NC0024406_BCSS_Appendix F_20191231

Corrective Action Plan Update December 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station
APPENDIX F
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
SynTerra

,61p
synTerra
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
3195 PINE HALL ROAD
BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
DECEMBER 2019
PREPARED FOR
r� DUKE
ENERGY.:
CAROLINAS
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS,, LLC
}
David Avard
Project Sciegitist
Ashley Obert, NC LG 2615
Project Manager

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1-1
2.0
LINEAMENT EVALUATION......................................................................................
2-1
2.1
Imagery Selection......................................................................................................2-1
2.2
Lineament Selection and Summary........................................................................
2-1
3.0
DEEP BEDROCK EVALUATION FIELD PROCEDURES AND
IMPLEMENTATION.....................................................................................................
3-1
3.1
Purpose.......................................................................................................................
3-1
3.2
Drilling Methodology and Well Design................................................................
3-1
3.3
Well Development....................................................................................................
3-3
3.4
Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements................................................................
3-4
3.5
Deep Bedrock Groundwater Sampling..................................................................
3-4
4.0
BEDROCK FRACTURE EVALUATION METHODS .............................................
4-1
4.1
Flow Profile Characterization.................................................................................
4-1
4.2
Fracture Hydraulic Apertures.................................................................................4-2
4.3
Fracture Spacing........................................................................................................4-3
4.4
Fracture Orientations................................................................................................4-4
4.5 Summary of Bedrock Fracture Characteristics..................................................... 4-5
4.6 Implications of Bedrock Fracture Network for Groundwater Flow.................4-5
5.0 BEDROCK MATRIX CHARACTERISTICS.............................................................5-1
5.1 Sample Selection........................................................................................................5-1
5.2 Matrix Porosity and Bulk Density.......................................................................... 5-1
5.3 Petrographic Evaluation.......................................................................................... 5-1
5.4 Implications of Bedrock Matrix Characteristics for Flow and Transport ......... 5-2
6.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 6-1
Page i

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Analytical Results for Deep Bedrock Wells
Table 2 Porosity and Bulk Density Results
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1A
USGS Topographic Map without Lineaments
Figure 1B
USGS Map with Inferred Lineaments
Figure 2A
1966 Aerial Photograph without Lineaments
Figure 2B
1966 Aerial Photograph with Lineaments
Figure 3
Deep Bedrock Evaluation Locations
Figure 4
Hydraulic Conductivity Vertical Profiles
Figure 5
Hydraulic Aperture Vertical Profiles
Figure 6
Fracture Spacing Vertical Profile
Figure 7
General Cross Section A -A'
Figure 8
General Cross Section B-B'
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
SynTerra
Attachment A Boring Logs, Well Construction Records and Well Development Logs
Attachment B USGS FLASH Results and Calculations
Attachment C Geophysical Logging Report
Attachment D Petrographic Evaluation of Core Samples
Page ii

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
LIST OF ACRONYMS
02L
15A North Carolina Administrative Code Subchapter 02L
Groundwater Quality Standards
ASTM
American Society for Testing and Materials
BCSS
Belews Creek Steam Station
bgs
below ground surface
CAP
Corrective Action Plan
Core Labs
Core Laboratories
CSA
Comprehensive Site Assessment
DO
Dissolved oxygen
Duke Energy
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
eh
hydraulic aperture
FLASH
Flow -Log Analysis of Single Holes
GEL
GEL Solutions
g
acceleration due to gravity
gpm
gallons per minute
HPF
heat pulse flowmeter
I.D.
inner diameter
IMP
Interim Monitoring Plan
Ka
distribution coefficient
µ
viscosity of water
µg/L
micrograms per liter
µm
microns
mm
millimeters
n
number of individual fractures in a flow layer
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
NTU
nephelometric turbidity unit
ORP
oxidation reduction potential
pw
density of water
PVC
polyvinyl chloride
Q
flow rate
ro
radius of influence
rW
radius of borehole
s
well drawdown
Site
Belews Creek Steam Station
Page iii

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
LIST OF ACRONYMS (CONTINUED)
SP
spontaneous potential
SPR
single point resistance
T
transmissivity
TD
total depth
USGS
U.S. Geological Survey
SynTerra
Page iv

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report provides a detailed characterization of the bedrock near the ash basin at
Belews Creek Steam Station (BCSS or Site). The characterization is based on additional
evaluation of lineaments, the bedrock fracture system, and the bedrock matrix. The
information in this report supplements information presented in the Comprehensive
Site Assessment (CSA) Update (SynTerra, 2017). This report also supports the
development of groundwater remedial alternatives as part of the BCSS Corrective
Action Plan (CAP).
Page 1-1

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
2.0 LINEAMENT EVALUATION
To supplement the CSA bedrock characterization and support the CAP for the ash basin
at BCSS, SynTerra evaluated lineaments in the vicinity of the ash basin. Lineaments are
linear features at ground surface that might have resulted from underlying bedrock
fractures, fracture zones, faults, or other geologic structures and therefore may
represent the approximate vicinity of preferential groundwater flow zones in bedrock.
2.1 Imagery Selection
Aerial imagery and topographic survey information used for the lineament evaluation
met the following criteria:
• The evaluation incorporated a 1966 aerial image produced before ash basin
construction (from 1971 to 1974) and a 1984 topographic map produced after ash
basin construction.
• The scale and resolution are sufficiently detailed to identify apparent linear
features not caused by anthropogenic activity.
Details pertaining to the selected map and image include:
• Topographic survey — The 1984 topographic map was obtained from the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) at http://store.usgs.gov. The scale is 1:24,000.
(Figure 1A)
• Aerial photograph — The April 15, 1966, photograph was obtained from the
USGS Earth Explorer website at http://earthexplorer.usgs.gov. (Figure 2A)
Note that the 1966 aerial photograph predates Belews Reservoir.
2.2 Lineament Selection and Summary
The following USGS list (Clark et al., 2016) summarizes features used to identify
lineaments in this evaluation:
• Linear topographic features
• Straight stream segments
• Aligned gaps in ridges
• Vegetation
The area evaluated for potential lineaments (Figures 1A and 1B) was visually reviewed
in the imagery listed above to identify linear features. A pre -basin construction
Page 2-1

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
topographic survey map, with sufficient topographic resolution for lineament analysis,
was not available for lineament identification in the evaluated area. A post -ash basin
construction topographic survey map was reviewed (Figure 1A); however, because this
map did not provide lineament information within the ash basin footprint, the aerial
photograph was used for this lineament analysis.
Lineaments identified on the 1966 aerial photograph are presented in Figure 2B.
Lineament orientations have been summarized using a 360-degree compass rose
diagram to identify general trends.
Observations from the aerial photograph and topographic survey map are summarized
as follows:
1966 USGS Aerial Photograph
• Twenty-three (23) linear features with a wide range of orientations were
identified.
• A predominant lineament group, oriented northeast and southwest, was
interpreted; 39 percent of the lineaments appear between azimuths of 34 degrees
and 65 degrees
• The remaining 61 percent of the interpreted lineaments cross -cut the
predominant set and present a wide range of orientations.
1984 Topographic Survey
• Linear features generally align with topographic expressions of valleys south,
east, and west of the ash basin area (Figure 1A).
These data indicate a predominant lineament orientation of northeast -southwest, but
with lineaments cross -cutting of various orientations.
Page 2-2

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
3.0 DEEP BEDROCK EVALUATION FIELD PROCEDURES AND
IMPLEMENTATION
3.1 Purpose
To refine the Site conceptual model and further improve the groundwater model being
prepared for the CAP, four additional bedrock wells were installed along the ash basin
dam, which is the only area with bedrock impacts downgradient of the ash basin. The
locations selected for additional bedrock evaluation include AB-1BRD, AB-2BR, AB-
2BRD, and AB-3BR (Figure 3). The scope of work described below was implemented to
evaluate shallow and deep bedrock groundwater quality near the dam and further
refine the understanding of the bedrock fracture system and hydraulic properties.
3.2 Drilling Methodology and Well Design
Prior to drilling activities, subsurface utility scans were conducted in the area of the
proposed borings.
Monitoring wells were installed in accordance with 15A NCAC 02C .0108 Standards of
Construction: Wells Other Than Water Supply. Geologic Exploration conducted
drilling, under contract to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy). Boring
advancement and well design/installation were consistent at all four deep bedrock
evaluation locations.
Augers with an inner diameter (I.D.) of 10.25 inches were initially used to reduce effects
on the dam conditions or safety at each of the four boring locations (AB-1BRD, AB-2BR,
AB-2BRD, AB-3BR). Augers drilled through the unconsolidated material (fill) to
refusal. Mud rotary drilling techniques were used from the point of auger refusal to a
minimum of 5 feet below the top of bedrock. A mud rotary continued to advance
boreholes 30 feet beyond adjacent bedrock well screens. These borings measured 10
inches in diameter. A permanent 8-inch-diameter, schedule 80 flush -joint threaded
polyvinyl chloride (PVC) outer casing was installed to the depth of mud rotary
termination. The casing was fitted with a grout shoe, seated into the rock, and tremie-
grouted into place. Aquaguard was placed between layers of grout at intervals
corresponding to adjacent well screens (AB-1BR and AB-2BR) to mitigate risk of grout
intrusion into potential interconnected fractures. Casings that exceeded 100 feet were
grouted in at least two lifts at approximately 80 feet per lift. After the grout cured (at
least 24 hours), pneumatic air hammer drilling technology was used to advance the
boring through the 10-inch casing to a target depth.
An air hammer of 6.25 inches in diameter was used to extend the boring to a target
depth of approximately 30 feet below the screen interval of the deepest, adjacent
Page 3-1

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
monitoring well screen interval. At target depths, a 6-inch diameter schedule 80 flush -
joint threaded PVC casing was installed and tremie-grouted into place. Casings that
exceeded 100 feet were grouted in at least two lifts with approximately 80 feet per lift.
After the grout cured (at least 24 hours), three of the four borings were advanced to a
prescribed total depth (TD) of 400 feet below ground surface (bgs) (AB-1BRD, AB-
2BRD, AB-3BR). AB-2BR boring was extended to a maximum depth of 240 feet bgs for
use as a shallow, centrally located bedrock well along the dam ridgeline.
During boring advancement below the 6-inch PVC casing, the field scientist noted
potential fractures based on driller and drill rig observations. Estimated yield of water -
bearing zones was determined through downhole circulation after each 10-foot run. On
the determination of a potential water -bearing fracture or fracture zone [yielding
approximately 1 gallon per minute (gpm) or more], a groundwater sample was
collected by air -lifting formation water from the borehole. The sample was screened for
boron with a Hach TNT877 spectrophotometer. Boron is considered the best indicator of
the leading edge of the plume. Samples were field -filtered with a 0.45 micron (µm) filter
to reduce the influence of turbidity (i.e., suspended solids) on screening results. The
Hach TNT877 test kit enables detection of boron concentrations from 50 micrograms per
liter (µg/L) to 2,500 µg/L. The presence or absence of boron at depth is significant for
refining groundwater model assumptions and vertical plume delineation. The North
Carolina groundwater regulatory standard for boron (700 µg/L) was considered during
well construction design.
Field boron screening results were noted during boring advancement. Screening results
are representative of a composite sample from the length of the open borehole. Boron
concentrations greater than 700 µg/L were encountered at depths that were already
monitored by existing transition zone (deep) and bedrock wells. Only one location, AB-
2S/D, had boron greater than 700 µg/L at a depth deeper than existing monitoring well
screen intervals; bedrock well AB-2BR (screened from 165-175 feet bgs) had boron
greater than the groundwater regulatory standard. Borings ABABRD, AB-2BRD, and
AB-3BR were advanced until reaching the prescribed TD to delineate the vertical extent
of boron to concentrations less than the regulatory standard. Vertical evaluation at each
location was deemed complete when the specified TD was reached, and field screening
results from packer tested intervals indicated boron concentrations were decreasing and
vertically delineated (i.e., sample result less than the regulatory standard) at depth.
On reaching TD at each boring, geophysical logging was conducted using the following
downhole tools: acoustic televiewer, optical televiewer, caliper, fluid conductivity, fluid
temperature, single -point resistance (SPR), spontaneous potential (SP), and heat pulse
Page 3-2

