3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 1 OF 24 

# Final Report

Analysis of PFOA, PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Aqueous Samples from

3M Decatur, Alabama : Groundwater Treatment Plant GAC System

– November 2013

Laboratory Request Number: ISO13

- 07

- 10

Method Re quirement: 3M Method ETS

- 8

- 044.1

Report Date

– Date of Last Signature



## Testing Laboratory

3M EHS &S Operations 3M Environmental Laboratory Building 260

- 5N

- 17 Maplewood, MN 55144

- 1000

Requester

Gary Hohenstein 3M Building 224

- 5W

- 03 Saint Paul, MN 55144

- 1000 Phone: (651) 737

- 3570

The testing reported herein meet the requirements of ANSI/ISO/IEC 17025:2005 “General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories”, in accordance with the A2LA Testing Certificate # 2052.01. Additionally, the laboratory’s quality system has been audited and was determined to be in conformance with the EPA GLPs (40 CFR 792) by an independent A2LA assessment.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 2 OF 24 

### 3M Enviro nmental Laboratory

3M Environmental Laboratory Technical Director: William K. Reagen, Ph.D

. 3M Principal Analytical Investigator: Susan Wolf Report Author: Chelsie Grochow



## Analytical Report ISO13

- 07

- 10

3M Decatur Groundwater Treatment Plant System; Nove mber 2013 Sampling

Report Date: Date of Last Signature



# 1 Introduction/Summary

The 3M Environmental Laboratory analyzed water samples from the groundwater treatment plant GAC system at the 3M Decatur, AL facility. Water samples were collected by Weston S olutions personnel

on November 18 , 2013

. Samples were returned to the 3M Environmental Laboratory for analysis of
P erfluorooctanoate (PFOA) , Perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS), Perf luorohexane sulfonate (PFHS), Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) under la borat ory project number ISO13

- 07

- 10

. Analysis of the samples was completed as specified under 3M Environmental Laboratory General Project Outline (GPO) number GPO11

- 1006.

T he 3M Environmental Laboratory provided sample containers for seven sampling locations; ACI, ACM2, ACE , WW8R, WW9R , WW10R, and WW11R . The sample set consisted of a field sample, field

sa mple duplicate and a field matrix spike. Each empty container was marked with a “fill to here” line that corresponded to a final volume of 200 mL. Contain ers reserved for field matrix spikes were fortified with an appropriate matrix spike solution containing all analytes prior to being sent to the field
for sample collection. S ample bottles for sampling locations ACM2 and ACE

, along with the Trip Blank

sam ple and low spike

, were fortified with internal standards and surrogates prior to being sent to the field for sample collection.

Samples were prepared and analyzed by method ETS

- 8

- 044. 1 “ Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compoun ds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection Analysis ”. Select internal standards were used to aid in the data quality objectives.

Table 1 summarizes the sample results using the analytical method identified above. All results for quality control samples prepared and analyzed with the samples will be reported and discussed elsewhere in this report.

The testing reported herein meet the requireme nts of ANSI/ISO/IEC 17025:2005 “General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories”, in accordance with the A2LA Testing Certificate # 2052.01. Additionally, the laboratory’s quality system has been audited and was determined to be in conformance with the EPA GLPs (40 CFR 792) by an independent A2LA assessment.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 3 OF 24 

### Table 1 . Sample Results Summary

3M LIMS ID Sample Description PFOA Concentration (ng/mL) PFBS
Concentration (ng/mL) PFHS
Conc entration (ng/mL) PFOS
Concentration (ng/mL)

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 001 DAL

- GW

- ACI ; Sample 2190 1100 1320 2260

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 002 DAL

- GW

- ACI ; Sample Dup 2190 1090 1340 2220

Average 2190 (1) 1100 (1) 1330 (1) 2240 (1)

%RPD Sample/Sample Dup 0. 0 0.91 1. 5 1. 8

ISO1 3

- 07

- 10

- 004 DAL

- GW

- ACM2; Sample 0.0539 1130 0.0728 0.206

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 005 DAL

- GW

- ACM2 ; Sample Dup 0.0527 1110 0.0670 0.198

Average 0.0533 (2 ) 1120 (1) 0.0699 (2 ) 0.202 (2 )

%RPD Sample/Sample Dup 2.3 1.8 8.3 4.0

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 007 DAL

- GW

- ACE; Sample 0. 511 0.620 0.401 0.0979

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 008 DAL

- GW

- ACE ; Sample Dup 0.445 0.563 0.331 0.0472

Average 0.478 (2 ) 0.592 (2 ) 0.366 (2 ) 0.0 726 (2 )

%RPD Sample/Sample Dup 14 9.6 19 70 (3)

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 010 DAL

- GW

- WW8R; Sample 3060 363 1440 4790

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 011 DAL

- GW

- WW8R ; Sample Dup 3010 360 1440 4710

Average 3040 (1) 362 (1) 1440 (1) 4750 (1)

%RPD Sample/Sample Dup 1.6 0.83 0.0 1.7

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 013 DAL

- GW

- WW9R; Sample 2910 301 1300 4430

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 014 DAL

- GW

- WW9R ; Sample Dup 2980 309 1370 4640

Averag e 2950 (1) 305 (1) 1340 (1) 4540 (1)

