TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT NEW AND EXISTING CHEMICALS PROGRAM COMPLIANCE MONITORING INSPECTION REPORT The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works 22828 NC Highway 87 West Fayetteville, NC 28306-7332 6 Report Date: April 24, 2018 Report Prepared By: 61 For . - Atlanta GA Que George eith Bates Daryl Hudson Dan-Tam Nguyen In tes: Inspectors: June 28 - 29, 2017 Verne George U.S. Environ . tection Agency, Region 4 Chemical nt and Emergency Planning Section EPA Region 4, Lead Inspector EPA Region 4 Eastern Research Group, Contractor to the EPA Eastern Research Group, Contractor to the EPA INFORMATION REDACTED (BLACKED OUT) IN THIS REPORT IS INFORMATION PROVIDED TO THE EPA REGION 4 BY THE FACILITY WITH A TSCA CBI CLAIM PURSUANT TO TSCA SECTION REQUEST FOR NONDISCLOSURE TSCA NEC Inspection Report The Chemours Company Fayeltcville Works Report Date: April 24, 2018 Page 1 Of 45 This page is intentionally blank. TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Works Page 2 of 45 CONTENTS EXHIBITS ACRONYMS SUMMARY we 1. INTRODUCTION 2. INSPECTION 2.1. Inspection Notice 2.2. Inspection Entrance 2.3. Opening Conference 2.3.1. Introduction 2.3.2. Summary 2.4. Facility Tour 2.4.1. Introduction 2.4.2. Summary PPVE Process Area - Process Area 2.5 Closing Conference 3. FINDINGS 3.1. Introduction 3.2. TSCA Section 4 Evaluation 3.3. TSCA Section 5 Evaluation 3.3.1. PPVE Process 3.3.1.1. PPVE Process Discussion 3.3.1.2. PPVE Process Waste Stream 3.3.2. - Process 3.3.2.1. PMN, Issuance of Order and Notice of Commencement 3.3.2.2. - Process Discussion 3.3.2.3. SCA 5 Consent Order Discussion lean?s Prohibition Testing Protection in the Workplace New Chemical Exposure Limit Performance Criteria for Sampling and Analytical Method Manufacturing Control of Ef?uent and Emissions (During the Manufacture of TSCA NBC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 3 of 45 Distribution Recordkeeging Request For Pie-inspection Information Successors Liability Upon Transfer of Consent Order 3.3.3. Non?GenX Evaluation 3.3.3.1. Exemptions Low Volume Research and Development Polymer 3.3.3.2. Bona Fide Intent 3.3.3.3. Signi?cant New Use Rules 3.4. TSCA Section 8 Evaluation Preliminary Assessment Information Rule (PAIR) 3.4.2. Allegation of Significant Adverse Reaction 3.4.3. Health and Safety Studies 3.4.4. Substantial Risk to Human Health/Environment 3.4.5. Chemical Data Reporting 3.4.5.1 . CDR Introduction 3.4.5.2. CDR Discussion - - - - - - 3.5. TSCA Section 12 Evaluation 3.6. TSCA Section 13 Evaluation 4. REPORT APPROVAL 4.1. Report Primary Author 4.2. Report Co-Authors 4.3. Report Technical Reviewer 4.4. Report - Approver TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetleville Works Page 4 of 45 Section A - Inspection Documents A10 A11 A12 A13 A14 Notice of Inspection Letter Notice of Inspection Form (EPA Form 7740-3) TSCA Inspection Con?dentiality Notice (EPA Form 7740-4) TSCA Receipt for Samples and Documents (EPA Form 7740-1) Document No. Document No. Document No. Document No. Document No. Document No. Document No. Document No. Document No. Document No. 0101F1908562817: 0201F1908562817: 0301F1908562817: 0401F1908562817: 0501F1908562817: 0601F1908562817: 0701F1908562817: 0801F1908562817: 0901F1908562817: 1001F1908562817: EXHIBITS Site Map Presentation, Fayetteville Works Overview PPVE Flow Chart EPA Consent Order Modification Letter, February 1, 2010 Safety Data Sheet GX902 Safety Data Sheet GX905C Safety Data Sheet GX9OSD Safety Data Sheet GX903 Copies of Product Labels (GXQOSD, GX902, GX903) Export Notices Section - Supporting Documents (provided after the inspectionBIO 812 B13 B14 B15 B16 317 BIS B19 B20 DuPont/Chemours Notice of Transfer Document PPVE Process Narrative Chemours September 1, 2017, letter to the EPA Chemours letter to the EPA with analytical data GenX Customer List DuPont December 10, 2010, Letter DuPont April 27, 2011, Letter EPA August 1, 2011, Letter Chemours Permeation Testing DuPont August 20, 2009, Letter EPA February 1, 2010, Modification of Order Chemours August 19, 2017, Letter 2016 Amended CDR TSCA NEC Inspection Report The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Report Date: April 24, 2018 Page 5 of 45 B21 B22 B23 B24 B25 B26 B27 B28 B29 B30 B31 B32 B33 B34 B35 B36 B37 B38 B39 B40 B41 B42 B43 B44 B45 B46 Flow Diagram and Production day/volume Air Emission Data Chemours September 6, 2017, Letter Chemours September 1, 2017, Letter Chemours October 13, 2017, Letter Chemours July 31, 2017, Letter TSCA Certified Statement 2016 Original CDR and Amended CDR 2016 Original CDR and Amended CDR 2016 Original CDR and Amended CDR EPA August 15, 2017 Chemours August 22, 2017, Letter Chemours July 31, 2017, Letter Chemours October 4, 2017, Letter PPVE Block Flow Diagram W553421 September 6, 2017 Letter March 29, 2018 Letter Air Emission Data Vinyl Ether South February 2, 2018 Letter TSCA NEC inspection Report The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Report Date: April 24, 2018 Page 6 of 45 ACRONYMS ADME Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Excretion APF Applied Protective Factor APFO Ammonium perfluorooctanoate ASE Accelerated Solvent Extraction CASRN Chemical Abstracts Service Registration Number CBI Con?dential Business Information CDR Chemical Data Reporting DCO Document Control Officer EPA US. Environmental Protection Agency ERG Eastern Research Group, Inc, Contractors to the EPA LLC Limited Liability Company NCEL New Chemical Exposure Limits NCDEQ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality NOC Notice of Commencement OCSPP Of?ce of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Piping and Instrumentation Diagram PAIR Preliminary Assessment Information Rule PBT Persist in the environmenta?could bio-accumulateitoxic to people, wild mammals, birds PFOA Perfluorooctanoic acid PFOS Per?uorooctane sulfonate PMN Premanufacture Notice PPVE Perfluoropropyl vinyl ether SNUN Signi?cant New Use Notice SNUR Significant New Use Rule TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company - Fayetteville Works Page 7 of 45 This page is intentionally blank. TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Dale: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Works Page 8 of 45 SUMMARY The Chemours Company FC, LLC (Chemours) is a chemical manufacturer, processor and exporter as defined under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). On June 28 - 29, 2017, a TSCA compliance monitoring inspection was conducted by the US. Environmental Protection Agency at the Chemours? Fayetteville Works Facility located at 22828 NC Highway 87 West, Fayetteville, North Carolina (the Facility). The inspection was conducted due to community concerns with the reported release of potentially harmful chemicals, associated with Chemours? GenX process, into the Cape Fear River, a source of drinking water supply for numerous counties in North Carolina. Chemours represents that GenX is a technology developed by E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (DuPont) and now used by Chemours to manufacture high-performance ?uoropolymers without the use of er?uorooctanoic acid PFOA . The GenX technolo is used at the Facilit in the Based on oral and written statements rovided Chemours, durin the roduction of PPVE During the inspection, Chemours stated that after June 21, 2017, the Facility began collecting the aqueous waste generated in the wet scrubber and storing it in temporary storage tanks. The Facility then ultimately ships the waste to an offsite facility for incineration rather than directin it to the WWTP which was dischar ed to the Ca Fear River. (Section 2.4.2) of this report. Based on inspection observations and the review of records provided by Chemours, the Facility: (1) manufactured, rocessed, ex orted andfor distributed in commerce, several chemical substances subject to TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 9 of 45 This page is intentionally blank TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Dale: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 10 of 45 SCOPE The sc0pe of this inspection includes a review of Chemours? compliance with TSCA Sections 4, 5, 8, 12 and 13 which covers activities that occurred at the Facility on or before June 29, 2017, (the ?nal date of the inspection). Between June 29, 2017, and March 14, 2018, the EPA submitted several follow up information request letters to Chemours. Between July 1, 2017, and March 29, 2018, Chemours responded to the information request letters. In addition to documenting facts and observations based on the inspection and information provided by Chemours, some preliminary evaluation of compliance with TSCA is included in this inspection report. The remainder of this page is intentionally blank TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 11 of 45 This page is intentionally blank TSCA NEC lnspeclion Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Faycllevillc