility. A PFAS reduction plan will be submitted by August 26, 2019. Paragraphs 12b and 12c - Accelerated Reduction of PFAS Contamination in the Cape Fear River and Downstream Water Intakes · On April 11, 2019, Chemours and its contractors submitted the final modeling scope of work document to DEQ and Cape Fear River Watch. · Comments were addressed from Cape Fear River Watch / Southern Environmental Law Center and NCDEQ in a submittal on May 31, 2019. · NCDEQ approved the modeling scope of work document on July 8, 2019. · Field work supporting the reductions plan have been underway since January 2019. Field work, to date, has included identifying seeps and sampling and flow gauging of onsite seeps, creeks and Old Outfall 002. Cape Fear River water samples were also collected during this effort. · In May and June 2019, additional field work was completed on creeks, seeps and Old Outfall 002 (one round during a dry event and one round during a wet event). Chemours’ contractors Parsons and Geosyntec conducted field work to temporarily install weirs to more accurately measure flow in the seeps and Old Outfall 002. · Additional on-site geologic mapping, characterization, and well installation field work began in June and continues. Paragraph 12d - Accelerated Reduction of PFAS Contamination in the Cape Fear River and Downstream Water Intakes · Assessment of the potential to achieve 80% reduction of Outfall 002 HFPO-DA and PFMOAA concentrations are being developed by Chemours’ facility staff and contractor Geosyntec. Analysis will in part be informed by sampling conducted for paragraph 11c. · Stormwater evaluation includes collection of additional stormwater grab samples to characterize stormwater runoff from the site. The first stormwater sample event was conducted on June 5, 2019. · Additional sampling of site drainage network sediments, wastewater treatment plant samples, and soil in construction areas is ongoing, and will help inform paragraph 12 objectives. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Paragraph 12e - Accelerated Reduction of PFAS Contamination in the Cape Fear River and Downstream Water Intakes · REGENESIS pilot study: o Trees were removed to facilitate the installation of performance verification monitoring wells and subsequent injections. o A geophysical survey was completed to determine the presence of utilities. o Performance verification testing monitoring points (six wells and four piezometers) were installed in April 2019. Pre-injection samples were collected from the six wells in early May (results are summarized in Attachment A-1). o Injections of PlumeStop were performed in early May 2019 (see Attachment A-2 for a summary of the current status of the PlumeStop pilot study, and Attachment A-3 for a summary report describing the initial findings prepared by Regenesis). o The first of three monthly post-injection sampling events occurred in June 2019. The results are pending. · Chemours’ contractor Parsons prepared a work plan for conducting monthly sampling at nine locations in the Old Outfall 002 channel as required by paragraph 12e. o Four sampling events have been completed to date (i.e., March, April, May, and June). The next sampling event is in mid-July. Results have been received for the March, April, and May sampling (summarized in the table in Attachment A-4). June data are pending. · Old Outfall 002 Pilot Capture and Treat Testing System is operating o The report describing the remedial options at Old Outfall 002 was submitted on May 20, 2019. o Parsons prepared a preliminary design of a pilot-scale treatment system to treat water collected from Old Outfall 002 at the Option B location. The pilot treatment system incorporates batch pretreatment to remove nuisance iron and solids, followed by continuous treatment through granular activated carbon (GAC) arranged in a series of four columns to remove PFAS. The system was designed to allow treatment through two series of columns simultaneously, allowing a comparison of either pretreatment conditions (e.g., testing at two different pH values) or the type of GAC (e.g., regenerated versus virgin F400). The treatment system is located in an unused Chemours warehouse space just north of the DuPont manufacturing facility. o The pilot treatment started up on Friday, June 14th when the first batch of OOF2 water was treated, including aeration, pH adjustment to around 8 s.u., and settling. Following settling the water was pumped through bag filters BF-01A/01B to Batch Holding Tank T-003. Pumping through the GAC columns was then initiated and the pumping rate adjusted to provide a target flow rate of 0.11 gpm (0.42 L/min). Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 o Pumping has been maintained continuously through the GAC columns along the 1st train. o Parsons developed a sampling schedule intended to (1) provide information on breakthrough of target constituents through the four columns; and (2) provide relevant pretreatment information including iron, TSS, and TOC removal.  In brief, Table 3+ samples (including HFPO-DA) were collected in the effluent from the 1st column each day for the first two weeks of operation and submitted for on-site analysis.  EPA Mod 537 MAX samples from Column 1 were collected three times per week to be submitted to TestAmerica Sacramento.  PFAS samples from Column 2 are being collected three times per week and from Columns 3 and 4 twice per week.  PFAS samples are also being collected weekly from influent and from each pretreated batch.  TOC samples are being regularly collected along with PFAS samples from the columns.  Total iron, TSS, and TOC are also being collected weekly from influent and from pretreated batch samples. Paragraph 14 - Toxicity Studies · Chemours responded to NCDEQ’s request for additional information from contract labs on May 9, 2019. · Toxicology lab approval was received from NCDEQ on May 29, 2019. · NCDEQ and Cape Fear River Watch have provided comments on Chemours’ draft toxicology study plan. Based on those comments, Chemours is evaluating the best method for test substance procurement, including the possibility of using in-house synthesis, external synthesis, or commercial sources. Paragraph 16 - Groundwater Remediation · Chemours’ contractor Geosyntec prepared a scope of work document and presentations to NCDEQ and Cape Fear River Watch regarding the approach for Consent Order paragraphs 16 and 18. · Additional well installations along Old Outfall 002, Willis Creek and Georgia Branch Creek are underway with mobilization scheduled during July. · Temporary perched zone groundwater pumping letter and results were delivered to the State on June 17, 2019. Paragraph 18 - On and Offsite Assessment · Chemours’ contractor Geosyntec continues to prepare the comprehensive site assessment, which will be submitted by the deadline of September 30, 2019. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Paragraphs 19 and 20 - Provision of Public Water Supplies, Whole Building Filtration Systems, and Reverse Osmosis Drinking Water Systems · Chemours’ contractors continue to install GAC whole building filtration systems and RO drinking water systems at residences. Statistics are provided in the “Replacement Drinking Water Actions” section above. Paragraph 21 - Private Well Testing · The step-out residential testing is underway. Paragraph 22 - Provision of Sampling Results · Chemours provided (and continues to provide) sampling results to DEQ and residences as required under the Consent Order. · Chemours’ contractor AECOM also prepared and transmitted level 4 lab reports for the sampling results to DEQ (and continues to do so). Paragraph 23 - Interim Replacement of Private Drinking Water Supplies · Chemours continues to provide interim replacement of private drinking water supplies pursuant to the Consent Order. Paragraph 24 - Drinking Water Compliance Plan · Chemours submitted the Drinking Water Compliance Plan on April 26, 2019. Paragraph 26 - Total Organic Fluorine · On May 6, 2019, Chemours submitted for approval a proposal to conduct the study. Paragraph 27 - Fate and Transport Study · Chemours’ contractor Geosyntec prepared a fate and transport literature review and identified relevant literature papers to support development of this study. The study was submitted to NCDEQ on June 25, 2019. Paragraph 28 - Reporting · Chemours submitted its first quarterly report under the Consent Order on April 30, 2019. Paragraphs 29 and 30 - Public Information · Chemours has posted its Consent Order submissions at https://www.chemours.com/Fayetteville-Works/en-us/c3-dimer-acid/compliance-testing/index.html. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Attachment A-1 Summary of Preliminary Results for PlumeStop Phase 1 Pilot Study Attachment A-1: Summary of Preliminary Results PlumeStop Phase 1 Pilot Study Chemours Fayetteville Works Fayetteville, North Carolina Detected constituents shown in bold type < = not detected J = estimated concentration B = constituent detected in blank sample Page 1 of 5 Location ID MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 MW-36 Date 05/03/2019 05/03/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 Purpose FS FS FS FS FS FS DUP Units Result Result Result Result Result Result Result 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane UG/L <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 1,1,1-Trichloroethane UG/L <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane UG/L <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 1,1,2-Trichloroethane UG/L <0.27 <0.27 <0.27 <0.27 <0.27 <0.27 <0.27 1,1-Dichloroethane UG/L <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 1,1-Dichloroethene UG/L <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 1,2,3-Trichloropropane UG/L <0.33 <0.33 <0.33 <0.33 <0.33 <0.33 <0.33 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane UG/L <0.47 <0.47 <0.47 <0.47 <0.47 <0.47 <0.47 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)UG/L <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 1,2-Dichloroethane UG/L 0.18 J <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 0.15 J 1,2-Dichloropropane UG/L <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 1,3-Dichlorobenzene UG/L <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 2-Hexanone UG/L <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 Acetone UG/L <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 Acetonitrile UG/L <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 Acrolein UG/L <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 Acrylonitrile UG/L <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 Allyl Chloride UG/L <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Benzene UG/L <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 Bromodichloromethane UG/L <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Bromoform UG/L <0.46 <0.46 <0.46 <0.46 <0.46 <0.46 <0.46 Carbon Disulfide UG/L <0.17 <0.17 0.40 B 0.64 B 0.47 B 0.38 B <0.17 Carbon Tetrachloride UG/L <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 Chlorobenzene UG/L <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Chlorodibromomethane UG/L <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Chloroform UG/L 1.6 B 0.19 B 1.7 B 1.0 B 2.0 B 1.5 B 1.5 B Parameter Name VOCs (8260B) Attachment A-1: Summary of Preliminary Results PlumeStop Phase 1 Pilot Study Chemours Fayetteville Works Fayetteville, North Carolina Detected constituents shown in