[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64963-64965]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22657]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78850; File No. SR-BatsEDGX-2016-33]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.;
Suspension of and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To
Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt an Options
Regulatory Fee

September 15, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On July 20, 2016, Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to adopt an Options Regulatory Fee (``ORF'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78452 (August 1,
2016), 81 FR 51951 (August 5, 2016) (``Notice''). The ORF is
designed to recover a material portion of the costs to the Exchange
for the supervision and regulation of Members' customer options
activity. The Exchange has committed to monitor the amount of
revenue collected from the ORF to ensure that it, in combination
with its other regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed the
Exchange's total regulatory costs. See id. at 51952.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its filing, EDGX adopted an ORF in the amount of $0.0002 per
contract and proposed to assess the fee to all ``customer'' range
options transactions cleared by Members \4\ and non-Members. The
proposed rule change was immediately effective upon filing with the
Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\5\ The
Commission published notice of filing of the proposed rule change in
the Federal Register on August 5, 2016.\6\ To date, the Commission has
not received any comment letters on the Exchange's proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``Member'' refers to ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
EDGX Rule 1.5(n).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). A proposed rule change may take
effect upon filing with the Commission if it is designated by the
exchange as ``establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the self-regulatory organization on any person, whether
or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory organization.''
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). Although the proposed rule change was
effective upon filing, EDGX indicated that it would not implement
the fee until August 1, 2016. See Notice, supra note 3, at 51953. On
August 22, 2016, the Exchange submitted a proposed rule change to
delay the implementation of the ORF until February 1, 2017. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78745 (September 1, 2016), 81 FR
62185 (September 8, 2016) (SR-BatsEDGX-2016-48).
    \6\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 51951.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission is
hereby: (1) Temporarily suspending the proposed rule change; and (2)
instituting proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove
the proposal.

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule Change

    In its proposed rule change filing, EDGX proposed to adopt an ORF
in the amount of $0.0002 per contract side that it would assess on
Members and non-Members. Specifically, under the proposal, EDGX would
assess the ORF on all options transactions that clear at the Options
Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') in the ``customer'' range, regardless of
the exchange on which the transaction occurs.\7\ Under the proposal,
the ORF would apply to all Member and non-Member options transactions
that clear at OCC in the ``customer'' range.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See id. at 51952.
    \8\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of its proposal, the Exchange stated that applying the
ORF to non-Members would remove an incentive for Members to clear their
trades through non-Members to avoid the obligation to pay the ORF to
EDGX.\9\ The Exchange further stated that applying the ORF to Member
and non-Member customer transactions would prevent options market
participants from avoiding becoming a Member of EDGX based on a desire
to avoid being assessed the ORF by EDGX.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See id.
    \10\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Suspension of the EDGX Proposal

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,\11\ at any time within
60 days of the date of filing of an immediately effective proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Act,\12\ the Commission
summarily may temporarily suspend the change in the rules of a self-
regulatory organization made thereby if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes it is appropriate in the public interest to
temporarily suspend EDGX's proposal to assess the ORF to Member and
non-Member customer transactions and solicit comment on and evaluate
further whether it is consistent with the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder that are applicable to EDGX.
    When exchanges file their proposed rule changes with the
Commission, including fee filings like EDGX's present proposal, they
are required to provide a statement supporting the proposal's basis
under the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to
the exchange.\13\ The instructions to Form 19b-4, on which exchanges
file their proposed rule changes, specify that such statement ``should
be sufficiently detailed and specific to support a finding that the
proposed rule change is consistent with [those] requirements . . . .''
\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 17 CFR 240.19b-4 (Item 3 entitled ``Self-Regulatory
Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for,
the Proposed Rule Change'').
    \14\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among other things, exchange proposed rule changes are subject to
Section 6 of the Act, including Section 6(b)(4), which requires the
rules of an exchange to ``provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and

issuers and other persons using its facilities,'' and Section 6(b)(5),
which requires the rules of an exchange to, among other things, be
``not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers . . . .'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In justifying its proposal, the Exchange stated in its filing that
its proposal is reasonable because the ORF supports the Exchange's
market surveillance programs that evaluate activity across all options
markets.\16\ EDGX further stated that it analyzes all options market
activity in order to effectively meet its statutory obligation to
enforce compliance by Members and their associated persons with the Act
and the rules of the Exchange.\17\ The Exchange also argued that the
proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because it would avoid market participants clearing their transactions
through non-Members in order to avoid paying an ORF to EDGX.\18\ The
Exchange further stated that applying the fee to both Member and non-
Member activity will eliminate an incentive for options market
participants to make exchange membership decisions based on a desire to
avoid paying the ORF to EDGX.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 51953.
    \17\ See id.
    \18\ See id.
    \19\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also stated that assessing an ORF on non-Members will
allow it to charge an ORF on transactions that were initially submitted
for clearing to a clearing broker that is a Member of EDGX, but that
were subsequently ``flipped'' to the account of a non-Member for
clearing.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See id. at 51952.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange noted that it has heard allegations from
market participants that some options exchanges may also assess an ORF
on all options transactions cleared by OCC in the customer range
regardless of whether such transactions are executed or cleared by an
exchange Member.\21\ The Commission notes, however, that no rules
presently maintained by any exchange currently apply the ORF to non-
Members in the manner that EDGX is now proposing.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See id. at 51953.
    \22\ See id. at note 16 (noting that no options exchange's
current rule text applies in such a manner).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In temporarily suspending the Exchange's fee change, the Commission
intends to further consider whether assessing the ORF on transactions
of non-Members--where no EDGX Member executed or cleared the trade--is
consistent with the statutory requirements applicable to a national
securities exchange under the Act. In particular, the Commission will
consider whether the proposed rule change satisfies the standards under
the Act and the rules thereunder requiring, among other things, that an
exchange's rules provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
fees among members, issuers, and other persons using its facilities;
not permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers or
dealers; and do not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the Commission finds that it is appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of investors, and otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, to temporarily suspend the
proposed rule change.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ For purposes of temporarily suspending the proposed rule
change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether to Approve or Disapprove the EDGX
Proposal

    In addition to temporarily suspending the proposal, the Commission
also hereby institutes proceedings pursuant to Sections 19(b)(3)(C)
\25\ and 19(b)(2) of the Act \26\ to determine whether the Exchange's
proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved. Further,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\27\ the Commission is
hereby providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under
consideration. The Commission believes it is appropriate to institute
disapproval proceedings at this time in view of the significant legal
and policy issues raised by the proposal. Institution of disapproval
proceedings does not indicate, however, that the Commission has reached
any conclusions with respect to the issues involved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). Once the Commission temporarily
suspends a proposed rule change, Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act
requires that the Commission institute proceedings under Section
19(b)(2)(B) to determine whether a proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act also
provides that proceedings to determine whether to disapprove a
proposed rule change must be concluded within 180 days of the date
of publication of notice of the filing of the proposed rule change.
See id. The time for conclusion of the proceedings may be extended
for up to 60 days if the Commission finds good cause for such
extension and publishes its reasons for so finding, or if the
exchange consents to the longer period. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, pursuant to EDGX's proposal, the Exchange would
assess the ORF on Members and non-Members for all of their transactions
cleared at OCC in the ``customer'' range. As noted above, the Act and
the rules thereunder require that an exchange's rules, among other
things, provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable fees among
members, issuers, and other persons using its facilities; not permit
unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers;
and not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Commission solicits
comment on whether the Exchange's ORF fee proposal is consistent with
these standards and whether EDGX has sufficiently met its burden in
presenting a statutory analysis of how its proposal meets these
standards.
    In particular, the grounds for possible disapproval under
consideration include whether EDGX's proposal is consistent with the
following sections of the Act:
     Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, which requires that the rules
of a national securities exchange ``provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and issuers and other persons using its facilities;'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires, among other
things, that the rules of a national securities exchange not be
``designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers;'' \29\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, which requires that the rules
of a national securities exchange ``not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of [the Act].'' \30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Commission is considering whether a sufficient
regulatory nexus exists between the Exchange and a non-Member to
justify imposition of the ORF on such non-Member. If a non-Member does
not execute a trade on EDGX's market, or utilize the services of a
Member of EDGX to either execute the trade on another market or clear
the trade, then the non-Member would not be utilizing the facilities of
the exchange or the services of a Member of the Exchange. Further, the
Exchange notes that the ORF would be ``designed to recover a

material portion of the costs to the Exchange of the supervision and
regulation of Members' and non-Member's customer options business,
including performing routine surveillances and investigations, as well
as policy, rulemaking, interpretive and enforcement activities.'' \31\
The Commission notes, however, that the Exchange's proposed application
of the ORF to non-Members raises concerns in that the exercise of an
exchange's regulatory jurisdiction and the application of its fee
schedule is generally confined to the exchange's Members and persons
using its facilities.\32\ In other words, EDGX's proposal preliminarily
appears to apply a fee that is specifically designed to fund the
exchange's regulatory operations in part, by assessing the fee to a
class of person over whom the Exchange does not have any direct
regulatory responsibility or jurisdiction and who have not directly or
indirectly accessed the Exchange's facilities or utilized the services
of a Member of the Exchange. Accordingly, the proposal's application of
the ORF to non-Members who do not use the facilities of the Exchange or
the services of a Member of the Exchange may prevent the Commission
from making a finding that the proposal is consistent with the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 51952.
    \32\ See, e.g., Section 6(b)(4), which addresses fees that an
exchange charges ``among its members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities.'' 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \33\ See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(ii) (setting forth the standard
for disapproval of a proposed rule change as follows: ``The
Commission shall disapprove a proposed rule change of a self-
regulatory organization if it does not make a finding described in
clause (i).''). Section 19(b)(2)(C)(i) provides that ``[t]he
Commission shall approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory
organization if it finds that such proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of [the Act] and the rules and
regulations issued under [the Act] that are applicable to such
organization.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Commission's Solicitation of Comments

    The Commission requests written views, data, and arguments with
respect to the concerns identified above as well as any other relevant
concerns. Such comments should be submitted by October 12, 2016.
Rebuttal comments should be submitted by October 26, 2016.
    The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, which
are set forth in the Notice,\34\ in addition to any other comments they
may wish to submit about the proposed rule change. In particular, the
Commission seeks comment on the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Commenters' views on the appropriateness of an options
exchange assessing an ORF on options transactions executed at an away
market that are cleared by OCC in the ``customer'' range that are
neither executed, nor cleared, by a Member of the exchange assessing
the ORF;
     Commenters' views on the Exchange's assertion that ``there
is a strong nexus between the ORF and the Exchange's regulatory
activities with respect to its Members', as well as non-Members,'
customer trading activity.'' \35\;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See id. at 51952.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Commenters' views on the Exchange's argument that ``[i]f
the ORF did not apply to activity across markets then a non-Member
would send their orders to the least cost, least regulated exchange. In
addition, applying the fee to all Members' and non-Members' activity
across all market [sic] will avoid options participants from
terminating their membership status on or not becoming a [sic] Members
of certain exchanges simply to avoid being assessed [sic] ORF.'' \36\;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Whether any other options exchange is currently assessing
an ORF on non-Members for their options transactions that are cleared
by OCC in the ``customer'' range in contravention to a stated rule of
such exchange; and
     Finally, whether any options exchange currently assesses
an ORF on a clearing member that does not ultimately clear a customer
transaction, but merely transfers it to the account of a non-Member for
clearance and settlement, and, if so, whether doing so is consistent
with the current ORF rule text of such options exchange.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the proposed rule changes, including whether the
proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be
submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2016-33 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2016-33. The
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2016-33 and should
be submitted on or before October 12, 2016. Rebuttal comments should be
submitted by October 26, 2016.