Works Page 12 of 45 1. INTRODUCTION In June 2017, in response to the community?s concerns about the reported release of potentially harmful chemicals (GX902 and GX903) into the Cape Fear River by Chemours? Fayetteville Works Facility, North Carolina (the Facility), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency commenced a Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) investigation. The chemicals of concern were associated with the Genx technology deve10ped by E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (DuPont). The GenX technology is now used by Chemours to manufacture high-performance ?uoropolymers without the use of Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Based on this information, the EPA immediately began investigating these concerns. - the EPA received two TSCA Premanufacture Notices PMNs) from DuPont. The notices were submitted pursuant to TSCA Section 5. The PMN number i was assigned to the chemical substance with the generic chemical identit erfluorinated ali hatic carboxylic acid Chemical Abstracts Service Registration Number Had PMN number was assi ned to the chemical substance with the eneric chemical identity, . in the PMNs, DuPont claimed the specific chemical identities and the CASRNs of the chemical substances as TSCA Confidential Business Information (CB1). This claim was not made in later documents submitted to the EPA by Chemours. the EPA and DuPont entered into a final TSCA Section 5(e) Consent Order (the Consent Order) governing the manufacture, rocessin use, distribution in commerce, release and disposal of the PMN substances Section of the Consent Order includes, the followin conclusions: The Consent Order indicates that the EPA concerns were based on data collected on the PMN substances, analogous to other similar chemicals, and to PFOA which were both under review by EPA for similar PBT concerns. PFOA and its salt, Ammonium perfluorooctanoate (APFO), are long-chain per?uorinated chemicals (C8), which have human health and environmental concerns, and have been used in the manufacture of products such as Teflon?. Due to the possibility or likelihood of the use as a major substitute for PFOA, the EPA states in the Consent Order, ?more information is needed on the toxicity and pharmacokinetics of the PMN substance that will be applied to the characterization of both PMN substances? and also noted the "high concern for possible environmental effects over the long-term.? Due to the stated concerns of the EPA, the Consent Order authorized the manufacture of the PMN substances, but under the terms in Section II (Control of Ef?uent and Emissions), the EPA noted that DuPont ?shall recover and capture (destroy) or recycle the PMN substances at an overall efficiency of 99% from all ef?uent process streams and air emissions (point source and fugitive). TSCA NBC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 13 of 45 Pursuant to Section of the Consent Order, (Successor Liability Upon Transfer of Consent Order), a "Successor in Interest" means a person outside the Company who has acquired the Company's full interest in the rights to manufacture the PMN substances, including all ownership rights and legal liabilities, through a transfer document signed by the Company, as transferor, and the Successor in Interest, as transferee. According to the Transfer Notice submitted to the EPA by Chemours, the effective date of the transfer of the manufacture rights and interest for the chemicals subject to the Consent Order was February 1, 2015, (See Exhibit Bl DuPont/Chemours Notice of Transfer Document). 2. INSPECTION Inspection Notice To determine Chemours? compliance with the Consent Order for the PMN substances and with other requirements of TSCA, the EPA determined that an on-site TSCA compliance monitoring inspection was warranted. An inspection team was organized and included Verne George, EPA Region 4 lead TSCA inspector and Keith Bates, EPA Region 4 TSCA Co-inspector, with expertise in addressing confidentiality of TSCA CBI claims. The TSCA inspection team also included Daryl Hudson and Dan- Tam Nguyen, (experts in chemical processes and manufacturing) from Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), contractors to the EPA with EPA TSCA inspection credentials. On June 22, 2017, Verne George contacted Mr. Michael Johnson, Environmental Manager, for the Chemours operations at the Facility and former employee of DuPont to schedule a ?for cause TSCA compliance monitoring inspection? to determine Chemours? compliance with TSCA Sections 4, 5, 8, 12, and 13. Based on the discussions with Mr. Johnson, the inspection was scheduled for um: 28 - 29, 2017. On June 22, 2017, the EPA Region 4, Chemical Management and Emergency Planning Section mailed an inspection notice (letter) to Chemours confirming the inspection date and requesting certain identified records be made available for review during the inspection. A copy of the letter was also emailed to Mr. Johnson on June 22, 2017, (See Exhibit A1 Notice of Inspection Letter). 2.2. Inspection Entry The final inspection team included all the planned inspection team members as follows: Verne George TSCA Lead Inspector (EPA Region 4) Keith Bates TSCA Co-inspector/TSCA CBI Document Control Officer (DCO) (EPA Region 4) Daryl Hudson TSCA Co-inspector (ERG) Dan-Tam Nguyen TSCA Co-inspector (ERG) On June 28, 2017, the inspection team arrived at the facility security office at approximately 8:50 am. The security office called Mr. Johnson who shortly arrived at the security of?ce to guide the inspection team to the main of?ce building. Mr. Bates collected a small map of the Facility at the security of?ce from a stack of such maps in plain view and available for site visitors after asking permission from the security guard (See Exhibit A5 - Document Number: 0101F1908562817: Sile Map). Upon arrival at the main office building, the inspection team signed in and was provided facility identity badges. The inspection team was escorted to a conference room and as the first step of the opening TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetlcvillc Works Page 14 of 45 conference each inspection team member presented their EPA credentials to the following Chemours representatives: Ellis McGaughy Fayetteville Works Manager; Laura Korte Global Product Manager; Michael Johnson Fayetteville Works Environmental Manager; and Joel Blake Fayetteville Works Environmental Health Safety Manager. Mr. George informed Chemours that the inspection was being conducted pursuant to TSCA Section 11 to determine compliance with TSCA Sections 4, 5, 8, 12, and 13. Mr. Johnson signed a TSCA Notice of Inspection (Form 7740-3) and Confidentiality Notice (Form 7740-4). The original copies were given to Chemours and a copy of each form was provided to the EPA (See Exhibit A2 - Notice of Inspection Form and Exhibit A3 TSCA Inspection Confidentiality Notice). Mr. George explained that the inspection would consist of: an opening conference with facility staff about the company, the nature of the company?s business, chemical imports/exports and production processes; a tour of the facility; a private discussion and review of information provided by the facility that would only include the EPA representatives; and a closing conference with the Chemours representatives. Mr. Bates explained the TSCA InSpection Confidentiality Notice and indicated that to ensure confidentiality of documents provided by the Facility, the Facility must make a TSCA CBI claim as documents are provided. Mr. Bates also indicated that no documents claimed by the Facility to contain TSCA would be taken with the inspectors at the conclusion of the inspection. However, any such documents needed by the inspectors must be sent to his attention by mail after the inspection in an inner envelope marked To Be Opened By Addressee Only,? and an outer envelope with the EPA Region 4 mailing address. The facility was also directed to mail, in the same manner, copies of the documents to the ERG contractor?s TSCA Document Control Of?cer (DCO) at the ERG address provided. 2.3. Opening Conference 2.3.1. Introduction Included in Section 2.3.2. of this report is a summary of the opening conference. Compliance evaluation is generally determined by the review of appr0priate records provided by the facility. Details of the review of the information provided to the inspection team at the time of the inspection, and information provided by Chemours after the inspection, are discussed in Section 3.0 of this report. 2.3.2. Summary An overview of information about the Facility was provided by Mr. Johnson in a slide show presentation. A hard copy of the slide show presentation was provided to the inspection team (See Exhibit A6 - Document Number: 0201F 1908562817: Presentation, Fayetteville Works Overview). The summary indicated that Chemours owns the entire Facility. DuPont and Kuraray America, Inc., also operate at the Facility and all share the utilities, roads, grounds and emergency response responsibilities. 