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
flowmeter (HPF). After the inner casing was installed and drilled through to TD, the
"lower" or "bottom" section of the open borehole was logged. HPF data were collected
during non -pumping (ambient) conditions and pumping conditions.
After completion of geophysical data collection, each deep bedrock well had some
interval of an open borehole backfilled with a bentonite clay plug. Shallow bedrock well
AB-2BR was not backfilled. The purpose of the backfilling was to facilitate well
installation at the desired screened interval based on field boron screening and
geophysical logs. Well materials were hung (suspended from a lift ring) to avoid casing
deflection while the wells were constructed.
Based on the field screening processes, screen intervals were selected at the deepest
water -bearing fracture zone and at a depth where boron was vertically delineated. Each
well consists of a 2-inch I.D. schedule 40 flush -joint threaded 10-foot prepacked screens.
Screens have 0.010-inch-wide slots and were packed in the field with a No. 2 sand filter
pack. The annular space between the borehole wall (inner casing) and prepacked well
screens for each of the wells was also filled with No. 2 sand filter pack. The sand -pack
extends approximately 5 feet above the top of the prepacked screen at each well.
The well seal consists of at least 3 feet of coated pelletized bentonite. The remainder of
the annular space was backfilled into the outer casing with grout. If the annulus
exceeded 100 feet in length, grouting was conducted in lifts of approximately 80 feet at
a time.
Due to their location adjacent to the dam's access road, monitoring wells were
completed with flush -mounted surface vaults, locking caps, and well tags. The
protective covers were secured and completed in a concrete collar.
3.3 Well Development
Installed monitoring wells were developed via Waterra hydrolift pump techniques with
driller's assistance. The drilling contractor conducted development until water quality
indicator parameters (e.g., conductivity, pH, temperature, turbidity) were generally
stable, and each well had been purged for more than 2 hours. Well development
continued with SynTerra scientists using monsoon pumps and drop -tube assemblies.
Each well was purged to a minimum of 10 well -volumes, or until water quality
indicator parameters stabilized and turbidity decreased to (or nearly) 10 nephelometric
turbidity units (NTUs).
The geologic logs, well installation details, and development records, which include
development method(s), the water volume removed, and field measurements of
Page 3-3

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, conductivity, oxidation-reduction potential
(ORP) and turbidity, are provided in Attachment A.
3.4 Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements
Prior to well completion, slug tests were conducted within open boreholes at multiple
potential water -bearing fracture intervals observed during drilling. Slug tests were
completed at 10-foot intervals using double packers to isolate the interval for testing.
Slug testing included multiple falling and rising head tests at all four bedrock wells.
Slug testing was performed in compliance with standards and policy including the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards and North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) policy (2007).
3.5 Deep Bedrock Groundwater Sampling
After well installation, development, and slug testing, groundwater was sampled at
each well for laboratory analyses and in accordance with the approved Interim
Monitoring Plan (IMP). The wells were sampled after water quality indicator
parameters were stabilized (Duke Energy, 2015).
At the three deep bedrock wells (AB-1BRD, AB-2BRD, and AB-313R), preliminary results
indicate boron concentrations less than the lab reporting limit (50 µg/L). Results show
that boron concentrations at the shallow bedrock well, AB-213R, were greater than the
NC Administrative Code, Title 15A, Subchapter 02L, Groundwater Classification and
Standards (02L) standard (700 µg/L). Analytical results for the four bedrock wells are
presented in Table 1.
Page 3-4

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
4.0 BEDROCK FRACTURE EVALUATION METHODS
Deep bedrock borehole logging data were used to characterize depths of flow zones to
set targets for monitoring well screen placement, hydraulic conductivity, the hydraulic
apertures of fractures and fracture spacing, and the in -situ orientations of bedrock
fractures. These evaluations provide a comprehensive assessment of the bedrock
fracture system in support of the CAP.
4.1 Flow Profile Characterization
FLASH (Flow -Log Analysis of Single Holes), a computer program developed by the
USGS, uses HPF data for ambient and pumping conditions to estimate transmissivity
profiles along single boreholes (Day -Lewis et al., 2011). FLASH software was used to
analyze the HPF data from the deep bedrock boreholes and generate a transmissivity
profile for each logged borehole. To produce a unique fit to the data, FLASH estimates
transmissivity or radius -of -influence. All model iterations used an estimated radius -of -
influence of 1,000 feet. Calculated transmissivity results are relatively insensitive to this
parameter. However, a large estimate was selected to produce conservative estimates
for transmissivity. The "objective function" for the FLASH code incorporates the mean
squared error between interpreted (from borehole HPF data) and predicted flow
profiles and the sum of the squared differences between the water level in the borehole
and the far -field head. For each borehole, the automated solver in FLASH ran until the
objective function reached a minimum value.
Total transmissivity for each borehole was calculated using the Thiem Equation for
steady-state flow to a well in a confined aquifer (Thiem, 1906):
lT = 21c(s) In (\rro
Where T is transmissivity, Q is flow rate, s is drawdown, ro is radius of influence, and rw
is the radius of the borehole.
For boreholes with a Thiem-calculated transmissivity that was greater than the FLASH
estimated total transmissivity, the transmissivity values for borehole intervals from
FLASH were proportionally scaled -up to produce a total FLASH transmissivity that
equaled the transmissivity value calculated for the entire borehole.
Results from FLASH analysis of the HPF data from four boreholes are presented in
detail in Attachment B. Transmissivity values for individual bedrock intervals were
divided by the interval vertical length to calculate hydraulic conductivity values, which
Page 4-1

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
are illustrated in contrast to the depth below the top of the bedrock on Figure 4.
Calculated bedrock hydraulic conductivity values based on FLASH analysis, generally
range from approximately 8.05 x 10-3 feet per day to 84.4 feet per day; however, there
was one measurement of 2.85 x 10-8 feet per day. For comparison, Figure 4 also shows
hydraulic conductivity based on slug test results from multiple 10-foot borehole
intervals prior to deep bedrock monitoring well installation. Both of these data sets
indicate a general decline in hydraulic conductivity with increasing depth below the top
of bedrock.
Most of the bedrock borehole intervals did not indicate notable transmissivity (or
hydraulic conductivity) based on HPF data. The data related to those borehole intervals
are not included in this analysis. In addition, monitoring wells were installed at depths
interpreted as having significant water -bearing fractures within each boring. Therefore,
the overall hydraulic conductivity of the bedrock fracture system is lower than
suggested by the data shown in Figure 4.
4.2 Fracture Hydraulic Apertures
Transmissivity data generated by FLASH were also used to estimate the average
hydraulic aperture (eh) for individual bedrock intervals applying the cubic law
(Steele, 2006):
F12 eh
Where T is transmissivity, µ is the viscosity of water, pw is the density of water, g is the
acceleration due to gravity, and n is the number of individual fractures in the flow
layer.
Bedrock fractures are rough, so fracture widths (apertures) vary at different points
within the fracture. The hydraulic aperture is the width of an idealized parallel -plate
opening with transmissivity that is the same as an actual, rough -walled fracture. It is
approximated by the geometric mean of the individual aperture values within the
fracture (Keller, 1998).
Average hydraulic apertures were estimated for each deep bedrock borehole interval
with a transmissivity greater than zero. The number of fractures in each zone was
determined from the fracture summary table provided in the geophysical evaluation
report by GEL Solutions (GEL) (Attachment C). Only "open major' and "open minor'
fractures identified by GEL were included in the fracture count for each zone; "closed"
Page 4-2

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
fractures were excluded. For layers without any identified open fractures, but with
measurable transmissivity, it was assumed that one fracture was present.
Based on HPF data and FLASH analysis, estimated mean hydraulic apertures of
bedrock fractures at the Site generally range from approximately 0.03 millimeters (mm)
to 0.62 mm (30 to 620 micrometers, or microns), with one value less than 0.01 mm (10
microns). Additionally, fracture hydraulic apertures were calculated based on slug test
results for 10-foot packer intervals; these data also show a general decline in aperture
versus depth (Figure 5).
As noted, many of the bedrock borehole intervals logged using a heat -pulse flowmeter
did not indicate any significant contribution to flow within the borehole. Most of these
intervals had interpreted open fractures but indicated negligible (approximately zero)
transmissivity; therefore, data from those intervals were not used in fracture aperture
calculations. Those depth intervals have hydraulic apertures near zero. This fracture
aperture evaluation represents only the most transmissive fractures within each logged
bedrock borehole. The overall apertures within the bedrock fracture system are less
than suggested by the data shown in Figure 5.
4.3 Fracture Spacing
Fracture spacing for each borehole interval was calculated by dividing the length of the
interval by the number of open fractures identified in that interval. For intervals with a
transmissivity of zero and where no open fractures were identified, it was assumed
there were no fractures; therefore, no fracture spacing was calculated for that interval.
Televiewer logging results (discussed below) from the combined dataset indicated
approximately 39 open fractures in 728 vertical feet of logging at the four logged
bedrock boreholes, which indicates an overall average spacing of approximately 18.7
feet (vertical separation) between fractures. In addition, the frequency of dipping
bedrock fractures is greater than was indicated in vertical borehole data (Morin et al.,
1997). Within the investigated depth intervals, the bedrock at the Site is not extensively
fractured. However, fractures of various orientations were identified, indicating that
fractures of various orientations intersect one another and produce an overall,
interconnected fracture network.
Figure 6 shows the mean vertical spacing of open fractures in bedrock intervals as a
function of depth below the top of rock, and indicates that fracture spacing is relatively
consistent with depth below the top of rock.
Page 4-3