VI. Conclusion

    It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the
Act,\37\ that File No. SR-BatsEDGX-2016-33, be and hereby is,
temporarily suspended. In addition, the Commission is instituting
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57) and (58).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-22657 Filed 9-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


SRCNAME SAMPLENO DATESMPL ANALYTE FILTERED RsltPost UNITS LPSD WELL F WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ F 2/ 28/ 2001 APFO T 0.100 ug/ l LPSD WELL A WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ A 2/ 28/ 2001 APFO T 0.45 ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE WWK LUBECK_ OFFICE 2/ 28/ 2001 APFO T 0.32 ug/ l LPSD WELL B WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ B 2/ 28/ 2001 APFO T 0.370 ug/ l LPSD WELL F WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ F 6/ 15/ 2001 APFO T ND ( 0.090) Uug/ l LPSD WELL B WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ B 6/ 15/ 2001 APFO T 0.321 ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE WWK D LUBECK_ OFFICE 6/ 15/ 2001 APFO T ND ( 0.090) Uug/ l LPSD WELL A WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ A 6/ 15/ 2001 APFO T 0.431 ug/ l LPSD WELL B WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ B 8/ 14/ 2001 APFO T 0.171 ug/ l LPSD WELL A WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ A 8/ 14/ 2001 APFO T 0.21 ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE WWK D LUBECK_ OFFICE 8/ 14/ 2001 APFO T 0.206 ug/ l LPSD WELL F WWK G LPWD_ WELL_ F 8/ 14/ 2001 APFO T ND ( 0.090) Uug/ l APFO indicates that this is trial data, check in CED for FC 143, not APFO! SRCNAME DATESMPL RsltPost ( FC 143) UNITS LPSD WELL A 1/ 19/ 2000 0.80 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 1/ 19/ 2000 0.313 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 1/ 19/ 2000 0.440 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 4/ 19/ 2000 0.21 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 4/ 19/ 2000 0.516 ug/ l LPSD WELL A 5/ 24/ 2000 0.315 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 8/ 15/ 2000 0.159 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 8/ 15/ 2000 0.073 J ug/ l LPSD WELL A 8/ 15/ 2000 0.535 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 10/ 31/ 2000 0.196 ug/ l LPSD WELL A 10/ 31/ 2000 0.672 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 10/ 31/ 2000 0.40 ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE 10/ 31/ 2000 0.629 ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE 10/ 31/ 2000 0.67 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 10/ 31/ 2000 0.492 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 10/ 31/ 2000 0.81 ug/ l LPSD WELL A 10/ 31/ 2000 0.79 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 2/ 28/ 2001 0.212 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 2/ 28/ 2001 0.638 ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE 2/ 28/ 2001 0.499 ug/ l LPSD WELL A 2/ 28/ 2001 0.648 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 6/ 15/ 2001 0.555 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 6/ 15/ 2001 0.065 J ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE 6/ 15/ 2001 0.143 ug/ l LPSD WELL A 6/ 15/ 2001 0.220 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 8/ 14/ 2001 0.055 J ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE 8/ 14/ 2001 0.224 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 8/ 14/ 2001 0.236 ug/ l LPSD WELL A 8/ 14/ 2001 0.270 ug/ l LPSD WELL F 10/ 11/ 2001 0.288 ug/ l LPSD WELL A 10/ 11/ 2001 0.703 ug/ l LPSD WELL B 10/ 11/ 2001 0.581 ug/ l LUBECK OFFICE 10/ 11/ 2001 0.621 ug/ l Table 3.9 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 1 of 6 Table 3 9 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 8/ 26/ 03 3.85 5/ 21/ 03 2.96 2/ 25/ 03 1.37 10/ 16/ 02 1.74 9/ 04/ 02 1.92 5/ 23/ 02 1.25 4/ 29/ 02 1.22 3/ 26/ 02 2.82 2/ 22/ 02 1.45 1/ 28/ 02 1.2 2/ 2/ 99 0.69 L AE11 MW01 11/ 10/ 98 0.41 8/ 25/ 03 0.0821 5/ 22/ 03 0.377 2/ 25/ 03 0.099 AJ06 MW02 10/ 16/ 02 0.133 8/ 11/ 03 1.16 5/ 22/ 03 0.377 3/ 8/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 10/ 22/ 02 0.269 8/ 26/ 02 0.335 5/ 17/ 02 0.247 4/ 16/ 02 0.159 3/ 21/ 02 0.171 2/ 14/ 02 0.129 1/ 22/ 02 0.131 11/ 20/ 00 0.24 8/ 16/ 00 0.071 J 5/ 12/ 99 0.578 2/ 3/ 99 0.082 B 11/ 18/ 98 1.9 L 6/ 19/ 98 0.4 6/ 2/ 97 0.79 AM07 PW01 4/ 2/ 96 0.48 8/ 11/ 03 0.802 5/ 22/ 03 0.736 3/ 8/ 03 0.308 10/ 22/ 02 0.415 8/ 26/ 02 0.420 5/ 17/ 02 0.499 4/ 16/ 02 0.497 3/ 21/ 02 0.568 2/ 14/ 02 0.439 1/ 22/ 02 0.355 11/ 20/ 00 0.4 11/ 20/ 00 ( dup) 0.26 8/ 15/ 00 0.167 5/ 12/ 99 0.307 6/ 19/ 98 1 6/ 2/ 97 0.55 AO08 PW01 4/ 2/ 96 0.52 8/ 11/ 03 1.51 5/ 22/ 03 1.97 3/ 3/ 03 1.07 10/ 22/ 02 0.721 8/ 26/ 02 0.834 5/ 17/ 02 0.911 4/ 16/ 02 1.42 3/ 21/ 02 1.22 AX13 PW01 2/ 14/ 02 1.03 Table 3.9 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 2 of 6 Table 3 9 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 8/ 26/ 03 0.0764 5/ 21/ 03 0.846 5/ 21/ 03 ( dup) 0.841 2/ 25/ 03 3.72 10/ 16/ 02 0.126 9/ 04/ 02 0.117 5/ 23/ 02 0.551 4/ 29/ 02 0.424 3/ 26/ 02 0.262 2/ 22/ 02 1.27 D08 MW01 1/ 28/ 02 0.582 8/ 26/ 03 2.88 5/ 21/ 03 3.67 2/ 25/ 03 3.15 10/ 16/ 02 3.43 9/ 04/ 02 2.39 5/ 23/ 02 2.47 4/ 29/ 02 2.44 3/ 28/ 02 1.62 2/ 22/ 02 2.32 1/ 28/ 02 2.11 5/ 12/ 99 0.882 2/ 2/ 99 0.59 L E13 MW01 11/ 11/ 98 2 8/ 11/ 03 11.9 5/ 22/ 03 16.0 3/ 8/ 03 8.93 10/ 22/ 02 16.2 8/ 26/ 02 9.71 5/ 17/ 02 12.4 4/ 16/ 02 13.2 3/ 21/ 02 17.2 2/ 14/ 02 12.00 1/ 22/ 02 10.5 11/ 20/ 00 7.5 2/ 9/ 99 16.2 K16 PW01 11/ 18/ 98 0.46 L 8/ 11/ 03 10.1 5/ 22/ 03 24.8 3/ 10/ 03 19.8 10/ 25/ 02 14.3 8/ 13/ 02 3.06 5/ 21/ 02 15.1 4/ 18/ 02 16.1 3/ 21/ 02 40.9 2/ 7/ 02 23.5 1/ 15/ 02 30.9 7/ 11/ 01 0.202 4/ 11/ 01 3.99 11/ 20/ 00 13.8 2/ 7/ 99 5.89 11/ 18/ 98 7.9 J L04 PW01 11/ 18/ 98 ( dup) 3.9 J 8/ 25/ 03 208 5/ 21/ 03 268 2/ 26/ 03 244 N04 MW03 10/ 16/ 02 21.2 Table 3.9 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 3 of 6 Table 3 9 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 8/ 26/ 03 Dry no sample 5/ 22/ 03 Dry no sample 2/ 25/ 03 Dry no sample 10/ 16/ 02 Dry no sample 9/ 04/ 02 Dry no sample 5/ 23/ 02 Dry no sample 4/ 29/ 02 Dry no sample 3/ 28/ 02 Dry no sample 2/ 25/ 02 57.8 2/ 2/ 99 29.6L N13 MW01 11/ 11/ 98 < 0.1 8/ 26/ 03 35100 5/ 21/ 03 45600 2/ 26/ 03 36900 10/ 16/ 02 46600 10/ 16/ 02 ( dup) 48300 9/ 04/ 02 34400 5/ 23/ 02 42400 4/ 29/ 02 36500 3/ 26/ 02 32300 2/ 25/ 02 26800 1/ 28/ 02 23600 1/ 25/ 01 12600 2/ 6/ 99 13600 P04 MW02 11/ 12/ 98 8300 8/ 26/ 03 Dry no sample 5/ 22/ 03 Dry no sample 2/ 25/ 03 Dry no sample 10/ 16/ 02 120 9/ 04/ 02 Dry no sample 5/ 23/ 02 Dry no sample 4/ 29/ 02 Dry no sample 3/ 28/ 02 Pump problems  no sample 2/ 25/ 02 20.7 2/ 4/ 99 43.4 P08 MW01 11/ 13/ 98 36 8/ 26/ 03 761 5/ 21/ 03 831 2/ 26/ 03 566 10/ 16/ 02 7720 9/ 04/ 02 32.2 5/ 23/ 02 1480 4/ 29/ 02 1210 3/ 26/ 02 2070 2/ 25/ 02 1590 1/ 28/ 02 1480 2/ 4/ 99 994 Q04 MW02 11/ 13/ 98 660 Table 3.9 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 4 of 6 Table 3 9 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 8/ 26/ 03 66700 8/ 26/ 03 ( dup) 70000 5/ 21/ 03 67500 2/ 26/ 03 322000 2/ 26/ 03 ( dup) 289000 10/ 16/ 02 84100 9/ 04/ 02 66500 5/ 23/ 02 68100 4/ 29/ 02 56300 3/ 26/ 02 54400 2/ 25/ 02 43600 1/ 28/ 02 47500 1/ 25/ 01 13800 2/ 6/ 99 9420 R04 MW02 11/ 12/ 98 1300 8/ 11/ 03 36.3 5/ 22/ 03 51.1 3/ 10/ 03 42.5 10/ 25/ 02 51.2 8/ 13/ 02 34.8 5/ 21/ 02 35.8 4/ 18/ 02 37.6 3/ 21/ 02 40.9 2/ 7/ 02 25.10 1/ 15/ 02 29.0 7/ 11/ 01 11.4 4/ 11/ 01 5.48 11/ 20/ 00 13.7 2/ 7/ 99 12.4 2/ 7/ 99 ( dup) 3.95 V05 PW01 11/ 18/ 98 0.66 L 8/ 26/ 03 16.7 5/ 22/ 03 21.6 2/ 25/ 03 15.7 10/ 16/ 02 18.2 9/ 04/ 02 18.4 5/ 23/ 02 15.3 4/ 29/ 02 13.9 3/ 28/ 02 15.5 2/ 22/ 02 10.9 1/ 28/ 02 12.7 2/ 2/ 99 4.95 L Y14 MW01 11/ 10/ 98 12 8// 25/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 22/ 03 0.0506 2/ 25/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) Y14 MW02 10/ 16/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) Table 3.9 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 5 of 6 Table 3 9 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 8/ 11/ 03 7.14 5/ 23/ 03 8.37 3/ 10/ 03 7.12 10/ 25/ 02 10.3 8/ 13/ 02 6.41 5/ 21/ 02 7.09 4/ 16/ 02 6.69 3/ 21/ 02 7.72 2/ 7/ 02 5.77 1/ 15/ 02 6.52 7/ 11/ 01 2.31 West Well Field ( 1)