0 The Facility was constructed by DuPont between 1968 and 1971. Production began in May 1970. TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 15 of 4S The Facility consists of approximately 2,150 acres with approximately 400 acres within the fence line and is situated along the Cape Fear River. - Chemours was a wholly owned subsidiary of DuPont when it acquired the from DuPont on February 1, 2015. Chemours later spun off from DuPont on July 1, 2015. - Chemours operates the following manufacturing areas at the Facility: (1) Nafion? (2) Polymer Processing Aid; (3) Monomers; and (4) Power/Utilities/WWTP.) In the oienini conference, Mr. Johnson indicated that the GenX technology is used in the - process at the Facilit and that the produces the chemical substances covered under the ConsentOrderr. Based on information rovided Chemours, the end products from the include various concentrations of . These products are identified by Chemours as GX902, GX903, GX905C and GX9OSD. Further description of these chemicai substances can be found in Section 3.0 of this report. Mr. Johnson asserted that the chemicals from the covered in the Consent Order are not released into the Cape Fear River and that all of the waste generated from the is trucked to an offsite dis osal facilit . Mr. Johnson indicated that some of the . He also stated that de endent upon various conditions such as the level in the outfall, the chemical, GX903 eeh form th the the. This CASRN I) is the same CASRN as the chemical that EPA assi ned PMN number Mr. Johnson indicated that the Consent Order applies to the i and not the PPVE process, but due to the community concerns, beginning June 21, 2017, waste from the PPVE process has been collected in temporary storage tanks and will ultimately be shipped for incineration at an offsite facility when a contract is finalized. The production managers for discussed the processes during the opening conference. Summary flow charts for both the and PPVE were provided to the inspection team, a TSCA CBI claim was made for the but not for the PPVE flow chart.(See Exhibit A7 - Document No. 0301F1908562817: PPVE Flow Chart). All the copies of the summary flow chart for the were returned to Mr. Johnson after the discussion due to Chemours? TSCA CBI claim on the process. To ensure that the inspection team fully understood the processes, both production managers were asked to create written summaries of the - and PPVE processes. The summaries were sent to the EPA and ERG after the inspection. During the discussion of worker protection requirements required under the Consent Order, Chemours provided documentation that modifications to the Consent Order, as requested by DuPont, were approved by the EPA on February 1, 2010 (See Exhibit A8 - Document No. 0401F1908562817: EPA Consent Order Modification Letter, February 1, 2010). 2.4. Facility Tour 2.4.1. Introduction As requested, Chemours gave the inspection team a tour of the Facility. The tour mainly focused on the - and PPVE processes. Chemours provided the EPA inspectors with fire resistant jump-suits and rubber gloves. The inspectors used their own hard hats, safety shoes, safety glasses and hearing TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 16 of 45 protection. The inspection team requested the tour to gain a general perspective and knowledge of the production areas to facilitate later review of summary flow charts, process diagrams and other operations information. 2.4.2. Summary PPVE Process Area The first area toured during the inSpection was the PPVE process area. This area is described as the Nafion? IXM Monomers area and is the location of the Facility waste water treatment plant (WWTP). This area is on the east side of the Facility and is approximately 2,000 feet from the Cape Fear River. The land between the PPVE process area and the river is mostly wooded. For the PPVE process, Chemours did not provide any information on releases of GX902 or GX903. Chemours did rovide the followin information indicatin Assuming all the is converted to GX903 or GX902 and is incinerated at the same ef?ciency as provided for the waste streams, the percentage released There was not enough information provided to the inspection team to calculate the infout of the Chemours also indicated that as of June 21, 2017, KOH scrubber wastes are no longer being sent to the WWTP (collected and incinerated/deep well injected). - Process Area The next area toured durin - the insection was the Process Summar Flow Dia_ram and Exhibits and B12, The information provided by Chemours durin and subsequent to the inspection indicates that the estimated annual air releases from the are less than percent. Chemours released approximately from the - process. Based on Chemours batch sizes, batches! ear, and annual production volume estimates, the percentage released is calculated to be approximately percent. For details on the - estimate emissions, see Exhibit B42 - Air Emission Data. 2.5. Closing Conference The inspection team concluded the ?rst inspection day, June 28, 2017, at approximately 3:30 pm and scheduled the closing conference for the next day. The inspection team arrived at the main office building at approximately 9:00 am on June 29, 2017. Mr. Johnson assisted the inspection team in obtaining facility badges and escorted the team to the conference room. The inspection team held an TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 17 of 45 inspection team only private meeting at the beginning of the second inspection day to discuss topics needing clarification. The closing conference began with a discussion of the topics needing clarification. The inspection team provided Chemours with a iist of information that would need to be sent to the EPA and ERG after the inspection. A TSCA Receipt for Samples and Documents, EPA Form 7740-1 (See Exhibit A4 TSCA Receipt for Samples and Documents) was created for the documents the inspection team collected during the inspection. Lastly, the inspection team discussed the EPA and ERG next steps which would be a review of the information provided by Chemours and potential requests for further information. The inspection concluded at approximately 12:30 pm. 3. FINDINGS 3.1. Introduction The findings discussed below are based on statements and observations made during the inspection and on information provided by Chemours after the inSpection. For consistency and clarity, chemical substances referenced in this report will be referred to as follows from this point forward regardless of how the chemical substances are referred to in referenced documents and diagrams, unless otherwise identified: TSCA NEC inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 18 of 45 I 111"" 11' TSCA NBC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetlcville Works Page 19 of 45 PPVE vinyl ether Systematic Namc: Propane, CASRN: 1623-05-8 Molecular Formula: CSFIOO PMN: None TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chcmours Company Fayettcvillc Works Page 20 of 4S 3.2. TSCA Section 4 Evaluation Based on Chemours? raw material lists for 2015 and 2016, Chemours purchased from a domestic su lier. The chemical substance was once subject to a . Chemical was used at the Facilit in the reduction of . The chemical was sent offsite for incineration as part of the material collected in the waste ?uorocarbon system. 3.3. TSCA Section 5 Evaluation 3.3.1. PPVE Process 3.3.1.1. PPVE Process Discussion DuPont and later Chemours in 2015, manufactured PPVE and - for commercial use. PPVE and are manufactured in the PPVE process. Based on the intended use, PPVE and - are sub'ect to TSCA. The PPVE roduction rocess involves the followin ste s: . For a detail description of the production of PPVE and see: (1) Section 3.4.5.2 of this report Discussion); (2i Exhibit B3 PPVE Process Narrative); (3) Exhibit A7 -PPVE Flow Chart; and (4) Exhibit BZ During the inspection, Chemours rovided a flow chart of the PPVE process. The PPVE Flow Chart indicates that either i or may be present in the NPDES ef?uent discharged into the Cape Fear River de endin on the level of the final ef?uent to outfall 002. For details on the release of mi as discussed during the inspection, see Exhibit A7 - PPVE Flow Chart. During the inspection, the inspection team requested a written detail summary of the PPVE process. On July 31, 2017, Chemours submitted to Region 4 and ERG a written summar of the PPVE rocess See Exhibit: B3 - PPVE Process Narrative . The PPVE Process Narrative stated Based on the PPVE Process Narrative, TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company - Fayetteville Works Page 21 of 45 According to statements made by Mr. Johnson during the inspection, the PPVE process and its waste streams are not regulated by the Consent Order for the chemical substances manufactured or processed for commercial purposes in the PPVE process. 