bold type < = not detected J = estimated concentration B = constituent detected in blank sample Page 2 of 5 Location ID MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 MW-36 Date 05/03/2019 05/03/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 Purpose FS FS FS FS FS FS DUP Units Result Result Result Result Result Result ResultParameter Name Chloroprene UG/L <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene UG/L <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 Dichlorodifluoromethane UG/L <0.31 <0.31 <0.31 <0.31 <0.31 <0.31 <0.31 Ethyl Chloride UG/L <0.41 <0.41 <0.41 <0.41 <0.41 <0.41 <0.41 Ethyl Methacrylate UG/L <0.86 <0.86 <0.86 <0.86 <0.86 <0.86 <0.86 Ethylbenzene UG/L <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 Iodomethane UG/L <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 Isobutyl Alcohol UG/L <37 <37 <37 <37 <37 <37 <37 Meta- And Para-Xylene UG/L <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 Methacrylonitrile UG/L <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 Methyl Bromide UG/L <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 Methyl Chloride UG/L <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 Methyl Ethyl Ketone UG/L <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone UG/L <0.98 <0.98 <0.98 <0.98 <0.98 <0.98 <0.98 Methyl Methacrylate UG/L <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 Methylene Bromide UG/L <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Methylene Chloride UG/L <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 Ortho-Xylene UG/L <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 Propionitrile UG/L <3.7 <3.7 <3.7 <3.7 <3.7 <3.7 <3.7 Styrene UG/L <0.36 <0.36 <0.36 <0.36 <0.36 <0.36 <0.36 Tetrachloroethene UG/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Toluene UG/L <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene UG/L <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene UG/L <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 trans-1,4-Dichlorobutene-2 UG/L <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 Trichloroethene UG/L <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 Trichlorofluoromethane UG/L <0.29 <0.29 <0.29 <0.29 <0.29 <0.29 <0.29 Attachment A-1: Summary of Preliminary Results PlumeStop Phase 1 Pilot Study Chemours Fayetteville Works Fayetteville, North Carolina Detected constituents shown in bold type < = not detected J = estimated concentration B = constituent detected in blank sample Page 3 of 5 Location ID MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 MW-36 Date 05/03/2019 05/03/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 Purpose FS FS FS FS FS FS DUP Units Result Result Result Result Result Result ResultParameter Name Vinyl Acetate UG/L <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 <0.94 Vinyl Chloride UG/L <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 Xylenes UG/L <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 1,4-Dioxane UG/L <19 <19 <19 <19 <19 <19 <19 Perfluorobutane Sulfonic Acid UG/L <0.002 0.0023 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0024 0.0025 0.0025 Perfluorobutanoic Acid UG/L 0.039 0.041 0.037 0.06 0.037 0.046 0.048 Perfluorodecanoic Acid UG/L 0.0031 0.003 0.0032 0.0025 0.0031 0.0027 0.0025 Perfluorododecanoic Acid UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluoroheptanoic Acid UG/L 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.015 0.013 0.016 0.016 Perfluorohexane Sulfonic Acid UG/L 0.003 0.0035 0.003 0.0029 0.0036 0.0042 0.0039 Perfluorohexanoic Acid UG/L 0.0088 0.012 0.0078 0.0098 0.011 0.012 0.014 Perfluorononanoic Acid UG/L 0.0045 0.0046 0.0061 0.0067 0.0045 0.0045 0.0046 Perfluoropentanoic Acid UG/L 0.052 0.051 0.045 0.095 0.046 0.061 0.066 Perfluoroundecanoic Acid UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 PFOA UG/L 0.016 0.013 0.015 0.015 0.013 0.018 0.019 PFOS UG/L 0.011 0.011 0.03 0.03 0.014 0.016 0.018 Hfpo Dimer Acid UG/L 4.7 2.7 2.5 4.9 3.2 4.7 J 6.1 J Perfluorodecane Sulfonic Acid UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluorotetradecanoic Acid UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluorotridecanoic Acid UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 10:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorodecanesulfonate (8:2 FTS)UG/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorohexanesulfonate (4:2 FTS)UG/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate UG/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 537 Modified Attachment A-1: Summary of Preliminary Results PlumeStop Phase 1 Pilot Study Chemours Fayetteville Works Fayetteville, North Carolina Detected constituents shown in bold type < = not detected J = estimated concentration B = constituent detected in blank sample Page 4 of 5 Location ID MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 MW-36 Date 05/03/2019 05/03/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 Purpose FS FS FS FS FS FS DUP Units Result Result Result Result Result Result ResultParameter Name ADONA UG/L <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 F-53B Major UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 F-53B Minor UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 N-ethyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acid UG/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 N-methyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acid UG/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 NaDONA UG/L <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 Perfluorododecane sulfonic acid (PFDoS)UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluoroheptane sulfonic acid (PFHpS)UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluorohexadecanoic acid (PFHxDA)UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluorononanesulfonic acid UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluorooctadecanoic acid UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluorooctane Sulfonamide UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Perfluoropentane sulfonic acid (PFPeS)UG/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 N-ethylperfluoro-1-octanesulfonamide UG/L <0.037 UJ <0.037 UJ <0.037 UJ <0.037 UJ <0.037 UJ <0.037 UJ <0.037 2-(N-ethyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)- ethanol UG/L <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 2-(N-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)- ethanol UG/L <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 Byproduct 4 UG/L 0.45 0.59 0.25 0.52 0.37 0.56 0.74 J Byproduct 5 UG/L 0.87 1.5 J 0.47 J 0.92 J 1.1 J 1.4 J 1.5 Byproduct 6 UG/L <0.015 0.018 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.016 DFSA UG/L 11 J 23 J 3.1 J <3.1 38 J 91 J 110 J EVE Acid UG/L <0.024 0.028 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 Hydro-EVE Acid UG/L 0.08 0.08 0.047 0.078 0.057 0.068 0.081 Cl. Spec. Table 3 Compound SOP Attachment A-1: Summary of Preliminary Results PlumeStop Phase 1 Pilot Study Chemours Fayetteville Works Fayetteville, North Carolina Detected constituents shown in bold type < = not detected J = estimated concentration B = constituent detected in blank sample Page 5 of 5 Location ID MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 MW-36 Date 05/03/2019 05/03/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 Purpose FS FS FS FS FS FS DUP Units Result Result Result Result Result Result ResultParameter Name MMF UG/L <3.6 3.6 J 3.6 J <3.6 3.6 J 3.6 J 3.6 J MTP UG/L 0.34 0.64 J 0.26 J 0.69 J 0.44 J 0.47 0.58 J N-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamide UG/L <0.035 <0.035 UJ <0.035 UJ <0.035 UJ <0.035 UJ <0.035 <0.035 NVHOS UG/L 0.71 1.6 0.57 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.5 PEPA UG/L 2.6 1.7 2.1 3 1.5 2.3 2.8 PES UG/L <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 PFECA B UG/L <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 PFECA-G UG/L <0.041 <0.041 <0.041 <0.041 <0.041 <0.041 <0.041 PFESA-BP1 UG/L <0.027 0.091 <0.027 0.052 0.04 0.049 0.041 PFESA-BP2 UG/L 0.78 0.91 0.45 0.73 0.5 0.51 0.54 PFMOAA UG/L 56 121 40 J 111 J 80 98 J 115 J PFO2HxA UG/L 13 24 J 9.3 22 17 22 27 PFO3OA UG/L 3.4 6 2.1 5.4 4.4 5.7 6.1 PFO4DA UG/L 1.1 1.5 0.71 1.3 1.1 1.4 1.5 PFO5DA UG/L 0.62 0.43 0.57 0.83 0.38 0.41 0.36 PMPA UG/L 5.7 3.9 4.5 6.6 3.4 5.1 6.8 PPF Acid UG/L 13 22 8.9 25 J 15 19 24 R-EVE UG/L 0.18 0.19 0.1 0.2 0.11 0.16 0.21 Total Calcium (6010D)MG/L 3.8 6 3.9 1.1 B 3.3 2.7 2.8 Dissolved Calcium (6010D / Filtered)MG/L 3.5 5.7 3.6 1 2.7 2.5 2.6 Total Organic Carbon (9060)MG/L 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 Dissolved Organic Carbon (9060 / Filtered)MG/L 1.5 2 1.2 B 1.2 B 1.4 1.4 1.4 Total Hardness As CaCO3 (2340 C-1997)MG/L 13 21 11 4.4 11 7.1 J 13 J Misc. Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Attachment A-2 PlumeStop Update and Figure PlumeStop® Liquid Activated Carbon™ Pilot Study Update Prior to beginning the pilot study, Parsons completed a hydrogeologic assessment in this area to locate the perched zone and collect samples for bench scale testing. As part of this assessment, a number of monitoring wells were installed to be used as performance monitoring wells for the PlumeStop application. As described in the May 2019 Remedial Options Plan prepared by Parsons, the pre-pilot study drilling project included the installation of soil borings (to map out the location of the perched zone clay), 6 monitoring wells, and 4 piezometers. The hydrogeologic assessment was completed between April 9 and April 23, 2019. Samples from the aquifer matrix (soil and groundwater) were also collected and shipped to REGENESIS for bench scale testing. The bench scale testing is nearly complete. The results of the bench scale testing will be incorporated into the final pilot study report to be submitted to NCDEQ by September 30, 2019 as required by Paragraph 12.e of the consent order. The hydrogeologic information was then reviewed by REGENESIS Remediation Services (RRS) prior to mobilization to the site. Based on groundwater elevations collected by Parsons, REGENESIS constructed a groundwater flow map showing the general groundwater flow direction to be rotated approximately 45 degrees from the longest side of the proposed barrier. Following this and taking into consideration the fixed locations of the performance monitoring wells, REGENESIS established an injection pattern as described in the attached Summary Report prepared by REGENESIS. Injection points (IP) were placed in three rows. RRS mobilized product, injection equipment, and personnel to the Site to begin work over nine days on May 7th through May 17th, 2019. General components of the pilot study included the installation of temporary monitoring wells, collection and analyses of pre- and post-application soil borings, design verification testing, and application of PlumeStop® at a total of 48 discrete injection locations. Throughout the application, water levels and reagent concentrations in monitoring wells were measured to ascertain the influence of remedial injections. After the application, RRS flushed the permanent monitoring wells that were influenced with clean water to minimize particulate buildup resulting from injections. The six monitoring wells were sampled in early May prior to the PlumeStop® injections and the first of three planned monthly post-injection sampling events was conducted in June 2019. The results of the pre-injection sampling are attached. The