4/ 11/ 01 1.58 Historic Sampling Locations 2/ 6/ 99 5.43 11/ 12/ 98 < 0.1 AA04 MW01 11/ 12/ 98 ( dup) 0.42 2/ 4/ 99 1.46 AA05 MW01 11/ 11/ 98 0.77 2/ 4/ 99 0.535 AB07 MW02 11/ 16/ 98 < 0.2 I 2/ 4/ 99 0.356 AC07 MW02 11/ 16/ 98 0.79 ADPMW 1 12/ 6/ 91 7800 ADPMW 2 12/ 6/ 91 25 ADPMW 3 12/ 6/ 91 20000 10/ 11/ 01 0.498 AQ09 PW01 5/ 12/ 99 1.45 BGMW2 12/ 13/ 91 2.3 12/ 13/ 91 4 BGMW3 12/ 13/ 91 ( dup) 3.6 BGMW5 12/ 11/ 91 5.5 10/ 11/ 01 0.507 10/ 11/ 01 ( dup) 0.471 BLDG 1 MAIN 8/ 15/ 00 0.589 10/ 11/ 01 0.45 5/ 12/ 99 0.306 BLDG 231 5/ 12/ 99 ( dup) 0.269 10/ 11/ 01 0.423 BLDG 293 5/ 12/ 99 0.496 BLDG 5 5/ 12/ 99 0.213 2/ 2/ 99 0.35 L F06 MW01 11/ 11/ 98 < 0.1 5/ 12/ 99 2.47 2/ 2/ 99 2.11 L G17 MW01 11/ 11/ 98 13 2/ 5/ 99 4.91 L06 MW01 11/ 13/ 98 870 9/ 14/ 00 0.819 6/ 3/ 99 1.63 2/ 9/ 99 2.76 11/ 18/ 98 0.33 6/ 2/ 98 16 5/ 29/ 97 7.9 4/ 11/ 96 3.7 L17 PW01 2/ 16/ 94 2 Table 3.9 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 6 of 6 Table 3 9 Historic Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 2/ 7/ 99 17 M04 MW02 11/ 12/ 98 0.2 2/ 3/ 99 3.66 L M16 MW01 11/ 10/ 98 0.86 MW AJP 4/ 18/ 96 < 0.4 MW MGM 4/ 18/ 96 0.69 MW TWW 4/ 18/ 96 0.85 MWBG 4/ 2/ 96 < 0.1 1/ 25/ 01 698 1/ 25/ 01 ( dup) 696 2/ 7/ 99 329 N04 MW02 11/ 12/ 98 380 2/ 5/ 99 815 N05 MW01 11/ 13/ 98 13 2/ 5/ 99 434 P05 MW02 11/ 13/ 98 1200 2/ 5/ 99 414 P06 MW02 11/ 13/ 98 31 Q05 MW01 11/ 13/ 98 38 12/ 5/ 91 140 RBLMW1 12/ 5/ 91 ( dup) 140 12/ 11/ 91 65 RBLMW2 12/ 11/ 91 ( dup) 67 RBLMW3 12/ 11/ 91 7100 RBLMW4 12/ 5/ 91 550 RBLMW5 12/ 10/ 91 1300 RBLMW6 11/ 21/ 91 3300 11/ 21/ 91 46 RBLMW7 11/ 21/ 91 ( dup) 52 RBLMW8 12/ 10/ 91 2.4 RBLMW9 12/ 10/ 91 3.4 RBLMW10 11/ 20/ 91 14 RBLMW11 11/ 20/ 91 47 RBLMW12 12/ 10/ 91 4.6 2/ 5/ 99 174 S05 MW02 11/ 13/ 98 690 2/ 3/ 99 0.64 L 2/ 3/ 99 ( dup) 1.30 L T13 MW01 11/ 17/ 98 < 0.1 R 2/ 6/ 99 4.2 U04 MW01 11/ 12/ 98 1.6 5/ 11/ 00 4.7 5/ 20/ 99 2 U16 MW01 6/ 19/ 98 11 2/ 4/ 99 1.91 V06 MW01 11/ 16/ 98 1.7 2/ 6/ 99 0.729 W05 MW01 11/ 17/ 98 0.31 2/ 4/ 99 0.803 Z06 MW02 11/ 16/ 98 4.5 2/ 4/ 99 2.05 Z07 MW01 11/ 16/ 98 3.8 2/ 6/ 99 2.74 Z09 MW01 11/ 17/ 98 < 0.1 R J = estimated value ( below laboratory quantification limit) L = possible low bias result ( relative to QA/ QC) B= compound detected in QC blank Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details). Table 3.10 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 1 of 4 Table 3 10 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 9/ 17/ 03 23.8 8/ 15/ 03 32.2 7/ 28/ 03 11.7 6/ 13/ 03 7.95 5/ 22/ 03 14.9 4/ 30/ 03 14.9 3/ 31/ 03 51.4 2/ 27/ 03 18.9 1/ 26/ 03 3.58 12/ 9/ 02 9.76 11/ 13/ 02 17.0 10/ 18/ 02 10.5 9/ 24/ 02 2.15 8/ 27/ 02 2.94 7/ 23/ 02 8.63 6/ 25/ 02 17.9 5/ 20/ 02 22.4 4/ 16/ 02 19.7 3/ 19/ 02 21.4 2/ 5/ 02 9.43 1/ 17/ 02 10.9 OUTLET 001 12/ 20/ 01 3.720 9/ 17/ 03 5.38 9/ 17/ 03 ( dup) 5.65 8/ 15/ 03 3.90 7/ 28/ 03 5.37 7/ 28/ 03 ( dup) 5.48 6/ 13/ 03 5.11 5/ 22/ 03 4.09 4/ 30/ 03 4.09 3/ 31/ 03 4.11 2/ 27/ 03 4.15 1/ 26/ 03 5.46 12/ 9/ 02 2.37 11/ 13/ 02 4.75 11/ 13/ 02 ( dup) 5.28 10/ 18/ 02 3.49 9/ 24/ 02 2.14 8/ 27/ 02 2.56 8/ 27/ 02 ( dup) 2.51 7/ 23/ 02 2.29 6/ 25/ 02 3.86 6/ 25/ 02 ( dup) 3.81 5/ 20/ 02 4.13 4/ 16/ 02 2.45 3/ 19/ 02 5.85 2/ 5/ 02 4.66 1/ 17/ 02 4.23 12/ 20/ 01 1.980 11/ 26/ 01* 4.84 10/ 25/ 01 2.8 9/ 19/ 01 0.118 7/ 11/ 01 0.558 6/ 14/ 01 0.594 5/ 31/ 01 0.436 4/ 11/ 01 1.5 3/ 21/ 01 8.54 OUTFALL 002 2/ 14/ 01 1.74 Table 3.10 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 2 of 4 Table 3 10 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 8/ 15/ 03 0.352 7/ 28/ 03 1.1 6/ 13/ 03 0.529 5/ 22/ 03 0.49 5/ 22/ 03 ( dup) 0.496 4/ 30/ 03 1.23 3/ 31/ 03 0.430 2/ 27/ 03 1.06 1/ 26/ 03 0.750 1/ 26/ 03 ( dup) 0.842 12/ 9/ 02 0.680 11/ 13/ 02 1.24 10/ 18/ 02 0.870 9/ 24/ 02 0.317 8/ 27/ 02 0.268 7/ 23/ 02 0.291 6/ 25/ 02 0.175 5/ 20/ 02 0.503 4/ 16/ 02 2.76 3/ 19/ 02 2.91 3/ 19/ 02 ( dup) 2.81 2/ 5/ 02 1.33 1/ 17/ 02 0.956 1/ 17/ 02 ( dup) 3.99 OUTLET 003 12/ 20/ 01 0.713 9/ 17/ 03 21.0 8/ 15/ 03 13.7 8/ 15/ 03 ( dup) 13.5 7/ 28/ 03 59.1 6/ 13/ 03 247 6/ 13/ 03 ( dup) 237 5/ 22/ 03 15.9 4/ 30/ 03 15.9 4/ 30/ 03 ( dup) 16.7 3/ 31/ 03 42.1 3/ 31/ 03 ( dup) 43.1 2/ 27/ 03 46.4 2/ 27/ 03 ( dup) 46.2 1/ 26/ 03 33.4 12/ 9/ 02 6.39 12/ 9/ 02 ( dup) 6.62 11/ 13/ 02 18.1 10/ 18/ 02 12.1 9/ 24/ 02 4.64 9/ 24/ 02 ( dup) 5.02 8/ 27/ 02 12.4 7/ 23/ 02 19.2 6/ 25/ 02 17.9 5/ 20/ 02 98.6 5/ 17/ 02 65.7 4/ 16/ 02 3.8 3/ 19/ 02 9.26 OUTFALL 005 2/ 5/ 02 141.0 Table 3.10 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 3 of 4 Table 3 10 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 1/ 17/ 02 137.0 12/ 20/ 01 31.40 12/ 20/ 01( dup) 35.20 11/ 26/ 01 915 10/ 25/ 01 65.7 9/ 19/ 01 2.86 8/ 30/ 01 2.16 7/ 11/ 01 120 6/ 14/ 01 7.4 5/ 31/ 01 1.43 4/ 11/ 01 4.31 3/ 21/ 01 199 OUTFALL 005 ( continued)

2/ 14/ 01 153 8/ 15/ 03 0.496 7/ 28/ 03 0.973 6/ 13/ 03 1.55 5/ 22/ 03 0.206 4/ 30/ 03 0.486 3/ 31/ 03 0.897 2/ 27/ 03 1.1 1/ 26/ 03 5.77 12/ 9/ 02 0.263 11/ 13/ 02 8.56 10/ 18/ 02 0.251 10/ 18/ 02 ( dup) 0.209 9/ 24/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 8/ 27/ 02 0.207 7/ 23/ 02 0.597 7/ 23/ 02 ( dup) 0.544 6/ 25/ 02 0.284 5/ 20/ 02 0.490 4/ 16/ 02 0.567 3/ 19/ 02 0.483 2/ 5/ 02 0.320 2/ 5/ 02( dup) 0.339 1/ 17/ 02 0.871 OUTLET 007 12/ 20/ 01 1.99 9/ 17/ 03 14.4 8/ 15/ 03 3.82 7/ 28/ 03 15.7 6/ 13/ 03 29.3 5/ 22/ 03 44.6 4/ 30/ 03 44.9 3/ 31/ 03 9.25 2/ 27/ 03 17.0 1/ 26/ 03 16.9 12/ 9/ 02 6.07 11/ 13/ 02 10.5 10/ 18/ 02 54.6 9/ 24/ 02 3.69 8/ 27/ 02 6.73 7/ 23/ 02 34.7 6/ 25/ 02 3.86 5/ 20/ 02 6.27 5/ 20/ 02 ( dup) 5.16 OUTLET 105 4/ 16/ 02 15.9 Table 3.10 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water DuPont Washington Works Facility Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 4 of 4 Table 3 10 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 3/ 19/ 02 13.2 2/ 5/ 02 14.6 1/ 17/ 02 7.53 OUTLET 105 ( continued)