3.3.1.2. PPVE Process Waste Stream Based on Chemours? Jul 31, 2017, PPVE Process Narrative, In an effort to determine when Chemours first became aware of the reiease/forming of the Gen)! chemicals in the WWTP or Cape Fear River, on August 15, 2017, Region 4 submitted a letter to Chemours regarding a description of the PPVE process. Region 4?s request was as follows: ?Regarding the PPVE process, when (date) did Chemours become aware that the GenX chemicals were being released to the Cape Fear River or formed in the Cape Fear River? For the period prior to the TSCA Inspection, if Chemours has analytic data/sample results of: (A) the earliest signs of - contamination in the PPVE sumps; or (B) earliest releases/forming of GenX chemicals in the Cape Fear River, please submit those records to the On Se tember 1, 2017, Chemours indicated Chemours did not provide a direct res onse concerning the date/time period as to when they first became aware that - andfor was released into the Cape Fear River or formed in the Cape Fear River. However, during the June 15, 2017, public meeting between Chemours and North Carolina local and state officials, Chemours indicated that DuPont was aware since 1980 that GenX was released into the Cape Fear River as a byproduct. Chemours also provided analytic data for the time period covering June 14, 2017, and July 28, 2017 (See Exhibit B5 - Chemours letter to the EPA with analytical data). During the inspection, the PPVE Flow Chart did not indicate that was a component in the ef?uent that was released from Chemours WWTP to outfall 002. The PPVE Process Narrative rovided Chemours after the ins ection indicated that . For details on the formation and releases of the see Exhibit B3 - PPVE Process Narrative. According to Chemours, as discussed during the inSpection, the PPVE process and its waste stream are not subject to the Consent Order. For the PPVE rocess, Chemours did not provide any information on releases of wassenno . Chemours did provide the following information: 1 the waste ?uorocarbon system (incineration) in 2016; and (2) the TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayettevillc Works Page 22 of 4S efficient in removin (based on stack testing). Assuming all the - is converted to and is incinerated at the same ef?ciency as provided for the - waste streams, the percent released is percent. Suf?cient information is not available for the inspection team to calculate the - infout of the . Chemours also indicated that KOH scrubber wastes are no longer being sent to the WWTP (collected and incinerated/deep well injected). Based on the information (recordst?discussions) provided by Chemours, there is no indication that Chemours informed the EPA of the PPVE process, as it relates to the presence of and in the ef?uent leaving the WWTP and the formation of in the combined effluent going to outfall 002 which was ultimately discharged into the Cape Fear River. Based on the PPVE Process Narrative, rior to June 21, 2017, . The PPVE Process Narrative did not indicate how much or what percent of the waste was captured. (See Exhibit B3 - PPVE Process Narrative). 3.3.2. - Process 3.3.2.1. PMN, Issuance of Order and Notice of Commencement DuPont submitted a consolidated PMN to the EPA for the manufacture of . The EPA identified the PMNs as respectively. Based on the information provided by Chemours, GenX is the technology used to identify the production process of the GenX chemicals. The GenX chemicals (PMN Substances) are manufactured in the Process. Based on the PMNs, the intended uses for the In addition, the intended uses for On or about As referenced in the Preamble to the Consent Order (Preamble, Section V, Conclusions of Law). the followin findin constitute the basis for the Consent Order: .(See Exhibit B7- Consent Order, Section I). The chemical substances that are subject to the Consent Order are the same two chemical substances that are associated with the - process waste stream that were TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayettevillc Works Page 23 of 45 either: (1) formed in the (2) formed in the or (3) formed in the Cape Fear River. During the PMN review period and during the negotiation of the Consent Order, Chemours did not provide any information to the EPA concernin (1) the ef?uent wastewater from the PPVE process that contained some and (2) the formed in the combined or in the Cape Fear River. On Director of the Chemical Control Division (Jim Willis) signed the TSCA Section 5(e) Consent Order, and on DuPont?s re resentative (James Hoover) signed the Consent Order. The effective date of the Consent Order was h. (See Exhibit B7 - TSCA Section 5(e) Order On Wommenced the first commercial production of at the Facility. On DuPont submitted to Of?ce of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP a TSCA Notice of Commencement (NOC) for (See Exhibit: B8 TSCA NOC it. On DuPont commenced the first commercial productionof. at the Facility. On DuPont submitted an NOC to OSCPP for . (See Exhibit: B9 TSCA NOC . The following iroducts are associated with the two PMN substances: (1) and (2) (GXQOSC, GX905 and GX902). (See Exhibit A9 - Document No. 0501F1908562817: Safety Data Sheet Exhibit A10 - Document No. 0601F1908562817: Safety Data Sheet Exhibit A11 - Document No. 0701F1908562817: Safety Data Sheet Exhibit A12 - Document No. 0801F1908562817: Safety Data Sheet and Exhibit A13 - Document No. 0901F 1908562817: Copies of Product Labels (GX905D, GX902, GX903). 3.3.2.2. - Process Discussion Based on the PPVE Process Narrative, - is produced in the PPVE recess. The PPVE production process is located at the Vin Ether North area of the Facilit . The i is transported from the PPVE process area via for use as a process for production of the PMN substances Accordin to the - Process Summar the roduction of involves ste includin . In addition to the details on the production of the two PMN substances in the Flow Diagram and Exhibit B12 - - Process Summary. process description below, for process, see Exhibit B11 - - Process TSCA NEC inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chenmurs Company Fayetteville Works Page 24 of 45 Based on the discussions with Chemours durin the ins ection and as referenced in the Process Flow Dia ram, . For details on the process, see Exhibit B11 - - Process release, containment and disposal of ef?uent from the Flow Diagram and Exhibit BIZ - - Process Summary. Process Summar re ardin air emissions, In addition, as referenced in the For details on Process Summary and air emissions, see Exhibit B11 - Process Flow Diagram, Exhibit 312 - Exhibit B42 - Air Emission Data. The followin feedstocks are used in the - rocess: 1 (2) h; and The EPA regulates the manufacture, rocessin use, distribution in commerce, disposal, and release of m. senx chemicals and pursuant to the Consent Order. 3.3.2.3. SCA 5 e) Consent Order Discussion Terms Prohibition Based on the Consent Order, DuPontr'Chemours was prohibited from manufacturing or importing and beyond the production limits as referenced in the Consent Order unless they (DuPontr'Chemours) conducted the studies referenced in the Consent Order and submit all the final reports. On or about DuPont submitted to the EPA, the final reports for the trigger testing requirements as referenced in Section II of the Consent Order. (See Exhibit B13 DuPont December 10, 2010, Letter). TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 25 of 45 (See Exhibit 814 2 DuPont April 27, 2011, Letter). On or about Au ust 1, 2011, the EPA acknowled ed the recei of the studies and determined that i. The letter also indicated that DuPont had ful?lled its obli ations under the Consent (See Exhibit B15 EPA August 1, 201 1, Letter) Testing TSCA Section 8 Re ortin Based on the Consent Order, any information on the PMN substances which reasonably supports the conclusion that the PMN substances present a substantial risk of injury to health or the environment is required to be reported under the TSCA Section 8(e) policy statement found at 43 Federal Register 11110 (March 16, 1978), as amended at 52 Federal Register 20083 (May 29, 1987), shall reference the appropriate PMN identification number for the substance and shall contain a statement that the substance is subject to a consent order. As indicated previously in the PPVE rocess discussion section of this re ort, based on the PPVE Process Narrative: Subsequent to the inspection, Region 4 requested information from Chemours concerning the date when they became aware that the PMN substances were either released to the Cape Fear River or formed in the Cape Fear River. Chemours reSponse referenced the date - they spun off from DuPont. For details on the release/forming of the PMN substances in the WWTP or Cape Fear River, see Exhibit B3 PPVE Process Narrative. As also indicated in the PPVE process discussion section of this report, on