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
4.4 Fracture Orientations
SynTerra
GEL measured in -situ bedrock fractures at four deep bedrock boreholes using a
combination of optical televiewer and acoustic televiewer. Data are summarized as
bedrock fracture tables, stereonet plots, and rose diagrams of fracture orientation
statistics in Attachment C. GEL classified each identified fracture as either "closed,"
"minor open," or "major open' based on flow logging or other evidence. The two
"open" classes were evaluated in terms of orientation; "closed" fracture orientations
were compared qualitatively.
Bedrock fracture orientations logged at each deep bedrock borehole indicate a wide
range of fracture orientations with no predominant, consistent fracture sets. At the four
logged boreholes, general observations for the fractures that GEL characterized as open
are as follows:
• AB-1BRD - Scattered fracture orientations, mostly with an eastward component
of dip but with a wide range of dip magnitudes and directions
• AB-2BR - Scattered fracture orientations, mostly toward the northeast but a wide
range of dip magnitudes
• AB-2BRD - Scattered fracture orientations, mostly with dip angles of less than 40
degrees but a wide range of dip directions
• AB-3BR - Scattered fracture orientations, mostly toward the southeast but a wide
range of dip magnitudes
Overall, the fracture data indicate a wide range of dip angles and dip directions, with
slightly more open fractures indicating an eastward component of dip than westward
component of dip.
Cross -sections presented in Figures 7 and 8 illustrate at a conceptual level the absence
of any predominant fracture set. The relative lengths of fractures shown on the cross -
sections decrease with depth to illustrate at a conceptual level that the degree of overall
fracturing decreases with depth. However, the length and spacing of fractures are
conceptual and qualitative. As noted above, the overall average vertical spacing
between open fractures is approximately 18.7 feet; therefore, fractures at the Site are too
numerous to illustrate on the cross -sections. In -situ fracture lengths are impractical to
measure, but Gale (1982) suggested that typical fracture lengths might be 3 to 4 times
the fracture spacing.
Page 4-4

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
4.5 Summary of Bedrock Fracture Characteristics
Overall, the bedrock hydraulic conductivity near the ash basin decreases with
increasing depth below the top of rock. This finding is consistent with the literature.
Gale (1982) showed that bedrock well yield and fracture permeability decrease
systematically as a function of depth. Neretnieks (1985) also showed a systematic
decline in bulk bedrock hydraulic conductivity with increasing depth.
Fracture spacing in the logged intervals of the bedrock is relatively consistent with
depth below the top of rock. This finding is consistent with data reported for a variety
of rock types by Snow (1968).
Overall, calculated fracture apertures decrease with increasing depth in the deep
bedrock. This finding is also consistent with information reported in the literature.
Snow (1968) published fracture aperture as a function of depth for several rock types,
including crystalline rocks such as granite, gneiss, and schist, and concluded that
fracture apertures generally decrease with increasing depth. With increasing depth, the
weight of the overlying rock increases. This increases the effective stress and causes the
fracture walls to deform and flatten, reducing fracture apertures with increasing depth.
The available data do not indicate any predominant bedrock fracture sets at BCSS.
Overall, a wide range of open fracture dip angles and dip directions is observed.
4.6 Implications of Bedrock Fracture Network for
Groundwater Flow
Based on the orientations of lineaments and open bedrock fractures, horizontal
groundwater flow within the bedrock should occur approximately parallel to the
hydraulic gradient, with no preferential flow direction (i.e., no expected, significant
anisotropy). Consistent with this interpretation, the current groundwater flow model
for BCSS does not simulate plan -view anisotropy.
The observed decline in bedrock hydraulic conductivity and hydraulic aperture with
increasing depth is consistent with expectations based on the literature and indicates
that the overall volumetric rate of groundwater flow in the bedrock decreases with
depth.
Page 4-5

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
5.0 BEDROCK MATRIX CHARACTERISTICS
Bedrock rock core samples were collected and analyzed by Core Laboratories (Core
Labs) for porosity, bulk density, and thin section petrography. Data provided by Core
Labs can be used to evaluate the potential influence of matrix diffusion and sorption on
constituent fate and transport within the fractured bedrock system at BCSS.
5.1 Sample Selection
One rock core sample was selected from each of two bedrock locations, AB-1 and GWA-
20, which represent two areas of affected groundwater migration north and northwest
of the ash basin (Figure 3). Samples were chosen from discrete options of rock core with
the most notable weathering of fracture surfaces interpreted to coincide with zones of
preferential groundwater flow. Sample locations and depth intervals were:
• AB-1:
o 83.2-84 feet bgs
• GWA-20:
o 74.5-75 feet bgs
5.2 Matrix Porosity and Bulk Density
Core Laboratories prepared samples by pulling 1-inch-diameter plugs drilled into the
rock core and trimming into right cylinders with a diamond -blade trim saw. Samples
were then cleaned by Soxhlet extraction and oven -dried at 240' F to weight equilibrium
(+/- 0.001 g).
Rock core samples were analyzed for porosity using Boyle's Law technique by
measuring grain volume and pore volume at ambient conditions. Grain density values
were calculated by direct measurement of grain volume and weight on the dried plug
samples. Grain volume was measured by Boyle's Law technique.
Results from the matrix porosity and bulk density analysis are presented in Table 2.
The reported matrix porosity values ranged from 0.50 to 0.73 percent, with an average
of 0.62 percent. Bulk density ranged from 2.80 to 2.84 with an average of 2.82 grams per
cubic centimeter.
5.3 Petrographic Evaluation
Thin sections were prepared by impregnating the samples with epoxy to augment
cohesion and to prevent loss of material during grinding. Each thinly sliced sample was
mounted on a slide and ground to an approximate thickness of 30 microns. Thin
Page 5-1

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
sections were stained to aid in mineral identification and analyzed using standard
petrographic techniques. The thin section petrographic evaluation results are presented
in Attachment D.
Core Labs classified both samples as mica schist. Both samples are metamorphic rocks
with a foliated fabric (i.e., the elongated minerals are oriented parallel to each other or
form some bands). The principal minerals are biotite, quartz, muscovite, and
plagioclase. Accessory minerals consist of garnet, pyrite, K-feldspar, tourmaline,
staurolite, zircon, magnetite, and apatite. Plagioclase crystals are locally altered into
sericite. Biotite is rarely altered into chlorite. Fe -dolomite is rare, replacing other
minerals such as plagioclase.
5.4 Implications of Bedrock Matrix Characteristics for Flow and
Transport
The reported matrix porosity values are within the range of those reported for
crystalline rocks in the literature (Freeze and Cherry, 1979) (Lofgren, 2004) (Zhou et al.,
2008) (Ademeso et al., 2012). The presence of measurable matrix porosity suggests that
matrix diffusion contributes to plume retardation at the Site (Lipson et al., 2005). In
addition, the identification of sericite (a mixture of muscovite, illite, or paragonite
produced by hydrothermal alteration of feldspars) in both samples indicates the
bedrock has some capacity to sorb boron and other elements associated with coal ash.
The influences of matrix diffusion and sorption are implicitly included in the
groundwater fate and transport model as a component of the constituent partition
coefficient (Ka) term used for the bedrock layers model.
Page 5-2

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station SynTerra
6.0 REFERENCES
Ademeso, O.A., J.A. Adekoya and B.M. Olaleye. 2012. "The Inter -relationship of Bulk
Density and Porosity of Some Crystalline Basement Complex Rocks: A Case
Study of Some Rock Types In Southwestern Nigeria." Journal of Engineering, Vol.
2, No. 4, pp. 555-562.
Clark, S.F., Moore, R.B., Ferguson, E.W., Picard, M.Z. 2016. "Criteria and Methods for
Fracture Trace Analysis of the New Hampshire Bedrock Aquifer." U.S.
Geological Survey Open File Report 96-479.
Day -Lewis, F.D., C.D. Johnson, F.L. Paillet, and K.J. Halford, March 7, 2011. FLASH: A
Computer Program for Flow -Log Analysis of Single Holes. Computer software.
Version 1.0. U.S. Geological Survey.
Duke Energy, June 10, 2015. Low Flow Sampling Plan, Duke Energy Facilities, Ash
Basin Groundwater Assessment Program, North Carolina.
Freeze, R.A. and J.A. Cherry. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice -Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey. 604 p.
Gale, J.E. 1982. Assessing the permeability characteristics of fractured rock. Geological
Society of America Special paper 189.
Keller, A., 1998. High -resolution, non-destructive measurement and characterization of
fracture apertures. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 35(8), pp. 1037-1050.
Lipson, D.S, B.H. Kueper and M.J. Gefell. 2005. Matrix diffusion -derived plume
attenuation in fractured bedrock. Ground Water, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 30-39.
Lofgren, M. 2004. Diffusive properties of granitic rock as measured by in -situ electrical
methods. Doctoral Thesis, Department of Chemical Engineering and Technology
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Morin, R.H., G.B. Carleton, and S. Poirier. 1997. Fractured -Aquifer Hydrogeology from
Geophysical Logs; The Passaic Formation, New Jersey. Ground Water, 35(2), 328-
338.
Neretnieks, I. 1985. Transport in fractured rocks. Hydrology of Rocks of Low
Permeability. Memoirs. International Association of Hydrogeologists, v. XVII,
part 1 of 2, pp. 301-318.
Page 6-1

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
SynTerra
Snow, D.T. 1968. Rock fracture spacings, openings, and porosities." J. Soil Mech. Found.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engrs., v. 94, pp. 73-91.
Steele, A., D.A. Reynolds, B.H. Kueper, and D.N. Lerner. "Field determination of
mechanical aperture, entry pressure and relative permeability of fractures using
NAPL injection." Geotechnique 56, no. 1 (2006): 27-38.
SynTerra. 2017. Comprehensive Site Assessment Update — Belews Creek Steam Station —
October 2017. Belews Creek, NC.
Thiem, G. 1906. Hydrologische methoden. Leipzig: Gebhardt.
Zhou, Q., H.H. Liu and F.J. Molz. 2008. Field -scale effective matrix diffusion coefficient
for fractured rock: results from literature survey. Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory. https:Hescholarship.org/uc/item/3dw5c7ff.
Page 6-2

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
TABLES
SynTerra

TABLE 1
ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR DEEP BEDROCK WELLS
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC, BELEWS CREEK, NC
Chromium
Total
Analytical Parameter
pH
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Chloride
(VI)
Chromium
Cobalt
Iron
Lithium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Selenium
Strontium
Sulfate
Thallium
Dissolved
Vanadium
Solids
Reporting Units
S.U.
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
mg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
mg/L
µg/L
mg/L
µg/L
ISA NCAC 02L Standard
6.5-8.5
1*
10
700
4*
700
2
250
10
10
1*
300
NE
50
NE
20
NE
250
0.2*
500
0.3*
Background Threshold Values (Bedrock Unit)
6.2 - 8.4
1
2
11
0.2
50
0.08
3
0.4
11
0.8
341
30
64
6
0.5
99
15
0.1
181
2
Sample ID
Screen Interval
Sample
Analytical Results
(ft bgs)
Collection Date
AB-01BRD
300-310
04/03/2019
12.3
7.61
1.86
610
<1
422
<1
96
11.9
10.9
<1
63
881
10
5.98
<1
4970
18
0.091j
1500
7.95
AB-02BR
165 - 175
04/03/2019
8.0
<1
<1
103
0.484 j
8870
1
410
1.1
1.4
83.1
8.546 j
104
12200
1.47
<1
1660
53
0.172 j
1100
0.333
AB-02BRD
269 -279
04/03/2019
12.2
17.9
66.7
124
<1
20.179j
<1
10
2.5
2.61
0.573j
92
237
2.9j
14.4
0.577j
1160
24
0.104j
280
7.78
AB-03BR
263.5 - 273.5
04/03/2019
11.1
4.4
11.1
62
<1
538
<1
70
1.2
1.43
<1
22
118
6
3.48
<1
693
67
<0.2
370
1.27
Notes:
Background Threshold Values updated with Background Results through December 2018.
* - Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations of the 15A NCAC 02L Standard, Appendix 1, April, 1, 2013.
^ - Federal Maximum Contaminant Level
< - Concentration not detected at or above the adjusted reporting limit.
µg/L - Micrograms per liter
j - Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit.
mg/L - Milligrams per liter
NE - Not established
S.U. - Standard Units
Prepared by: PWA Checked by: GRK
Page 1 of 1