June sampling results have not yet been received. SB-202 SB-203 Approximate Location of Proposed Perched Zone Treatment Barrier (Phase 1) MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 PZ-31 PZ-32 PZ-33 PZ-34 SB-202 SB-203 Approximate Location of Proposed Perched Zone Treatment Barrier (Phase 1) MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 PZ-31 PZ-32 PZ-33 PZ-34 Parsons Environment & Infrastructure4701 Hedgemore Dr.Charlotte, NC 28209 Regenesis PlumeStop Performance Verification TestingOld Outfall 002 Remedial Options PlanFayetteville Works FacilityFayetteville, North Carolina ¯ 0 60 12030Feet Pilot Study Proposed Locations Proposed Perched Zone Treatment Barrier Drawn:Date: Revision:Figure Number: 4 C. Oneal 1 File Project Number:449338.01050 Name: RegenesisVerification_v2 5/14/2019 D:\GIS\Fayetvle\Gis\Project_figures\2019\RegenesisVerification_v2.mxd Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Attachment A-3 Regenesis Application Summary Report for the Perched Zone Pilot Study     Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090     June 14, 2019 REGENESIS Proposal No. DaP62230    The Chemours Company FC, LLC  ATTN: Sebastian Bahr  1007 Market Street, D‐3084  Wilmington, DE 19899    SUBJECT:  Summary Report for the Perched Zone Pilot Study at the Fayetteville Works Site      Sebastian,  REGENESIS Remediation Services (RRS) has recently completed the first of two planned pilot studies of in  situ  injections  utilizing  PlumeStop®  Liquid  Activated  Carbon™  (PlumeStop) for the treatment of the  contaminants perfluoro‐2‐methoxyacetic acid (PFMOAA) as well as GenX and its derivatives including  hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO‐DA) at the Fayetteville Works Site (Site) located at 22828  NC‐87 in Fayetteville, North Carolina. In this Phase 1 pilot study, a “proof of concept” barrier was installed  in a perched aquifer (Perched Zone Area) at the Site. During Phase I, further site‐specific data were  gathered in order to optimize the sorption‐based treatment designs for the perched zone, the surficial  aquifer barrier of Phase II, and future large‐scale applications.  RRS mobilized product, injection equipment, and personnel to the Site to begin work over nine days on  May 7th through May 17th, 2019. RRS staffed the project with experienced personnel who ensured a safe,  successful  injection  application.  General  components  of  the  pilot  study  included  the  installation  of  temporary monitoring wells, collection and analyses of pre‐ and post‐application soil borings, design  verification testing, and application of PlumeStop at a total of 48 discrete injection locations. Throughout  the application, water levels and reagent concentrations in monitoring wells were measured to ascertain  the influence of remedial injections. After the application, RRS flushed the permanent monitoring wells  that were influenced with clean water to minimize particulate buildup resulting from injections.  For complete details of the study, please review the attached application summary page, injection layout,  soil boring logs, photo log, injection logs, and water level monitoring log.  RRS appreciates the opportunity to work at the Site with The Chemours Company. RRS will be available  to interpret the field data as it is collected and answer any questions. If you need additional information  regarding the application process or attached documents, please contact Steve Barnes at 574.349.0650  or Tyler Harris at 404.809.8807.  Sincerely,                                                                         Steve Barnes       Tyler Harris  RRS Operations Manager     Field Project Manager  REGENESIS Remediation Services    REGENESIS Remediation Solutions  cc:   Chad Northington (CNorthington@Regenesis.com); Doug Davis (DDavis@Regenesis.com); Dave Peterson (DPeterson@Regenesis.com);  Scott Wilson (SWilson@Regenesis.com); Tony Boever (TBoever@Regenesis.com)      REGENESIS Remediation Services  Page 1 of 6  Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                          OVERVIEW  Client: The Chemours Company                 Site Address: 22828 NC‐87, Fayetteville, NC 28306  Client PM: Sebastian Bahr                   Project Name: Fayetteville Works Site  RRS Project Manager: Steve Barnes                                         Perched Zone Pilot Study         RRS Project Supervisor: Tyler Harris   Project Dates: 5/7/2019‐5/17/2019    TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY    The treatment approach for the Perched Zone Pilot Study at the Fayetteville Works Site followed in situ  sorption using the REGENESIS product PlumeStop to partition PFMOAA and HFPO‐DA contamination in  perched groundwater out of the dissolved phase. PlumeStop is a colloid of micro‐milled activated carbon  with a particle size of 1‐2 μm suspended in water using unique organic polymer chemistry. After initial  injections, the unique chemistry allows for distribution of PlumeStop through soil pore throats and  deposition  onto  soil  surfaces.  Once  deposition  of  the  colloidal  activated  carbon  onto  soil  occurs,  PlumeStop effectively treats contaminated groundwater by providing a high surface area matrix for  sorption  of  contaminants.  PlumeStop  is  effective  at  removing  a wide range of contaminants from  groundwater, including refractory compounds such as the fluoroethers at the Site.  RRS conducted design verification testing (DVT) activities as outlined in the proposal dated May 3rd, 2019,  with the results supplementing the conceptual design and installation of the Perched Zone Area barrier  for Phase 1 of the pilot studies. Design modifications were necessitated from both the DVT work and  review of hydrogeologic information submitted by Parsons immediately prior to mobilization.  PHASE I PILOT STUDY AREA  The Perched Zone Area of Phase I is located near the polyvinyl fluoride resin manufacturing unit at the  Fayetteville Works manufacturing site. Situated near an outfall channel, the area itself is relatively flat  and is adjacent to a moderately steep ravine to the west‐southwest. The Phase I pilot test was  conducted to assess PlumeStop treatment near the southwestern extent of the perched zone which is a  relatively thin saturated, sandy zone atop a clay unit starting at approximately 16 to 22 feet below  ground surface (bgs). The saturated thickness of the perched zone varies from 5 to 9 feet,  approximately, in the pilot test area. The area previously contained a stand of coniferous trees, which  was cleared prior to the arrival of RRS. The area also includes a series of permanent monitoring wells  located both within and outside the surficial extent of the injection barrier.  Prior to mobilization, Parsons completed a hydrogeologic assessment in this area to locate the perched  zone. As part of this assessment, a number of monitoring wells were installed to be used as performance  Perched Zone Pilot Study Summary Page      REGENESIS Remediation Services  Page 2 of 6  Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090 monitoring wells for the PlumeStop application. Hydrogeologic information was reviewed immediately  prior to mobilization. Based on groundwater elevations collected by Parsons, REGENESIS constructed a  groundwater flow map showing the general groundwater flow direction to be rotated approximately 45  degrees from the longest side of the proposed barrier. Following this and taking into consideration the  fixed locations of the performance monitoring wells, REGENESIS established an injection pattern as  shown in Figure 1 and Appendix A: Injection Layout. Injection points (IP) were placed in three rows, with  Rows 1 and 2 numbered 1‐32 and in the upgradient portion of the barrier and Row 3 numbered 33‐48  and located in the downgradient side of the barrier.    Figure 1. Potentiometric groundwater flow map for the Phase 1 Pilot Test Area. (Contour intervals at 0.2 feet).  DESIGN VERIFICATION TESTING  Prior to and during the pilot‐scale PlumeStop barrier application, a DVT was conducted to refine the  Perched Zone treatment design. A total of 11 soil borings, five pre‐application and six post‐application  cores were collected throughout the study. Soil borings were retrieved in 5‐foot sections using a 2.25‐inch  dual‐tube sampler and ranged in total collection depths of 20 to 23 feet below ground surface (ft bgs).  Cores were logged in detail from eight feet below ground surface to the end of the boring (Appendix B:  Soil  Boring  Logs).  Special  emphasis  was  placed  on  measuring  the  vertical  saturated  thickness  and  observing the perched zone sand/cay contact across the length of the barrier, which established the target  vertical  treatment  positionally  in  the  barrier.  Soil  grain  size,  which  was  used  to  predict  hydraulic  conductivity and potential radius of influence (ROI) of the treatment, was observed through soil settling  analysis, whereby soil samples collected in 1‐foot increments were placed in glass vials with water, mixed,  and allowed to settle by particle size into distinct layers (Figure 2; Appendix C: Photo Log).      REGENESIS Remediation Services  Page 3 of 6  Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090   Figure 2. DV‐1 soil settling tubes from 10 ft bgs (far left) to 20 ft bgs (far right) depicting  the abrupt change from light tan sand (10‐13 ft bgs) to light gray silty sand (13‐17 ft bgs)  to orange‐brown clay beginning at 16.3 ft bgs. Complete boring log located in Appendix B:  Soil Boring Logs.  The lithology of the perched zone was predominantly sand and silty sand with varying degrees of fines.  Two fine‐grained (silt/clay) layers were noted in all soil borings. A thin fine‐grained layer, two to eight  inches thick was observed approximately between 11 and 13 ft bgs. The aquiclude of the perched aquifer  was determined to begin at between 16 and 21 ft bgs, increasing in depth from the SSE to NNW. Water  was encountered beginning at 11 to 12 ft bgs and extended into the confining layer. The saturated  thickness in the western portion of the barrier was greater than what was expected based on the review  of available data including previous boring logs. The increase in the total vertical treatment increased the  treatment volume by approximately 20 percent from the original design calculations, and as a result,  REGENESIS expedited the shipment of 2,000 lbs of additional PlumeStop to compensate for the increase.  The first of the pre‐application borings (DVs 1 & 2) were collected in the eastern side of the barrier where  the saturated thickness was expected to be smallest. Prior to injections, three temporary piezometers  (PZs 1‐3) were installed and used as an ROI indicator and to improve the spatial sampling resolution of  water level measurements. To observe the effect on water levels in nearby wells, injections began with a  single‐point injection test at IP‐1. During the test, wells were observed for changes in depth to water  (DTW) and arrival of the PlumeStop reagent. Additionally, pressures and flowrates were varied to identify  any lithological limitations of injections (Appendix D: Injection Log – Table 1, IP‐1). During the application,  soil borings were advanced and soil color observed for the vertical distribution of the PlumeStop reagent.  