August 15, 2017, Region 4 requested additional information from Chemours as a follow up to the June 2011r inspection, The request was as follows: ?Regarding the PPVE process, when (date) did Chemours become aware that the GenX chemicals were being released to the Cape Fear River or formed in the Cape Fear River? For the period prior to the TSCA Inspection, if Chemours has analytic data/sample results of: (A) the earliest signs of Dimer Acid Fluoride (DAF) contamination in the PPVE sumps; or (B) earliest releases/forming of GenX chemicals in the Cape Fear River, please submit those records to the 0n Se tember l. 20I7. Chemours? res onse indicated that (See Exhibit B4 - Chemours September 1, 2017, letter to the EPA). Chemours did not indicate when they first became aware the - and/or was released into the Cape Fear River and/or formed in the Cape Fear River. In addition, during the June 15, 2017, public meeting between Chemours and North Carolina?s local and state of?cials, Chemours TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayettevillc Works Page 26 of 45 indicated they have been aware since 1980, that GenX was released to the Cape Fear River as a byproduct. During the inSpection, the Region 4 Inspection Team asked Chemours about the chemical substance that was discovered in the Ca Fear River. Chemours stated that Chemours did not provide any records or documentation in response to the requests re ardin when the ?rst became aware of the releaser'forming of the PMN substances in the Cape Fear River. Protection in the Workplace Chemours has the following dermal protective items for use in the - process area: gloves; full body chemical protective clothing; chemical goggles or equivalent protection; and clothing which covers other ex osed area of the arms, le and torso. Chemours rovided documentation demonstrating (See Exhibit Bl? Chemours Permeation Testing). Respiratory Protection: Initially, for the - process area associated with -, the Consent Order re uired the use, at a minimum, of a . On Au ust 20, 2009, DuPont requested the approval to use (See Exhibit B17 DuPont August 20, 2009, Letter). On February 1, 2010, the EPA modified the Consent Order in res onse to DuPont?s re uest authorizin . In the Februar 1, 2010, letter, roved DuPont?s re uest to use . (See Exhibit 818 EPA February 1, 2010, Modi?cation of Order). New Chemical Exposure Limit (NCEL) The NCEL section of the Consent Order details an . In order to deviate from the respirator requirements, certain criteria must be met: TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 27 of 45 As stated in the Protection in the Workplace, Respirator Protection discussion above, the EPA reviewed DuPont?s request and stated the use of met the Seiection ofA r0 riarc Res irarory Protection for measured concentrations less than or equal to ENCEL. Performance Criteria for Sampling and Analytical Method The initial calibration language in the Consent Order was also modified. The original language stated: the initial calibration shall at a minimum consist of ?ve (5) calibration The revised Consent Order states the method utilized six calibration standards. Further, the modi?ed order states modi?ed calibration ranging from 0.01 to 0.2 Lastl the Subse uent Calculation text was chan ed to reflect that the spike must be prepared H. Manufacturing According to the Consent Order, DuPont/Chemours shall not cause, encourage, or suggest the manufacture or import of the PMN substances by any other person. This prohibition shall ex ire 75 da 5 after romul ation ofa final Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) governing the and under Section of TSCA unless DuPont/Chemours is notified on or before a Federal Court action occurs seeking judicial review of the SNUR. Once this prohibition expires, DuPontr'Chemours shall notif each person whom it causes, encourages or suggests to manufacture or import the and of the existence of the SNUR. To date, no SNUR has been promulgated for either chemical EPA identifies as or Control of Ef?uent and Emissions (During the Manufacture of? and - The Consent Order states that DuPont/Chemours ?shall recover and capture (destroy) or recycle? the and ?at an overall efficiency of 99% from all the effluent process streams and air emissions (point source and fugitive).? Process Flow Dia ram and Based on the . Chemours stated that no effluent from the process goes to the WWTP. Re ardin the air emissions from the rocess, the For detail, see Exhibit B11 Process Flow Diagram and Exhibit B12 - Process Summary. As reference in the process discussion, the air emissions estimate from the - process is . For details on the - releases (ef?uent and emission), see the - process discussion above. In addition, for details on the PPVE release, see the PPVE process discussion above. TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetleville Works Page 28 of 4S Distribution The Consent Order states DuPont/Chemours shall distribute the and - only to a person who has agreed in writing (prior to distribution) to: 1. Comply with the same requirements and restrictions stated in the Protection in the Workplace and the NCEL sections of the Consent Order; to a erson who will either and 2. Distribute the and onl from all ef?uent process streams and air emissions (point source and fugitive) at an recover and capture (destroy) or recycle the overall efficienc of 99%; and 3. Distribute the in aqueous dispersion of the polymer roduct or on a heat treated solid roduct such that the contents polymer residr and total (anion peak in the are below level using the Accelerated Solvent Extraction (ASE) method. DuPont/Chemours may distribute the and outside of DuPont/Chemours for temporar trans ort and stora e. Based on the records associated with the distribution and users of and there was no information showing that any of the PMN substances were temporary transported and stored. The distribution records for both PMN substances show that Chemours shipped them to their production sites in Deep Water, New Jersey (Chambers Works); Washington, West Virginia (Washington Works); or the substances were exported to foreign countries. Review of safety data sheets for the and all products containing the - indicate distribution of all products to be in aqueous dispersion form. A visual inspection of the - product storage area by the Region 4 Inspection Team found only final product containers with aqueous products. Recordkeeping The Consent Order states that DuPontt?Chemour-s ?shall maintain records until 5 years after the date created and shall make them available for inspection and copying by the EPA in accordance with Section 11 of The records associated with Chemours compliance with the Consent Order and other sections of TSCA were requested during the inspection and were either provided during the inspection or following the inspection. The records provided to the EPA covered activities that occurred before July 1, 2015, (the date Chemours spun off from DuPont) and activities that occurred on or after July 1, 2015. However, when the EPA requested records pertaining to: (1) when Chemours became aware that the GenX chemicals were being released to the Cape Fear River or formed in the Cape Fear River; and (2) the analytic data/sample results associated with si ns of contamination in the PPVE sumps, Chemours stated: . Prior to that Request For Pre-inspection Information The Consent Order states that the EPA may conduct compliance ins ections of DuPont/Chemours facilities and conveyances associated with the and - TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayettcville Works Page 29 of 45 and that the EPA may contact DuPont/Chemours ?in advance to request information pertinent to the scheduling and contact of such inspections." Prior to the inspection, the EPA did contact Chemours to schedule the inspection and provided information requests as part of the letter. Chemours provided most of the information requested in the letter during the inspection. Information that was not readily available to Chemours during the inspection was provided to the inspectors following the inspection. Subsequent to the inspection, Region 4 submitted several information requests to Chemours and Chemours responded to the requests in phases. Successors Liability Upon Transfer of Consent Order On or about February 6, 2015, DuPont submitted a TSCA Notice of Transfer to the EPA re ardin the manufacturing rights and liabilities associated with and a. On or about July 1, 2015, Chemours spun off from DuPont. 3.3.3. Non-GenX Evaluation 3.3.3.1. Exemptions Low Volume Based on the records or statements provided to the EPA by Chemours, the Facility did not manufacture or import any chemical substances that were subject to a low volume exemption. Research and Development Based on the records or statements provided to the EPA, Chemours did not engage in any research and development activities associated with new chemical substances at the Facility. Elm Based on the records or statements provided to the EPA, Chemours did not submit any polymer exemption notices to the EPA. 3.3.3.2. Burro ide Intent Based on the records or statements provided to the EPA, within the past two years, Chemours did not submit any bona fide intent to the EPA for the Facility. 