TABLE 2
POROSITY AND BULK DENSITY RESULTS
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC, BELEWS CREEK, NC
Sample
Number
Depth
(ft)
Porosity
(%)
Grain Density
(g/cm3)
Bulk Density
(g/cm3)
AB-1
83.2-84
0.73
2.82
2.80
GWA-20
74.5-75
0.50
2.85
2.84
Prepared by: ALA Checked by: DAA
Notes•
1. 1.O inch diameter plugs were drilled and trimmed into right cylinders with a diamond -blade trim saw.
2. Plugs selected for routine core analysis were cleaned by Soxhlet extraction cycling between a chloroform /methanol
(87:13) azeotrope and methanol.
3. Samples were oven dried at 2400 F to weight equilibrium (+/- 0.001 g).
4. Porosity was determined using Boyle's Law technique by measuring grain volume & calculating pore volume at ambient
conditions.
5. Grain density values were calculated using Boyle's Law technique by direct measurement of grain volume and weight
on dried plug samples.
6. ft - feet below ground surface
7. g/cm3 - gram per cubic centimeter
Page 1of1

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
FIGURES
SynTerra

WASTE BOUNDARY ROXIMATE)
\ � f
__ ____________ _________ _____
,_ __ __ -_ ____ __- ___ __ _-__==_==_==_=___
=� ______-- ===_ ==T:�
=_
- -�_-�_--_--- _�___-� ==�
--- ___ __ __ _ ___-_ __
r — _ —_ —____ __ —_ _ _ =__— __ —
'- V-7Z
HE
__—_—� —____ � = -- \\
BELEWS CREEK STEAM
1/
STATION PARCEL LINE
r r
F
� V( BELEWS CREEK
STEAM STATION
U o
J
I
�i Po r n t
c�
fj Tow �, V-"
THE INFERRED LINEAMENTS (RED DASHED LINES) DEPICTED ON THIS 11
TOPOGRAPHICUSGS LINEARFEAATURES WITHOI IN THE ASH BASIN. RANGE O
IN. HEORIENTATIONS
DEPICTED LINEAMENTS J o
WERE NOT USED QUALITATIVELY IN A ROSE DIAGRAM. �}0 \ ,
SOURCE: / l�
1971, PHOTO INSPECTED 1984 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OBTAINED FROM THE USGS STORE AT
http://store.usgs.gov/b2c_usgs/b2c/start/%%%28xcm=r3standardpitrex_prd%%%29/.do -
DUKE GRAPHIC SCALE FIGURE 1A
500 0 500 1000
40) ENERGY IN FEET IUSGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WITHOUT
CAROLINAS DRAWN BY: J. CHASTAIN DATE: 12/16/2019 LINEAMENTS
REVISED BY: DATE:- FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
CHECKED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 12/16/2019
APPROVED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 12/16/2019 BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
PROJECT MANAGER: A. ALBERT DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS
synTena www.synterracorp.com BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA

1 • BELEWS CREEK STEAM V /
•' `STATION PA'I EL LINE
\ v
WASTE BOUNDARY(APP ROXIMATE)� • /
-------------------------------
--y - -_- -_ -_
1 �--- --- ------ASH BASIN'- ---__--
- _- _= ___________-
03
--- — -- —_�_ _ a
__ —_ __---
moo__" === __ == =� �=_-__ \
1, J 800
O
• �l 190
IF
�j BELEWS CREEK
STEAM STATION
C-) o
I
I
• �i Po r n t
• • 1 � J 8
I
how
THE INFERRED LINEAMENTS (RED DASHED LINES) DEPICTED ON THIS 11
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP SHOW A WIDE RANGE OF ORIENTATIONS FOR
LINEAR FEATURES WITHIN THE ASH BASIN. THE DEPICTED LINEAMENTS oo
WERE NOT USED QUALITATIVELY IN A ROSE DIAGRAM. \
SOURCE: / 1
1971, PHOTO INSPECTED 1984 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OBTAINED FROM THE USGS STORE AT
http,.//store. usgs.gov/ b2c_usgs/b2c/start/%%%28xcm=r3standard pitrex_prd %%%29/.do _
DUKE GRAPHIC SCALE FIGURE 1B
500 0 500 1000
4' ENERGY IN FEET USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WITH INFERRED
CAROLINAS DRAWN BY: J. CHASTAIN DATE:12/16/2019 LINEAMENTS
16 REVISED BY: DATE:- FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
1p CHECKED BY: A. ALBERT DATE:12/16/2019
APPROVED BY: A. ALBERT DATE:12/16/2019 BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
PROJECT MANAGER: A. ALBERT DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS
WnTeaa www.synterracorp.com BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA

APRIL 15, 1966 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OBTAINED FROM THE USGS EARTH EXPLORER WEB SITE AT
DUKE GRAPHIC SCALE FIGURE 2A
500 0 500 1000
4' ENERGY IN FEET 11966 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WITHOUT
CAROLINAS DRAWN BY:J.CHASTAIN DATE:9/7/2019 LINEAMENTS
REVISED BY: DATE:- FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
1 CHECKED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 9/7/2019
APPROVED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 9/7/2019 BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
PROJECT MANAGER: A. ALBERT DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS
synTeaa www.syrterracorp.com BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA

IT
90°
APRIL 15, 1966 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OBTAINED FROM THE USGS EARTH EXPLORER WEB SITE AT
DUKE GRAPHIC SCALE FIGURE 2B
500 0 500 1000
4' ENERGY IN FEET 1966 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WITH
CAROLINAS DRAWN BY: J. CHASTAIN DATE: 9/7/2019 LINEAMENTS
16 REVISED BY: DATE:- FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
CHECKED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 9/7/2019
APPROVED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 9/7/2019 BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
PROJECT MANAGER: A. ALBERT DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS
synTena www.synterracorp.com BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA

® GWA-30S/D GWA-1S/D/BR
® CCR-4S/D
CCR-SS/D
GWA-20S/SA/D/BR
DSO
"mot AB-lS/D/BR
' DSO
4
BELEWS
RESERVOIR
'COAL
PILE
STRUCTURAL
FILL
(CLOSED)
FGD
LANDFILL
CRAIG
ROAD
LANDFILL
A
ti
AB-2S/D
CCR-7SIDQe
GWA-32SID
MW-103SID
475
�•.. �� . -{r �" r , tea- J� �
sIF
® GWA-2SID
LEGEND
Q DEEP BEDROCK EVALUATION LOCATION
INSET SCALE: 1'=100' OO ROCK CORE SAMPLE LOCATION
(' DUKE
ENERGY®
CAROLINAS
EXISTING MONITORING WELL
ASH BASIN WASTE BOUNDARY
- — - — ASH BASIN COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY
LANDFILL BOUNDARY
- - • DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS PROPERTY LINE
STREAM (AMEC NRTR)
WETLAND (AMEC NRTR)
NOTES:
THE WATERS OF THE US HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE US ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS AT THE TIME OF THE MAP CREATION. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION PURPOSES. THE WETLANDS AND STREAMS
BOUNDARIES WERE OBTAINED FROM AMEC FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL &
INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. NATURAL RESOURCE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR BELEWS
CREEK STEAM STATION DATED JULY 2, 2015.
TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY WSP SURVEY, 2015.
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED FROM GOOGLE EARTH PRO ON JUNE 11, 2019.
AERAL WAS COLLECTED ON FEBRUARY 3, 2019.
DRAWING HAS BEEN SET WITH A PROJECTION OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE
-
COORDINATE SYSTEM RIPS 3200 (NAD83).
GRAPHIC SC
FIGURE 3
100 O100 200
DEEP BEDROCK EVALUATION LOCATIONS
(IN FEET)
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
DRAWN BY: B. YOUNG DATE: 05/09/2019
C..ALBE DATE: 12/16/2019
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
CREVISED HECKED
CHECKED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 12/16/2019
APPROVED BY: A. ALBERT DATE: 12/16/2019
BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA
PROJECT MANAGER: A. ALBERT
www.synterracorp.com

1. E+02
1. E+01
1. E+00
1. E-01
T
f6
1.E-02
w
3
2 1. E-04
T
2
1. E-05
1. E-06
1. E-07
1. E-08
0
50 100
NOTES:
1. FLASH hydraulic conductivity values calculated from FLASH
estimated transmissivity values.
2. SLUG hydraulic conductivity values estimated from slug
test data.
•
C
•AB-1BRD FLASH
OAB-1BRD SLUG
•AB-2BR FLASH
OAB-2BR SLUG
•AB-2BRD FLASH
OAB-2BRD SLUG
•AB-3BRD FLASH
OAB-3BRD SLUG
150
200 250
300
350
Depth Below Top of Rock (ft)
DUKE
DRAWN BY: D. AVARD
DATE: 07/01/2019
REVISED BY: P. ALTMAN
DATE: 11/18/2019
FIGURE 4
ENERG�/
Y
CHECKED BY: A. LEFITZ
DATE:09/09/2019
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
_1NA5
APPROVED BY: A.ALBERT
DATE:11/20/2019
VERTICAL PROFILE
PROJECT MANAGER: A.ALBERT
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
tip
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA
synTeRa
www.synterracorp.com

0.7
0.6
0.5
E
£ 0.4
v
0.2
0.1
0.0
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Depth Below Top of Rock (ft)
NOTES:
1. FLASH hydraulic aperture values calculated from FLASH
estimated transmissivity values.
2. SLUG hydraulic aperture values estimated from slug test
data.
�. DUKE
ENERGY
DRAWN BY: D.AVARD
REVISED BY: P. ALTMAN
CHECKED BY: A. LEFITZ
_1NA5
APPROVED BY: A. ALBERT
PROJECT MANAGER: A.ALBERT
t'
synTem
DATE:07/01/2019
DATE:11/18/2019
DATE:09/09/2019
DATE:11/20/2019
www.synterracorp.com
6AB-113RD FLASH
OA13-113RD SLUG
•AB-2BR FLASH
OAB-21313 SLUG
RAB-213RD FLASH
A13-213RD SLUG
0AB-313RD FLASH
OAB-313RD SLUG
FIGURE 5
HYDRAULIC APERTURE
VERTICAL PROFILE
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA

12
10
8
4
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Depth Below Top of Rock (ft)
NOTES:
DUKE
DRAWN BY: D. AVARD
DATE: 07/01/2019
REVISED BY: P. ALTMAN
DATE: 11/18/2019
1. Fracture spacing data shown above are specific to relatively
R ENERGY..
CHECKED BY: A. LEFITZ
DATE:09/09/2019
transmissive bedrock intervals identified based on HPF logging
_iNAS
APPROVED BY: A.ALBERT
DATE:11/20/2019
and FLASH analysis.
PROJECT MANAGER: A.ALBERT
2. Fracture spacing calculated by dividing the length of the t'
interval by the number of open fractures identified in that
interval. I synTem www.synterracorp.com
• AB-1BRD
• AB-2BR
AB-2BRD
• AB-3BRD
FIGURE 6
FRACTURE SPACING
VERTICAL PROFILE
FRACTURED BEDROCK EVALUATION
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA

900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
A � ow A'
(SOUTH) (NORTH)
f STRUCTURAL FILL
COMPLIANCE
BOUNDARY
N co o = DAN RIVER - -
_O a o a o
M d� LD0 m °
N O m m d O N N N
I FILL u O>Of Of Oa J Q G'd' J co co coaaaa q�aY �aa
IT a" Q Q Q m m m m m m m m m
\\ SAPROLITE FILL a a a a a a a a a N N N
\— 1/ : I• I ASH FILL a a a
\v APPROX. WATER LEVEL-747.6'
CD (7
— \ : 1 • •I ASH PORE WATER O O O
TRANSITION ZONE 1 N N N COMPLIANCE
SAPROLITE 1 BOUNDARY
TRANSITION ZONE
\�l T? 3 3 3
IUNNAMED I 1
/\/\I/1�/\/\I/1�/ \I 1�/\/♦ 1 _\ I 1\/\ I /li/\/\I/1�/\ 11�/\ / `/\/\I/1�/\/♦/1/ \/\/1/ _\ / \ / / / I:
\/`-j\ / I / \// /\
/_\/\I/1//\/\I/1//\/\I/1//\/\I/•1/�\/\I/1//\/� 1\/\/\I/1/�\/\/� \I/ `/ "i,'CL_ /�\�/1//\/\I/1//\/\I/1//\/\I T� /\I/1`/\/\I/1`/\ \I/1`/\/\I/1`/_\ 1 /\/\I/1`/\/\ 1\
BEDROCK
/ I-77
T� I I / I I ♦/ I I ♦/ I I ♦/ I 7- I ♦/ I I ♦ //\ I I I � I \/ I _ I ♦/ I
\
��/ �"+� \/� \ /I \/ \ \ /I \/ /\\ /I \/ ♦ \ I �/\/ /`� /I \/ \ \ /I \�\/ / \ /I / I / \/'BEDROCK�\ - / \ / I / \/ / \ /I `/ /\yam \/�'� \ \/ /\\ /I \/ ♦ \ /I \l / li \ /I \l \ / \ /I
/\
\ J
/
l / / l � l / / l l / / l l / / l l / / l / / `�} - � l / / l • l l / / l l / / l l / / 1 j.t� 1- / / -
�\�\�\/I-\i�i�/I/`l/�\/I-\l/i /I/\//�\/I-\//i/I/\//�\/I-\//i/I/`//�\/I-\//'/'/I/\//�\/I-\/'i /I/`/��\/I-\//i/li�\\/I-`//i/I/\//�\/I-\n`�\/I/\�♦�\/I-\//i /I/\//�\/I
0 125 250 500
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 500'
LEGEND NOTES
VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 200'
AB 9S
WELL IN SHALLOW ZONE
AB 9D
WELL IN DEEP ZONE
AB 9BR
WELL IN COMPETENT BEDROCK
AB-4S
WELL IN ASH PORE WATER
GENERALIZED WATER TABLE
BEDROCK FRACTURE
ORIENTATION
GENERALIZED GROUNDWATER
FLOW DIRECTION
GENERALIZED ASH PORE
WATER FLOW DIRECTION
GENERALIZED VERTICAL
HYDRAULIC GRADIENT
ASH
ASH PORE WATER
FILL
—SAPROLITE
® WEATHERED ROCK
BEDROCK
ASH PORE LAYER
WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
R
SHALLOW GROUNDWATER FLOW ZONE
WELL WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
DEEP GROUNDWATER FLOW ZONE
WELL WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
BEDROCK GROUNDWATER FLOW ZONE
WELL WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
m
GEOMEAN BORON CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
.
WATER LEVEL ELEVATION (NAVD 88)
(LABEL COLORING BY FLOW ZONE)
WELL SCREEN
- — - COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
1. WATER ELEVATIONS REPRESENT THE MANUAL WATER LEVELS COLLECTED FOR APRIL 8,2019 FOR EACH
WELL. NOTE ELEVATIONS WITHIN EACH CLUSTER ARE MEASURED IN THE SAME DAY. ASH BASIN POND
ELEVATION IS RECORDED FROM APRIL 8, 2019. REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM
1988.
2. GEOMEAN BORON CONCENTRATIONS REPRESENT THE GEOMETRIC AVERAGE OF VALID AVAILABLE
SAMPLE RESULTS BETWEEN JANUARY, 2018 AND APRIL, 2019.
3. FRACTURES DEPICTED ON THIS CROSS SECTION REPRESENT THE GENERALIZED FRACTURE
ORIENTATIONS BASED ON TELEVIEWER LOGGING AT SITE -SPECIFIC BOREHOLES. AS CONCEPTUALLY
ILLUSTRATED HERE, TELEVIEWER LOGGING RESULTS DID NOT INDICATE ANY DISTINCT, CONSISTENT
FRACTURE SETS, BUT A WIDE VARIETY OF FRACTURE ORIENTATIONS AT THE SITE. THE ACTUAL NUMBER
OF FRACTURES IS FAR TOO NUMEROUS TO ILLUSTRATE AT THIS SCALE. IN ADDITION, THE DEPTHS AND
LENGTHS OF FRACTURES VERSUS DEPTH ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY.
4. THE NORTH CAROLINA 02L FOR BORON IS 700 ug/L.
5. PROVISIONAL BACKGROUND THRESHOLD VALUE (PBTV) FOR BORON IS 50 pg/L WITHIN THE SHALLOW,
50 ug/L DEEP, 50 ug/L BEDROCK FLOW ZONES.
6. ALL VERTICAL ELEVATIONS ARE MEASURED IN FEET, NORTH AMERICA VERTICAL DATUM (NAVD) OF 1988.
7. WATER LEVEL IN AB-2BRD IS NOT AT EQUILIBRIUM DUE TO SLOW RECOVERY. MW-200BR IS A FREE
FLOWING ARTISAN WELL (WATER LEVEL SHOWN REPRESENTS THE TOP OF THE WELL CASING).
CROSS SECTION LOCATION

g -a -- B,
(WEST) (EAST)
COMPLIANCE
BOUNDARY
1C
to
900
m
II.
PARCEL
y m
N
NN
0
I- A J
r to
NNN
3aa
�W
800
w
If
700 ' _ -
600
♦/ /\1/ 1 ♦/ /
500 - \ /�- \ \ /`- / - BEDROC
400
ACCELERATED
REMEDIATION
EXTRACTION
SYSTEM
111
BELEWS CREEK ASH BASIN DAM
w w w
o� �
K K Q U
wmi
��1a iaaa ;
In
e e
COMPLIANCE
BOUNDARY
I
I
Ia
I�
li \lam
\/\1/1�/\/\1,�BEDR6CK✓%\/\1/1�/
X
1 —7-\<>
300
GENERALIZED
GROUNDWATER
W DIRECTION
NORTH
200 _
l'\/ I_ - / i - \ l /` i i \ l /�I i 1 / /` i - . i 1 / / I i - \ l i - / i 1 / I i - \ l i - i 1 / / I i - 1 / i _ i 1 / / I/` 1 - i , l / I i 1 / i - i 1 / / I i - \ l i - i 1 / / I i - 1 / i _
0 125 250 500
100 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 500'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 200'
LEGEND NOTES
FILL
I I
I
1
1
mv
K
AB 9S
WELL IN SHALLOW ZONE
AB 9D
WELL IN DEEP ZONE
AB 9BR
WELL IN COMPETENT BEDROCK
AB 4S
WELL IN ASH PORE WATER
GENERALIZED WATER TABLE
BEDROCK FRACTURE
ORIENTATION
nompo. GENERALIZED VERTICAL
HYDRAULIC GRADIENT
0 ASH PORE WATER
FILL
0 SAPROLITE
® WEATHERED ROCK
BEDROCK
ASH PORE LAYER
WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
SHALLOW GROUNDWATER FLOW ZONE
WELL WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
DEEP GROUNDWATER FLOW ZONE
WELL WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
BEDROCK GROUNDWATER FLOW ZONE
WELL WATER LEVEL ELEVATION
IMI
GEOMEAN BORON CONCENTRATION (pg/L)
WATER LEVEL ELEVATION (NAVD 88)
(LABEL COLORING BY FLOW ZONE)
0 WELL SCREEN
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
1. WATER ELEVATIONS REPRESENT THE MANUAL WATER LEVELS COLLECTED FOR APRIL 8,2019 FOR
EACH WELL. NOTE ELEVATIONS WITHIN EACH CLUSTER ARE MEASURED IN THE SAME DAY. ASH
BASIN POND ELEVATION IS RECORDED FROM APRIL 8, 201-9. REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM 1988.
2. GEOMEAN BORON CONCENTRATIONS REPRESENT THE GEOMETRIC AVERAGE OF VALID AVAILABLE
SAMPLE RESULTS BETWEEN JANUARY, 2018 AND APRIL, 2019.
3. FRACTURES DEPICTED ON THIS CROSS SECTION REPRESENT THE GENERALIZED FRACTURE
ORIENTATIONS BASED ON TELEVIEWER LOGGING AT SITE -SPECIFIC BOREHOLES. AS
CONCEPTUALLY ILLUSTRATED HERE, TELEVIEWER LOGGING RESULTS DID NOT INDICATE ANY
DISTINCT, CONSISTENT FRACTURE SETS, BUT A WIDE VARIETY OF FRACTURE ORIENTATIONS AT
THE SITE. THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF FRACTURES IS FAR TOO NUMEROUS TO ILLUSTRATE AT THIS
SCALE. IN ADDITION, THE DEPTHS AND LENGTHS OF FRACTURES VERSUS DEPTH ARE
CONCEPTUAL ONLY.
4. THE NORTH CAROLINA 02L FOR BORON IS 700 pg/L.
5. PROVISIONAL BACKGROUND THRESHOLD VALUE (PBTV) FOR BORON IS 50 pg/L WITHIN THE
SHALLOW, 50 pg/L DEEP, 50 pg/L BEDROCK FLOW ZONES.
6. ALL VERTICAL ELEVATIONS ARE MEASURED IN FEET, NORTH AMERICA VERTICAL DATUM (NAVD)
- — - COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY OF 1988.
CROSS SECTION LOCATION

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
ATTACHMENT A
SynTerra
BORING LOGS, WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORDS,
AND WELL DEVELOPMENT LOGS