12/ 20/ 01 9.78 Historic Sampling Locations RIVER BELOW 005 6/ 14/ 01 0.034 J RIVER BELOW PAGES RUN 6/ 14/ 01 0.075 J Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details). NQ = Not Quantifiable. Detected at a concentration above the LOD and below the limit of quantification ( LOQ). Table 3.13 Summary of C 8 in Groundwater Public Water Supplies, West Virginia and Ohio Dupont Washington Works Facility, Washington WV Location Sample ID Sample Date C 8 ug/ l Comments Little Hocking, OH LHPSD1 12/ 20/ 2001 1.82 Production Well LHPSD1 1/ 21/ 2002 1.72 Production Well LHPSD1 2/ 22/ 2002 2.37 Production Well LHPSD1 3/ 26/ 2002 2.99 Production Well LHPSD1 4/ 23/ 2002 2.02 Production Well LHPSD1 8/ 21/ 2002 3.65 Production Well LHPSD1 10/ 16/ 2002 3.41 Production Well LHPSD1 2/ 26/ 2003 3.38 Production Well LHPSD1 5/ 28/ 2003 3.34 Production Well LHPSD2 12/ 20/ 2001 3.72 Production Well LHPSD2 12/ 20/ 2001 3.52 duplicate LHPSD2 1/ 21/ 2002 2.97 Production Well LHPSD2 2/ 22/ 2002 2.03 Production Well LHPSD2 2/ 22/ 2002 2.07 duplicate LHPSD2 3/ 26/ 2002 3.31 Production Well LHPSD2 4/ 23/ 2002 3.4 Production Well LHPSD2 8/ 21/ 2002 4.26 Production Well LHPSD2 10/ 16/ 2002 3.98 Production Well LHPSD2 2/ 26/ 2003 3.62 Production Well LHPSD2 5/ 28/ 2003 4.31 Production Well LHPSD3 12/ 20/ 2001 0.844 Production Well LHPSD3 1/ 21/ 2002 0.744 Production Well LHPSD3 2/ 22/ 2002 0.42 Production Well LHPSD3 3/ 26/ 2002 0.827 Production Well LHPSD3 4/ 23/ 2002 0.783 Production Well LHPSD3 8/ 21/ 2002 0.952 Production Well LHPSD3 10/ 16/ 2002 0.495 Production Well LHPSD3 10/ 16/ 2002 0.434 duplicate LHPSD3 2/ 26/ 2003 0.733 Production Well LHPSD3 5/ 28/ 2003 0.921 Production Well LHPSD5 12/ 20/ 2001 7.66 Production Well LHPSD5 1/ 21/ 2002 6.22 Production Well LHPSD5 1/ 21/ 2002 6.14 duplicate LHPSD5 2/ 22/ 2002 5.69 Production Well LHPSD5 3/ 26/ 2002 6.57 Production Well LHPSD5 4/ 23/ 2002 6.11 Production Well LHPSD5 8/ 21/ 2002 8.09 Production Well LHPSD5 10/ 16/ 2002 8.58 Production Well LHPSD5 2/ 26/ 2003 6.93 Production Well LHPSD5 2/ 26/ 2003 7.16 duplicate LHPSD5 5/ 28/ 2003 6.92 Production Well LHPSDTW1 1/ 22/ 2002 2.16 Test well LHPSDTW1 8/ 21/ 2002 0.81 Test well LHPSDTW2 1/ 22/ 2002 0.103 Test well LHPSDTW2 8/ 21/ 2002 0.081 Test well LHPSDTW3 1/ 22/ 2002 4.48 Test well LHPSDTW3 8/ 21/ 2002 4.17 Test well LHPSDTW4 1/ 22/ 2002 37.1 Test well Active Sampling Locations 1/ 6/ 2004 1 of 6 Tab 3.13 Table 3 13 Table 3.13 Summary of C 8 in Groundwater Public Water Supplies, West Virginia and Ohio Dupont Washington Works Facility, Washington WV Active Sampling Locations LHPSDTW4 3/ 26/ 2002 33.3 Test well LHPSDTW4 4/ 23/ 2002 28.7 Test well LHPSDTW4 8/ 21/ 2002 12.3 Test well LHPSDTW4 10/ 16/ 2002 14.5 Test well LHPSDTW4 2/ 26/ 2003 22.5 Test well LHPSDTW4 2/ 26/ 2003 22.5 Test well LHPSDTW4 5/ 28/ 2003 33.3 Test Well LHPSDTW4 5/ 28/ 2003 33.5 duplicate LHPSDTW5 8/ 21/ 2002 6.26 Test well LHPSDTW6 1/ 22/ 2002 1.79 Test well LHPSDTW6 8/ 21/ 2002 1.15 Test well LHPSDTW6 8/ 21/ 2002 1.23 duplicate LHPSDTW9 1/ 22/ 2002 0.364 Test well LHPSDTW9 8/ 21/ 2002 0.812 Test well LHPSDTW10 1/ 21/ 2002 1.9 Test well LHPSDTW10 8/ 21/ 2002 1.1 Test well LHPSDTW11 1/ 21/ 2002 1.41 Test well LHPSDTW11 8/ 21/ 2002 1.73 Test well LHPSDTW12 1/ 21/ 2002 0.758 Test well LHPSDTW12 8/ 21/ 2002 0.824 Test well LHPSDEP001 1/ 22/ 2002 1.69 Finished Water LHPSDEP001 3/ 26/ 2002 2.62 Finished Water LHPSDEP001 4/ 23/ 2002 1.93 Finished Water LHPSDEP001 10/ 16/ 2002 4.29 Finished Water LHPSDEP001 2/ 26/ 2003 2.33 Finished Water LHPSDEP001 5/ 28/ 2003 2.54 Finished Water LHTORCHBS 1/ 22/ 2002 1.85 Booster Station Sample BARTLETTCC 1/ 22/ 2002 1.94 Booster Station Sample 339B STA 1/ 22/ 2002 1.81 Booster Station Sample Lubeck, WV LPSDAT 3/ 28/ 2002 0.69 After Treatment Sample LPSDAT 4/ 26/ 2002 0.652 After Treatment Sample LPSDAT 6/ 24/ 2002 0.6 After Treatment Sample LPSDAT 10/ 15/ 2002 0.653 After Treatment Sample LPSDAT 2/ 25/ 2003 0.565 After Treatment Sample LPSDAT 5/ 27/ 2003 0.539 After Treatment Sample LPSD WELL A 1/ 3/ 2002 0.764 Production Well LPSD WELL A 2/ 21/ 2002 0.683 Production Well LPSD WELL A 3/ 28/ 2002 0.796 Production Well LPSD WELL A 4/ 26/ 2002 0.938 Production Well LPSD WELL A 7/ 24/ 2002 0.753 Production Well LPSD WELL A 10/ 15/ 2002 0.856 Production Well LPSD WELL A 2/ 25/ 2003 0.777 Production Well LPSD WELL A 5/ 27/ 2003 0.746 Production Well LPSD WELL B 2/ 21/ 2002 0.61 Production Well LPSD WELL B 3/ 28/ 2002 0.551 Production Well LPSD WELL B 4/ 26/ 2002 0.532 Production Well LPSD WELL B 7/ 24/ 2002 0.443 Production Well LPSD WELL B 10/ 15/ 2002 0.537 Production Well LPSD WELL B 2/ 25/ 2003 0.48 Production Well LPSD WELL B 5/ 27/ 2003 0.488 Production Well 1/ 6/ 2004 2 of 6 Tab 3.13 Table 3 13 Table 3.13 Summary of C 8 in Groundwater Public Water Supplies, West Virginia and Ohio Dupont Washington Works Facility, Washington WV Active Sampling Locations LPSD WELL C 1/ 3/ 2002 0.592 Production Well LPSD WELL C 2/ 21/ 2002 0.479 Production Well LPSD WELL C 3/ 28/ 2002 0.491 Production Well LPSD WELL C 4/ 26/ 2002 0.471 Production Well LPSD WELL C 7/ 24/ 2002 0.398 Production Well LPSD WELL C 10/ 15/ 2002 0.504 Production Well LPSD WELL C 2/ 25/ 2003 0.429 Production Well LPSD WELL C 5/ 27/ 2003 0.428 Production Well LPSD WELL D 1/ 3/ 2002 0.758 Production Well LPSD WELL D 2/ 21/ 2002 0.725 Production Well LPSD WELL D 3/ 28/ 2002 0.692 Production Well LPSD WELL D 4/ 26/ 2002 0.506 Production Well LPSD WELL D 7/ 24/ 2002 0.444 Production Well LPSD WELL D 10/ 15/ 2002 0.517 Production Well LPSD WELL D 2/ 25/ 2003 0.397 Production Well LPSD WELL D 5/ 27/ 2003 0.401 Production Well LPSD WELL E 1/ 3/ 2002 0.332 Production Well LPSD WELL E 2/ 21/ 2002 1 Production Well LPSD WELL E 3/ 28/ 2002 1.09 Production Well LPSD WELL E 4/ 26/ 2002 1.11 Production Well LPSD WELL E 7/ 24/ 2002 1.02 Production Well LPSD WELL E 10/ 15/ 2002 1.21 Production Well LPSD WELL E 2/ 25/ 2003 1.09 Production Well LPSD WELL E 5/ 27/ 2003 1.05 Production Well LPSD WELL F 1/ 3/ 2002 1.04 Production Well LPSD WELL F 2/ 21/ 2002 0.313 Production Well LPSD WELL F 3/ 28/ 2002 0.358 Production Well LPSD WELL F 3/ 28/ 2002 0.352 duplicate LPSD WELL F 4/ 26/ 2002 0.332 Production Well LPSD WELL F 7/ 24/ 2002 0.284 Production Well LPSD WELL F 7/ 24/ 2002 0.283 duplicate LPSD WELL F 10/ 15/ 2002 0.355 Production Well LPSD WELL F 2/ 25/ 2003 Restricted Access* Production Well LPSD WELL F 5/ 27/ 2003 0.319 Production Well Tuppers Plains PSD, OH TPPSDPT 2/ 6/ 2002 0.372 Before Treatment Sample TPPSDPT 3/ 25/ 2002 0.347 Before Treatment Sample TPPSDPT 7/ 23/ 2002 0.24 Before Treatment Sample TPPSDPT 10/ 15/ 2002 0.226 Before Treatment Sample TPPSDPT 2/ 25/ 2003 0.285 Before Treatment Sample TPPSDPT 5/ 27/ 2003 0.288 Before Treatment Sample TPPSDAT 2/ 6/ 2002 0.361 After Treatment Sample TPPSDAT 3/ 25/ 2002 0.358 After Treatment Sample TPPSDAT 4/ 24/ 2002 0.363 After Treatment Sample TPPSDAT 7/ 23/ 2002 0.246 After Treatment Sample TPPSDAT 10/ 15/ 2002 0.268 After Treatment Sample TPPSDAT 2/ 25/ 2003 0.291 After Treatment Sample TPPSDAT 5/ 27/ 2003 0.287 After Treatment Sample TPPSDPW1 2/ 6/ 2002 0.726 Production Well TPPSDPW1 3/ 25/ 2002 0.705 Production Well TPPSDPW1 4/ 24/ 2002 0.702 Production Well 1/ 6/ 2004 3 of 6 Tab 3.13 Table 3 13 Table 3.13 Summary of C 8 in Groundwater Public Water Supplies, West Virginia and Ohio Dupont Washington Works Facility, Washington WV Active Sampling Locations TPPSDPW1 7/ 23/ 2002 0.588 Production Well TPPSDPW1 10/ 15/ 2002 0.486 Production Well TPPSDPW1 2/ 25/ 2003 0.532 Production Well TPPSDPW1 5/ 27/ 2003 0.541 Production Well TPPSDPW1 5/ 27/ 2003 0.52 duplicate TPPSDPW2 2/ 6/ 2002 0.417 Production Well TPPSDPW2 3/ 25/ 2002 0.327 Production Well TPPSDPW2 4/ 24/ 2002 0.371 Production Well TPPSDPW2 7/ 23/ 2002 0.235 Production Well TPPSDPW2 10/ 15/ 2002 0.255 Production Well TPPSDPW2 2/ 25/ 2003 0.356 Production Well TPPSDPW2 5/ 27/ 2003 0.35 Production Well TPPSDPW3 2/ 6/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well TPPSDPW3 3/ 25/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well TPPSDPW3 7/ 23/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well TPPSDPW3 10/ 15/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well TPPSDPW3 2/ 25/ 2003 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well TPPSDPW3 5/ 27/ 2003 ND (< 0.010) Production Well TPPSDPW4 2/ 6/ 2002 0.0734 Production Well TPPSDPW4 3/ 25/ 2002 0.07 Production Well TPPSDPW4 7/ 23/ 2002 0.052 Production Well TPPSDPW4 10/ 15/ 2002 0.076 Production Well TPPSDPW4 2/ 25/ 2003 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well TPPSDPW4 5/ 27/ 2003 0.078 Production Well TPPSDPW5 2/ 6/ 2002 0.201 Production Well TPPSDPW5 3/ 25/ 2002 0.201 Production Well TPPSDPW5 7/ 23/ 2002 0.216 Production Well TPPSDPW5 10/ 15/ 2002 0.229 Production Well TPPSDPW5 2/ 25/ 2003 0.297 Production Well TPPSDPW5 5/ 27/ 2003 Not Pumping** Production Well TPPSDPW6 2/ 6/ 2002 0.649 Production Well TPPSDPW6 3/ 25/ 2002 0.634 Production Well TPPSDPW6 4/ 24/ 2002 0.62 Production Well TPPSDPW6 7/ 23/ 2002 0.62 Production Well TPPSDPW6 10/ 15/ 2002 0.433 Production Well TPPSDPW6 2/ 25/ 2003 0.542 Production Well TPPSDPW6 5/ 27/ 2003 0.542 Production Well Location Sample ID Sample Date C 8 ug/ l Comments Parkersburg, WV PPSDPT 3/ 6/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Before Treatment Sample PPSDAT 3/ 6/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) After Treatment Sample PPSDAT 4/ 25/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) After Treatment Sample PPSDRANY1 3/ 6/ 2002 0.0693 Production Well PPSDRANY1 3/ 6/ 2002 0.0686 duplicate PPSDRANY1 4/ 25/ 2002 0.0746 Production Well PPSDRANY2 3/ 6/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well PPSDRANY3 3/ 6/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well PPSDRANY4 3/ 6/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well PPSDRANY5 3/ 6/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well Belpre, OH BELPSDAT 2/ 7/ 2002 0.0818 After Treatment Sample Historic Sampling Locations 1/ 6/ 2004 4 of 6 Tab 3.13 Table 3 13 Table 3.13 Summary of C 8 in Groundwater Public Water Supplies, West Virginia and Ohio Dupont Washington Works Facility, Washington WV Active Sampling Locations BELPSDAT 3/ 25/ 2002 0.113 After Treatment Sample BELPSDAT 4/ 23/ 2002 0.12 After Treatment Sample BELPSDPW1 2/ 7/ 2002 0.0995 Production Well BELPSDPW1 3/ 25/ 2002 0.13 Production Well BELPSDPW2 2/ 7/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well BELPSDPW2 2/ 7/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) duplicate BELPSDPW2 3/ 25/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well BELPSDPW3 3/ 25/ 2002 0.141 Production Well BELPSDPW3 4/ 23/ 2002 0.12 Production Well BELPSDPW4 2/ 7/ 2002 0.101 Production Well BELPSDPW4 3/ 25/ 2002 0.133 Production Well BELPSDPW4 4/ 23/ 2002 0.114 Production Well BELPSDPW5 2/ 7/ 2002 0.107 Production Well BELPSDPW5 3/ 25/ 2002 0.103 Production Well BELPSDPW5 4/ 23/ 2002 0.107 Production Well BELPSDPW5 4/ 23/ 2002 0.111 duplicate Blennerhassett Island, WV BLENI TW0 2/ 21/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Test well BLENI TW7 2/ 21/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Test well BLENI W19A 2/ 21/ 2002 0.316 Test well BLENISLEPS1 1/ 30/ 2002 0.165 Drinking Supply Well General Electric, WV GE WELL 3 1/ 3/ 2002 1.78 Production Well GE WELL 3 1/ 3/ 2002 1.87 duplicate GE WELL 3 2/ 21/ 2002 1.75 Production Well GE WELL 3 4/ 26/ 2002 1.84 Production Well Belleville Hydra Plant, WV BELLEVILLELD 1/ 29/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Miscellaneous Use Ravenswood Municipal, WV COR ASIN 3/ 27/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Air Stripper In COR ASOUT 3/ 27/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Air Stripper Out COR BLEND AT 3/ 27/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Blend After Treatment COR WELL1 3/ 27/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well COR WELL 2 3/ 27/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well COR WELL3 3/ 27/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well COR WELL 4 3/ 27/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well COR WELL 5 3/ 27/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well Mason County PSD, WV MASONCPSD1 1/ 29/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well MASONCPSD1 3/ 27/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well MASONCPSD1 4/ 25/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well MASONCPSD2 1/ 29/ 2002 0.0618 Production Well MASONCPSD2 3/ 27/ 2002 0.0838 Production Well MASONCPSD2 4/ 25/ 2002 0.0714 Production Well MASONCPSD3 1/ 29/ 2002 0.0707 Production Well MASONCPSD3 3/ 27/ 2002 0.102 Production Well MASONCPSD3 4/ 25/ 2002 0.063 Production Well Racine Locks and Dam, WV RACINELD 1/ 4/ 2002 0.518 Miscellaneous Use Village of Racine, OH VORAT 3/ 26/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) After Treatment Sample VORRV3 3/ 26/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well VORWELL1 3/ 26/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well VORWELL2 3/ 26/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well New Haven Water Dept., WV NHPSDAT 4/ 10/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) After Treatment Sample NHPSDPW1 4/ 10/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well New Haven Water Dept., WV NHPSDPW1 4/ 10/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) duplicate Village of Syracuse, OH VOSAT 3/ 29/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) After Treatment Sample VOSAT 4/ 24/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) After Treatment Sample VOS NORTH 2 3/ 29/ 2002 NQ (< 0.050) Production Well VOS NORTH 2 4/ 24/ 2002 0.491 Production Well VOS SOUTH R3 3/ 26/ 2002 0.208 Production Well 1/ 6/ 2004 5 of 6 Tab 3.13 Table 3 13 Table 3.13 Summary of C 8 in Groundwater Public Water Supplies, West Virginia and Ohio Dupont Washington Works Facility, Washington WV Active Sampling Locations VOS SOUTH R3 4/ 24/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well Village of Pomeroy, OH VOPAT 3/ 26/ 2002 0.0659 After Treatment Sample VOPAT 4/ 24/ 2002 0.0628 After Treatment Sample VOPWELL1 4/ 24/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well VOPWELL2 3/ 26/ 2002 0.0689 Production Well VOPWELL2 4/ 24/ 2002 ND (< 0.010) Production Well VOPWELL4 3/ 26/ 2002 0.0851 Production Well VOPWELL4 4/ 24/ 2002 0.0712 Production Well ND = Not Detected at or above the limit of detection ( LOD).