%RPD Sample/Sample Dup 2.4 2.6 5.2 4.6

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 019 DAL

- GW

- WW10R; Sample 2410 301 1120 3940

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 020 DAL

- GW

- WW10R ; Sample Dup 2380 304 1120 3840

Average 2400 (1) 303 (1) 1120 (1) 3890 (1)

%RPD Sample /Sample Dup 1.3 0.99 0.0 2.6

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 022 DAL

- GW

- WW11R; Sample 1300 286 673 1790

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 023 DAL

- GW

- WW11R ; Sample Dup 1330 288 687 1900

Average 1 320 (1) 287 (1) 680 (1) 1850 (1)

%RPD Sample/Sample Dup 2.3 0.70 2.1 5.9

NA = Not Applicable (1) Reported results were prepared and analyzed by ETS

- 8

- 044. 1 using external standard calibration . The analytical method uncertainties associated with the reported results are as follows: PFOA ±17 %, PFBS ± 1 8 %, PFHS ±15 %, and PFOS ± 21 %. (2) Reported results were prepared and analyzed by ETS

- 8

- 044.1 using internal standard calibration. The analytical method uncertainties associated with the reported results are as follows: PFOA ± 1 5 %, PFBS ±1 6 %, PFHS ± 20 %, and PFOS ± 17 %. (3) Sample/sample duplicate RPD did not meet acc eptance criteria of ≤ 20%.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 4 OF 24 

# 2 Methods

- Analytical and Preparatory

2.1 Methods Analysis was completed using 3M Environmental Laboratory Method ETS

- 8

- 044. 1 “ Method of Analysis
for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection Analysis ”

.

Table 2 . Target Analytes

Target Analytes Acronym Reference
Material Structure

Perfluorooctanoic Acid (C8 Acid) PFOA Linear + Branched
Perfluorobutanesulfonate (C4 Sulfonate ) PFBS Linear
Perfluorohexanesulfonate (C6 Sulfonate) P FHS Linear
Perfluorooctanesulfonate (C8 Sulfonate) PFOS Linear + Branched



## 2.2 Sample Collection Samples were collected on November 18 , 201 3 in Nalgene TM 

### (high

- density polyethylene) bottles prepared at the 3M Environmental Laboratory. Prior to sample collec tion, bottles designated for field matrix spikes were spiked in the laboratory with a known volume of an appropriate matrix spiking solution containing PFOA, PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS

. Sample bottles for sampling locations ACM2 and ACE, along with the Tr ip Bla nk sample and low spike, were fortified with a mixture of mass

- labeled
internal standards at a nom inal concentration of 1 ng/mL and a mixture of surrogate recovery standards at a nominal concentration of 0.1 ng/mL

. Collected sample bottles were received b y the laboratory at
ambient conditions on November 25 , 201 3

.



## 2.3 Sample Preparation

All s ample s were diluted with methanol and analyzed for all analytes. Samples diluted 1:10 were prepared by removing a 1 mL aliquot of the well mixed sample and adding 8.9 m L of methanol and 0.1 mL of a surrogate spiking solution. The 1:100 dilutions were prepared by removing a 0.1 mL aliquot of the well mixed sample and adding 9.8 mL of methanol and 0.1 mL of a surrogate spiking solution. Prepared samples were analyzed b y external standard calibration. Further dilution may have been applied by using a lower injection volume on the instrument.

The ACE and ACM2 sample set s and the Trip Blank sample were prepared and analyzed for all analytes by transferring a n aliquot o f the well mixed sample into an autovial. Prepared samples were analyzed by internal standard calibration.

During the preparation of the laboratory control samples for internal standard calibration , an aliquot of a separate internal standard spiking so lution was added to the laboratory control samples (nominal concentration of 1 ng/mL). The sample bottles for ACE, ACM2, and Trip Blank were spiked with an internal standard mix at a nominal concentration of 1 ng/mL prior to being sent to the field for sa mple collection. The laboratory control samples were analyzed in the same manner as the samples.



## 2.4 Analysis All samples and quality control samples were analyzed for f our target analytes using high per formance liquid chromatography/ tandem mass spectromet ry (HPLC/MS/MS). Pertinent instrument parameters, the liquid chromatography gradient program, and the specific mass transitions analyzed are described
in the tables below.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 5 OF 24 

### Due to the nature of the sample, the wide range of concentrations found in the s ample, and the environmental occurrence of multiple isomers of the laboratory’s analytes of interest, the software used for processing the analytical results is not able to consistently integrate the analytical peak, manual integration of the analytical pe ak is necessary. All manual integrations are performed following the procedures outlined in method ETS

- 12

- 010. The consistency of the laboratory’s integration is ensured through the training of laboratory personnel, the peer review process required for a ll manual integrations, the review of manual integrations by the QAU, and where necessary the review of manual integrations by laboratory management.

Table 3 . Instrument Parameters.