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-01BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 02-04-19
COMPLETED: 03-11-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,647.89
EASTING: 1,682,527.0
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 769.85
M.P. ELEV: 769.85
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
98.56
TOTAL DEPTH: 310.85
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.7 (in) 6.2
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
sPF-Ambien
0.— O50
Lu
C
(9 )
(A 0
V
PF Puumpmg
0
0.00 OS
Own)
po u. gpo
I.
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
T T :
Silty Sand: reddish brown, dry, cohesive (FILL)
Sandy Silt: reddish brown, high mica content, dry
(FILL)
light brown, moist, cohesive, high mica content
(FILL)
light brown, increasing moisture, cohesive, high
mica content (FILL)
yellowish brown, saturated, high mica
content/some rock fragments (FILL)
auger refusal at 78'
Schist: dark grey mica schist with hornblende,
foliated
light grey mica schist with hornblende and quartz
Well Cap
Cementitious
Grout
Cementitious
Grout
Sch 40 8" PVC
Casing
Aquaguard
Grout
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 1 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-01BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 02-04-19
COMPLETED: 03-11-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,647.89
EASTING: 1,682,527.0
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 769.85
M.P. ELEV: 769.85
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
98.56
TOTAL DEPTH: 310.85
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.7 (in) 6.2
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
sPF-Ambien
0.00O50
Lu
C
i9 )
(A 0
V
Puumpmg
0
0.0(pPF
OS
Own)
po u. gpo
130
135
light grey mica schist, rock strength increasing with
140
depth
145
Schist: grey/green greenschist with mica, chlorite,
150
feldspar and quartz
'
' Sch 80 2" PVC
Casing
155
160
Cementitious
Schist: grey mica schist with quartz, hornblende
and garnet
Grout
165
dark grey platy mica schist with quartz,
170
hornblende, accessory pyrite and garnet
175
180
185
\
\
190
Schist: very strong greenschist with prominent
195
chlorite and some pyrite veins
200
205
Schist: dark grey/brown mica schist with minor
pyrite and quartz. Some chlorite, quartz, garnet
210
and mica graded in.
215
220
Cementitious
225
\
\ Grout
230
235
240
245
dark grey/brown mafic cuttings comprised of mica
schist and minor quartz.
250
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 2 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-01BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 02-04-19
COMPLETED: 03-11-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,647.89
EASTING: 1,682,527.0
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 769.85
M.P. ELEV: 769.85
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
98.56
TOTAL DEPTH: 310.85
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.7 (in) 6.2
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
sPF-Ambien
0.00O50
Lu
C
i9 )
(A 0
V
Puumpmg
0
0.0(pPF
OS
Own)
po u. gpo
255
260
265
270
275
280
285
290
295
300
305
310
315
320
325
330
335
340
345
350
355
360
365
370
375
380
very strong, dark grey mica schist with quartz and
accessory garnet and pyrite
Schist: greenschist with prevalent chlorite, quartz
and plagioclase. Some accessory garnet.
foliated greenschist with chlorite, quartz and
feldspar. grey/green cuttings, increasing strength
with depth
very strong, foliated greenschist, black/green fine
grained cuttings with minor quartz
Bentonite Seal
Sand Pack
Screen
Sand backfill
Bentonite Pellet
Backfill
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 3 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-01BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 02-04-19
COMPLETED: 03-11-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,647.89
EASTING: 1,682,527.0
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 769.85
M.P. ELEV: 769.85
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
98.56
TOTAL DEPTH: 310.85
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.7 (in) 6.2
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
sPF-Ambien
0.00O50
Lu
C
i9 )
(A 0
V
Puumpmg
0
0.0(pPF
OS
Own)
po u. gpo
385
390
395
400
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
symTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 4 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-02BR
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 01-30-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,574.08
EASTING: 1,683,133.2
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.81
M.P. ELEV: 770.81
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
43.32
TOTAL DEPTH: 175.00
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
6.1 (in) 6.4
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SPF-Ambien
0.— 020
Lu
C
(9
(A 0
V
PF Puum)
0
0.00 pmg 02
Own)
po u. gpo
I.
E
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
,-
Sandy Silt: reddish brown, some mica present
(FILL)
reddish brown, moist, mica present with small rock
fragments (FILL)
T T :
T T
Silty Sand: brown, moist to saturated, cohesive,
mica present (FILL)
Sandy Silt: light brown, saturated, some mica and
small rock fragments, cohesive, non -plastic (FILL)
reddish brown, saturated, increasing mica content
(FILL)
Auger refusal at 120'
Schist: light/dark grey mica schist with hornblende,
feldspar and some quartz.
Well Cap
Cementitious
Grout
Cementitious
Grout
Sch 40 8" PVC
Casing
Sch 80 2" PVC
Casing
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 1 OF 2

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-02BR
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 01-30-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,574.08
EASTING: 1,683,133.2
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.81
M.P. ELEV: 770.81
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
43.32
TOTAL DEPTH: 175.00
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
6.1 (in) 6.4
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SPF-Ambien
0.00020
Lu
C
i9 )
(A 0
V
Puumpmg
0
0.0(pPF
02
Own)
po u. gpo
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
210
215
220
225
230
235
240
Aquaguard
Grout
Cementitious
Grout
Bentonite Seal
Sand Pack
Screen
Sand Backfill
Bentonite Pellet
Backfill
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 2 OF 2

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-2BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 01-11-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,577.28
EASTING: 1,683,175.9
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.91
M.P. ELEV: 770.91
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
93.73
TOTAL DEPTH: 279.06
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.5 (in) 6.0
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SPF-Ambien
0.— 800
Lu
C
(9 )
(A 0
V
PF Puumpmg
0
0.00 80
Own)
po u. gpo
I.
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
T T :
Silty Sand: reddish brown, micaceous (FILL)
T T :
T.'
TT :
Silty Sand: light brown, micaceous (FILL)
light brown, micaceous, saturated, cohesive (FILL)
—
—
Sandy Silt: reddish brown, moist, cohesive, few
small mica schist fragments (FILL)
reddish brown, saturated, cohesive, micaceous
(FILL)
,-
Sandy Silt: reddish brown, moist, with fragments
of mica schist (SAPROLITE)
reddish brown, increasing fragments of mica
schist, saturated, (SAPROLITE)
Auger refusal at 125'
Well Cap
Cementitious
Grout
Cementitious
Grout
8" Sch 40 PVC
Casing
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 1 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-2BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 01-11-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,577.28
EASTING: 1,683,175.9
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.91
M.P. ELEV: 770.91
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
93.73
TOTAL DEPTH: 279.06
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.5 (in) 6.0
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SPF-Ambien
0.00800
Lu
C
i9 )
(A 0
V
Puumpmg
0
0.0(pPF
80
Own)
po u. gpo
Schist: dark grey, mica schist with amphibolite and
130
hornblende
135
;\,
'\ ; 2" Sch 80 PVC
Casing
140
145
Aquaguard
Grout
150
Cementitious
155
Grout
160
dark grey, mica schist with hornblende and
feldspar
165
170
175
very strong, dark grey mica schist, with minor
180
quartz
Cementitious
185
Grout
190
195
6" Sch 80 PVC
grey/dark grey mica schist with quartz
Casing
200
,
205
210
dark grey foliated mica schist
215
220
225
Gneiss: grey, biotite hornblende gniess with
garnet.
230
Cementitious
Grout
235
240
Schist: greenschist with chlorite, quartz and
245
plagioclase
250
Gneiss: dark grey biotite gniess with hornblende,
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 2 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-2BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 01-11-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,577.28
EASTING: 1,683,175.9
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.91
M.P. ELEV: 770.91
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
93.73
TOTAL DEPTH: 279.06
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.5 (in) 6.0
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SPF-Ambien
0.00800
Lu
C
i9 )
(A 0
V
Puumpmg
0
0.0(pPF
80
Own)
po u. gpo
255
260
265
270
275
280
285
290
295
300
305
310
315
320
325
330
335
340
345
350
355
360
365
370
375
380
quartz, and garnet
Schist: grey mica schist with accessory garnet and
pyrite.
Schist: greenschist with chlorite, quartz, accessory
garnet and pyrite.
foliated greenschist with chlorite, mica, feldspar
and quartz
very strong, foliated greenschist with chlorite,
prevalent quartz, and feldspar
greenschist with chlorite, quartz and plagioclase
Bentonite Seal
Sand Pack
Screen
Sand Backfill
Bentonite Pellet
Backfill
41p SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 3 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-2BRD
PROJECT NO: 1026.20.18
STARTED: 01-11-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,577.28
EASTING: 1,683,175.9
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.91
M.P. ELEV: 770.91
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
93.73
TOTAL DEPTH: 279.06
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.5 (in) 6.0
w
^
_
OJ
DESCRIPTION
>
c�
j
WELL CONSTRUCTION
SPF-Ambien
0.00800
Lu
C
i9 )
(A 0
V
Puumpmg
0
0.0(pPF
80
Own)
po u. gpo
385
390
395
400
41p SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy Carolinas
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
s)mTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 4 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-03BR
PROJECT NO: 1028.20.18
STARTED: 01-02-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,710.37
EASTING: 1,683,769.7
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.14
M.P. ELEV: 770.14
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
92.40
TOTAL DEPTH: 273.45
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.3 (in) 5.8
w
ay
p
DESCRIPTION
V H
H
WELL CONSTRUCTION
0 OF-Ambien 000
Lu
J
(gpr)
O
HH
0.02PF-Pumping1.00
Own)
po u. gpo
I.
E
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
...
Sandy Silt: dry, fine grained, loose (FILL)
moist, orange/brown, with weathered small
fragments of mica schist (FILL)
moist, orange/brown, small mica schist fragments,
loose (FILL)
Silt: light brown, saturated, increasing mica schist
fragments (SAPROLITE)
T T
T T'
T T •
Silty Sand: light brown, saturated, with mica schist
and quartz (SAPROLITE)
Auger refusal at 103'
Schist: amphibolite mica schist with quartz
Schist: mica schist with quartz and accessory
garnet
mica schist with quartz, garnet, and accessory
Well Cap
Cementitious
Grout
8" Sch 40 PVC
Casing
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy, Carolinas LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 1 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-03BR
PROJECT NO: 1028.20.18
STARTED: 01-02-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,710.37
EASTING: 1,683,769.7
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.14
M.P. ELEV: 770.14
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
92.40
TOTAL DEPTH: 273.45
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.3 (in) 5.8
w
ay
p
DESCRIPTION
V H
H
WELL CONSTRUCTION
0 OF-Ambien 000
Lu
J
(gpm)
O
HH
0.02PF-Pumping1.00
Own)
po u. gpo
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
210
215
220
225
230
235
240
245
250
2" Sch 80 PVC
Casing
6" Sch 80 PVC
Casing
Cementitious
Grout
Cementitious
Grout
Bentonite Seal
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy, Carolinas LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 2 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-03BR
PROJECT NO: 1028.20.18
STARTED: 01-02-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,710.37
EASTING: 1,683,769.7
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.14
M.P. ELEV: 770.14
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
92.40
TOTAL DEPTH: 273.45
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.3 (in) 5.8
w
ay
p
DESCRIPTION
V H
H
WELL CONSTRUCTION
0 OF-Ambien 000
Lu
J
(gpm)
O
HH
0.02PF-Pumping1.00
Own)
po u. gpo
255
260
265
270
275
280
285
290
295
300
305
310
315
320
325
330
335
340
345
350
355
360
365
370
375
380
Sand Pack
Screen
Sand Backfill
Bentonite Pellet
Backfill
41P SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy, Carolinas LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
ynTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 3 OF 4