The listed LOD is approximate and varies by instrument and over time.

NQ = Not Quantifiable. Detected at a level above the LOD and below the limit of quantification ( LOQ).

All C 8 results are reported in ug/ l.

Misc. = Miscellaneous water use is not used for drinking.

* LPSD Well F was inaccessible on 2/ 25/ 03 due to flooding conditions.

** TPPSD Production Well 5 was not pumping during this sampling event.

1/ 6/ 2004 6 of 6 Tab 3.13 Table 3 13 Table 4.1 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Local Landfill Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 1 of 2 Table2.1B. doc Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) A Zone 7/ 21/ 03 72.9 5/ 13/ 03 65.9 3/ 4/ 03 52.4 10/ 15/ 02 79.6 9/ 03/ 02 63.5 5/ 20/ 02 57.7 3/ 28/ 02 47.2 2/ 25/ 02 50.2 1/ 27/ 02 58.4 12/ 13/ 01 54.60 5/ 16/ 2001 1.4 5/ 11/ 2000 10 5/ 19/ 1999 16.2 5/ 27/ 1998 26 LLMW 4 4/ 11/ 1996 39 7/ 21/ 03 17.2 5/ 13/ 03 19.4 3/ 4/ 03 16.1 10/ 15/ 02 19.9 10/ 15/ 02 ( dup) 17.0 9/ 03/ 02 13.7 5/ 20/ 02 18.6 3/ 28/ 02 11.5 2/ 25/ 02 10.1 1/ 27/ 02 12.2 12/ 13/ 01 11.90 5/ 16/ 2001 3 5/ 10/ 2000 1.42 5/ 19/ 1999 1.32 5/ 27/ 1998 9 LLMW 6 4/ 11/ 1996 15 7/ 21/ 03 0.063 5/ 13/ 03 0.0657 3/ 4/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 10/ 15/ 02 0.0569 9/ 03/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 20/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 3/ 28/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 2/ 25/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 1/ 27/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 12/ 13/ 01 ND (< 0.01) 5/ 16/ 2001 0.039 J 5/ 10/ 2000 < 0.029 5/ 20/ 1999 0.046 J 5/ 27/ 1998 < 0.1 LLMW 9 4/ 11/ 1996 0.14 7/ 21/ 03 0.253 5/ 13/ 03 0.302 5/ 13/ 03 ( dup) 0.304 3/ 4/ 03 0.300 3/ 4/ 03 ( dup) 0.318 10/ 15/ 02 0.395 9/ 03/ 02 0.357 LLMW 10 5/ 20/ 02 0.56 Table 4.1 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Local Landfill Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 2 of 2 Table2.1B. doc Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) A Zone 3/ 28/ 02 0.698 2/ 25/ 02 1.12 1/ 27/ 02 0.162 12/ 13/ 01 0.133 5/ 20/ 1999 0.15 LLMW 10 ( continued)

5/ 28/ 1998 0.22 B Zone 7/ 31/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 14/ 03 0.0839 3/ 3/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) LLMW 12B 10/ 8/ 02 0.0658 C Zone 7/ 31/ 03 1.67 5/ 14/ 03 2.09 3/ 4/ 03 2.05 LLMW 11A 10/ 8/ 02 2.22 C Zone 7/ 31/ 03 5.11 5/ 14/ 03 6.43 3/ 3/ 03 6.38 LLMW 13B 10/ 8/ 02 6.61 7/ 31/ 03 0.322 5/ 14/ 03 0.646 3/ 3/ 03 0.317 LLMW 14B 10/ 9/ 02 0.488 D Zone 7/ 31/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 21/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 3/ 4/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) LLMW 11B 10/ 8/ 02 NQ (< 0.05)

J= estimated value ( below laboratory quantitation limit) ND= Not Detected at or above the limit of detection ( LOD) NQ= Not Quantifiable. Detected at a concentration above the LOD and below the limit of quantification ( LOQ). Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details). Table 4.2 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Local Landfill Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 1 of 3 Table 4 2 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 9/ 17/ 03 12.3 8/ 13/ 03 10.9 7/ 24/ 03 9.75 6/ 13/ 03 13.4 5/ 21/ 03 19.3 4/ 30/ 03 18.1 3/ 29/ 03 15.9 2/ 28/ 03 No flow conditions 1/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 12/ 13/ 02 10.7 11/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 10/ 31/ 02 No flow conditions 9/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 8/ 26/ 02 No flow conditions 7/ 1/ 02 11.2 6/ 13/ 02 9.29 5/ 21/ 02 No flow conditions 4/ 29/ 02 14.5 OUTFALL 004 ( New)

3/ 26/ 02 14.6 9/ 17/ 03 No flow conditions 8/ 13/ 03 35.0 7/ 24/ 03 7.93 6/ 13/ 03 20.9 5/ 21/ 03 21.0 4/ 30/ 03 12.5 3/ 31/ 02 No flow conditions 2/ 28/ 03 No flow conditions 1/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 12/ 13/ 02 9.51 11/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 10/ 31/ 02 No flow conditions 9/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 8/ 26/ 02 No flow conditions 7/ 1/ 02 No flow conditions 6/ 13/ 02 No flow conditions 5/ 21/ 02 No flow conditions 4/ 29/ 02 34.3 OUTFALL 005 ( New)

3/ 26/ 02 16.0 9/ 17/ 03 No flow conditions 8/ 13/ 03 No flow conditions 7/ 24/ 03 29.5 6/ 13/ 03 39.2 5/ 21/ 03 47.9 4/ 30/ 03 50.1 3/ 29/ 03 44.9 2/ 28/ 03 No flow conditions 1/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 12/ 13/ 02 38.1 11/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 10/ 31/ 02 No flow conditions 9/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 8/ 26/ 02 No flow conditions 7/ 1/ 02 32.1 6/ 13/ 02 27.3 5/ 21/ 02 No flow conditions OUTFALL 005 ( Old)/ SS1 4/ 29/ 02 40.9 Table 4.2 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Local Landfill Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 2 of 3 Table 4 2 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 3/ 26/ 02 39.0 2/ 20/ 02 46.0 1/ 11/ 02 51.4 12/ 13/ 01 No flow conditions 9/ 27/ 2000 13.3 12/ 10/ 1999 34 6/ 3/ 1999 6.8 6/ 2/ 1998 39 5/ 29/ 1997 41 4/ 2/ 1996 39 OUTFALL 005 ( Old)/ SS1 ( cont.)