Instrument Name ETS Kirk

Analysis Dates 12/12 /1 3

– external standard calibration

12/13 /13

– internal standard calibration
Analytical Method ETS

- 8

- 044.1
Liquid Chromatograph Agilent 1260

Guard column Betasil C18 (4.6 mm X 100 mm), 5 μ Analytical column Betasil C18 (4.6 mm X 100 mm), 5 μ Injection Volume 2, 5

, or 20 μ L
Mass Spectrometer Applied Biosystems TripleQuad 5500

Ion Source Turbo Spray

Polarity Negative

Software Analyst 1.6.1



### Table 4 . Liquid Chromatography Gradient Program.

Step
Number Total Time (min) Flow Rat e ( μ L/min) Percent A
(2 mM ammonium acetate) Percent B
(Methanol)

0 0.00 750 90.0 10.0

1 0.50 750 90.0 10.0

2 4.00 750 70.0 30.0

3 6.00 750 70.0 30.0

4 11.0 750 20.0 80.0

5 13.0 750 20.0 80.0

6 13.5 750 10.0 90.0

7 16.0 750 10.0 90.0

8 16.5 750 90 .0 10.0

9 19.0 750 90.0 10.03M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 6 OF 24 

### Table 5 . Mass Transitions

.

Analyte Mass Transition

Q1/Q3 Internal Standard (1) Mass Transition Q1/Q3

PFOA 413/369

[ 13 C 8 ] PFOA 421/376 413/219

413/169

PFBS 299/80 [ 1 8 O 2 ]PFB S 303/ 84 299/99

PFHS 399/99 [ 13 C 3 ]PFHS 402/ 80 399/80

PFOS 499/99

[ 13 C 8 ]PFOS 507/80 499/80

499/130

[ 13 C 4 ]PFOA surrogate 417/372 [ 13 C 8 ]PFOA 421/376

[ 13 C 4 ]PFOS surrogate 503/80 [ 13 C 8 ]PFOS 507/80

Dwell time was 20 msec for each transition. The individual transitions were summed to produce a “total ion chromatogram” (TIC) , which was u sed for quantitation.
(1) Internal standard s were used for the analysis on 12/13 / 13

. 

# 3 Data Analysis

3.1 Calibration External Standard Calibration Analysis on 12/12 /13 : Samples were analyzed against an external standard calibration curve. Calibration standards were prepared by spiking known amounts of the stock solution containing the target analytes into 90:10 methanol: Milli

- Q laboratory water. A total of eleven sp iked standards ranging from 0.02 ng/mL to 50 ng/mL (nominal) were analyzed. The standards also contained the surrogates at concentrations ranging from 0.02 ng/mL to 25 ng/mL nominal. A quadratic, 1/x weighted, calibration curve of the standard peak area counts was used to fit the data for each analyte. The data were not forced through zero during the fitting process. Calculating the standard concentrations using the peak area counts and the resultant calibration curve confirmed accuracy of each curve po int.

Internal Standard Calibration Analysis on 12/13 /13 : Samples were analyzed against a matrix

- matched stable isotope internal standard calibration curve. Calibration standards were prepared by spiking
known amounts of stock solutions into laboratory prepared reagent water . The calibration standards
contained an internal standard mix at a nominal concentration of 1 ng/mL. A total of thirteen calibra tion standards ranging from 0.0 25 ng/mL to 25 ng/mL (nominal) were analyzed with the prepared samples.
Of these t hirteen calibration standards, eleven contained the surrogates at concentrations ranging from
0.0 25 ng/mL to 10 ng/mL nominal. A quadratic, 1/x weighted, calibration curve of the ratio of the standard peak area counts over the internal standar d peak area counts was used to fit the data for each analyte. The data were not forced through zero during the fitting process. Calculating the standard concentrations using the peak area ratios and the resultant calibration curve confirmed accuracy of e ach curve point.

For each calibration curve, t he reference standards of PFOA and PFOS used to prepare the calibration
standards consisted of both linear and branched isomers. Each curve point was quantitated using the
overall calibration curve and revie wed for accuracy. Method calibration accuracy requirements of 100±25% (100±30% for the lowest curve point) were met for all analyte s. The correlation coefficient r was greater than 0.995 for all analytes

.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 7 OF 24 

## 3.2 System Suitability

A calibration standard was an alyzed four times at the beginning of the analytical sequence to
demonstrate overall system suitability. T he acceptance criteria for system suitability samples is less than or equal to 5% relative standard deviation (RSD) for peak area /ratio and retention time criteria of less than or equal to 2% RSD

. These cri teria were met for all analytes

.



## 3.3 Limit of Quantitation (LOQ)

The LOQ as defined in method ETS

- 8

- 044. 1 is the lowest non

- zero calibration standard in the curve that meets linearity and accuracy requ irements and for which the area counts are at least twice those of the appropriate blanks. The LOQs associated with the sample analysis are listed in Table 6

.

T able 6 . LOQ

Analyte Calibration LOQ, ng/mL

PFOA Internal standard 0 .0240

PFBS Internal standard 0.0250

PFHS Internal standard 0.0 400

PFOS Internal standard 0.0232

PFOA External standard 0.0958 (1)

PFBS External standard 0.0200 (1)

PFHS External standard 0.0200 (1)

PFOS External standard 0.0185 (1)
(1) The dilution f actor was not applied to the LOQ.



## 3.4 Continuing Calibration During the course of the analytical sequence, several continuing calibration verification samples (CCVs) were analyzed to confirm that the instrument response and the initial calibration curve were still
in control. The method acceptance criteria of 100% ± 25% was met for all analytes

.



## 3.5 Blanks

Two types of blanks were prepared and analyzed w ith the samples: method blanks/solvent blanks and field/trip blanks . Each blank result wa s reviewed and used to evaluate method performance to determine the LOQ for each analyte.