3.3.3.3. Significant New Use Rules Based on the records provided to the EPA, Chemours manufactured three chemical substances that are sub'ect to a SNUR: 1 TSCA NEC inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 30 of 45 Based on the results of the review of Chemours? production records and TSCA 2016 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) submission, Chemours manufactured is subject to a SNUR romul ated at 40 CFR The effective date of the SNUR is i Pursuant to 40 CFR 721. the si nificant new use for an use other than as an . Pursuant to 40 CFR 721. ned and operated so that . A roeess with Chemours indicated in their Au ust 22, 2017, letter to the EPA: . In 2015, approximately of the uantit of manufactured at Fa etteville Works was not used on site. Greater than is defined as a urocess that is desi - . The remainin pounds) were shipped from Fa etteville Works to' . Chemours understands that (See Exhibit B19 - Chemours August 21, 2017, Letter). Based on the rocess descri tion, ?ow diagram and use of -, Chemours manufactured a: the Facility. The report indicated that Chemours manufactured pounds of . roximately was used at the Facility and the . (See Exhibit B20 2016 Amended CDR). Based on records submitted to the EPA, Chemours provided documentation (Safety Data Sheet) informing the following customers that was subject to a SNUR: The Facilit used . (See Exhibit B21- Flow Diagrams and Production day/volume). TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 31 of 45 The columns in the tables below reference: (1) the production processes; and (2) CASRNs of the substances (intermediates/raw materials/end products) present in the production of the CASRNS of the - CASRNS of the Substances Present in nation Substancesl?ment in mm -Processes Production Processes - processes referenced in the in each of the was subject to a SNUR (the effective date), . Pursuant to 40 CFR 721. Chemours used tables above. As of romul ated at 40 CFR 721. . As referenced in 40 CFR 721. si nificant new use TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 Page 32 of 45 The Chemours Company Works The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) obtained air emission estimates data for the PPVE and - process areas generated from Chemours? website. The air emission estimates ro'ected the otential for the release of nine chemical substances associated with the processes. (See Exhibit 322- Air Emission Estimates). The followin CASRNs are that are resent in the . Chemours? air emission estimates for 2012 through 2016 proiected the release of these chemical substances when used in a production process. The table below (2012 2016 air emissions estimates references: 1 Chemours designated Emission Point (2) the substances present in the that could potentially be released to the air; and (3) projected annual releases (pounds) of the substance present in the processes. Substances Present in Emission Point ID Processes Released to Air- 1012 (Pounds) 2013 (PoundSJ 1014 (Pounds) 2015 (Pounds) 2016 (Pounds) and r2 Based on Chemours? air emission estimates, it is ro'ected that the chemical substances referenced above (substances present in the rocesses) could potentially be released to the air. Pursuant to 40 CFR 721. (SNUR), can only be used - TSCA NEC Inspection Report The Chemours Company - Fayetteville Works Report Date: April 24, 2018 Page 33 of 45 . The projected release of signi?cant quantities of air emissions associated with the chemical substances referenced in the table above, may constitute a significant new use of -. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1), person who intends to manufacture, import, or process for commercial purposes a chemical substance identified in a specific section" 40 CF Part 721, Subpart E, ?and intends to engage in a significant new use of the substance identified in that section? must submit a significant new use notice (SNUN) as specified under the provisions of Section of TSCA, 40 CFR Part 720 and 40 CFR 721.25. Based on a review of the EPA records regarding submissions for -, DuPont/Chemours did not submit a SNUN to the EPA. Based on the projected air emission release (estimates) associated with the chemicals present in the processes, Chemours did not submit SNUN to the EPA at least 90 da 5 rior to usin as an . The processes are located in the process areas. Based on Chemours records associated with the use of -, between July 1, 2015 and June 29, 2017, Chemours used days for a combined total of pounds of -. For those da 5 when Chemours used/consumed -, the daily amount consumed ranged from pounds. To determine the amount of - that was actually used on a daily basis between July 1, 2015 and June 29, 2017, see Exhibit B40 Production and Use. DuPont submitted a consolidated PMN to the EPA to manufacture . The EPA identified the PMNs as PMN substances are present in the - production process (See Exhibit B37- Block Diagram for -). The confidential records associated with DuPont?s consolidated PMN for available through Virtual Deskto Infrastructure (VDI stem identifies as a used in the production of . A review of the process rovided to the EPA subsequent to the inspection revealed that was not included in the Summar Block Diagram also provided See Exhibit: B23 Chemours September 6, 2017, letter and Summar Block Diagram). is manufactured in Chemours? process (See Exhibit B38- Flow diagram and information in system). - is produced for commercial purpose. In addition, based on Chemours? March 29, 2018, letter isee Exhibit 41 March 29,2018 Letter), - is also used as As of? was subject to a SNUR romul ated at 40 CFR 721. . Based on the SNUR romulgated at 40 CFR 721.-, i. Manufacture, import, or processing of subject to reporting as a significant new use. Chemours? letter dated September 6, 2017, listed several factors (use, production, pollution prevention, and hazard assessment) associated with the PMN submission as it relates to See Exhibit: B23 Chemours September 6, 2017 Letter. TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayeltcville Works Page 34 of 45 Based on the EPA records, there is no record on ?le indicatin that either Chemours or its predecessor (DuPont) submitted a SNUN to the EPA for . Chemours? September 6, 2017, letter indicated: In its Se tember 6, 2017 Letter, Chemours did not state that a SNUN was submitted to the EPA . Instead, in the letterfsummar Chemours stated that, For detail and confirmation of Chemours statement, see Exhibit B23 - September 6, 2017, Letter and Exhibit B4 - September 1, Letter. Pursuant to 40 CFR a person who intends to manufacture, import, or process for commercial purposes a chemical substance identified in a specific section in 40 CFR Part 721, Subpart E, and intends to engage in a significant new use of the substance identified in that section must submit a SNUN as specified under the revisions of Section of TSCA, 40 CFR Part 720 and 40 CFR 721.25. a? reduction records, on July 16, 2015, Chemours exceeded the SNUR Based on review, Chemours did not submit a SNUN as required pursuant to the provisions of TSCA Section 40 CFR Part 720 and 40 CFR 721.25. Chemours letter dated October 4, 2017, stated The October 4, 2017 Letter Exhibit B34 also stated if the TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 35 of 45 Based on production records for - and - between Jul 5, 2015, and Jul 16, 2015 (11 day period), Chemours manufactured a total of . During this eriod (Jul 5, 2015 and July 16, 2015), the production of generated percent . Accordin to the March 29, 2018 Letter (Exhibit B41), used was manufactured for commercial or ose. Based on roduction records, on July 16, 2015, Chemours threshold . Between July 16, 2015, and June 29, 2017, Chemours manufactured . Between July 16, 2015, and June 29, 2017, the daily production range Wilts . To determine the amount of - that was produced on a daily basis between July 16, 2015, and June 29, 2017, see Exhibit B40 - Production and Use and Exhibit B41 March 29, 2013 Letter. were transferred from the unit to For details on the transfer of and . sec A review of the shows unit by way of Exhibits B43 and B44 - - The production records indicated %manufactured at the Facility. - is sub'ect to a SNUR romul ated at 40 CFR 721. . The effective date of the SNUR for was The si nificant new use for includes the manufacture includin im ort or rocessing for The manufacture includin im ort or rocessin of Chemours indicated . In the reaction recess, . Based on Chemours? 