2/ 16/ 1994 35 9/ 17/ 03 96.7 8/ 13/ 03 63.3 7/ 24/ 03 60.4 6/ 13/ 03 59.7 5/ 21/ 03 48.4 4/ 30/ 03 74.1 3/ 28/ 03 45.4 2/ 26/ 03 43.9 1/ 29/ 03 72.3 12/ 16/ 02 49.5 11/ 19/ 02 76.7 10/ 31/ 02 78.6 9/ 30/ 02 115.0 8/ 26/ 02 70.3 7/ 1/ 02 63.0 6/ 13/ 02 38.0 5/ 21/ 02 40.0 4/ 29/ 02 48.2 3/ 25/ 02 36.4 2/ 20/ 02 63.10 1/ 23/ 02 81.4 12/ 13/ 01 82.40 9/ 14/ 2000 12 6/ 3/ 1999 15 OUTLET 101 6/ 2/ 1998 54 6/ 13/ 03 87.9 5/ 21/ 03 83.2 4/ 30/ 03 98.0 12/ 16/ 02 81.7 OUTLET LM1 ( LEACHATE) / INLET 002 11/ 21/ 02 120.0 Historic Sampling Locations 6/ 13/ 03 14.4 5/ 21/ 03 20.2 4/ 30/ 03 16.8 3/ 29/ 03 14.7 2/ 28/ 03 No flow conditions 1/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 12/ 13/ 02 12.5 11/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 10/ 31/ 02 No flow conditions 9/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions OUTFALL 004 ( Old)

8/ 26/ 02 No flow conditions Table 4.2 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Local Landfill Washington, WV 01/ 06/ 04 3 of 3 Table 4 2 Historic Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 7/ 1/ 02 11.6 6/ 13/ 02 10.0 5/ 21/ 02 No flow conditions 4/ 29/ 02 15 3/ 26/ 02 1.54 2/ 20/ 02 10.9 1/ 24/ 02 11.4 12/ 13/ 01 No flow conditions 9/ 27/ 2000 4.73 12/ 10/ 1999 7.1 6/ 3/ 1999 3.06 6/ 2/ 1998 12 5/ 29/ 1997 13 4/ 2/ 1996 13 OUTFALL 004 ( Old) ( cont.)

2/ 16/ 1994 11 LEACHATE 2/ 16/ 1994 31 5/ 29/ 1997 80 OUTLET 001 4/ 2/ 1996 61 5/ 29/ 1997 < 0.2 OUTLET 002 4/ 2/ 1996 72 5/ 29/ 1997 23 OUTLET 003 4/ 2/ 1996 20 5/ 29/ 1997 11 STREAM 1 4/ 2/ 1996 7.2 9/ 14/ 2000 4.12 12/ 29/ 1999 10.7 6/ 2/ 1998 15 STREAM 2 4/ 2/ 1996 14 Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details). Table 5.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Letart Landfill, Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 1 of 6 Table 5 3 Active Sampling Locations A Zone Wells Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l)

7/ 23/ 03 57200 5/ 21/ 03 27300 3/ 12/ 03 25000 10/ 14/ 02 25900 8/ 29/ 02 23000 5/ 24/ 02 30500 3/ 29/ 02 20600 2/ 24/ 02 18400 1/ 26/ 02 29400 12/ 10/ 01 24600 7/ 19/ 01 6100 1/ 31/ 01 9190 10/ 4/ 00 10600 7/ 24/ 00 8990 4/ 3/ 00 13600 1/ 13/ 00 17400 10/ 21/ 99 12600 7/ 20/ 99 6920 5/ 28/ 98 24000 7/ 23/ 97 5100 4/ 17/ 96 1700 11/ 22/ 91 68 LMW 1 3/ 22/ 91 60 7/ 23/ 03 273 5/ 21/ 03 385 3/ 12/ 03 218 10/ 14/ 02 300 8/ 27/ 02 197 5/ 24/ 02 567 3/ 29/ 02 324 2/ 24/ 02 180 1/ 26/ 02 496 12/ 10/ 01 334 7/ 20/ 01 242 1/ 31/ 01 249 10/ 4/ 00 231 7/ 25/ 00 158 4/ 3/ 00 211 1/ 13/ 00 219 10/ 20/ 99 339 7/ 20/ 99 78.3 5/ 28/ 98 260 7/ 23/ 97 53 4/ 17/ 96 15 LMW 7 11/ 22/ 91 0.1 Table 5.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Letart Landfill, Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 2 of 6 Table 5 3 Active Sampling Locations A Zone Wells Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l)

7/ 23/ 03 2780 5/ 20/ 03 3100 3/ 12/ 03 1720 10/ 14/ 02 3480 8/ 29/ 02 3100 5/ 24/ 02 4020 3/ 29/ 02 3520 2/ 23/ 02 2230 1/ 26/ 02 3930 12/ 10/ 01 3240 7/ 19/ 01 1120 1/ 30/ 01 2650 10/ 4/ 00 2300 7/ 24/ 00 2160 4/ 3/ 00 2180 1/ 13/ 00 2100 10/ 20/ 99 3260 7/ 20/ 99 1790 5/ 28/ 98 2700 7/ 23/ 97 2000 4/ 17/ 96 2200 LMW 8 11/ 22/ 91 280 C Zone Wells 7/ 24/ 03 2060 5/ 21/ 03 2030 3/ 11/ 03 Dry no sample 10/ 11/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 8/ 26/ 02 Dry no sample 5/ 24/ 02 2270 3/ 27/ 02 1760 2/ 24/ 02 1920 1/ 29/ 02 1700 12/ 13/ 01 1520 11/ 22/ 91 1000 LMW 3 3/ 22/ 91 390 7/ 24/ 03 473 5/ 21/ 03 245 3/ 11/ 03 134 10/ 11/ 02 112 8/ 26/ 02 Dry no sample 5/ 21/ 02 87.6 3/ 27/ 02 93.6 2/ 23/ 02 82.2 1/ 26/ 02 99.3 12/ 11/ 01 94.4 11/ 22/ 91 0.8 LMW 5A 3/ 22/ 91 1.6 Table 5.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Letart Landfill, Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 3 of 6 Table 5 3 Active Sampling Locations D/ E Zone Wells Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l)

7/ 22/ 03 146 5/ 19/ 03 200 3/ 11/ 03 144 10/ 11/ 02 204 8/ 26/ 02 Dry no sample 5/ 24/ 02 134 3/ 27/ 02 132 2/ 23/ 02 101 1/ 26/ 02 98.6 12/ 11/ 01 100 7/ 19/ 99 60.3 11/ 22/ 91 350 LMW 3A 3/ 22/ 91 380 7/ 22/ 03 992 5/ 19/ 03 1280 3/ 11/ 03 1520 10/ 11/ 02 2840 8/ 27/ 02 1410 5/ 21/ 02 1690 3/ 27/ 02 2620 2/ 23/ 02 2250 1/ 26/ 02 3060 12/ 13/ 01 1580 4/ 3/ 00 272 1/ 14/ 00 172 11/ 22/ 91 830 LMW 4 3/ 28/ 91 690 7/ 22/ 03 1800 5/ 19/ 03 2010 5/ 19/ 03 ( dup) 1660 3/ 11/ 03 1470 10/ 11/ 02 2230 10/ 11/ 02 ( dup) 2280 8/ 27/ 02 1480 8/ 27/ 02 ( dup) * 1340 5/ 21/ 02 1720 5/ 21/ 02 ( dup) * 1630 3/ 27/ 02 1810 3/ 27/ 02 ( dup) 1850 2/ 23/ 02 1460 2/ 23/ 02( dup) 1490 1/ 26/ 02 1780 1/ 26/ 02 ( dup) 1890 12/ 11/ 01 1880 7/ 20/ 01 483 7/ 20/ 01( dup) 592 LMW 5B 1/ 31/ 01 615 Table 5.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Letart Landfill, Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 4 of 6 Table 5 3 Active Sampling Locations D/ E Zone Wells Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l)

10/ 5/ 00 1190. J 10/ 5/ 00 ( dup) 780 7/ 25/ 00 900. J 4/ 3/ 00 1100 4/ 3/ 00 ( dup) 1020 1/ 14/ 00 1030 10/ 21/ 99 1750 10/ 21/ 99 ( dup) 1700 7/ 20/ 99 445 7/ 23/ 97 480 9/ 20/ 94 530 3/ 15/ 94 1200 11/ 22/ 91 380 LMW 5B continued 3/ 22/ 91 340 7/ 24/ 03 Dry no sample 5/ 20/ 03 Dry no sample 3/ 11/ 03 Dry no sample LMW 12 10/ 10/ 02 Dry no sample 7/ 24/ 03 177 5/ 19/ 03 185 3/ 11/ 03 144 LMW 13A 10/ 10/ 02 510 7/ 24/ 03 766 5/ 19/ 03 998 3/ 11/ 03 498 LMW 14A 10/ 10/ 02 974 F Zone Wells 7/ 22/ 03 1020 5/ 20/ 03 998 3/ 12/ 03 676 10/ 14/ 02 931 8/ 27/ 02 676 5/ 24/ 02 922 3/ 29/ 02 717 2/ 24/ 02 714 1/ 26/ 02 740 12/ 11/ 01 830 7/ 19/ 01 242 1/ 30/ 01 423 10/ 5/ 00 248 7/ 25/ 00 275 4/ 3/ 00 306 1/ 14/ 00 453 10/ 21/ 99 370 LMW 2A 7/ 20/ 99 350 Table 5.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Letart Landfill, Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 5 of 6 Table 5 3 Active Sampling Locations F Zone Wells Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l)

5/ 28/ 98 990 7/ 23/ 97 460 4/ 17/ 96 460 9/ 20/ 94 270 3/ 15/ 94 260 11/ 22/ 91 63 LMW 2A ( continued)