## 3.6 Lab Control Spikes (LCSs) Low, mid, and high lab control spikes were prepared for the target analytes and analyzed in triplicate, while only low and high lab control spikes were prepa red for the surrogates . LCSs were prepared by spiking known amounts of the analytes into either 10 mL of laboratory

- prepared matrix matched water
or 1 mL of Milli

- Q water to produce the desired concentration. When applicable, t he LCSs were then
diluted w ith methanol in the same manner as the samples

. Method ETS

- 8

- 044.1 states that the average recovery of LCS s at each spiking level be within 80%

- 120% wi th a RSD ≤20%. All LCS sampl es met method accuracy criteri a

.

All LCSs were used in the determination of the analytical m ethod uncertainty in section 3.7

.

T he following calculations were used to generate data in Table 7

.

100% * ion Concentrat Spike ion Concentrat Calculated Recovery Percent LCS
=

100% * recovery LCS average replicates LCS deviation standard RSD LCS%
=3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 8 OF 24 

### Table 7 . Lab Control Spike Results.

ETS

- 8

- 044.1

Ex

ternal St andard

Calibration
Analyzed 12/12 / 13 PFOA (Linear + Branched ) PFOA surrogate

Lab ID Spiked Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Spiked Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS

- 131212

- 1 0.1 91 0.194 102 0.199 0.223 112

LCS

- 131212

- 2 0.191 0.188 98.4 0.199 0.214 108

LCS

- 131212

- 3 0.191 0.184 96.3 0.199 0.214 107

Average ± %RSD 98.9 % ± 2.9 % 109 % ± 2. 4 %

LCS

- 131212

- 4 4.74 5.37 113 4.94 5.22 106

LCS

- 131212

- 5 4.74 5.32 112 4.94 5.23 106

LCS

- 131 212

- 6 4.74 5.48 116 4.94 5.11 104

Average ± %RSD 114 % ± 1. 8 % 10 5 % ± 1.1 %

LCS

- 131212

- 7 38.2 41.5 109

LCS

- 131212

- 8 38.2 38.1 99.6

LCS

- 131212

- 9 38.2 38.1 99.7

Average ± %RSD 1 0 3 % ± 5.2 %

ETS

- 8

- 044.1

External Standard

Calibration
Analyzed 12 /12 /13 PFBS PFHS

Lab ID Spiked
Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Spiked
Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS

- 131212

- 1 0.199 0.219 110 0.199 0.207 104

LCS

- 131212

- 2 0.199 0.220 110 0.1 99 0.202 102

LCS

- 131212

- 3 0.199 0.214 108 0.199 0.204 102

Average ± %RSD 109 % ± 1.1 % 1 03 % ± 1.1 %

LCS

- 131212

- 4 4.95 5.70 115 4.95 5.46 110

LCS

- 131212

- 5 4.95 5.76 116 4.95 5.41 109

LCS

- 131212

- 6 4.95 5.78 117 4.95 5.56 112

Average ± %RSD 116 % ± 0.86 % 1 10 % ± 1.4 %

LCS

- 131212

- 7 39.8 41.5 104 39.8 >ULOQ NA

LCS

- 131212

- 8 39 .8 40.6 102 39.8 >ULOQ NA

LCS

- 131212

- 9 39.8 40.0 100 39.8 >ULOQ NA

Average ± %RSD 10 2 % ± 2.0 % NA

>ULOQ = analyte concentration exceeded upper limit of quantitation NA = Not Applicable3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 9 OF 24 

### Table 7 continued. Lab Control Spike Results.

ETS

- 8

- 044.1

E xternal Standard

Calibration
Analyzed 12/12/13 PFOS (Linear + Branched) PFOS surrogate

Lab ID Spiked
Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Spiked
Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS

- 13 1212

- 1 0.185 0.204 110 0.190 0.215 113

LCS

- 131212

- 2 0.185 0.197 107 0.190 0.208 109

LCS

- 131212

- 3 0.185 0.197 107 0.190 0.207 109

Average ± %RSD 108 % ± 1.6 % 110 % ± 2.1 %

LCS

- 131212

- 4 4.59 5.37 117 4.73 5.11 108

LCS

- 131212

- 5 4.59 5.34 116 4.73 5.19 110

LCS

- 131212

- 6 4.59 5.38 117 4.73 5.01 106

Average ± %RSD 1 17 % ± 0.49 % 108 % ± 1.9 %

LCS

- 131212

- 7 36.9 39.3 106

LCS

- 131212

- 8 36.9 36.1 97 .9

LCS

- 131212

- 9 36.9 36.5 98.8

Average ± %RSD 101 % ± 4.4 %

ETS

- 8

- 044.1

In ternal Standard

Calibration
Analyzed 12/13 /13 PFOA (Linear + Branched) PFOA surrogate

Lab ID Spiked
Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery S piked
Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS

- 131213

- 1 0.190 0.199 105 0.198 0.232 117

LCS

- 131213

- 2 0.190 0.190 100 0.198 0.225 114

LCS

- 131213

- 3 0.190 0.200 105 0.198 0.229 116

Average ± %RSD 103 % ± 2.8 % 116 % ± 1.3 %

LC S

- 131213

- 4 1.90 2.15 113 1.98 2.32 117

LCS

- 131213

- 5 1.90 2.06 109 1.98 2.18 110

LCS

- 131213

- 6 1.90 2.04 107 1.98 2.28 115

Average ± %RSD 110 % ± 2.8 % 114 % ± 3.2 %

LCS

- 131213

- 7 19.0 20.7 109

LCS

- 131213

- 8 19.0 20.2 106

LCS

- 131213

- 9 19.0 19.4 102

Average ± %RSD 106 % ± 3.3 %3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 10 OF 24 