On visual inspection of the post‐application borings, the vertical distribution of the PlumeStop solution  was demonstrated by gray to black coloration of the sediments (Appendix C: Photo 7). Semi‐quantitative  results  of  PlumeStop  distribution  were  obtained  from  colorimetric  analyses  of  sediments  using  the  Munsell color system in which clear color changes were measured from nine feet below ground surface  to the beginning of the confining layer. Prominent PlumeStop bands, generally 2 to 12 inches thick were  observed at various depths in the cores. RRS assessed vertical distribution of PlumeStop utilizing several  injection delivery methods (discussed below).    APPLICATION  A  total  of  48  discrete  locations  were  utilized  to  deliver  the  remedial  solution  of  PlumeStop  to  the  subsurface of the treatment area. Using direct‐push technology (DPT), PlumeStop was injected through  2.25‐inch tooling. Injection points were placed in a staggered grid‐like pattern of three rows with an  average spacing of five feet between points and rows. Treatment depths and intervals varied based on  the saturated thickness of the perched aquifer. For all locations, the bottom of the TTZ was located at the      REGENESIS Remediation Services  Page 4 of 6  Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090 perched water table‐aquiclude interface. As such, bottom treatment depths increased from 17 to 22 ft  bgs along the barrier from the SSE to the NNW while the treatment interval increased from six to nine  feet.  Initial injections were completed following a bottom‐up approach using 3‐foot retractable screens to  deliver the PlumeStop reagent to the subsurface in discrete intervals of 1‐3 feet (i.e., an injection from 22‐ 20 ft bgs was completed before lifting tooling three feet to inject in the 20‐17 ft bgs interval). In addition  to retractable screens, injections were attempted using pressure‐activated probes which discharge fluid  in a narrow band from four injection ports. These probes were utilized in 6‐inch intervals following  bottom‐up and top‐down approaches. Lastly, 3‐foot retractable screens were attempted in small, 1‐foot  intervals  following  top‐down  and  bottom‐up  approaches.  Based  on  visual  inspection  of  PlumeStop  distribution in the post‐application cores corresponding to the aforementioned methods, 3‐foot screens  following a bottom‐up approach of 3‐foot intervals was determined to be the best delivery method.  With the exception of high‐pressure tooling (e.g., pressure‐activated probes), injection pressures were  relatively low, remaining under 50 pounds per square inch (psi). The median pressure for all points,  regardless of tooling, was 18 psi. Aside from a pressure of 80 psi in the bottom injection interval at IP‐9,  pressures above 50 psi were observed at locations where pressure‐activated probes were used as well as  where retractable screens following a top‐down approach were used, which resulted in clogged screens  caused by back‐pressure. Back‐pressure was noted in some areas and appeared to  increase as the  injection volume to a particular area increased.  To test injection limitations, flowrates were varied from 0.50 to 10.05 gallons per minute (gpm) for an  overall median flowrate of 4.31 gpm. Based on the lithology and injection tooling diameter, flowrates  appeared to be limited to a maximum of 5.50 gpm, whereby higher rates resulted in surfacing from around  the  active  boring.  Surfacing  was  otherwise  uncommon  and  successfully  prevented  or  mitigated  by  decreasing flowrates to 4.0 gpm or lower; lower rates were required  as  the  application  neared  completion.   REGENESIS’ design for the Perched Zone Area included two primary design types, termed “Rows 1 & 2”  and “Row 3”, with a total of five unique per point target volumes injected at three different concentrations  (Table 1). For Rows 1 & 2 (IPs 1‐32), PlumeStop was injected at 30,000 ppm, whereas IPs 33‐44 of Row 3  received a solution of 13,500 ppm, and IPs 45‐48 of Row 3 was injected at 10,541 ppm. During injections,  all nearby monitoring wells were monitored for water table fluctuations and the presence of PlumeStop  (Table 2; Appendix E: Water Level Measurements). Bailed samples were semi‐quantitatively measured  colorimetrically, with the upper limit of PlumeStop concentrations in MWs 34‐36 and PZs 1‐3 ranging from  3,000 to 30,000 ppm. To prevent particulate buildup in affected wells, MWs 34‐36 were flushed with clean  water after injections were completed. The temporary piezometers were removed and abandoned with  bentonite.      REGENESIS Remediation Services  Page 5 of 6  Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090 TREATMENT AREA SUMMARY  ROWS 1 & 2  9,200 pounds of PlumeStop were mixed with hydrant water and diluted to a 30,000 ppm solution. A  total of 7,351 gallons of the PlumeStop solution was injected.  Application Method: 2.25‐inch direct‐push tooling following top‐down and bottom‐up approaches.  Injection Tooling: 3‐foot retractable screens and pressure‐activated probes.                                             Injection Depths: 22‐10 ft bgs – varied by injection point based on saturated thickness; see Appendix D:  Injection Logs, Table 1 for details.  Number of Injection Points: 32  Deviations from Proposal:   1. Injection volume for IP‐12 applied in 18‐15 ft bgs interval due to volume calculation error.  2. Volume of IP‐31 and IP‐32 combined from 22‐16 ft bgs at IP‐32 due to surfacing‐related  abandonment of IP‐31 resulting from alternate delivery method; separate contingency point not  utilized due to the proximity of potential locations to IPs 31 and 32.  Please see Table 1 of Appendix D for details on injection flowrates and pressures observed.  ROW 3  12,800 pounds of PlumeStop were mixed with hydrant water and diluted to 13,500 ppm (IPs 33‐44) and  10,541 ppm (IPs 45‐48) solutions. A total of 4,867 gallons of the PlumeStop solution was injected.  Application Method: Direct‐push injection following bottom‐up approach                                     Injection Tooling: 3‐foot retractable screens                              Injection Depth: 22‐11 ft bgs – varied by injection point based on saturated thickness; see Appendix D:  Injection Logs, Table 2 for details.  Number of Injection Points: 16  Deviations from Proposal: None  Please see Table 2 of Appendix D for details on injection flowrates and pressures observed.  SUMMARY  For this initial phase pilot test, design verification testing and installation of a PlumeStop barrier were  completed in the Perched Zone at the Fayetteville Works Site. The sorption‐based technology of  PlumeStop was implemented in the REGENESIS design to treat the target contaminants PFMOAA and  HFPO‐DA in groundwater of a perched aquifer located adjacent to the southern boundary of the  Fayetteville Works manufacturing site in Fayetteville, North Carolina. The in situ application of  PlumeStop at a total of 48 locations created a barrier 70 feet in length. A total of 22,000 lbs of  PlumeStop was injected via direct‐push technology for a total application volume of 12,218 gallons.      REGENESIS Remediation Services  Page 6 of 6  Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090   Table 1: Treatment design details for the Perched Zone Pilot Study Area.  Design  Name  Injection  Point  Number  TTZ  Thickness  (vertical  feet)  Injection  Concentration  (ppm)  Target per  Point Volume  (gal)  Actual per  Point Volume  (gal) ‐ mean  Rows 1 & 2  1‐16  6  30,000  188  183 ± 8  17‐22  8  30,000  250  240 ± 38  23‐32  9  30,000  281  300 ± 26  Row 3  33‐39  6  13,500  284  285 ± 16  40‐44  8  13,500  284  281 ± 22  45‐48  9  10,541  364  366 ± 21    Table 2: Depth to water and PlumeStop concentrations measured at the six primary wells during injections.  Monitoring  Well Well Type  │∆ DTW│  (absolute  feet)  Max  PlumeStop  Concentration  (ppm)  MW‐34  Permanent  2.00  9,550  MW‐35  1.35  29,250  MW‐36  5.74  30,050  PZ‐1  Temporary  1.98  3,050  PZ‐2  1.56  21,550  PZ‐3  1.24  21,050               Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                APPENDIX A – Injection Layout     Injection LayoutPerched Zone Pilot Study AreaFayetteville Works SiteFayetteville, North CarolinaDate Prepared:May 2019Prepared By:Tony Boever213456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748PZ‐3DV‐5DV‐4DV‐8PZ‐2DV‐3DV‐6DV‐7DV‐2bDV‐1bDV‐1PZ‐1DV‐2MW‐35MW‐36MW‐34DV‐9“Rows 1 & 2” Injection Point“Row 3” Injection PointPre‐application soil boringPost‐application soil boringTemporary piezometerPermanent monitoring well051020feetAppendix A: Injection LayoutPage 1 of 1REGENESIS Remediation Services 2019          Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                APPENDIX B – Soil Boring Logs:  Pre‐application cores: DVs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Post‐application cores: DVs 1b, 2b, 6, 7, 8, 9       Depth TimeSoil Classification(ft.)TimeRecoveryPenetrometPre‐app MunsellPost‐app Munsell (DV‐1b)Fines%Sand%Fine SandMed SandCoarse SDryMoistWetSharpGradationName0‐8 St‐9:30‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐8100 2.25‐‐‐ 10 90 XXSand, some silt9100 <0.5‐‐‐ 60 40 XXSilt and Sand10100 <0.5‐‐ GLEY 1 4/N 40 60 XXSilt and Sand11100 1.5 10YR 7/2 2.5Y 6/2 20 80 XXSilty Sand12100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 GLEY 1 2.5/N 65 35 XXSandy Silt13100 0.5 10YR 7/1 GLEY 1 2.5/N 55 45 XXSilt and Sand14100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 6/1 25 75 XXSilty Sand15100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 5Y 6/1 35 65 X XXSilty Sand16100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 5Y 7/1+ 30 70 XXX (16.3)Clay17100 0.5 10YR 6/6 ‐ 100X XClay181001 10YR 6/4 ‐ 100X XClay19501 10YR 6/6 ‐ 100X XClay20EOB EOB ‐‐ ‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐blue shaded = target wet (perched zone) sand intervalEnd of boring at 20 ft.  Abandoned with bentonite.No recovery 19.5‐20.0'20' = End of BoringSilt Loam to 1.2 ft, then sandy silt to 8 ft.Silt Zone 10.8 ‐ 11.1, wet at ~11.2Sand Coarsens b/t 15‐16 ft‐ Medium  Clay at 16.3Design Verification,  Perched Zone Pilot Study ‐ Fayetteville Works Site ‐ Fayetteville, NC5/8/2019Boring DV‐1Grain Size Info.Moisture  ContactCommentsPhysicalAppendix B: Soil Boring LogsPage 1 of 7REGENESIS Remediation Services Depth TimeSoil Classification(ft.)TimeRecoveryPenetrometerPre‐app MunsellPost‐app Color (DV‐7)Fines%Sand%Fine SandMed SandCoarse SDryMoistWetSharpGradationName0‐8 St‐9:30‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐8100 2.25‐‐‐ 10 90 XXSand, some silt9100 <0.5‐‐ GLEY 1 4/N 60 40 XXSilt and Sand10100 <0.5‐‐ 2.5Y 5/2 40 60 XXSilt and Sand11100 1.5 10YR 7/2 2.5Y 5/1 20 80 XXSilty Sand12100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 7/2 65 35 XXSandy Silt13100 0.5 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 6/1 55 45 XXSilt and Sand14100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 GLEY 1 2.5Y/N 25 75 XXSilty Sand15100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 GLEY 2 3/5PB 35 65 X XXSilty Sand16100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 7/1 30 70 XXX (16.3)Clay17100 0.5 10YR 6/6 GLEY 2 3/5PB 100X XClay181001 10YR 6/4 GLEY 1 5/N 100X XClay19501 10YR 6/6 GLEY 1 2.5/10Y 100X XClay20EOB EOB ‐‐ ‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐blue shaded = target wet (perched zone) sand intervalEnd of boring at 20 ft.  