3/ 22/ 91 50 7/ 23/ 03 9.73 5/ 21/ 03 9.53 3/ 13/ 03 11.6 10/ 14/ 02 15.1 8/ 27/ 02 10.5 5/ 24/ 02 20.7 3/ 29/ 02 14.8 2/ 24/ 02 14.9 1/ 26/ 02 18.1 12/ 11/ 01 15.8 1/ 13/ 00 9.4 5/ 28/ 98 30 11/ 22/ 91 24 LMW 6 3/ 22/ 91 25 7/ 24/ 03 Dry no sample 5/ 20/ 03 Pump problems  Not sampled 3/ 11/ 03 Dry no sample 10/ 17/ 02 Instrumentation problems  Not sampled 8/ 29/ 02 Pump problems  Not sampled 5/ 21/ 02 0.298 3/ 27/ 02 0.136 2/ 23/ 02 0.126 1/ 26/ 02 0.133 LMW 10 12/ 13/ 01 0.134 7/ 22/ 03 0.128 5/ 20/ 03 0.124 3/ 12/ 03 0.12 10/ 14/ 02 0.121 8/ 27/ 02 0.058 5/ 21/ 02 0.069 3/ 29/ 02 0.119 2/ 24/ 02 0.112 1/ 26/ 02 0.159 LMW 11 12/ 11/ 01 0.128 7/ 24/ 03 4.97 5/ 19/ 03 0.603 3/ 11/ 03 0.149 LMW 13B 10/ 10/ 02 0.0956 7/ 24/ 03 Dry no sample 5/ 19/ 03 101 3/ 12/ 03 70.4 LMW 14B 10/ 10/ 02 105 Table 5.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Letart Landfill, Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 6 of 6 Table 5 3 Active Sampling Locations Under F Zone Wells Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l)

7/ 23/ 03 0.803 5/ 20/ 03 0.856 3/ 12/ 03 0.625 10/ 17/ 02 0.907 8/ 29/ 02 0.479 5/ 24/ 02 0.715 3/ 27/ 02 0.631 2/ 23/ 02 0.617 1/ 26/ 02 0.875 12/ 10/ 01 0.845 LMW 9 10/ 7/ 92 0.2 J = estimated value ( below laboratory quantitation limit). Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details). * Analytical duplicates' values were previously inadvertently omitted from the tables. Table 5.4 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Letart Landfill Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 1 of 3 Table 5 4 Active Sampling Location Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 9/ 16/ 03 1950 8/ 13/ 03 867 7/ 30/ 03 No Flow Conditions 6/ 13/ 03 Not Sampled *

5/ 23/ 03 Not Sampled *

4/ 30/ 03 Not Sampled *

3/ 28/ 03 Not Sampled *

2/ 28/ 03 Not Sampled** 1/ 24/ 03 Frozen 12/ 30/ 02 1170 11/ 25/ 02 939 10/ 31/ 02 645 9/ 27/ 02 4.52 8/ 30/ 02 2050 7/ 30/ 02 1410 6/ 28/ 02 Not Analyzed* 5/ 30/ 02 1630 4/ 30/ 02 443 3/ 28/ 02 131 2/ 19/ 02 355 1/ 25/ 02 50.1 12/ 14/ 01 36.1 11/ 27/ 2001 53.2 7/ 20/ 01 159 7/ 25/ 2000 1350 4/ 3/ 2000 1900 1/ 14/ 2000 920 002( LEACHATE BASIN)

10/ 21/ 1999 3240 Historic Sampling Locations 4/ 30/ 03 No Flow Conditions 3/ 31/ 03 No Flow Conditions 2/ 28/ 03 Not Sampled** 1/ 31/ 03 No Flow Conditions 12/ 30/ 02 No Flow Conditions 11/ 30/ 02 No Flow Conditions 10/ 31/ 02 No Flow Conditions 9/ 27/ 02 0.170 8/ 30/ 02 No Flow Conditions 7/ 30/ 02 No Flow Conditions 6/ 28/ 02 Not Analyzed* 5/ 30/ 02 0.282 4/ 30/ 02 0.0653 3/ 28/ 02 0.198 2/ 19/ 02 No Flow Conditions 1/ 25/ 02 0.148 003 12/ 14/ 01 0.390 5/ 21/ 03 0.442 3/ 13/ 03 0.247 BRINKER'S RUN 10/ 14/ 02 0.0612 4/ 30/ 03 Not Sampled *

3/ 28/ 03 Not Sampled *

2/ 28/ 03 Not Sampled** 1/ 24/ 03 Frozen 12/ 30/ 02 415 CAP RUNOFF 11/ 25/ 02 65.1 Table 5.4 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Letart Landfill Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 2 of 3 Table 5 4 Historic Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 10/ 31/ 02 102 9/ 27/ 02 50.9 8/ 30/ 02 No Flow Conditions 6/ 28/ 02 Not Analyzed* 5/ 30/ 02 371 4/ 30/ 02 279 3/ 28/ 02 Not Sampled 2/ 19/ 02 No Flow Conditions CAP RUNOFF ( cont.)

1/ 25/ 02 119 11/ 27/ 2001 53.2 7/ 20/ 01 159 7/ 25/ 2000 2250 LEACHATE 7/ 20/ 1999 1030 1/ 14/ 2000 1410 4/ 3/ 2000 1260 10/ 21/ 1999 2530 7/ 19/ 1999 1190 5/ 28/ 1998 1100 7/ 23/ 1997 1600 4/ 17/ 1996 1900 9/ 20/ 1994 2200 3/ 15/ 1994 730 12/ 27/ 1991 1300 11/ 22/ 1991 1000 4/ 26/ 1991 670 3/ 22/ 1991 340 2/ 8/ 1991 400 LOWER POND 1/ 18/ 1991 1200 3/ 12/ 1992 0.3 N SPRING FLOW 3/ 12/ 1992 0.3 3/ 28/ 03 2.27 10/ 31/ 02 2.83 9/ 27/ 02 2.24 8/ 30/ 02 No Flow Conditions 5/ 30/ 02 1.570 4/ 30/ 02 0.845 3/ 28/ 02 1.26 2/ 19/ 02 3.92 1/ 25/ 02 1.9 7/ 20/ 2001 2.01 7/ 31/ 2000 0.573 7/ 20/ 1999 2.23 7/ 23/ 1997 2 RT 33 STREAM 4/ 17/ 1996 1.8 3/ 15/ 1994 0.5 STREAM MN RD 9/ 20/ 1994 0.9 SW SPRING FLOW 3/ 12/ 1992 1 Table 5.4 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Letart Landfill Letart, WV 01/ 06/ 04 3 of 3 Table 5 4 Historic Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 7/ 19/ 1999 517 5/ 28/ 1998 480 7/ 23/ 1997 < 200 4/ 17/ 1996 2100 3/ 15/ 1994 4400 12/ 27/ 1991 4100 11/ 22/ 1991 790 4/ 26/ 1991 930 3/ 22/ 1991 500 2/ 8/ 1991 2300 UPPER POND 1/ 18/ 1991 2900 Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details). * Samples were taken at the respective surface water locations. However, due to an error by the courier, the samples arrived at the lab warm and were not analyzed. ** These surface water locations were not sampled due to downed trees from an ice storm that prohibited access to the landfill. * These sampling points could not be accessed due to a rock slide that had covered the sampling locations. Table 6.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Dry Run Landfill, Lubeck, WV 01/ 06/ 04 1 of 4 Table 6.3 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) Overburden 8/ 20/ 03 1.63 5/ 14/ 03 1.59 2/ 27/ 03 0.727 10/ 9/ 02 1.13 8/ 28/ 02 0.785 5/ 22/ 02 1.24 3/ 30/ 02 0.843 2/ 20/ 02 0.822 1/ 27/ 02 0.824 12/ 12/ 01 1.04 7/ 20/ 00 0.212 7/ 21/ 99 0.096 5/ 26/ 98 0.27 7/ 22/ 97 0.36 DRMW 6A 4/ 10/ 96 0.19 8/ 20/ 03 0.0612 5/ 13/ 03 0.0547 2/ 27/ 03 0.059 10/ 9/ 02 0.181 8/ 28/ 02 0.088 5/ 22/ 02 0.0832 3/ 30/ 02 0.0785 2/ 20/ 02 0.125 1/ 25/ 02 0.168 12/ 12/ 01 0.158 7/ 19/ 00 0.128 7/ 21/ 99 0.081 J 5/ 26/ 98 < 0.10 7/ 22/ 97 < 0.1 DRMW 12A 4/ 10/ 96 < 0.1 8/ 20/ 03 0.0699 5/ 13/ 03 0.0649 2/ 27/ 03 0.050 2/ 27/ 03 ( dup) 0.052 10/ 9/ 02 0.258 10/ 9/ 02 ( dup) 0.242 8/ 28/ 02 NQ 5/ 22/ 02 NQ 3/ 30/ 02 NQ 3/ 30/ 02 ( dup) NQ 2/ 20/ 02 NQ 1/ 25/ 02 0.073 1/ 25/ 02 ( dup) 0.085 12/ 12/ 01 0.215 7/ 20/ 00 ND ( 0.029) 7/ 21/ 99 5.4 DRMW 12B 6/ 16/ 98 < 0.1 Table 6.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Dry Run Landfill, Lubeck, WV 01/ 06/ 04 2 of 4 Table 6.3 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) Overburden 8/ 20/ 03 4.38 5/ 13/ 03 3.23 2/ 27/ 03 1.5 10/ 9/ 02 6.66 8/ 28/ 02 5.14 5/ 22/ 02 2.31 3/ 30/ 02 4 2/ 20/ 02 3.73 1/ 25/ 02 5.97 12/ 12/ 01 6.4 7/ 20/ 00 9.9 7/ 21/ 99 0.070 J 5/ 26/ 98 8.7 7/ 22/ 97 15 4/ 10/ 96 8.2 DRMW 13A 4/ 10/ 1996 ( dup) 11 8/ 21/ 03 0.157 5/ 16/ 03 0.370 2/ 28/ 03 0.138 DRMW 21A 10/ 9/ 02 0.27 A Zone Wells 8/ 22/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 16/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 2/ 28/ 03 ND (< 0.01) DRMW 16B 10/ 8/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 8/ 21/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 3/ 3/ 03 Not Sampled** DRMW 17B 10/ 8/ 02 0.155 8/ 21/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 15/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 3/ 3/ 03 Not Sampled** DRMW 18B 10/ 7/ 02 ND (< 0.01) 8/ 21/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 15/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 2/ 28/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) DRMW 19B 10/ 7/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 8/ 22/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 15/ 03 ND (< 0.01) 2/ 28/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) DRMW 20B 10/ 8/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) B Zone Wells 8/ 20/ 03 0.0686 5/ 13/ 03 0.0714 5/ 13/ 03 ( dup) 0.0787 2/ 27/ 03 0.101 10/ 9/ 02 0.109 8/ 28/ 02 0.0626 5/ 22/ 02 0.0817 3/ 30/ 02 0.0929 2/ 20/ 02 0.11 1/ 25/ 02 0.116 12/ 12/ 01 0.086 7/ 19/ 00 0.16 7/ 21/ 99 0.134 5/ 26/ 98 < 0.10 7/ 22/ 97 < 0.1 DRMW 12 4/ 10/ 96 < 0.1 Table 6.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Dry Run Landfill, Lubeck, WV 01/ 06/ 04 3 of 4 Table 6.3 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) B Zone Wells 8/ 20/ 03 17.8 5/ 13/ 03 22.8 2/ 27/ 03 15.0 10/ 9/ 02 20.9 8/ 28/ 02 13.1 8/ 28/ 02 ( dup) * 14.6 5/ 22/ 02 16.9 3/ 30/ 02 12.6 2/ 20/ 02 11.5 1/ 25/ 02 16.5 12/ 12/ 01 9.86 7/ 20/ 00 9.8 7/ 21/ 99 3.6 5/ 26/ 98 9.2 DRMW 13 7/ 22/ 97 7 8/ 20/ 03 4.77 5/ 14/ 03 4.55 3/ 3/ 03 4.64 10/ 15/ 02 4.92 8/ 28/ 02 3.99 5/ 22/ 02 5 5/ 22/ 02 ( dup) * 4.66 3/ 30/ 02 4.91 2/ 20/ 02 3.65 1/ 27/ 02 4.35 12/ 12/ 01 4.94 7/ 20/ 00 0.763 DRMW 15 7/ 21/ 99 0.263 C Zone Wells 8/ 21/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 16/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 2/ 28/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) DRMW 21B 10/ 9/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) Above A Zone Wells 8/ 20/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 5/ 14/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 3/ 3/ 03 NQ (< 0.05) 10/ 15/ 02 NQ (< 0.05) 8/ 28/ 02 NQ 5/ 22/ 02 NQ 3/ 30/ 02 NQ 2/ 20/ 02 NQ 1/ 27/ 02 NQ 12/ 12/ 01 NQ 7/ 20/ 00 0.115 7/ 21/ 99 2.5 6/ 16/ 98 < 0.1 7/ 21/ 97 < 0.1 DRMW 14 4/ 10/ 96 < 0.1 Table 6.3 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Groundwater Dry Run Landfill, Lubeck, WV 01/ 06/ 04 4 of 4 Table 6.3 Historic Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l)