### Table 7 continued. Lab Control Spike Results.

ETS

- 8

- 044.1

Internal Standard

Calibration
Analyzed 12/13 /13 PFBS PFHS

Lab ID Spiked Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Spiked Concentrati on (ng/mL) Calculated Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS

- 131213

- 1 0.198 0.213 108 0.198 0.205 103

LCS

- 131213

- 2 0.198 0.206 104 0.198 0.198 100

LCS

- 131213

- 3 0.198 0.218 110 0.198 0.208 105

Average ± %RSD 107 % ± 2.9 % 103 % ± 2.4 %

LCS

- 131213

- 4 1.98 2. 25 114 1.98 2.34 118

LCS

- 131213

- 5 1.98 2.24 113 1.98 2.29 116

LCS

- 131213

- 6 1.98 2.25 114 1.98 2.35 119

Average ± %RSD 114 % ± 0.51 % 118 % ± 1 .3 %

LCS

- 131213

- 7 19.9 21.6 108 19.9 21.7 109

LCS

- 131213

- 8 19.9 21.0 106 19.9 21.6 108

LCS

- 131213

- 9 19.9 20.7 10 4 19.9 20.8 105

Average ± %RSD 106 % ± 1.9 % 107 % ± 1.9 %

ETS

- 8

- 044.1

Internal Standard

Calibration
Analyzed 12/13/ 13 PFOS (Linear + Branched) PFOS surrogate

Lab ID Spiked
Concentration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Spiked
Conc entration (ng/mL) Calculated
Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS

- 131213

- 1 0.184 0.203 111 0.189 0.216 114

LCS

- 131213

- 2 0.184 0.195 106 0.189 0.209 110

LCS

- 131213

- 3 0.184 0.206 112 0.189 0.219 116

Average ± %RSD 110 % ± 2.9 % 113 % ± 2. 7 %

LCS

- 131213

- 4 1.84 2.15 117 1.89 2.15 114

LCS

- 131213

- 5 1.84 2.11 114 1.89 2.08 110

LCS

- 131213

- 6 1.84 2.11 115 1.89 2.16 114

Average ± %RSD 115 % ± 1.3 % 1 13 % ± 2.0 %

LCS

- 131213

- 7 18.4 21.7 118

LCS

- 131213

- 8 18.4 21.1 115

LCS

- 131213

- 9 18.4 20.4 111

Average ± %RSD 115 % ± 3.1 %3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 11 OF 24 

## 3.7 Analytical Method Uncertainty Analytical uncertainty is based on historical QC data that is control charted and used to evaluate method accuracy and precision. The method uncertainty is calculated following ETS

- 12

- 012.2. The standard deviation is calculated for the set of accuracy results (in %) obtained for the QC samples. The expanded uncertainty is calculated by multiplying the standard deviation by a factor of 2, which corresponds to a confidence level of 95%.

Table 8 . Analytical Method Uncertainty.

Analyte Calibration Method Standard Deviation (%) Method Uncertainty

PF OA External Standard 8.37 ± 17 %

PFBS External Standard 8.78 ± 18 %

PFHS External Standard 7.69 ± 15 %

PFOS External Standard 10.4 ± 21 %

PFOA Internal Standard 7.68 ±15 %

PFBS Internal Standard 7.99 ± 16 %

PFHS Internal Standard 9.94 ± 20 %

PFOS Internal Standard 8.42 ± 17 %



## 3.8 Field Matrix Spikes (FMS) A field matrix spike w as collected at each sampling point to verify that the analytical method is applicable to the collected matrix. Field matrix spikes are generated by adding a measured volume of field sample to a container spiked by the laboratory with the target analytes prior to shipping sample containers for sample collection. Field matrix spike recoveries within method acceptance criteria of 100±30% confirm that “unknown” components in the sample matrix do not significantly interfere with the extraction and analysis of the analytes of interest. The standards used for the preparatio n of the field matrix spiking solutions contained reference materials comprised of both linear and branched
isomers for PFOA and PFOS. Field matrix spikes are presented in section 4 of this report.

100% *

on Concentrat Spike Dup.) Sample Field & Sample Field : ion Concentrat Average FMS of ion Concentrat (Sample Recovery FMS −

=



### Table 9 . Field Matrix Spike Concentrations

.

Final Concentration (ng/mL)

Location Description PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS

ACI Field Matrix Spike 2480 2500 2510 2500

ACM2 Field Matrix Spike 4.9 6 5.00 5.00 4.99

ACE Field Matrix Spike 4.9 6 5.00 5.00 4.99

WW8R, WW9R

, WW10R, WW11R Field Matrix Spike 2480 2500 2510 2500

Trip Blank Low Field Matrix Spike 4.9 6 5.00 5.00 4.99

High Field Matrix Spike 2480 2500 2510 25003M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 12 OF 24 

# 4 Data Summary and Discussion

The tables below summarize the sample results and field m atrix spike re coveries for the seven locations as well as the Trip Blank. Each table provides the average concentration and the relative percent difference ( % RPD) of the sample and sample duplicate. Results and average values are rounded to three significant figures. Relative percent difference (%RPD) values are rounded to two significant figures. Because of rounding, values may vary slightly from those listed in the raw data. Field matrix spikes meeting the method acceptance criteria of ± 30%, demonstrate that the m ethod is appropriate for the given matrix.