Abandoned with bentonite.PhysicalNo recovery 19.5‐20.0'20' = End of BoringSand Coarsens b/t 15‐16 ft‐ Medium  Clay at 16.3Silt Loam to 1.2 ft, then sandy silt to 8 ft.Silt Zone 10.8 ‐ 11.1, wet at ~11.2Design Verification,  Perched Zone Pilot Study ‐ Fayetteville Works Site ‐ Fayetteville, NC5/8/2019Boring DV‐1Grain Size Info.Moisture  ContactCommentsAppendix B: Soil Boring LogsPage 2 of 7REGENESIS Remediation Services Depth TimeSoil Classification(ft.)TimeRecoveryPenetrometerPre‐app MunsellPost‐app Munsell (DV‐2b)Fines%Sand%Fine SandMed SandCoarse SDryMoistWetSharpGradationName0‐10 St‐14:00‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐850 0.5 ‐‐ ‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐XSandy Silt90‐‐‐‐ GLEY 1 4/N ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐No Recovery10100 2.75 10YR 6/2 2.5Y 5/1 75 25 XXSandy Silt11100 1.5 10YR 6/1 GLEY 1 5/N 75 25 XXSandy Silt12100 2 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 6/2 80 20 XX XSandy Silt13100 <0.5 10YR 6/3 2.5Y 6/2 5 95 XxSand140‐‐‐‐ GLEY 1 2.5Y/N ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐No Recovery15100 0.5 10YR 7/1 5YR 4/10 30 70 XXSilty Sand16100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 6/6 30 70 X XXSilty Sand17100 <0.5 10YR 7/1 10YR 5/4 30 70 XXSilty Sand18100 1 10YR 6/6 10YR 6/2 100X X X (18')19100 <0.5 10 YR 6/4 GLEY 2 3/5PB 100X X20EOB EOB ‐‐ ‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐blue shaded = target wet (perched zone) sand intervalEnd of boring at 20 ft.  Abandoned with bentonite.Silty Clay (approx 20% silt)20' = End of BoringSilt Loam to 1.2 ft, then sandy silt to 10 ft.  No Recovery 2.5 ‐ 5' and 9‐10'Sandy SiltBecoming moist, then wet starting at ~12 ftSandSilty SandDesign Verification,  Perched Zone Pilot Study ‐ Fayetteville Works Site ‐ Fayetteville, NC5/8/2019Boring DV‐2Grain Size Info.Moisture  ContactCommentsPhysicalAppendix B: Soil Boring LogsPage 3 of 7REGENESIS Remediation Services Depth TimeSoil Classification(ft.)TimeRecoveryPenetrometerPre‐app MunsellPost‐app Munsell (DV‐6)Fines%Sand%Fine SandMed SandCoarse SDryMoistWetSharpGradationName0‐8 St‐16:00‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐8100 <0.5‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ XSand920 <0.5‐‐ GLEY 1 3/N ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ XSand10100 <0.5 10YR 7/2 GLEY 1 5+/N 10 90 XXSand11100 1.5 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 6/1 60 40 XXSilt and Sand12100 0.5 10YR 7/2 2.5Y 6/2 10 90 XX XSand13100 2.5 10 YR 6/2 GLEY 1 2.5/N+ 5 95 XXSand14‐‐1.5‐‐ GLEY 1 2.5/N+ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐No Recovery15100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 GLEY 1 3/N 30 70 XXSilty Sand16100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 GLEY 2.5/N 40 60 XXSilty Sand17100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 GLEY 1 4/N 30 70 XXSilty Sand18100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 GLEY 1 4/N 5 95 XXSand19100 <0.510 YR 7/1 ‐‐> 5/6 @19.5'GLEY 1 3/N 10 90 XXX (19.5')20EOB EOB‐‐ 2.5Y 5/6 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐‐blue shaded = target wet (perched zone) sand intervalEnd of boring at 20 ft.  Abandoned with bentonite.Becoming moist, then wet starting at ~12 ft@13‐13.2  and at 13.8‐14 silt, sand and clay, stiffNo recovery 14‐15'Pronounced sat zone 16.5‐17.2 ftPronounced sat zone 18.5‐19.1 ft20' = End of BoringDesign Verification,  Perched Zone Pilot Study ‐ Fayetteville Works Site ‐ Fayetteville, NC5/9/2019Boring DV‐3PhysicalGrain Size Info.Moisture  ContactCommentsSand Loam to 1.5 ft, then sandy silt to 7.2 ft (no Recovery 3.2 ‐ 5'), then sand.  Top 8 ft is all dry, mostly stiffNo recovery 9.2‐10'Appendix B: Soil Boring LogsPage 4 of 7REGENESIS Remediation Services Depth TimeSoil Classification(ft.)TimeRecoveryPenetrometerPre‐app MunsellPost‐app Munsell (DV‐8)Fines%Sand%Fine SandMed SandCoarse SDryMoistWetSharpGradationName0‐8 St‐16:00‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐8100 <0.5‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ XSand920 <0.5‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ XSand10100 <0.5 10YR 7/2 2.5Y 6/1 10 90 XXSand11100 1.5 10YR 7/1 2.5Y 6/1 60 40 XXSilt and Sand12100 0.5 10YR 7/2 2.5Y 6/1 10 90 XX XSand13100 2.5 10 YR 6/2 GLEY 1 2.5+/N 5 95 XXSand14‐‐1.5‐‐ 2.5Y 5/1 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐No Recovery15100 <0.5 10 YR 7/130 70 XXSilty Sand16100 <0.5 10 YR 7/140 60 XXSilty Sand17100 <0.5 10 YR 7/130 70 XXSilty Sand18100 <0.5 10 YR 7/15 95 XXSand19100 <0.510 YR 7/1 ‐‐> 5/6 @19.5'10 90 XXX (19.5')20EOB EOB‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐‐blue shaded = target wet (perched zone) sand intervalEnd of boring at 20 ft.  Abandoned with bentonite.Pronounced sat zone 18.5‐19.1 ft20' = End of Boring2.5Y 5/1    (20% recovery 15‐20 ft bgs)Pronounced sat zone 16.5‐17.2 ftSand Loam to 1.5 ft, then sandy silt to 7.2 ft (no Recovery 3.2 ‐ 5'), then sand.  Top 8 ft is all dry, mostly stiffNo recovery 9.2‐10'Becoming moist, then wet starting at ~12 ft@13‐13.2  and at 13.8‐14 silt, sand and clay, stiffNo recovery 14‐15'Design Verification,  Perched Zone Pilot Study ‐ Fayetteville Works Site ‐ Fayetteville, NC5/9/2019Boring DV‐3Grain Size Info.Moisture  ContactCommentsPhysicalAppendix B: Soil Boring LogsPage 5 of 7REGENESIS Remediation Services Depth TimeSoil Classification(ft.)TimeRecoveryPenetrometerPre‐app MunsellPost‐app Munsell (DV‐9)Fines%Sand%Fine SandMed SandCoarse SDryMoistWetSharpGradationName0‐8' St‐14:20‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐GLEY 1 2.5/N10100 0.75 10 YR 6/4 GLEY 1 3/N 30 70 XXSilty Sand111001 10 YR 6/1 GLEY 1 3/N 10 90 XXSand12100 2.25 10 YR 6/1 10YR 7/1 20 80 Xx (12.5')Silty Sand13100 0.75 10 YR 6/4 10YR 6/2 20 80 XXSilty Sand1420 <0.5‐‐ GLEY 1 2.5/N ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐X‐‐15100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 10YR 7/1 10 90 XXSand16100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 GLEY 1 5/N 10 90 XXSand17100 <0.5 10 YR 6/1 10YR 7/1 30 70 XXSilty Sand18100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 GLEY 1 2.5/N 5 95 XXSand19100 <0.5 10 YR 6/1‐>5/4 ‐ 5/100 95/0 X/'‐‐XX (19.2')20EOB EOB ‐‐ ‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐blue shaded = target wet (perched zone) sand intervalEnd of boring at 20 ft.  Abandoned with bentonite.@19.2 ft ‐ Sand to Clay contact, lt gray to gray/brown20' = End of BoringSand Loam to 1.5 ft, then silt and sand.  Top 10 ft is all dry, mostly stiff/dense.No recovery 14.2‐15 ftDesign Verification,  Perched Zone Pilot Study ‐ Fayetteville Works Site ‐ Fayetteville, NC5/9/2019Boring DV‐4Grain Size Info.Moisture  ContactCommentsPhysicalAppendix B: Soil Boring LogsPage 6 of 7REGENESIS Remediation Services Depth TimeSoil Classification(ft.)TimeRecoveryPenetrometerMunsellFines%Sand%Fine SandMed SandCoarse SDryMoistWetSharpGradationName0‐8 St‐16:00‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐8100 1‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐950 <0.5‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐ ‐‐‐‐10100 <0.5 10 YR 4/2 10 90 XXSand11100 <0.5 10 YR 7/4 0 100 XXSand121002 10 YR 6/2 70 30 XXX (12.7')Silty Sand1325 <0.510 90 X XXSand14‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐‐15100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 5 95 XXSand16100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 10 90 XXSand17100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 30 70 XXSilty Sand18100 <0.5 10 YR 7/1 30 70 XXSilty Sand1950 <0.5‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X‐‐20100 <0.5 10 YR 5/2 5 95XSand21100 <0.5 10 YR 5/3 100 0X XClay, some silt2230 <0.5‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐X XClay, some silt23EOB EOB‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ X X ‐‐ ‐‐‐‐blue shaded = target wet (perched zone) sand intervalEnd of boring at 20 ft.  Abandoned with bentonite.@20.8 ‐ contact, sand to clay 23' = End of BoringSand Loam to 2.2 ft, then silt and sand to 7 ft, fine sand and silt to 10 ft, top 10 ft is all dry, mostly stiff/denseSandSilt zone, stiff ‐ 12‐12.7,  increasing moistureNo recovery 14‐15'Design Verification,  Perched Zone Pilot Study ‐ Fayetteville Works Site ‐ Fayetteville, NC5/9/2019Boring DV‐5PhysicalGrain Size Info.Moisture  ContactCommentsAppendix B: Soil Boring LogsPage 7 of 7REGENESIS Remediation Services          Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                  APPENDIX C – Photo Log             Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090    Photo Log: Perched Zone Pilot Study Area at the Fayetteville Works Site      Photo 1: Perched Zone Pilot Study prior to the  PlumeStop application. MW‐35 pictured in center.  Photo 2: Staging area for RRS equipment, water,  and product.  Photo 3:  Product delivery area. Photo 4: Hydrant water source located along the  truck delivery route for Fayetteville Works.  Photo 5: Layout of injection locations. MW‐34  pictured in foreground.  Photo 6:Core sections of DV‐1 pre‐application soil  boring.  Appendix C: Photo Log Page 1 of 4 REGENESIS Remediation Services       Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090  Photo 7: Post‐application boring DV‐1b showing  concentrated PlumeStop in a banding pattern.  Photo 8:DV‐1b sediments mixed with water  demonstrating coloration by PlumeStop.  Photo 9:  Pre‐application soil boring DV‐2.Photo 10: Post‐application cores of DV‐2b denoting PlumeStop concentration at depth.  Photo 11: Soil settling vials of DV‐2b sediments.Photo 12:Pre‐application boring DV‐3.  Appendix C: Photo Log Page 2 of 4 REGENESIS Remediation Services       Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090  Photo 13: Post‐application core DV‐6 located in  the center of the treatment area.  Photo 14: Core sediments demonstrating significant influence from 13‐20 ft bgs.  Photo 15:  Pre‐application soil boring DV‐4 Photo 16: Post‐application soil boring DV‐9   Photo 17: Pre‐application boring DV‐5. Photo 18:Bailed sample of groundwater from PZ‐3  showing PlumeStop in sample.  Appendix C: Photo Log Page 3 of 4 REGENESIS Remediation Services       Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                              Photo 19: PlumeStop in bailed sample from one of  the permanent monitoring wells in the area.  Photo 20: Injections in progress in the Perched  Zone Area.  Photo 21:  Perched Zone after completing  injections. MWs 34‐36 pictured.  