2016 CDR report, was used at the Facility as In DuPont submitted a PMN to the EPA to manufacture a chemical that the EPA identified as for use as time of the PMN submission, was listed on the TSCA inventory, but the was not listed on the TSCA inventory (See Exhibit: B25- Chemours October '13, 2017, Letter). Based on Chemours? 2016 CDR report, between 2012 and 2015, DuPont/Chemours manufactured the This means DuPont manufactured before they manufactured the A review of con?dential database revealed DuPont did not submit a Notice of Commencement (NOC) to EPA when was manufactured for commercial purpose as TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 36 of 45 an . This means - was not added/listed on the TSCA inventory. . Between October 10, 2015, and November 27, 2015, Chemours manufactured for commercial purpose. The production record did not reference the amount of that was produced during the production of During the production period (October 10, 2015, and The production of November 27, 2015), the record did not indicate the actual number of da 5 was produced. For details on the production volume associated with of see Exhibit B26- July 31, 2017 Letter). (See Exhibit B27- TSCA Certified Statement). Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 720, a chemical substance that is not listed on the TSCA inventory is classified as a new chemical substance. Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 720, manufacturers, including importers, must submit a PMN for a new chemical substance at least ninety (90) days prior to the ?rst commercial production. A review of the process flow diagram shows Based on certi?ed statement is not listed on the TSCA inventori. According to the certified statement, is regulated under a was not listed on the TSCA Inventory when it was produced for commercial purpose, Chemours was required to submit a PMN to the EPA for pursuant to 40 CFR 720,22. Based on confidential records (VDI), Chemours did not submit a PMN for 3.4. TSCA Section 8 Evaluation 3.4.1. Preliminary Assessment Information Rule (PAIR) Based on the records provided to EPA, Chemours did not manufacture, import, or use any chemical substance that was subject to reporting under PAIR. 3.4.2. Allegation of Signi?cant Adverse Reaction Based on the discussions with Chemours representatives and review of the records for the past two years, there was no allegation of significant adverse reaction on ?le for the chemical substances manufactured, imported, processed or distributed at the Facility. 3.4.3. Health and Safety Studies Based on the discussions with Chemours representatives regarding health and safety studies, Mr. Johnson indicated they would check with the corporate of?cials to confirm the status of studies. Chemours did not include any health and safety studies in their response. 3.4.4. Substantial Risk to Human Health/Environment TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 37 of 45 During the inspection, the inspection team inquired about: (1) documentation of allegations of adverse reactions that may be subject to TSCA Section 8(e) reporting; (2) a list of Section 8(d) health and safety studies submitted to EPA and copies of any known health and safety information that were not submitted to and (3) any substantial risk information not known to EPA (TSCA Section At the time of the inspection, Chemours indicated they had no such records as referenced above, and they would check with their corporate office in Delaware, and, if applicable, they would submit the records to EPA and ERG. No records pertaining to TSCA Sections 8(d) or 8(e) were submitted to Region 4 or ERG. As discussed in Section 3.3.1 PPVE Process) above, the ef?uent from the PPVE process contains the PMN substance and depending on the pH level in the combined ef?uent to the outfall the may convert to the other PMN substance which is discharged into the Cape Fear River. During a public meeting on June 15, 2017, between Chemours and the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners, Chemours indicated that dating back to 1980; GenX (which Chemours referred to as a byproduct) was also a component in the wastewater discharged to the Cape Fear River. The Consent Order 4, Testing) indicates that any information on the PMN substances (- and which reasonably supports the conclusion that the PMN substances present a substantial risk of injury to health or the environment is required to be reported under TSCA Section 8(e) policy statement at 43 Federal Register 11110 (March 16, 1978) as amended at 52 Federal Register 20083 (May 29, 1987), and shall reference the appropriate PMN identification number for this substance and shall contain a statement that the substance is subject to a consent order. (See Exhibit A15 Federal Register, May 29, 1987) As discussed in the PPVE process (Section 3.3.1.2), Chemours did not rovide an record as to when they first became aware that the PMN substances and H) were either released from the WWTP or formed in the Cape Fear River. 3.4.5. Chemical Data Reporting CDR Introduction On September 20, 2016, Chemours submitted a TSCA 2016 CDR report for chemical substances. Based on review of Chemours? 2015 production volumes and comparison with the submitted CDR report, the followin chemical substances were not re orted to two si nificant figures of accuracy on the 2016 CDR: (1) (2) and (3) . After June 29, 2017, without notice from the EPA, on August 3, 2017, Chemours submitted an amended CDR (revising production volumes) for: and -. In addition to Chemours 2016 CDR submission, Chemours did not include the following chemical substances on the 2016 CDR: (1) (2) and (3) I 3.4.5.2. CDR Discussion Based on the 2015 production records, Chemours manufactured pounds of The original 2016 CDR report indicated pounds of TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 38 of 45 were produced in 2015. The amended 2016 CDR report indicated - pounds of. were produced (See Exhibit B28 - 2016 Original CDR and Amended CDR). Based on the amended 2016 CDR and calculation, the original 2016 CDR was not reported to two signi?cant figures of accuracy. For calendar year 2015, was over-reported on the 2016 CDR. Based on the 2015 production records, Chemours manufactured . The original 2016 CDR report indicated ounds of in 2015. The amended 2016 CDR report indicated pounds of produced (See Exhibit: B29 -2016 Original CDR and Amended CDR). ounds of - were produced were Based on the amended 2016 CDR and calculation, the initial 2016 CDR was not reported to two significant figures of accuracy. For calendar year 2015, was under-reported on the 2016 CDR. Based on the 2015 production records, 2016 original CDR report indicated amended 2016 CDR report indicated B30 - 2016 CDR, and amended CDR). Chemours manufactured - pounds of -. The ounds of were produced in 2015. The pounds of were produced (See Exhibit: Based on the amended 2016 CDR. and calculation, the initial 2016 CDR was not reported to two significant figures of accuracy. For calendar year 2015, - was under reported on the 2016 CDR. Based on the PPVE Process Narrative, the PPVE Flow Chart and the Block Dia ram, durin the ?rst ste of the rocess, the Production (See Exhibit A7 - PPVE Flow Chart, Exhibit B2 - and B3 - PPVE Process Narrative). In the second ste of the PPVE rocess, the TSCA NBC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 39 of 45 . (See Exhibit A7 PPVE Flow Chart, Exhibit 32 - - Production and B3 - PPVE Process Narrative). In an effort to confirm whether the - used to produce - is actually on August 14, 2017, Region 4 requested additional information from Chemours via email and in a letter dated August 15, 2017 (See Exhibit B31 - EPA August 15, 2017 Letter). The request was as follows: ?Regarding the PPVE process, the flow diagram shows that the goes either production process or it is used in the sul?mnt steps to produce . Based on the review of the PPVE dia ram, it a ears that the that can be classified as a ?cmmours classified please explain the isolation of the in the - is used to produce the - as an process.? On August 22, 2017, Chemours provided an ex lanation on the 2016 CDR re ort for statement is as foliows: ?The uantities of that are used . However, For ur oses of the 2016 CDR re ort, Chemours indicated that the . ChemOurs is treating the entire production of as an isolated intermediate. (See Exhibits: B33- Chemours July 31, 2017 letter). Reiion 4 first became aware there was an additional step/process between the when Chemours submitted a response letter dated August 22, 2017. As a result, on Se tember 20, 2017, Re ion 4 re uested the followin information from Chemours: On October 4. 