All field matrix spike samples and surrogate recovery standards met method acceptance criteria except
where noted below.

DAL

- GW

- ACM2 ; the FMS sample ( 5 ng/mL) was not appropriate for PFBS ; however, t he surroga te recovery standard 13 

### C 4 

### - PFOS met method acceptance criteria. No additional QC samples were prepared.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 13 OF 24 

### Table 10

. DAL GW ACI 131118 (1)

PFOA PFBS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/m L) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 001 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- 0

- 131118 2190 NA 1100 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 002 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- DB

- 131118 2190 NA 1090 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 003 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- FMS

- 131118 4670 100 3440 93.6

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 2190 ng/mL ± 0 .0 % 1100 ng/mL ± 0.91 %

PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 001 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- 0

- 131118 1320 NA 2260 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 002 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- DB

- 131118 1340 NA 2220 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 003 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- FMS

- 131118 3840 100 4700 98.4

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 1330 ng/mL ± 1.5 % 2240 ng/mL ± 1.8 %

13 C 4 - PFOA 13 C 4 - PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 001 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- 0

- 131118 107 108

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 002 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- DB

- 131118 107 109

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 003 DAL

- GW

- ACI

- FMS

- 131118 111 112

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RSD 108 % ± 2.1% 110 % ± 1. 9 %

NA = Not Applicable (1) S amples were analyzed by external standard calibration

. The surrogate recovery standards 13 C 4 - PFOA and 13 C 4 - PFOS were added to the sampl es during sample preparation.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 14 OF 24 

### Table 11

. DAL GW ACM2 131118

PFOA ( 1 ) PFBS ( 2 )

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 004 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- 0

- 131118 0.0539 NA 113 0 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 005 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- DB

- 131118 0.0527 NA 1110 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 006 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- FMS

- 131118 4.88 97.3 1120 NC

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 0.0533 ng/mL ± 2.3 % 1120 ng/mL ± 1.8 %

PFHS (1 ) PFOS ( 1 )

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 004 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- 0

- 131118 0.0728 NA 0.206 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 005 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- DB

- 131118 0.0670 NA 0.198 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 006 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- FMS

- 131118 5.30 105 5.41 104

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 0.0699 ng/mL ± 8.3 % 0.202 ng/mL ± 4.0 %

13 C 4 - PFOA (1) 13 C 4 - PFOS (1 )

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 004 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- 0

- 131118 105 106

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 005 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- DB

- 131118 110 108

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 006 DAL

- GW

- ACM2

- FMS

- 131118 1 05 106

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± % RSD 107 % ± 2 .7 % 107 % ± 1.1 %

NA = Not Applicable NC = Not Calculated; Spike level was less than 0.5x the endogenous sample concentration. (1) Samples were analyzed by internal standard calibration. (2) Samples were analyze d by external standard calibration.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 15 OF 24 

### Table 12

. DAL GW ACE 131118 (1)

PFOA PFBS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 007 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- 0

- 131118 0.51 1 NA 0.620 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 008 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- DB

- 131118 0.445 NA 0.563 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 009 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- FMS

- 131118 5.37 98.6 5.56 99.4

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 0.478 ng/mL ± 14 % 0.592 ng/mL ± 9.6 %

PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 007 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- 0

- 131118 0.401 NA 0.0979 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 008 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- DB

- 131118 0.331 NA 0.0472 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 009 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- FMS

- 131118 5.58 104 5.13 101

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± % RPD 0.366 ng/mL ± 19 % 0.0726 ng/mL ± 70 % (2)

13 C 4 - PFOA 13 C 4 - PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 007 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- 0

- 131118 106 104

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 008 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- DB

- 131118 105 105

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 009 DAL

- GW

- ACE

- FMS

- 131118 109 106

Aver age Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RSD 107 % ± 1.9 % 105 % ± 0.95 %

NA = Not Applicable (1) Samples were analyzed by internal standard calibration

. (2) Sample/sample duplicate RPD did not meet acceptance criteria of ≤ 20%.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 16 OF 24 

### Table 13

. DAL GW WW8R 13 1118 (1)

PFOA PFBS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 010 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- 0

- 131118 3060 NA 363 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 011 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- DB

- 131118 3010 NA 360 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 012 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- FMS

- 13111 8 5130 84.3 2790 97.1

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 3040 ng/mL ± 1.6 % 362 ng/mL ± 0.83 %

PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 010 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- 0

- 131118 1440 NA 4790 NA

I SO13

- 07

- 10

- 011 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- DB

- 131118 1440 NA 4710 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 012 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- FMS

- 131118 3960 100 7360 104

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 1440 ng/mL ± 0.0 % 4750 ng/mL ± 1.7 %

13 C 4 - PFOA 13 C 4 - PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

IS O13

- 07

- 10

- 010 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- 0

- 131118 101 111

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 011 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- DB

- 131118 96.6 109

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 012 DAL

- GW

- WW8R

- FMS

- 131118 97.3 109

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RSD 98.3 % ± 2.4 % 110 % ± 1.0 %