Appendix C: Photo Log Page 4 of 4 REGENESIS Remediation Services          Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                APPENDIX D – Injection Logs:  Table 1: Rows 1 & 2  Table 2: Row 3       Beginning Flow Meter (gal)Ending Flow Meter (gal)Gallons Injected Per Time PointGallons Injected Per Interval5/8/2019 10:30281.230.005.255.2530,0006.57DVT location5/8/2019 10:38211.385.2514.769.5130,00011.905/8/2019 10:41232.7714.7621.156.4030,0008.015/8/2019 10:48203.3721.1539.1217.9630,00022.485/8/2019 10:56189.2339.1266.7227.6030,00034.555/8/2019 11:02184.1566.7290.1923.4730,00029.385/8/2019-364.1190.1993.243.0530,0003.825/8/2019 11:10274.1193.24126.3033.0530,00041.375/8/2019 11:14304.68126.30144.0017.7030,00022.155/8/2019 11:23304.68144.00182.9738.9730,00048.785/8/2019 11:46314.680.003.203.2030,0004.015/8/2019 11:52274.943.2020.8917.6930,00022.14Slight surfacing around rod.5/8/2019 12:02223.5520.8959.9939.1030,00048.945/8/2019 12:11233.5459.9992.9432.9530,00041.255/8/2019 12:1783.9992.94100.958.0130,00010.03Raised extra foot due to surfacing from rod joint.5/8/2019 12:2373.76100.95122.7021.7430,00027.225/8/2019 12:3863.78122.70183.1560.4530,00075.675/8/2019 12:43273.910.006.726.7230,0008.415/8/2019 12:49274.666.7234.3127.5830,00034.525/8/2019 12:55244.6834.3158.1823.8730,00029.885/8/2019 13:03122.3758.1891.8533.6730,00042.155/8/2019 13:20164.2491.85106.4714.6230,00018.295/8/2019 13:30164.35106.47150.5744.1030,00055.205/8/2019 13:38--150.57186.6536.0930,00045.175/8/2019 14:42405.220.009.549.5430,00011.945/8/2019 14:52285.279.5448.5439.0030,00048.825/8/2019 15:00255.2548.5493.0144.4730,00055.665/8/2019 15:03285.2793.01112.1819.1730,00024.00Slight surfacing around rod.5/8/2019 15:11173.38112.18143.6631.4830,00039.405/8/2019 15:20--143.66170.1326.4730,00033.145/9/2019 14:1417-14214.250.0090.6790.679130,000113.495/9/2019 14:4614-11114.5090.67183.7893.119330,000116.545/9/2019 10:58101.890.002.252.2530,0002.825/9/2019 11:02233.922.259.987.7330,0009.685/9/2019 11:28227.079.9894.5384.5530,000105.835/9/2019 11:4814-1104.5894.53183.3688.838930,000111.185/8/2019 13:15283.650.009.829.8230,00012.305/8/2019 13:21304.339.8226.1216.2930,00020.395/8/2019 13:31324.2326.1266.0539.9330,00049.985/8/2019 13:37444.1166.0591.3725.3230,00031.705/8/2019 13:47104.4891.37102.7011.3330,00014.185/8/2019 13:5264.45102.70146.4043.6930,00054.695/8/2019 14:0054.48146.40183.0936.7030,00045.935/9/2019 15:12331.670.006.546.5430,0008.195/9/2019 15:42--6.5499.8293.2830,000116.765/9/2019 15:55200.5799.82129.2129.3930,00036.785/9/2019 16:07--129.21185.6856.4730,00070.695/9/2019 10:45801.100.008.548.5430,00010.685/9/2019 11:02253.638.5440.5832.0530,00040.115/9/2019 11:33104.8740.5893.8053.2230,00066.615/9/2019 11:5514-1161.4993.80183.0989.308930,000111.775/13/2019 11:59323.320.005.555.5530,0006.955/13/2019 12:22294.095.5591.6586.1030,000107.775/13/2019 13:1315-1210-91.65172.0780.4130,000100.65Flowmeter stopped.5/13/2019----172.07192.6320.5630,00025.74Volume estimated.5/9/2019 15:23275.140.008.008.0030,00010.015/9/2019 15:39215.818.0088.4980.4930,000100.755/9/2019 15:55224.1488.49119.4931.0030,00038.805/9/2019 16:07--119.49170.0950.6030,00063.335/13/2019 14:5818-1522-0.00192.63192.6319330,000241.12Location volume injected at depth.5/13/2019 12:0512-0.004.574.5730,0005.725/13/2019 12:30--4.5746.8342.2630,00052.89Backpressure noted.5/13/2019 13:110-46.8395.1548.3230,00060.485/13/2019-15-12--95.15192.6397.499730,000122.02Volume estimated.5/14/2019 8:0918-15194.590.0096.3696.369630,000120.615/14/2019 8:3315-12124.3796.36171.0574.687530,00093.485/13/2019 14:3218-15183.690.0088.3988.398830,000110.635/13/2019-15-12--88.39192.63104.2510430,000130.48Volume estimated.5/14/2019 8:0118-15204.810.0076.7676.767730,00096.075/14/2019 8:3015-12154.0476.76171.5894.839530,000118.693-Foot Screen9210188829524124121417-1414-1117-1414-1117-1413-1017-1414-1118-1518-1515-1218-1517-1417-1414-1117-1414-113-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen241Pounds of PlumeStop Stout Injected Per Time PointCommentsInjection Tooling213230230229232Total Pounds of PlumeStop Injected Per LocationTotal Gallons Per LocationInjection Point DateTimeInjection Depth (feet)Injection Pressure (psi)Flow Rate (gpm)PlumeStop Reagent Concentration (ppm)Volume of PlumeStop Reagent Injected 61837183818617-149192100869183 2291519312193131931417116172 215Parsons - Fayetteville Works SitePlumeStop Injection Summary Log Perched Zone Rows 1 & 2Table 141703187229229234518421831183101931117024121394909393909295937795Appendix D: Injection LogsPage 1 of 4REGENESIS Remediation Services Beginning Flow Meter (gal)Ending Flow Meter (gal)Gallons Injected Per Time PointGallons Injected Per IntervalPounds of PlumeStop Stout Injected Per Time PointComments Injection ToolingTotal Pounds of PlumeStop Injected Per LocationTotal Gallons Per LocationInjection Point Date TimeInjection Depth (feet)Injection Pressure (psi)Flow Rate (gpm)PlumeStop Reagent Concentration (ppm)Volume of PlumeStop Reagent Injected Parsons - Fayetteville Works SitePlumeStop Injection Summary Log Perched Zone Rows 1 & 2Table 15/13/2019 11:33236.220.009.189.1830,00011.495/13/2019 12:13144.379.1868.8659.6830,00074.695/13/2019 12:5318-1582.9768.86163.0894.2330,000117.945/13/2019 13:2715-1244.53163.08244.8381.7530,000102.325/14/2019 10:4020-191251.620.0015.1315.131530,00018.935/14/2019 10:4419-18.5213.3615.1329.8914.761530,00018.485/14/2019 10:4918.5-18193.7429.8946.0416.151630,00020.215/14/2019 10:5318-17.5194.2246.0460.2614.231430,00017.815/14/2019 10:5617.5-17184.2760.2680.2219.962030,00024.985/14/2019 11:0017-16.5184.2980.2291.0510.831130,00013.555/14/2019 11:0316.5-16184.3191.05106.3515.301530,00019.155/14/2019 11:0716-15.5174.32106.35121.1914.831530,00018.575/14/2019 11:0915.5-15174.33121.19131.2510.061030,00012.595/14/2019 11:1515-14.5144.21131.25146.2114.961530,00018.735/14/2019 11:1914.5-14154.35146.21164.0117.801830,00022.285/14/2019 11:2214-13.5164.39164.01177.0513.041330,00016.335/14/2019 11:2513.5-13164.43177.05192.1815.131530,00018.935/14/2019 11:3013-12.5154.43192.18235.4343.264330,00054.145/14/2019 7:5520-18104.950.0061.7461.746230,00077.285/14/2019 8:1318-1502.6761.74158.4996.759730,000121.105/14/2019 8:3215-1204.13158.49240.8682.388230,000103.115/13/2019 14:0520-18132.950.0060.9560.956130,00076.295/13/2019 14:3718-15134.1860.95155.4894.539530,000118.335/13/2019-15-12--155.48192.6337.153730,00046.50Volume estimated.5/14/2019 14:2912-1361.760.0030.1730.173030,00037.77Top-down approach.5/14/2019 15:0613-14133.6830.1760.2930.123030,00037.705/14/2019 15:2214-15843.3860.2992.8432.553330,00040.745/14/2019 15:4415-16132.5092.84121.3528.502930,00035.685/14/2019 16:0416-17460.91121.35149.4328.082830,00035.155/14/2019 16:3417-181101.29149.43176.0426.612730,00033.315/15/2019 8:4518-201250.500.0043.9543.954430,00055.02Clogged screen.5/15/2019 14:33123.540.0010.2010.2030,00012.775/15/2019 14:5264.4310.2094.5684.3630,000105.595/15/2019 14:5444.4794.56102.688.1230,00010.175/15/2019 15:09--102.68122.3119.6330,00024.575/16/2019 6:5865.20120.52196.5776.0530,00095.195/16/2019 7:2015-12--0.00109.04109.0410930,000136.485/16/2019 9:28325.710.0013.4213.4230,00016.805/16/2019 9:43255.6513.4277.2463.8230,00079.885/16/2019 10:0018-15225.9877.24176.6399.399930,000124.415/16/2019 10:2215-12--176.63246.5569.927030,00087.525/14/2019 14:3513-141201.750.0029.8829.883030,00037.40Top-down approach.5/14/2019 15:0414-1503.4029.8860.9831.103130,00038.935/14/2019 15:2015-161204.6560.9890.5029.523030,00036.945/14/2019 15:4216-17751.9390.50121.1930.693130,00038.415/14/2019 15:5717-18324.04121.19151.4130.223030,00037.835/14/2019 16:1118-19522.19151.41182.8331.433130,00039.345/15/2019 7:5919-20101.970.0031.0831.083130,00038.905/15/2019 8:1820-21781.7531.0865.8934.813530,00043.575/15/2019 11:1621-22471.8365.89115.8149.935030,00062.495/16/2019 7:58284.800.0032.1832.1830,00040.285/16/2019 8:15204.7832.18121.5289.3430,000111.835/16/2019 8:22142.92121.52147.0925.5630,00032.005/16/2019 8:42173.37147.09207.4160.3230,00075.505/16/2019 9:1116-13115.08207.41324.27116.8611730,000146.275/15/2019 14:1521-18325.080.005.805.80630,0007.265/15/2019 14:40174.725.8099.4993.6930,000117.275/15/2019 14:41193.6399.49101.361.8730,0002.345/15/2019 15:10--101.36177.6276.2630,00095.455/16/2019 6:38234.81175.02194.1519.1330,00023.955/16/2019 7:0415-12119.910.00124.41124.4112430,000155.725/16/2019 8:2493.890.0042.3842.3830,00053.055/16/2019 8:3993.9742.38103.1260.7430,00076.025/16/2019 9:0402.29103.12187.2484.1330,000105.305/16/2019 9:3903.99187.24304.79117.5430,000147.135/16/2019 7:42265.610.0049.6849.6830,00062.185/16/2019 7:54194.5049.68116.5566.8730,00083.705/16/2019 7:58194.86116.55132.7916.2430,00020.325/16/2019 8:14174.72132.79217.8685.0730,000106.485/16/2019 8:23163.79217.86234.8416.9830,00021.255/16/2019 8:44194.44234.84323.5588.7130,000111.04283243-Foot Screen40569176951043-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen3-Foot ScreenPressure Activated Probe3-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen1724530620-1818235192412953012019321220241275223072324738530921-1820-1818-1577242992532437440622-1919-1612286263212730540238121-1818-1518-1519110320222-1919-1616-13117101106Appendix D: Injection LogsPage 2 of 4REGENESIS Remediation Services Beginning Flow Meter (gal)Ending Flow Meter (gal)Gallons Injected Per Time PointGallons Injected Per IntervalPounds of PlumeStop Stout Injected Per Time PointComments Injection ToolingTotal Pounds of PlumeStop Injected Per LocationTotal Gallons Per LocationInjection Point Date TimeInjection Depth (feet)Injection Pressure (psi)Flow Rate (gpm)PlumeStop Reagent Concentration (ppm)Volume of PlumeStop Reagent Injected Parsons - Fayetteville Works SitePlumeStop Injection Summary Log Perched Zone Rows 1 & 2Table 15/15/2019 10:2013-13.554.470.0016.1016.101630,00020.15Top-down approach.5/15/2019 10:4213.5-14903.3816.1031.8215.721630,00019.68Surfacing noted.5/15/2019 10:5514-14.5325.3731.8247.2815.461530,00019.355/15/2019 11:1314.5-15305.6947.2862.7715.491530,00019.39Surfacing noted.5/15/2019 11:2215-15.5183.6962.7778.7615.981630,00020.015/15/2019 11:3115.5-16253.9578.7694.5215.761630,00019.735/15/2019 11:4616-16.5651.9994.52110.1215.601630,00019.525/15/2019 11:5416.5-17902.81110.12126.0415.921630,00019.935/15/2019 12:0017-17.5215.44126.04142.3616.321630,00020.435/15/2019 12:1517.5-18303.99142.36158.0715.711630,00019.675/15/2019 13:0622-18253.670.008.148.14830,00010.19Bottom-up5/15/2019 13:1718-15195.168.1458.2150.065030,00062.665/15/2019 13:3415-12174.7258.21157.6899.479930,000124.515/15/2019 9:57144.760.008.068.0630,00010.095/15/2019 10:0284.928.0631.1823.1230,00028.945/15/2019 10:2920-1954.4531.1862.4831.303130,00039.175/15/2019 10:3719-1884.8562.4895.5933.113330,00041.455/15/2019 10:5418-17285.4795.59126.0230.433030,00038.085/15/2019 11:0617-162510.05 126.02157.4431.423130,00039.335/15/2019 11:2316-15188.31157.44188.1930.753130,00038.495/15/2019 11:3315-1403.57188.19224.5336.343630,00045.495/15/2019 11:4214-1304.70224.53253.1028.572930,00035.765/15/2019 11:4713-1204.55253.10283.5630.463030,00038.125/15/2019 10:0213-13.5906.230.0017.7617.761830,00022.23Top-down approach.5/15/2019 10:4513.5-14872.4617.7621.223.46330,0004.345/15/2019 11:0314-14.5864.1421.2247.0725.852630,00032.365/15/2019 11:1114.5-15464.3947.0762.9815.911630,00019.92Surfacing.5/15/2019 11:2515-15.5465.7962.9874.7911.811230,00014.78Abandoned. Remaining volume injected at adjacent IP-32.5/15/2019 13:4594.530.00126.36126.3630,000158.16IP-31 15-22' interval volume injected at IP-32.5/15/2019 14:06--126.36203.6577.2930,00096.745/15/2019 14:19343.19203.65205.611.9630,0002.465/15/2019 14:36204.69205.61281.9876.3730,00095.595/15/2019 14:58174.83281.98375.5793.5930,000117.145/15/2019 15:11--375.57376.210.6430,0000.805/16/2019 6:5504.65370.70485.79115.0930,000144.067,3519,2013-Foot ScreenPressure Activated Probe3-Foot ScreenPressure Activated Probe3-Foot Screen293163953028431753559421-20313249161522-1919-1616-13204172116Total Pounds Injected:Total Gallons:Appendix D: Injection LogsPage 3 of 4REGENESIS Remediation Services Beginning Flow Meter (gal)Ending Flow Meter (gal)Gallons Injected Per Time PointGallons Injected Per Interval5/10/2019 8:4117-14243.540.006.366.36613,50017.905/10/2019 9:3318-6.36133.68127.3313,500358.485/10/2019 10:02--133.68282.11148.4213,500417.88Volume estimated.5/9/20197:54201.790.0010.4710.4713,50029.495/9/20198:17295.0310.4744.0333.5613,50094.485/9/20198:46--44.03198.10154.0713,500433.775/9/20198:52205.45198.10201.683.5913,50010.105/9/20199:1005.00201.68304.40102.7213,500289.20Surfacing from abandoned boring.5/9/20199:18--304.40311.106.7013,50018.865/10/2019 8:11273.500.009.759.7513,50027.465/10/2019 