7/ 22/ 1997 1.00 DRMW 6 4/ 10/ 1996 0.97 ND = Not Detected at or above the limit of detection ( LOD). The listed LOD is approximate and varies by instrument and over time. NQ = Not Quantifiable. Detected at a concentration above the LOD and below the limit of quantification ( LOQ). J = estimated value ( below laboratory quantitation limit). Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details). * Analytical duplicates' values were previously inadvertently omitted from the tables. ** No samples were collected for these wells because snow and ice blocked the way for the truck with sampling equipment to gain access. Only water levels were taken for these wells. Table 6.4 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Dry Run Landfill Lubeck, WV 06/ 16/ 03 1 of 3 Table 6 4 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 9/ 22/ 03 37.5 8/ 13/ 03 38.6 7/ 24/ 03 39.7 6/ 13/ 03 30.5 5/ 19/ 03 88.8 4/ 30/ 03 131.0 3/ 28/ 03 88.5 2/ 26/ 03 69.0 1/ 29/ 03 88.4 12/ 30/ 02 56.9 11/ 21/ 02 64.6 10/ 30/ 02 81.7 9/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 8/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 7/ 31/ 02 No flow conditions 7/ 1/ 02 No flow conditions 6/ 28/ 02 No flow conditions 5/ 28/ 02 30.9 4/ 24/ 02 41 3/ 25/ 02 71.6 2/ 25/ 02 43.9 1/ 28/ 02 41.6 12/ 12/ 01 No flow conditions 10/ 3/ 2000 31.5 12/ 29/ 1999 66 5/ 19/ 1998 17 OUTLET 001 4/ 9/ 1996 86 9/ 22/ 03 16.1 8/ 13/ 03 No flow conditions 7/ 24/ 03 27.6 6/ 13/ 03 10.3 5/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 4/ 30/ 03 No flow conditions 3/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 2/ 28/ 03 No flow conditions 1/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 12/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 11/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 10/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 9/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 8/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 7/ 1/ 02 25.3 6/ 28/ 02 No flow conditions 5/ 28/ 02 No flow conditions 4/ 29/ 02 20.1 3/ 26/ 02 6.77 2/ 25/ 02 No flow conditions 1/ 28/ 02 No flow conditions OUTLET 003 12/ 12/ 01 No flow conditions 9/ 22/ 03 0.354 8/ 13/ 03 No flow conditions 7/ 24/ 03 0.243 6/ 13/ 03 0.461 5/ 19/ 03 0.543 4/ 30/ 03 No flow conditions 3/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 2/ 28/ 03 No flow conditions 1/ 31/ 03 No flow conditions 12/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 11/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 10/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions OUTLET 004 9/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions Table 6.4 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Dry Run Landfill Lubeck, WV 06/ 16/ 03 2 of 3 Table 6 4 Active Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 8/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 7/ 1/ 02 0.70 6/ 28/ 02 No flow conditions 5/ 28/ 02 No flow conditions 4/ 27/ 02 No flow conditions 3/ 26/ 02 158 2/ 25/ 02 No flow conditions 1/ 28/ 02 No flow conditions OUTLET 004 ( continued)

12/ 12/ 01 No flow conditions Historic Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) DOWN STREAM 4/ 9/ 1996 25 5/ 20/ 03 135 3/ 28/ 03 99.7 10/ 30/ 02 704 5/ 28/ 02 150 4/ 24/ 02 237 3/ 25/ 02 334 2/ 25/ 02 256 1/ 28/ 02 398 12/ 12/ 01 109 10/ 3/ 2000 27.4 12/ 29/ 1999 34 5/ 19/ 1998 56 DRLEACHATE 7/ 22/ 1997 62 5/ 19/ 03 48.7 3/ 28/ 03 53.3 10/ 30/ 02 38.8 5/ 28/ 02 67.4 4/ 24/ 02 33.4 3/ 25/ 02 66.7 2/ 25/ 02 37.1 1/ 28/ 02 29.3 POND UNDERDRAIN 12/ 12/ 01 35.4 5/ 19/ 03 2.97 3/ 28/ 03 11.3 10/ 30/ 02 3.80 8/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 5/ 28/ 02 9.41 4/ 24/ 02 6.69 3/ 25/ 02 22.8 2/ 25/ 02 3.81 1/ 28/ 02 11.1 12/ 12/ 01 3.99 10/ 3/ 2000 10.3 12/ 29/ 1999 39 7/ 14/ 1998 0.88 PROPERTY BOUNDARY 4/ 9/ 1996 9.9 5/ 19/ 03 1.13 3/ 28/ 03 1.24 10/ 30/ 02 1.63 8/ 30/ 02 No flow conditions 5/ 28/ 02 1.63 4/ 24/ 02 0.932 STREAM SAMPLING POINT# 1 3/ 25/ 02 1.06 Table 6.4 Summary of Analytical Results: C 8 in Surface Water Dry Run Landfill Lubeck, WV 06/ 16/ 03 3 of 3 Table 6 4 Historic Sampling Locations Sample Date C 8 ( ug/ l) 2/ 25/ 02 0.850 1/ 28/ 02 0.893 12/ 12/ 01 1.19 10/ 3/ 2000 0.758 12/ 29/ 1999 0.54 STREAM SAMPLING POINT# 1 ( cont.)

5/ 19/ 1998 1 5/ 19/ 03 17.4 3/ 28/ 03 61.1 10/ 30/ 02 29.2 8/ 20/ 02 No flow conditions 5/ 28/ 02 51.0 4/ 24/ 02 28.9 3/ 25/ 02 66.6 2/ 25/ 02 24.3 1/ 28/ 02 42.4 12/ 12/ 01 20.5 10/ 3/ 2000 27.6 12/ 29/ 1999 87 STREAM SAMPLING POINT# 2 5/ 19/ 1998 4.6 Note: Analytical method changed as of November 2001 ( see Section 2.0 for details).


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 208 (Monday, October 28, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57742-57743]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23413]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-4657]

Science Advisory Board to the National Center for Toxicological
Research Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming
public advisory committee meeting of the Science Advisory Board to the
National Center for Toxicological Research. The general function of the
committee is to provide advice and recommendations to the Agency on
research being conducted at the National Center for Toxicological
Research. At least one portion of the meeting will be closed to the
public.

DATES: The meeting will be held on December 3, 2019 from 8 a.m. to 5:55
p.m., and on December 4, 2018 from 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Heifer Village, 1 World Ave., Little Rock, AR 72202. Answers
to commonly asked questions including information regarding special
accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking, and transportation
may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm. and https://www.heifer.org/what-you-can-do/experience-heifer/heifer-village/index.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Mendrick, National Center for
Toxicological Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 2208, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-8892, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138
(301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal
Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously
announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly
enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the
Agency's website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm
and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or
call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible
modifications before coming to the meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATON: Agenda: On December 3, 2019, the Science
Advisory Board Chair will welcome the participants, and the NCTR
Director will provide a Center-wide update on scientific initiatives
and accomplishments during the past year. The Science Advisory Board
will be presented with an overview of the Science Advisory Board
Subcommittee Site Visit Report and a response to this review. The
Center for Biologics and Evaluation and Research, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Center for Devices and Radiological Health,
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, the Center for Tobacco
Products and the Office of Regulatory Affairs will each briefly discuss
their specific research strategic needs and potential areas of
collaboration.
    On December 4, 2019, there will be updates from the NCTR Research
Divisions and a public comment session. Following an open discussion

of all the information presented, the open session of the meeting will
close so the SAB members can discuss personnel issues at NCTR at the
end of the day.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's website after the meeting. Background material is
available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: On December 3, 2019, from 8 a.m. to 5:55 p.m., and
December 4, 2019, from 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., the meeting is open to the
public. Interested persons may present data, information, or views,
orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. Written
submissions may be made to the contact person on or before November 26,
2019. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between
approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. on December 3, 2019. Those individuals
interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the
contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of
the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses
of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time
requested to make their presentation on or before November 18, 2019.
Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of
registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably
accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may
conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open
public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested
persons regarding their request to speak by November 19, 2019.
    Closed Committee Deliberations: On December 4, 2019, from 11:30
a.m. to 12:00 p.m., the meeting will be closed to permit discussion
where disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6)). This portion of the meeting
will be closed to permit discussion of information concerning
individuals associated with the research programs at NCTR.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Donna Mendrick at least 14 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: October 21, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-23413 Filed 10-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


1 Harrison William E Civ AFRL/ PRTG < william. harrison@ wpafb. af. mil> 11/ 01/ 2003 02: 26 PM To: Jeff Herzog/ AA/ USEPA/ US@ EPA cc: Subject: RE: Question on jet fuel sulfur levels Jeff,

Since I am reading emails at home and will be out of the office for a few days I will send this and a follow on message when I get back.

In general we see fuel less than 500ppm and the Defense Energy Support Center has a survey called PQIS that has a large amount of information. About 50% of the jet fuel is much higher than 500ppm and I have found some at the 0.3 wt% level. I would anticipate some sulfur contamination into diesel from jet based on contamination information I have reviewed.

Not to open a can of worms, but lowering the sulfur level of jet would be a good thing.

Will send you some actual data to review next week.

Bill  Original Message From: Herzog. Jeff@ epamail. epa. gov To: william. harrison@ wpafb. af. mil Sent: 10/ 30/ 2003 3: 57 PM Subject: Question on jet fuel sulfur levels Dear Mr. Harrison, I am a mechanical engineer at EPA working on the final offroad diesel fuel sulfur control rule. As part of our analysis of the potential costs/ impacts of various sulfur control scenarios, it has become important to us to estimate jet fuel sulfur levels. We are not considering controlling jet fuel sulfur. We are evaluating how the sulfur level of the jet fuel in pipeline transmix volumes effects the sulfur levels of the distillate fuels which are recovered during transmix processing. Our understanding is that jet fuel is never recovered by transmix processors and that the distillate product 2 recovered currently is most often sold into the heating oil market ( it is also sold into the highway diesel market... when the sulfur level permits).

The TRW data that I reviewed indicates that the average jet fuel sulfur level in the US is ~ 550 ppm ( 5 yr avg). I also have some data from Boeing that indicates that 75% of the jet fuel they use is below 500 ppm sulfur.

Are you aware of any other information on jet fuel sulfur levels in the US?

Do you know why jet fuel sulfur levels tend to be so much lower the 3,000 ppm allowed maximum? One reference mentioned briefly that this is because the processes used to meet other jet fuel specifications also tend to remove sulfur. However, I have not been able to get any additional input from the source on this statement, and it is not completely clear to our refinery folks why meeting jet fuel specs would result in sulfur levels so much lower than the allowed maximum.

Thanks for your consideration.

Jeffrey A. Herzog, Mechanical Engineer United States Environmental Protection Agency National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory Assessment and Standards Division 2000 Traverwood Drive Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105 Phone: ( 734) 214 4227 Fax: ( 734) 214 4816 E Mail: herzog. jeff@ epa. gov