NA = Not Applicable (1) Samples were analyzed by extern al standard calibration. The surrogate recovery standards 13 C 4 - PFOA and 13 C 4 - PFOS were added to the samples during sample preparation

.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 17 OF 24 

### Table 14

. DAL GW WW9R 131118 (1)

PFOA PFBS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (n g/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 013 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- 0

- 131118 2910 NA 301 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 014 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- DB

- 131118 2980 NA 309 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 015 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- FMS

- 131118 5050 84.7 2750 97.8

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 29 50 ng/mL ± 2.4 % 305 ng/mL ± 2.6 %

PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 013 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- 0

- 131118 1300 NA 4430 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 014 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- DB

- 131118 1370 NA 4640 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 015 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- FMS

- 131118 3940 104 7240 108

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 1340 ng/mL ± 5.2 % 4540 ng/mL ± 4.6 %

13 C 4 - PFOA 13 C 4 - PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 013 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- 0

- 131118 98.4 110

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 014 DA L

- GW

- WW9R

- DB

- 131118 98.7 112

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 015 DAL

- GW

- WW9R

- FMS

- 131118 93.8 107

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RSD 97.0 % ± 2 .8 % 110 % ± 2.3 %

NA = Not Applicable (1) Samples were analyzed by external standard calibration. The surrogate recovery standards 13 C 4 - PFOA and 13 C 4 - PFOS were added to the samples during sample preparation

.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 18 OF 24 

### Table 15

. DAL GW WW10R 131118 (1)

PFOA PFBS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 016 DAL

- GW

- W W10R

- 0

- 131118 2410 NA 301 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 017 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- DB

- 131118 2380 NA 304 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 018 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- FMS

- 131118 4530 85.9 2790 99.5

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 2400 ng/mL ± 1.3 % 303 ng/mL ± 0.99 %

PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 016 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- 0

- 131118 1120 NA 3940 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 017 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- DB

- 131118 1120 NA 3840 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 018 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- FMS

- 131118 3690 102 6390 100

Average Concentrat ion (ng/mL) ± %RPD 1120 ng/mL ± 0.0 % 3890 ng/mL ± 2.6 %

13 C 4 - PFOA 13 C 4 - PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 016 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- 0

- 131118 100 111

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 017 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- DB

- 131118 97.0 110

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 018 DAL

- GW

- WW10R

- FMS

- 131 118 93.5 108

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RSD 96.8 % ± 3.4 % 110 % ± 1.4 %

NA = Not Applicable (1) Samples were analyzed by external standard calibration. The surrogate recovery standards 13 C 4 - PFOA and 13 C 4 - PFOS were added to the samples during sample prep aration.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 19 OF 24 

### Table 16

. DAL GW WW11R 131118 (1)

PFOA PFBS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 019 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- 0

- 131118 1300 NA 286 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 020 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- DB

- 131118 1330 NA 288 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 021 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- FMS

- 131118 3620 92.7 2810 101

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 1 320 ng/mL ± 2.3 % 287 ng/mL ± 0.70 %

PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 019 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- 0

- 131118 673 NA 1790 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 020 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- DB

- 131118 687 NA 1900 NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 021 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- FMS

- 131118 3220 101 4480 105

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 680 ng/mL ± 2.1 % 1850 ng/mL ± 5.9 %

13 C 4 - PFOA 13 C 4 - PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 019 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- 0

- 131118 100 110

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 020 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- DB

- 131118 101 113

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 021 DAL

- GW

- WW11R

- FMS

- 131118 98.1 109

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RSD 99.7 % ± 1.5 % 111 % ± 1.9 %

NA = Not Applicable (1) Samples were analyzed by external standard calibration. The surrogate recovery standards 13 C 4 - PFOA and 13 C 4 - PFOS were added to the samples during sample preparation.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 20 OF 24 

### Table 17 . Trip Blank Results

PFOA PFBS

3M LIMS ID Descripti on Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 022 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- 0

- 131118 <0.0240 (1) NA <0. 0 25 0 (1 ) NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 023 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- LS

- 131118 5.17 (2 ) 104 5.13 (2 ) 103

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 024 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- HS

- 131118 2710 (2) 109 2490 (2) 99.6

PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery Concentration (ng/mL) %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 022 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- 0

- 131118 <0.0400 (1) NA <0.0232 (1) NA

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 023 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- LS

- 131118 4.84 (2 ) 96.8 4.98 (2 ) 99.8

IS O13

- 07

- 10

- 024 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- HS

- 131118 2530 (2) 101 2650 (2) 106

13 C 4 - PFOA 13 C 4 - PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description %Recovery %Recovery

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 022 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- 0

- 131118 107 (1) 106 (1)

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 023 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- LS

- 131118 116 (2 ) 115 (2 )

ISO13

- 07

- 10

- 024 DAL

- GW

- TRIP

- HS

- 131118 114 (2) 113 (2 )

NA = Not Applicable (1) Samples were analyzed by internal standard calibration. (2) Sample s w ere analyzed by exte rnal standard calibration

. The surrogate recovery standards 13 C 4 - PFOA and 13 C 4 - PFOS were added to the samples during sample preparation.3M ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
REPORT

NO. ISO13-07-10



# 5 Conclusio n

Laborator y contro l spike s wer e use d t o determin e th e analytica l metho d accurac y an d precisio n fo r al l analytes

. Th e accurac

y an d precisio n wer e the n use d t o estimat e th e metho d uncertaint y fo r th e results

. Fiel d matri x spil< e recoverie s demonstrate d tha t th e analytica l metho d wa s appropriat e fo r th e give n sampl e matrix

. Analysi s wa s complete d usin g 3 M Environmenta l Laborator y Metho d ETS-8

- 044. 1 "Metho d o f Analysi s fo r th e Determinatio n o f Perfluorinate d Compound s i n Wate r b y LC/MS/MS ; Direc t Injectio n Analysis"

. Analytica l result s ar e reporte d i n Tabl e 1 an d 10-1 7 o f thi s report

.