8:49244.119.75142.62132.8713,500374.095/10/2019 8:51214.25142.62150.978.3413,50023.495/10/2019 9:39--150.97282.11131.1413,500369.22Volume estimated.5/10/2019 10:47267.900.002.902.9013,5008.175/10/2019 11:35102.472.9079.6776.7613,500216.13Slight surfacing from around rod; decreased flow rate to mitigate.5/10/2019 11:5494.3079.67130.6651.0013,500143.585/10/2019 12:5514-11103.08130.66258.35127.6812813,500359.495/9/20198:1310-0.004.494.4913,50012.655/9/20198:16265.164.4918.6814.1813,50039.935/9/20198:46--18.68152.80134.1313,500377.635/9/20198:56124.64152.80171.8619.0613,50053.665/9/20199:18106.37171.86272.95101.0913,500284.635/9/20199:25--272.95296.9023.9513,50067.425/10/2019 10:51364.730.004.774.7713,50013.425/10/2019 11:34245.004.77112.31107.5413,500302.775/10/2019 11:45244.99112.31157.5445.2413,500127.365/10/2019 12:3615-12123.79157.54281.43123.8912413,500348.805/13/2019 10:28324.600.0032.4232.4213,50091.285/13/2019 10:53254.6432.42158.00125.5813,500353.57Slight backpressure noted.5/13/2019 11:07203.90158.00178.0020.0013,50056.315/13/2019 11:27204.26178.00284.00106.0013,500298.445/16/2019 10:41205.060.004.354.3513,50012.245/16/2019 11:21125.974.35132.43128.0913,500360.625/16/2019 11:23104.85132.43138.005.5713,50015.675/16/2019 11:5604.54138.00263.48125.4813,500353.295/10/2019 9:08285.390.0013.3313.3313,50037.535/10/2019 10:02--13.33141.05127.7213,500359.60Volume estimated.5/10/2019 10:4115-12--141.05282.11141.0514113,500397.13Volume estimated.5/16/2019 11:25194.710.0040.7140.7113,500114.615/16/2019 11:35194.9240.7185.5144.8013,500126.145/16/2019 12:1819-16126.0785.51262.74177.2317713,500498.985/16/2019 10:38285.160.0018.1318.1313,50051.045/16/2019 10:58183.8118.1380.1462.0213,500174.615/16/2019 10:59123.3680.1483.142.9913,5008.435/16/2019 11:3782.3183.14181.8698.7213,500277.955/16/2019 12:0615-12-4.85181.86280.1698.309813,500276.775/10/2019 12:2120-18194.630.0066.8366.836713,500188.165/10/2019 12:4918-15154.3166.83176.58109.7511013,500309.015/10/2019 13:3115-12165.46176.58317.91141.3214113,500397.895/16/2019 12:56255.670.0011.9711.9710,54126.325/16/2019 13:2784.1411.97134.29122.3210,541268.915/16/2019 13:46124.32134.29213.2678.9710,541173.605/16/2019 14:04113.30213.26277.1863.9210,541140.51Surfacing.5/16/2019 14:4816-13113.14277.18384.93107.7510810,541236.885/17/2019 6:53122.880.0018.2018.2010,54140.015/17/2019 7:25124.2418.20144.22126.0210,541277.035/17/2019 8:0019-16124.87144.22272.86128.6412910,541282.795/17/2019 8:2116-13114.82272.86346.2273.367310,541161.28End of project volume.5/16/2019 13:05144.260.0018.8618.8610,54141.475/16/2019 13:4043.8918.86137.49118.6210,541260.785/16/2019 13:47183.700.0035.6135.6110,54178.29Surfacing.5/16/2019 14:1563.4235.61132.3996.7810,541212.76Surfacing.5/16/2019 14:5016-1363.54132.39212.4880.098010,541176.075/17/2019 6:5482.680.0013.6113.6110,54129.935/17/2019 7:2454.2213.61108.4394.8210,541208.455/17/2019 7:5419-1646.34108.43277.96169.5317010,541372.695/17/2019 8:2116-1304.58277.96383.38105.4210510,541231.74End of project volume.4,867 12,799Comments Injection ToolingTotal Pounds of PlumeStop Injected Per LocationTotal Gallons Per LocationInjection Point Date TimeInjection Depth (feet)Injection Pressure (psi)Flow Rate (gpm)PlumeStop Reagent Concentration (ppm)Pounds of PlumeStop Injected Per Time PointVolume of PlumeStop Reagent Injected 332827942763431135282876794198113143139362583729772783613115314438281392847928001581581264026341282742794132131141422634328074078986801024431845385895846134143463464735076176914413713248383843108Total Pounds Injected:Parsons - Fayetteville Works SitePlumeStop Injection Summary Log Perched Zone Row 3Table 2Total Gallons:3-Foot Screen14-113-Foot Screen17-1414-113-Foot Screen17-1414-113-Foot Screen17-143-Foot Screen17-1414-113-Foot Screen18-153-Foot Screen19-1616-133-Foot Screen19-1616-133-Foot Screen22-193-Foot Screen22-1919-163-Foot Screen22-193-Foot Screen18-153-Foot Screen21-193-Foot Screen20-1818-153-Foot Screen3-Foot Screen22-1919-16Appendix D: Injection LogsPage 4 of 4REGENESIS Remediation Services          Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                      APPENDIX E – Water Level Measurements    Location Date Time DTW (ft from TOC)DTW (ft bgs) Concentration PlumeStop (ppm) Comments 5/10/19 - 15.81 13.61 Baseline. 5/15/19 12:51 15.70 13.50 5/16/19 7:28 15.61 13.41 5/17/19 10:00 15.61 13.41 5/10/19 - 14.87 12.32 Baseline. 5/17/19 9:58 14.69 12.14 0 5/10/19 - 14.32 11.82 Baseline. 5/15/19 12:56 14.33 11.83 5/16/19 7:14 14.28 11.78 5/17/19 9:35 14.33 11.83 5/10/19 - 15.86 13.41 Baseline. 5/13/19 9:29 15.89 13.44 5/14/19 8:57 15.66 13.21 5/14/19 12:02 16.71 14.26 6,550 5/14/19 16:40 15.85 13.40 5/15/19 8:37 15.27 12.82 5/15/19 12:33 15.55 13.10 5/16/19 7:25 15.54 13.09 5/17/19 7:19 14.71 12.26 5/17/19 8:36 14.71 12.26 9,550 5/10/19 - 15.35 12.90 Baseline. 5/13/19 9:37 14.00 11.55 29,250 Pressure noted. 5/13/19 15:16 14.56 12.11 5/14/19 8:53 14.80 12.35 5/14/19 11:55 14.84 12.39 5/14/19 16:40 15.14 12.69 5/15/19 8:43 15.19 12.74 5/16/19 7:21 15.07 12.62 5/17/19 7:27 15.05 12.60 5/17/19 9:05 15.11 12.66 16,050 5/8/19 10:33 15.62 12.62 Baseline. 5/8/19 10:51 15.41 12.41 5/8/19 11:19 15.32 12.32 5/8/19 12:10 15.30 12.30 5/8/19 12:41 15.25 12.25 5/8/19 13:34 14.61 11.61 26,550 Sample bailed at 13:17. 5/8/19 15:39 15.18 12.18 5/9/19 9:08 9.94 6.94 5/9/19 11:07 9.88 6.88 5/9/19 16:47 14.95 11.95 5/10/19 - 15.55 12.55 5/13/19 9:40 15.58 12.58 19,250 5/13/19 15:11 14.15 11.15 5/15/19 12:54 15.52 12.52 5/16/19 7:17 15.43 12.43 5/17/19 9:17 15.46 12.46 30,050 5/8/19 10:30 15.78 11.91 Baseline; first bailed sample very cloudy. 5/8/19 10:54 15.39 11.52 5/8/19 11:21 15.25 11.38 5/8/19 12:08 14.98 11.11 Well water clear. 5/8/19 12:44 15.16 11.29 No PlumeStop in well. 5/8/19 13:35 14.37 10.50 5/8/19 15:40 15.19 11.32 150 5/9/19 9:10 14.78 10.91 5/9/19 11:09 13.80 9.93 5/9/19 16:49 15.46 11.59 5/10/19 - 15.75 11.88 5/13/19 9:42 14.79 10.92 2,350 5/13/19 15:09 15.42 11.55 5/15/19 12:40 15.76 11.89 5/16/19 7:15 15.66 11.79 5/17/19 9:20 15.67 11.80 3,050 Parsons ‐ Fayetteville Works Site Depth to Water (DTW) and PlumeStop Measurements Perched Zone Pilot Study Area MW-31 MW-32 MW-33 MW-34 MW-35 MW-36 PZ-1 Appendix E: Water Level Measurements Page 1 of 2 REGENESIS Remediation Services Location Date Time DTW (ft from TOC)DTW (ft bgs) Concentration PlumeStop (ppm) Comments Parsons ‐ Fayetteville Works Site Depth to Water (DTW) and PlumeStop Measurements Perched Zone Pilot Study Area 5/9/19 9:50 14.45 12.15 Baseline. 5/9/19 10:57 15.37 13.07 5/9/19 16:52 14.39 12.09 5/10/19 -14.54 12.24 5/13/19 9:32 14.56 12.26 21,550 5/13/19 15:13 14.05 11.75 5/14/19 8:48 14.01 11.71 5/14/19 11:52 14.16 11.86 5/14/19 16:40 14.34 12.04 5/15/19 8:41 14.30 12.00 5/15/19 12:35 15.44 13.14 5/16/19 7:23 13.88 11.58 5/17/19 7:25 14.39 12.09 5/17/19 8:58 14.30 12.00 10,050 5/9/19 16:53 15.86 12.69 Baseline. 5/10/19 -15.97 12.80 5/13/19 9:30 16.03 12.86 5/14/19 9:00 16.82 13.65 5/14/19 12:00 15.88 12.71 6,550 5/15/19 8:39 15.89 12.72 5/15/19 12:32 15.75 12.58 5/16/19 7:33 15.62 12.45 5/17/19 8:40 15.58 12.41 21,050 5/10/19 -15.82 13.27 Baseline. 5/14/19 12:38 15.88 13.33 0 5/15/19 12:43 15.91 13.36 0 5/16/19 7:19 15.91 13.36 5/17/19 10:02 15.80 13.25 PZ-34 PZ-2 PZ-3 Appendix E: Water Level Measurements Page 2 of 2 REGENESIS Remediation Services     Global Headquarters 1011 Calle Sombra  San Clemente, CA 92673  Ph: (949) 366‐8000  Fax: (949) 366‐8090                                                          End of document.  Consent Order Progress Report For Second Quarter 2019 Attachment A-4 Old Outfall 002 Monthly Sampling Results Old Outfall 002 Monthly Sampling ResultsChemours Fayetteville WorksFayetteville, North Carolina03/21/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019FSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSDUPFSParameter NameUnits Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result ResultPerfluorobutane Sulfonic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorobutanoic AcidUG/L0.079 0.088 0.08 0.082 0.082 0.084 0.027 0.081 0.083 0.082 0.086Perfluorodecanoic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorododecanoic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluoroheptanoic AcidUG/L0.022 0.026 0.026 0.027 0.024 0.026 0.0045 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.025Perfluorohexane Sulfonic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorohexanoic AcidUG/L0.014 0.016 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.006 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016Perfluorononanoic AcidUG/L0.0067 0.011 0.007 0.0069 0.0081 0.0083<0.00200.0071 0.0071 0.0074 0.012Perfluoropentanoic AcidUG/L0.150.150.150.160.140.14 0.029 0.140.150.140.15Perfluoroundecanoic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020PFOAUG/L0.032 0.037 0.032 0.032 0.037 0.037<0.00200.034 0.031 0.032 0.037PFOSUG/L0.002 0.003 0.0022 0.0023 0.0022 0.0022<0.00200.0021 0.0022 0.0021 0.0038Hfpo Dimer AcidUG/L8866.58.47.51.87.46.9 J 8.8 J7.8Perfluorodecane Sulfonic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorotetradecanoic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorotridecanoic AcidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.002010:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonateUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00201H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorodecanesulfonate (8:2 FTS) UG/L<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.0201H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorohexanesulfonate (4:2 FTS) UG/L<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.0206:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonateUG/L<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020ADONAUG/L<0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021F-53B MajorUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020F-53B MinorUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020N-ethyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acidUG/L<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020N-methyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acidUG/L<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020NaDONAUG/L<0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021Perfluorododecane sulfonic acid (PFDoS)UG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluoroheptane sulfonic acid (PFHpS)UG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorohexadecanoic acid (PFHxDA)UG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorononanesulfonic acidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorooctadecanoic acidUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluorooctane SulfonamideUG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020Perfluoropentane sulfonic acid (PFPeS)UG/L<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020537 ModifiedLocation IDDate SampledSample PurposeOLDOF-2BOLDOF-AOLDOF-A-SEEPOLDOF-BNotes:NR = Not Reported< = Not detected above the method detection limitJ = Estimated valueUJ = Not detected (estimated detection limit)Detected results are presented in bold typePage 1 of 6 TABLE 1Old Outfall 002 Monthly Sampling ResultsChemours Fayetteville WorksFayetteville, North Carolina03/21/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019FSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSDUPFSParameter NameUnits Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result ResultLocation IDDate SampledSample