PROJECT: Belews Creek Deep Bedrock Evaluation
WELL/BORING NO:
AB-03BR
PROJECT NO: 1028.20.18
STARTED: 01-02-19
COMPLETED: 03-12-19
DRILLING COMPANY:
Geologic Exploration
NORTHING: 928,710.37
EASTING: 1,683,769.7
DRILLING METHOD:
HSA / Mud Rotary / Air Hammer
G.S. ELEV: 770.14
M.P. ELEV: 770.14
BOREHOLE DIAMETER:
10" / 8" / 4"
DEPTH TO WATER:
92.40
TOTAL DEPTH: 273.45
NOTES:
LOGGED BY:
DAA
CHECKED BY: COE
r
V
5.3 (in) 5.8
w
ay
p
DESCRIPTION
V H
H
WELL CONSTRUCTION
0 OF-Ambien 000
Lu
J
(gpm)
O
HH
0.02PF-Pumping1.00
Own)
po u. gpo
385
390
395
400
41p SynTerra CLIENT: Duke Energy, Carolinas LLC
148 River Street, Suite 220 PROJECT LOCATION: Walnut Cove, NC
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
s mTerra Phone: [phone] PAGE 4 OF 4

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD
This form can be used for single or mulliple wells
1. Well Contractor Information:
NiCHOLAS HAYES
Well Contractor Name
A - 4121
NC Well Contractor Certification Number
GEOLOGIC EXPLORATION, INC
Company Name
2. Well Construction Permit k:
Liu all applicable uvlt c•orestruco nt perndrs (t e. C-aunnt State, Variance, etc.)
3. Well Use (check well use):
Water Supply Well:
OAgricultural OMulicipal/Pubhc
CGeothermal (Heating/Coohng Supply) ❑Residential Water Supply (single)
❑Industrial/Commercial ❑Residential Water Supply (Shared)
0irrigation
Non -Water Supply Nell:
©Monitoring, ORecovery
❑Aquifer Recharge
OAquiter Storage and Recovery
O Aq ui t& Test
OExperimental Technology
DGeothermal (Closed Loup)
DGeothermal (I-Icahng/Cooling
OGraundwater Remediation
OSalinity Barrier
OStormwatcr Drainage
❑Subsidence Control
OTracer
OUther (explain under #21 F
4. Date Well(s) Completed: 03/12/19 hell ID# AB-1 B RD
5a, Well Location:
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
Fact lity/Owtier Name Facility ID9 (i£applicable)
3195 PINE HALL ROAD BELEWS CREEK 27009
Physical Address, Crty, and Zip
STOKES
County Facet Identification No (PIN)
5b. Latitude and Longitude in degrees/minutes/seconds or decimal degree
(i£well field• one tat long is suf lcrent)
36' 17' 18.21" N 80' 04' 29.02"
6. is (are) the well(s): ©Permanent or ❑Temporar)
For Internal Use UNLI'
14. WATER ZONES
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION
ft.
ft,
ft.
ft.
15. OUTER CASING for multi -cased wells) OR LINER if a Rcable)
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
TIIICKNESS
MATERIAL,
0.0 f1.
160.0 ft.
8.0 in.
SCH 80
PVC
16. INNER CASING OR TUBING eothermal
closed -loop)
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
'THICKNESS
MATERIAL
0.0 D'
300.0 R-
2.0 in.
SCH 40
PVC
ft.
ft.
in.
17. SCREEN
TO
DIAMETER
SLOTSIZE
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
F
310.0 ft,2.0
m
010
SCH 40
PVC"
ft.
18. GROUT
FROM
TO
MATERIAL
EMPLACEMENTMETI1OD&AMOUNr
0.0 ft.
290.0 ft-PORTLWaaENTONITE
SLURRY
Q,0 ft.
160.0 ft-
Paftn.NNaaENTONITE
SLURRY
ft,
ft.
19. SAND/GRAVEL PACK if applicable)
FROM
TO
MATERIAL
EMPLACEMENTMETHOD
295.0 ft.
315.0 ft.
20-40
FINE SILICA SAND
ft.
ft.
20. DRILLING
LOC attach additional sheets if necessary)
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION iralar, hardness, soitI o k s rain sin, etc.)
0.0 ft•
25.0 e.
BROWN/RED SILT
25.0 fL
66.0 ft•
BROWN SiLT
66.0 ft-
78.0 ff•
PWR
78.0 fr•
400.0 ft•
ROCK
ft.
It.
I
ft.
ft.
ft,
ft.
21. REMARKS
BENTONITE SEAL FROM 290.0 TO 295.0 FT & 315.0 TO 400.0 FT
"U-PACK SCREEN"
s' 22. Certification:
03/20/19
Signature ol'Cenified Well Contractor Date
7, Is this it repair to an existing well: ❑Yes or ONo
t('thtc r.s o repair, lilt out known well cort.simciron htfirrrnatturr and explain the mature a/tire
repair under 21 renrarkv veetion or on the back nJ this furor.
8. Number of wells constructed: 1
Ic mohiple hijec nun or nun-wuter.snpplr av/4 ONLY with the .same construction. you can
m,hom tine form.
Kr .signing rhiv Jorm, 1 hurehr certify thnr the irelt(.cJ alas 61 ere) constructed in accurdauce
troth 15,1 NC'A' 112C , 0Hl0 ar /jA NCA- 02C. 02011 tpe4l Cunsiructiurr Stwuh-1,, and thin o
rape aJ this record has been provided to the trait asrner.
23. Site diagram or additional well details:
You may use the back of this page to provide additional well site details or well
construction details. You may also attach additional pages if necessary.
SUBMITTAL INSTUCTIONS
9. Total well depth below land surface: 310.0 ` p (ft.) 24a. For A31 Wells: Submit this form vvrthm 30 days of completion of well
hirr multiple welts Im all depttry if different (example- 3 a 200' and 2dtJ001 construction t0 the following:
i0, Static water level below top of casing: 99.12 (ft-)Division of Water Quality, information Processing Unit,
y roarer level iv ubore covoix, uve ' 1617 Nlail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
11. Borehole diameter: 12.017.875/9.87516.0 (in.) 24b. For lniection Wells: In addition to sending the form to the address in 24a
AUGER/MUD ROTARY/AIR above, also submit a copy of this form within 30 days of completion of well
12, Well construction method: construction to the following:
t i.e. auger, rotary, cable, dricct push, etc.)
Division of Water Quality, Underground Injection Control Program,
FOR WATER SUPPLY WELLS ONLY: 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
13a. field (gpm) Method of test: 24c. For Water Supply & lniection Wells: In addition to sending the form to
the address(es) above, also submit one copy of this form within 30 days of
13b. Disinfection type: Amount: completion of well construction to the county health department of the county
where constructed.
Form 0!v-I Nonh Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of water Oualih devised tau. 2013,

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD
This form can be used for single or multiple wells
1. Well Contractor Information:
NICHOLAS HAYES
Well Contractor Name
A-4121
NC Well Contractor Certification Number
GEOLOGIC EXPLORATION, INC
Company Name
2. Well Construction Permit #:
List all applicable well construction permits (i.e. County. State. Variance, etc.)
3. Well Use (check well use):
Water Supply Well:
❑Agricultural
❑Geothermal (Heating/Cooling Supply)
❑ Industrial/Commercial
Water
❑Aquifer Recharge
El Aquifer Storage and Recovery
❑Aquifer Test
❑Experimental Technology
❑Geothermal (Closed Loop)
❑Geothermal (Heating/Cooling
❑Municipal/Public
❑Residential Water Supply (single)
❑Residential Water Supply (shared)
❑Groundwater Remediation
❑Salinity Barrier
❑Stormwater Drainage
❑Subsidence Control
❑Tracer
❑Other (explain under #21 1
4. Date Well(s) Completed: 03/12/19 Well ID# A13-213RD
5a. Well Location:
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
Facility/Owner Name Facility ID# (ifapplicable)
3195 PINE HALL ROAD BELEWS CREEK 27009
Physical Address, City, and Zip
STOKES
County Parcel Identification No. (PIN)
5b. Latitude and Longitude in degrees/minutes/seconds or decimal degrees
(if well field, one ]at/long is sufficient)
36e 17' 18.21" N 800 04' 29.02"
6. Is (are) the well(s): 2Permanent or ❑Temporary
W
7. Is this a repair to an existing well: ❑Yes or ElNo
/J'this is a repair, Jill out known well construction in/brntation and explain the nature of the
repair under #21 remarks section or on the back of this form.
S. Number of wells constructed: 1
For multiple injection or non -water supply wells ONLY with the same construction, you can
submit one,/orm.
9. Total well depth below land surface: 279.1 (ft.)
For multiple wells list all depths ifdifferent erent (example- 3@200' and 2@100')
10. Static water level below top of casing: 95.03 (ft.)
1f water level is above caring, use ••+"
11. Borehole diameter: 12.0/9.875/10.0/6.0 (in.)
AUGER/MUD ROTARY/AIR
For Internal Use ONLY:
14. WATER ZONES
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
15.OUTER CASING for multi -cased wells OR LINER if a licable
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
0.0 ft
158.0 ft
8.0 1" 1
SCH 80
PVC
16. INNER
CASING OR TUBING(geothermal closed -loop)
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
0.0 ft.
269.1 ft.
2.0 in.
SCH 40
PVC
0.0 ft'
210.0 ft'
6.0 in.
SCH 80
PVC
17. SCREEN
TO
DIAMETER
SLOT SIZE
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
FFROM
269.1 ft'
279.1 ft.
2.0 in'
.010
SCH 40
PVC**
ft.
ft.
in.
18. GROUT
FROM
I TO
MATERIAL
EMPLACEMENT METHOD & AMOUNT
0.0 ft'
256.0 ft'
PORTLANDBENTONITE
SLURRY
0.0 ft,
210.0 ft.
PORTLANDBENTONRE
SLURRY
0.0 f-
158.0 ft-
PORTLANDBENTONITE
SLURRY
19, SAND/GRAVEL PACK if applicable)
FROM
TO
MATERIAL
EMPLACEMENT METHOD
264.0 ft•
284.0 ft'
20-40
FINE SILICA SAND
ft.
ft.
20. DRILLING
LOG attach additional sheets if necessary)
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION color, hardness, soil/rock type, rain size, etc.
0.0 ft.
40.0 ft.
RED/BROWN SILT
40.0 ft•
117.0 ft•
BROWN SILT
117.0 ft•
124.0 it'
PWR
124.0 ft'
400.0 ft.
ROCK
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
21. REMARKS
BENTONITE SEAL FROM 256.0 TO 264.0 FT & 284.0 TO 400.0 FT
**U-PACK SCREEN**
22. Certification:
Signature of Certified Well Contractor
03/20/19
Date
By signing this form, I herebi, certify that the wells) was (were) constructed in accordance
with 1 SA NCAC 02C .0100 or IJA NCAC 01C .0200 Well Construction Standards and that a
copy o/ this record has been provided to the well owner.
23. Site diagram or additional well details:
You may use the back of this page to provide additional well site details or well
construction details. You may also attach additional pages if necessary.
SUBMITTAL INSTUCTIONS
24a. For All Wells: Submit this form within 30 days of completion of well
construction to the following:
Division of Water Quality, Information Processing Unit,
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
24b. For Infection Wells: In addition to sending the form to the address in 24a
above, also submit a copy of this form within 30 days of completion of well
12. Well construction method: construction to the following:
(i.e. auger, rotary, cable, direct push. etc.)
Division of Water Quality, Underground Injection Control Program,
FOR WATER SUPPLY WELLS ONLY: 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
13a. Yield (gpm) Method of test: 24c. For Water Supply & Injection Wells: In addition to sending the form to
the address(es) above, also submit one copy of this form within 30 days of
13b. Disinfection type: Amount: completion of well construction to the county health department of the county
where constructed.
Form GW-I North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality Revised Jan. 2013