# 6 Dat a /

Sampl e Retentio n

Al l remainin g sampl e an d associate d projec t dat a (hardcop y an d electronic ) wil l b e archive d accordin g
t o 3 M Environmenta l Laborator y standar d operatin g procedures

.



# 7 Attachment s

Attachmen t A : Analyt e Tren d Dat a fo r selec t samplin g point s a t th e Decatu r Groun d Wate r Treatmen t
Plan t (GWTP ) GA C System

.



# 8 Signature s

Susa n T

. Wolf

, SMgpincipa l Analytica l Investigato r Dat e

Willia m K

. Reagen

, Ph.D.

, 3 M Environmenta l Laborator y Technica l Directo r Dat e

Th e 3 M Environmenta l Laboratory' s Quality Assuranc e Uni t ha s audite d th e dat a an d repor t fo r thi s project

.

Qualit y AssLj/anc e Representativ e Dat e

rA7/s test report shall not be reproduced

except In full, without

written approval

of the 3M
Environmental

Laboratory.

PAG E 2 1 O F 2 43M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 22 OF 24 

### Attachment A : Analyte Trend Data for select sampling points at the Decatur Ground Water Treatment Plant (GWTP) GAC System

ACI (Activated Carbon Inf luent)

- Sample Results in ng/mL

ACI 1/17/20 13 2/13/20 13 3/27/20 13 4/29/20 13 5/31/20 13 6/27/20 13 7/23/20 13 9/30/2013 10/28/2013 11/18/2013

PFOA 1910 2300 2220 1480 1860 1480 1630 2320 1880 2190

PFBS 588 830 1060 1360 1040 708 1230 356 1590 1100

PFHS 895 1580 1090 777 940 942 749 1400 866 1330

PFOS 1810 2940 2490 1670 2150 1590 1680 3240 2100 2240



### AC E (Activated Carbon Ef fluent)

- Sample Results in ng/mL

ACE 1/17/20 13 2/13/20 13 3/27/20 13 4/29/20 13 5/31/20 13 6/27/20 13 7/23/20 13 9/30/2013 10/28/ 2013 11/18/2013

PFOA <0.0240 0.124 0.0380 0.0422 0.0725 0.0717 0.0643 0.115 0.231 0.478

PFBS <0.0250 0.0360 <0.0250 0.392 24.8 111 1960 1950 0.379 0.592

PFHS <0.0250 0.178 0.0477 0.057 0.105 0.118 0.0778 0.156 0.180 0.366

PFOS <0.0232 0.0329 <0.0232 <0 .0232 <0.0232 <0.0232 0.0277 0.0452 0.0785 0.07263M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 23 OF 24 

### Attachment A : Analyte Trend Data for select sampling points at the Decatur Ground Water Treatment Plant (GWTP) GAC System

WW8R

- Sample Results in ng/mL

WW8R 1/17/20 13 2/13/20 13 3/27/20 13 4/29/20 13 5/31/20 13 6/27/20 13 7/23/20 13 9/30/2013 10/28/2013 110/18/2013

PFOA 4350 3250 3640 3190 2760 2760 2640 2890 2830 3040

PFBS 410 354 385 364 289 282 263 303 312 362

PFHS 1930 1900 1760 1610 1330 1340 1260 1370 1300 1440

PFOS 5710 4850 5120 4830 4180 411 0 3910 4100 4410 4750



### WW9R

- Sample Results in ng/mL

WW9R 1/17/20 13 2/13/20 13 3/27/20 13 4/29/20 13 5/31/20 13 6/27/20 13 7/23/20 13 9/30/2013 10/28/2013 11/18/2013

PFOA 2710 2850 3330 2650 2660 2630 2410 2730 2820 2950

PFBS 184 236 278 244 226 225 212 249 286 305

PFHS 954 1400 1440 1200 1120 1140 1030 1220 1280 1340

PFOS 3690 4100 4660 4340 4210 4150 3670 4200 4380 45403M ENVIRONMENTAL LAB ORATORY
REPORT NO. ISO13

- 07

- 10

PAGE 24 OF 24 

### Attachment A : Analyte Trend Data for select sampling points at the Decatur Ground Water Treatment Plant (GWTP) GAC System

WW10R

- Sample Results in ng/mL

WW10R 9/30/2013 10/28/2013 11/18/2013

PFOA 2070 2150 2400

PFBS 247 264 303

PFHS 1030 1030 1120

PFOS 2770 3160 3890



### WW11R

- Sample Results in ng/mL

WW11R 9/30/2013 10/28/2013 11/18/2013

PFOA 1720 1100 1320

PFBS 29 9 240 287

PFHS 1000 511 680

PFOS 2200 1670 1850