PurposeOLDOF-2BOLDOF-AOLDOF-A-SEEPOLDOF-BN-ethylperfluoro-1-octanesulfonamideUG/L<0.075 UJ <0.075 <0.075 UJ <0.075 <0.075 UJ <0.037 <0.037 <0.075 UJ <0.037 <0.037 <0.0372-(N-ethyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)-ethanol UG/L<0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.060 UJ <0.0600.12<0.060 UJ <0.060 <0.0602-(N-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)-ethanol UG/L<0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.11 <0.11 <0.22 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11Byproduct 4UG/L<0.320.520.350.530.350.40.190.320.530.460.57Byproduct 5UG/L0.80 J 1.5 0.76 J 1.4 0.86 J1<0.0580.75 J10.981.4Byproduct 6UG/L<0.031 <0.031 <0.031 <0.031 <0.0310.018<0.015 <0.0310.015 0.015 0.015EVE AcidUG/L<0.049 <0.049 <0.049 <0.049 <0.049 <0.024 <0.024 <0.049 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024Hydro-EVE AcidUG/L0.170.220.170.190.170.21<0.0280.160.190.190.22N-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamideUG/L<0.069 UJ <0.069 <0.069 <0.069 <0.069 <0.035 <0.035 <0.069 <0.035 <0.035 <0.035NVHOSUG/L0.710.780.730.770.80.88<0.0540.610.820.840.83PEPAUG/L1.91.91.91.82.22.11.11.9221.9PESUG/L<0.092 <0.092 <0.092 <0.092 <0.092 <0.046 <0.046 <0.092 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046PFECA BUG/L<0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.060 <0.060 <0.12 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060PFECA-GUG/L<0.082 <0.082 <0.082 <0.082 <0.082 <0.041 <0.041 <0.082 <0.041 <0.041 <0.041PFESA-BP1UG/L0.19<0.0530.19<0.0530.170.14<0.0270.150.110.13 0.027PFESA-BP2UG/L0.290.350.250.280.30.35 0.035 0.250.310.330.36PFMOAAUG/L679175 J88841080.627110510682PFO2HxAUG/L1618171819191.317171720PFO3OAUG/L4.24.64.24.44.650.2544.44.75PFO4DAUG/L1.31.71.41.51.51.4<0.0791.31.11.31.5PFO5DAUG/L0.620.860.660.680.740.58<0.0340.630.490.530.71PMPAUG/L5.85.75.95.46.353.55.54.84.95.7R-EVEUG/L<0.14 <0.140.17<0.140.160.170.130.15<0.0700.19 J 0.25Cl. Spec. Table 3 Compound SOPNotes:NR = Not Reported< = Not detected above the method detection limitJ = Estimated valueUJ = Not detected (estimated detection limit)Detected results are presented in bold typePage 2 of 6 TABLE 1Old Outfall 002 Monthly Sampling ResultsChemours Fayetteville WorksFayetteville, North CarolinaParameter NameUnitsPerfluorobutane Sulfonic AcidUG/LPerfluorobutanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorodecanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorododecanoic AcidUG/LPerfluoroheptanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorohexane Sulfonic AcidUG/LPerfluorohexanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorononanoic AcidUG/LPerfluoropentanoic AcidUG/LPerfluoroundecanoic AcidUG/LPFOAUG/LPFOSUG/LHfpo Dimer AcidUG/LPerfluorodecane Sulfonic AcidUG/LPerfluorotetradecanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorotridecanoic AcidUG/L10:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonateUG/L1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorodecanesulfonate (8:2 FTS) UG/L1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorohexanesulfonate (4:2 FTS) UG/L6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonateUG/LADONAUG/LF-53B MajorUG/LF-53B MinorUG/LN-ethyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acidUG/LN-methyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acidUG/LNaDONAUG/LPerfluorododecane sulfonic acid (PFDoS)UG/LPerfluoroheptane sulfonic acid (PFHpS)UG/LPerfluorohexadecanoic acid (PFHxDA)UG/LPerfluorononanesulfonic acidUG/LPerfluorooctadecanoic acidUG/LPerfluorooctane SulfonamideUG/LPerfluoropentane sulfonic acid (PFPeS)UG/L537 ModifiedLocation IDDate SampledSample Purpose03/21/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019FSDUPFSFSDUPFSFSFSFSFSFSResult Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result0.0021 0.0021 0.002 0.0024 0.0023 0.0023 0.0024 0.0028<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.120.120.120.110.120.110.110.11 0.026 0.029 0.03<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.0021<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.0026<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.035 0.035 0.035 0.038 0.036 0.035 0.035 0.037 0.0067 0.0083 0.00730.0025 0.0026 0.0025 0.0026 0.0026 0.0025 0.0027 0.0027<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.022 0.021 0.022 0.023 0.024 0.020.020.02 0.0043 0.0052 0.00540.013 0.013 0.012 0.023 J 0.016 J 0.014 0.014 0.022<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.20.20.190.190.190.20.190.18 0.033 0.037 0.037<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.048 0.048 0.047 0.054 0.053 0.053 0.052 0.066 0.036 0.036 0.0350.0034 0.0034 0.0035 0.0067 J 0.0048 0.004 0.0043 0.0074<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.002012.0 J 9.8 J1010118.3117.72.532.9<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020OLDOF-COLDOF-C2OLDOF-CREEK-A2Notes:NR = Not Reported< = Not detected above the method detection limitJ = Estimated valueUJ = Not detected (estimated detection limit)Detected results are presented in bold typePage 3 of 6 TABLE 1Old Outfall 002 Monthly Sampling ResultsChemours Fayetteville WorksFayetteville, North CarolinaParameter NameUnitsLocation IDDate SampledSample PurposeN-ethylperfluoro-1-octanesulfonamideUG/L2-(N-ethyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)-ethanol UG/L2-(N-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)-ethanol UG/LByproduct 4UG/LByproduct 5UG/LByproduct 6UG/LEVE AcidUG/LHydro-EVE AcidUG/LN-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamideUG/LNVHOSUG/LPEPAUG/LPESUG/LPFECA BUG/LPFECA-GUG/LPFESA-BP1UG/LPFESA-BP2UG/LPFMOAAUG/LPFO2HxAUG/LPFO3OAUG/LPFO4DAUG/LPFO5DAUG/LPMPAUG/LR-EVEUG/LCl. Spec. Table 3 Compound SOP03/21/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019FSDUPFSFSDUPFSFSFSFSFSFSResult Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result ResultOLDOF-COLDOF-C2OLDOF-CREEK-A2<0.075 UJ <0.075 UJ <0.037 <0.075 <0.075 <0.075 UJ <0.037 <0.037 <0.037 UJ <0.037 <0.037<0.12 <0.12 <0.060 UJ <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 UJ <0.060<0.22 <0.22 <0.11 <0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.110.54 0.51 0.65 0.61 0.67 0.55<0.160.73<0.160.16<0.161.3 J 1.3 1.5 2.4 2.4 1.2 J<0.0582.1<0.058 UJ <0.058 <0.058<0.031 <0.0310.024<0.031 <0.031 <0.0310.022 0.036<0.015 <0.015 <0.015<0.049 <0.0490.025<0.049 <0.0490.082 0.061 0.078<0.024 <0.024 <0.0240.290.260.310.390.360.260.260.37<0.028 <0.028 <0.028<0.069 <0.069 <0.035 <0.069 <0.069 <0.069 <0.035 <0.035 <0.035 <0.035 <0.0351.31.21.31.31.31.21.31.3<0.054 <0.054 <0.0542.62.52.52.32.42.42.42.11.11.21.1<0.092 <0.092 <0.046 <0.092 <0.092 <0.092 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046<0.12 <0.12 <0.060 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060<0.082 <0.082 <0.041 <0.082 <0.082 <0.082 <0.041 <0.041 <0.041 <0.041 <0.0410.290.250.250.140.160.770.640.75<0.027 <0.027 <0.0270.450.430.490.650.540.430.470.65 0.0820.10.12137 120 J 1521501471511391470.440.740.5729282929313030291.61.81.97.27.27.87.687.18.57.70.210.280.282.42.32.42.92.92.52.830.150.170.21.110.91.71.3 J1.41.12.3<0.034 <0.034 <0.0347.47.46.477.26.96.76.73.22.63.30.240.190.20.14<0.140.18<0.0700.31<0.0700.086 0.12Notes:NR = Not Reported< = Not detected above the method detection limitJ = Estimated valueUJ = Not detected (estimated detection limit)Detected results are presented in bold typePage 4 of 6 TABLE 1Old Outfall 002 Monthly Sampling ResultsChemours Fayetteville WorksFayetteville, North CarolinaParameter NameUnitsPerfluorobutane Sulfonic AcidUG/LPerfluorobutanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorodecanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorododecanoic AcidUG/LPerfluoroheptanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorohexane Sulfonic AcidUG/LPerfluorohexanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorononanoic AcidUG/LPerfluoropentanoic AcidUG/LPerfluoroundecanoic AcidUG/LPFOAUG/LPFOSUG/LHfpo Dimer AcidUG/LPerfluorodecane Sulfonic AcidUG/LPerfluorotetradecanoic AcidUG/LPerfluorotridecanoic AcidUG/L10:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonateUG/L1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorodecanesulfonate (8:2 FTS) UG/L1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorohexanesulfonate (4:2 FTS) UG/L6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonateUG/LADONAUG/LF-53B MajorUG/LF-53B MinorUG/LN-ethyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acidUG/LN-methyl perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acidUG/LNaDONAUG/LPerfluorododecane sulfonic acid (PFDoS)UG/LPerfluoroheptane sulfonic acid (PFHpS)UG/LPerfluorohexadecanoic acid (PFHxDA)UG/LPerfluorononanesulfonic acidUG/LPerfluorooctadecanoic acidUG/LPerfluorooctane SulfonamideUG/LPerfluoropentane sulfonic acid (PFPeS)UG/L537 ModifiedLocation IDDate SampledSample Purpose03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019FS FS FS FS FS FSResult Result Result Result Result Result0.0041 0.004 0.0041 0.0059 0.0059 0.00650.130.130.130.160.160.16<0.0020 <0.00200.0025 0.0026 0.0021 0.0042<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.045 0.043 0.047 0.061 0.062 0.0630.0035 0.0035 0.003 0.0039 0.0038 0.00360.024 0.025 0.024 0.031 0.031 0.0350.021 0.021 0.031 0.034 0.035 0.050.240.230.210.340.320.31<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00200.068 0.066 0.069 0.08 0.084 0.0970.0059 0.0062 0.0088 0.01 0.011 0.014191111172010<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020<0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0021<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020<0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020OLDOF-EOLDOF-DNotes:NR = Not Reported< = Not detected above the method detection limitJ = Estimated valueUJ = Not detected (estimated detection limit)Detected results are presented in bold typePage 5 of 6 TABLE 1Old Outfall 002 Monthly Sampling ResultsChemours Fayetteville WorksFayetteville, North CarolinaParameter NameUnitsLocation IDDate SampledSample PurposeN-ethylperfluoro-1-octanesulfonamideUG/L2-(N-ethyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)-ethanol UG/L2-(N-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamido)-ethanol UG/LByproduct 4UG/LByproduct 5UG/LByproduct 6UG/LEVE AcidUG/LHydro-EVE AcidUG/LN-methyl perfluoro-1-octanesulfonamideUG/LNVHOSUG/LPEPAUG/LPESUG/LPFECA BUG/LPFECA-GUG/LPFESA-BP1UG/LPFESA-BP2UG/LPFMOAAUG/LPFO2HxAUG/LPFO3OAUG/LPFO4DAUG/LPFO5DAUG/LPMPAUG/LR-EVEUG/LCl. Spec. Table 3 Compound SOP03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019 03/21/2019 04/17/2019 05/15/2019FS FS FS FS FS FSResult Result Result Result Result ResultOLDOF-EOLDOF-D<0.075 UJ <0.037 <0.037 <0.075 UJ <0.075 UJ <0.056<0.12 <0.060 UJ <0.060 <0.12 <0.12 UJ <0.090<0.22 <0.11 <0.11 <0.22 <0.22 <0.160.73 0.62 0.77 0.81 0.6 0.991.8 J 1.6 2.8 2.5 J 2.1 4.2<0.0310.037 0.041 0.035 0.031 0.0430.3 0.29 0.33 0.5 0.31 0.520.4 0.43 0.48 0.52 0.37 0.59<0.069 <0.035 <0.035 <0.069 UJ <0.069 UJ <0.0521.5 1.5 1.4 1.8 1.3 1.82.6 2.7 2.5 2.7 2 2.4<0.092 <0.046 <0.046 <0.092 <0.092 <0.069<0.12 <0.060 <0.060 <0.12 <0.12 <0.090<0.082 <0.041 <0.041 <0.082 <0.082 <0.0612.6 2.6 2.8 5.5 4 5.50.64 0.65 0.77 0.85 0.65 0.99167 180 177 215 143 24137 35 35 46 31 479.5 9.8 9.2 12 9.5 123.5 3.5 3.9 4.9 3.6 5.72 1.6 3.3 3.1 2 4.38 6.8 7.6 8.6 5.9 7.90.26 0.22 0.32 0.28 0.21<0.11Notes:NR = Not Reported< = Not detected above the method detection limitJ = Estimated valueUJ = Not detected (estimated detection limit)Detected results are presented in bold typePage 6 of 6