20l7, Chemours res onded to Re ion 4?s re uest. Chemours res onse indicated: Based on the Chemours October 4, 2017 letter, in 2015, {See Exhibit B34 Chemours? October 4, 2017, Letter and Exhibit B35 PPVE Flow Chart). TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayettcvillc Works Page 40 of 45 In an attempt to identify the actual location of the Region 4 and ERG reviewed the PPVE Based on the review of the the EPA was able to locate . However, on the same da Au ust 14, 2017) that Region 4 inquired about the of process, Chemours made a revision to the system associated with . (See Exhibit B36 - W553421). W553421 shows that on Au ust 14, 2017, there was a revision associated with the . Based on the review of the - production process, Chemours classi?ed as an In -, DuPont submitted a consolidated PMN to EPA to manufacture and . As referenced in the PMN, was used as an for production of . The EPA identified the PMNs as . DuPont submitted a TSCA NOC for both PMN substances. In 2012, DuPont submitted a TSCA 2012 CDR report to the EPA for both PMN substances that were produced at the Facility. In 2015, Chemours used the same roduction site (the Facility) to produce both chemicals substances. Chemours included on the TSCA 2016 CDR, but failed to report the that was used to produce Chemours? Block Dia am for - shows - as a being transferred to a Based on the PMN submission, is an . (See Exhibit 1337 - - Block Diagram). Based on the Chemours? March 29, 2018 Letter (Exhibit B41 Chemours does ?generated asa ,The March 29, 2018 Letter also indicated between July 1, 2015, and June 29, 2017, Chemours Based on the 2015?2017 roduction volume for Chemours manufactured a reportable in 2015. Pursuant to 40 CFR 711.5, a report must be submitted for any chemical substance that is on the TSCA Master Inventory File at the beginning of a submission eriod described in 711.20, unless the chemical substance is specifically excluded by 711.6. was on the TSCA Master Inventory at the beginning of a submission period and based on the submission, - was not exempt from the 2016 CDR requirements. Chemours did not include in the Facility?s 2016 CDR, as required by 40 CFR 711.5. In 2015, Chemours manufactured Block Flow Diagram, - is a use in the production of either Diagram). In addition, the durin the reaction during the production of . Based on the that is transferred to the (See Exhibit: B38 - roduction summary indicated certain also are for Block Flow enerated (See Exhibit B4 - Chemours September 1, 2017 Letter to the EPA). TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 41 of 45 Based on the information referenced in the - Block Flow dia ram and written response that was transferred from the . In addition, for production of in VDI and Exhibit is also listed as a as referenced in . For details on the use of B41). Based on the 2016 CDR approximately were roduced in 2015. Based on the Chemours? March 29, 2018 Letter, the roduction of . That meant that approximately were roduced in 2015 (See Exhibit B41 . Chemours? letter dated October 4, 2017, stated are roduced as unit and . The October 4, 2017 Letter Exhibit B38 also stated if the . For details on the production, use and release/disposal of Exhibit B34 - October 4, 2017 Letter. Chemours did not include - in the Facility?s 20.16 CDR that was submitted to the EPA, as required 40 CFR 711.5. Based on Chemours ?March 29, 2018 Letter (Exhibit 41), - is used as an to produce were transferred from the . For details on the transfer of see A review of the P&le shows Exhibits B43 and B44 - In 2015, Chemours manufactured Block Flow Dia ram, . Based on the during the production of that is transferred to the (See Exhibit B38 uction summary indicated certain rocess also are removed durin Block Flow Dia ram). In addition, the . (See Exhibit B4 - Chemours September 1, 2017, Letter to the EPA). Based on the information referenced in the - Block Flow Diagram and Chemours? written res onse summar that is transferred from the rocess to the . In addition, for production of Block Diagram). as referenced in (See in vor and Exhibit B37 - Based on the 2016 CDR, approximately were roduced in 2015. Based on Chemours March 29, 2018 Letter, the roduction of This means approximately Exhibit B41 . Chemours? letter dated October 4, 2017, stated were roduced in 2015 (See are roduced as October 4, Letter (Exhibit BS4), also stated from the - unit are treated as a waste and vented to and captured by the NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 42 of 45 3.5. . For details on the production, use and releaset'diSposal of -, see Exhibit B34 - October 4, Letter. Chemours did not include - in the 2016 CDR that was submitted to the EPA as required by 40 CFR 711.5. Based on Chemours? March 29, 2018 Letter (Exhibit B41), - is used as an - to produce were transferred from the . For details on the transfer of A review of the shows and see Exhibits B43 and B44 - In 2011, DuPont manufactured - at the Facility. DuPont included ?heir 2012 CDR. In 2015, Chemours used the same roduction site the Facility) to produce as an for the production of and . For details on the productionfuse of -, see Exhibit 45 - Co-production of Based on the production volume for the other that is used in the - and processes, Chemours may have produced a reportable quantity (greater than 25,000 pounds) of -. Pursuant to 40 CFR 711.5, a report must be submitted for any chemical substance that is on the TSCA Master Inventory File at the beginning of a submission period described in 711.20, unless the chemical substance is specifically excluded by 711.6. was on the TSCA Master Inventory at the beginning of a submission period. Chemours did not include in the Facili ?s 20l6 CDR, as re uired 40 CFR 7 1.5. Based on Exhibit 45, TSCA Section 12 Evaluation Customers (foreign and domestic that rocessed (GX903 and Various Concentrations of (GX902, GX905C and GenX Acid (GX903) is shipped to Chemours Chambers Works facility in Deep Water, New Jersey. GenX Salt (GX905C, GX905D GX902) is shipped to Chemours Washington Works facility in Washington, West Virginia. GenX Salt (GX905C, GX905D GX902) is exported to the Netherlands. GenX Acid (GX903) and GenX Salt (GX905C, GX905D GX902) are exported to Japan. GenX Salt (GX905D GX902) is exported to China. GenX Salt (GX905D GX902) is exported to India. Export notices dating back to 2015 were submitted to the EPA (See Exhibit: B10 GenX Customer List). 3.6. TSCA Section 13 Evaluation TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Date: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayetteville Works Page 43 of 45 As a follow up to the June 22, 2017, during the inspection, the EPA inspection team asked Chemours if the Facility imported any chemical substance in the past four years. See Exhibit Al- NOI. Chemours stated that all chemical import activities are controlled by the corporate office in Wilmington, Delaware. As a result, Chemours did not provide any records on the import of chemical substances associated with the Facility. Subsequent to the inspection and through coordination with Region 4?s Resource Conservation and Restoration Division, it was disclosed to Re ion 4?s TSCA New and Existin Chemicals Pro ram that the Facilit received im orted ent . The importation of was discussed further with representatives from EPA Headquarters Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). On January 22, 2018, OPPT submitted a written re uest for information to Chemours regarding the reclamation of and The EPA requested the following information: (1) Time period (dates of reclamation); (2) The origin of the waste material and the amount; (3) The reclamation process including process diagrams; (4) The name of the compounds and the amount processed daily; (5) The disposition of the reclaimed materials (end use); (6) The on-site emission point sources and dail release; and 7 A licable statutory reporting requirements for the reclaimed materials (d and . On February 2, 2018, Chemours submitted their response to concerns. On or about March 1, 20l8. OPPT submitted a copy of Chemours? response to Region 4. Based on Chemours response, the spent that was imported for reclamation was included on Chemours Corporate Headquarter 2016 CDR. A review of the confidential CDR database revealed Chemours? Corporate Headquarter submitted a 2016 CDR repoW. For details on the import and reclamation of- and see Exhibit 46 - February 2, 2018 Letter. The remainder of this page is intentionally blank TSCA NEC Inspection Report Report Da1e: April 24, 2018 The Chemours Company Fayettevillc Works Page 44 of 45 4.0. REPORT APPROVAL 4.1. Report- ?my; Verne George lead TSCA Inspector U.S. EPA Region 4 Chemical Management and Emergency Planning Section Daryl HudsonW TSCA Inspector (Contractor to EPA) Eastern Research Group, Inc. Keith Bates Inspector/TSCA CBI DCO U.S. EPA Region 4 Chemical Management and Emergency Planning Section 4.3. Report - Technical Reviewer Gapal firnsina InspectorfI?SCA CBI ADCO U.S. EPA Region 4 Chemical Management and Emergency Planning Section 4.4. Report- A over Rob W. Boolcrnan Sef Region 4 Chemical Management and Emergency Planning Section y/f?/f Date 4/zo//8 Date 76 Date 4/30/59 Dale 2730/18 Date TSCA NEC Inapection Report The Chemoura Company - Fayetteville Works Report Date: April 24. 2018 Page 45 DNS