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD
This farm can be used lot single or nuiluple wells
1. Well Contractor information:
NICHOLAS HAYES
well Contractor Nano
A - 4121
NC AA'ell Contractor Certification Number
GEOLOGIC EXPLORATION, INC
Company Name
2. Well Construction Permit #:
list alf upplu ohle tall c+tnsirm it /?grunts (t c. r'avnrv, stare, t itrianc e, et,
3. Well Use (check well use):
Water Supply Well:
❑AgriculRual
OGeothermal (rieating(Cooling Supply)
O I ndustr is l/Commercial
OMumcipal/Public
OResidential Water Supply (single)
OResidential Water Supply (shared)
j Non -Water Supply Well: j
GnMumturina ORecovery
DAquifer Recharge
DAquii'er Storage and Recovery
OAquiier Test
OExperimental Technology
OGcothermal (Closed i_oup)
4. Date Well(s) Completed:
OGroundwater Remediation
❑Salinity Barrier
OStormwater Drainage
OSubsidence Control
OTracer
❑Other (explain under 921 G
03/12/19 Well ID# AB-2BR
5a. Well Location:
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
FnciInylOwuer Name Facility ID# (if applicable)
3195 PINE HALL ROAD BELEWS CREEK 27009
Phu sical Address, City, and Zip
STOKES
Connty Parcel Identification No. (PIN)
Sb. Latitude and Longitude in degrees/minutes/seconds or decimal degrees:
(itivcll field, one hit/long is sufflcientl
36a 17' 18.21" N 800 04' 29,02"
6. Is (tire) the vvetl(s): ©Permanent or OTemporary
7. Is this a repair to an existing well: ❑!'es or ©No
if [It. is a repair, Jill our knamn hell consiructino injirmanoir aacl explain the nature of'the
reixtir under i:21 rerrtarks .suction ar an the hack r f this form.
8. Number of wells constructed: 1
1-iir whipte• iniectlon or nary-u aier suppfy trolls OA'/. )' tvith the .same construction.wit earl
.suhmir o re fitrrn.
9. Toad well depth below land surface: 175.0 (ft.)
Far multiph, ''ells lieu al! depths J'Jtj/vrcirl (example- s tt 00' and 2 rt 1(101
10. Static wader level below top of casing: 43.42 (ft.)
l/ maler level is ahove casing, rise "
11. Borehole diameter: 12.0/9.875/6.0 (ia)
12. Well construction method: AUGER/MUD ROTARY/AIR
(i.e. auger, rotary, cable, daect push, etc.)
For Internal Use ONLY
14. WATER ZONES
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION
D.
ft.
tr.
rr.
IS. OUTER CASING (for multi -cased wellst OR LINER if licuble
FROM
TO mAht ETER
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
0,0 ft
157.Q ft• 8.0 i"
SGH 80
PVC
16. INNER CASING OR Tt!BING(geothermal closed-loa
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
0.0 ft'
165.0 ft•
2.0 in.
SCH 40
PVC
ft.
I ft.
in.
17. SCREEN
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
SLOT SIZE
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
165.0ft•
175_Q ft'
2.0 in.
.010
SCH 40
PVC`"
ft.
ft.
in.
IS. GROUT
FROM
TO
MATERIAL
EMPLACEDt ENTINETIIOD&,iMOUNT
0.0 ft.
155.0 ft.
aoarV.vo9Enr0rtlTE
SLURRY
0.0 ft-
157.0 ft•
-Fir-aaENTO 'E
SLURRY
ft.
ft.
19. SANDIGRAV'EL PACK: ifa licable
FROM
TO
ril T RIAL
EMPLACEMENTMETHOD
160.0 e•
180.0 ft-
20-40
FINE SILICA SAND
fL
ft.
20. DRILLING
LOG attach additional sheets if necessa
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION (valor, hardness, spill-k qrse, grain siu, etc,)
0.0 ft-
15.0 ft-
RED CLAY
15.0 ft'
80.0 H•
BROWN/RED SiLT
80.0 ft'
108.0 ft•
BROWN SILT
108.0 ft.
119.0 ft.
PWR
119.0 H•
240.0 ft•
ROCK
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
21. REMARKS
BENTONITE SEAL FROM 155.0 TO 160.0 FT & 180.0 TO 245.0 FT
**U-PACK SCREEN**
22. Certification:
Signature ofCertified well Contractor
03/20/19
Date
Hy stgning this f wm, f herehy eerlyj, that the ire/l(s) va.s (mere/ cutmoseted in acerirdutrce
irirh 15.4 NUAC 02C,0100 or 13A NC'AC tt2C .G200 hell C rin.structirin Standards and that a
copy rJ this record liar heert provided m rite ti ell otraer.
23. Site diagram or additional well details:
You may use the back of this page to provide additional well site details or well
construction details. You may also attach additional pages if necessary.
SUBMITTAL INSTUCTiONS
24a. For All Wells: Submit this torm within 30 days of completion of well
construction to the iollowmg:
Division of Water Quality, information Processing Unit,
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
24b, For Injection Wells: to addition to sending the form to the address in 24a
above, also submit a copy of this form within 30 days of completion of well
construction to the following:
Division of Water Quality, Underground Injection Control Program
FOR WATER SUPPLY WELLS ONLY: 1636 ,Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
13a. Yield (gpnl) Alethod of test: lac• For Water Supply & Injection Wells: In addition to sending the form to
the addresses) above, also submit one copy of this form within 30 days of
tab. Disinfection type: Amount completion of well construction to the county health department of the county
where constructed.
Form GA` -I North Carolina Department of Environment and Nanaal Resources - Division of water Quality Revised Jan. 2013

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD
This form can be used for single or multiple wells
1. Well Contractor Information:
NICHOLAS HAYES
Well Contractor Name
A - 4121
NC Well Contractor Certification Number
GEOLOGIC EXPLORATION, INC
Company Name
2. Well Construction Permit #:
List all applicable well construction permits (i.e. County. State, Variance, etc.)
3. Well Use (check well use):
Water Supply Well:
❑Agricultural ❑Municipal/Public
❑Geothermal (Heating/Cooling Supply) ❑Residential Water Supply (single)
❑ Industrial/Commercial
❑Residential Water Supply (shared)
❑Irri ation
Non -Water Supply Well:
17Monitoring
❑Recovery
Injection Well:
❑Aquifer Recharge
❑Groundwater Remediation
❑Aquifer Storage and Recovery
❑Salinity Barrier
❑Aquifer Test
❑Stormwater Drainage
❑Experimental Technology.. -
❑Subsidence Control
❑Geothermal (Closed Loop)
❑Tracer
❑Geothermal (Heating/Cooling Return)
❑Other (explain under #21 Remarks)
4. Date Well(s) Completed: 03/13/19 Well ID# AB-36R
5a. Well Location:
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
Facility/Owner Name Facility ID# (if applicable)
3195 PINE HALL ROAD BELEWS CREEK 27009
Physical Address, City, and Zip
STOKES
County
Parcel Identification No. (PIN)
5b. Latitude and Longitude in degrees/minutes/seconds or decimal degrees:
(ifwell field, one ]at/long is sufficient)
360 17' 18.21" N 800 04' 29.02" W
6. Is (are) the well(s): ©Permanent or ❑Temporary
7. Is this a repair to an existing well: ❑Yes or ElNo
I/'this is a repair. fill out known well construction inlbrmation and explain the nature ofthe
repair under #21 remarks section or on the back of this form.
8. Number of wells constructed: 1
For multiple injection or non -water supply wells ONLY with the same construction, you can
,submit one farm.
9. Total well depth below iand surface: 273.5
For multiple wells list all depths ifdijierent (example- 3@200' and 1@l00')
10. Stack water level below top of casing: 92.16
If water level is above casing, use "+
11. Borehole diameter: 12.0/9.875/10.0/6.0 (in.)
12. Well construction method: AUGER/MUD ROTARY/AIR
(i.e. auger, rotary, cable, direct push, etc.)
FOR WATER SUPPLY WELLS ONLY:
13a. Yield (gpm) Method of test:
13b. Disinfection type: Amount:
For Internal Use ONLY:
14. WATER ZONES
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
15.OUTER CASING for
multi -cased wells OR LINER if applicable)
FROM
TO
DIAMETER THICKNESS1
MATERIAL
0.0 ft•
108.0 ft'
1 8.0 in.SCH 80
PVC
16. INNER CASING OR TUBING(geothermal closed -loop)
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
0.0 1"
263.5 I'L
2.0 in.
SCH 40
PVC
0.0 ft'
180.0 f°
6.0 in.
SCH 80
PVC
17.SCREEN
FROM
TO
DIAMETER
SLOT SIZE
THICKNESS
MATERIAL
263.5 ft'
273.5 it.
2.0 in.
.010
SCH 40
PVC**
ft.
ft.
in.
18. GROUT
FROM
TO
MATERIAL
EMPLACEMENT METHOD & AMOUNT
0.0 ft'
252.0 ft'
PORTLANDBENTONITE
SLURRY
0.0 IL
180.0 ft-
PORTLANDBENTONITE
SLURRY
0.0 ft-
108.0 ft-
PORTLANDBENTONITE
SLURRY
19. SAND/GRAVEL PACK if applicable)
FROM
TO
MATERIAL I
EMPLACEM17ENT METHOD
258.0 ft•
278.0 ft'
20-40
FINE SILICA SAND
ft,
ft.
20. DRILLING
LOG attach additional sheets if necessary)
FROM
TO
DESCRIPTION color, hardness, soiVrock type, grain size, etc.)
0.0 ft-
40.0 ft.
RED/BROWN SILT
40.0 ft'
80.0 ft•
BROWN SILT
80.0 ft•
94.0 ft•
BROWN SILTY PWR
94.0 ft•
100.0 ft'
PWR
100.0 ft•
400.0 ft-
ROCK
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
21. REMARKS
BENTONITE SEAL FROM 252.0 TO 258.0 FT & 278.0 TO 400.0 FT
`*U-PACK SCREEN**
22. Certification: A./-
03/20/19
Signature of Certified Well Contractor Date
By signing this form, I herebv certh, that the well(s) was (were) constructed in accordance
with 15A NCAC 01C .0100 or 1 SA NCAC 02C .0100 Well Construction Standards and that a
copy oithis record has been provided to the well owner.
23. Site diagram or additional well details:
You may use the back of this page to provide additional well site details or well
construction details. You may also attach additional pages if necessary.
SUBMITTAL INSTUCTIONS
24a. For All Wells: Submit this form within 30 days of completion of well
construction to the following:
Division of Water Quality, Information Processing Unit,
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
24b. For Injection Wells: In addition to sending the form to the address in 24a
above, also submit a copy of this form within 30 days of completion of well
construction to the following:
Division of Water Quality, Underground Injection Control Program,
1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
24c. For Water Supply & Injection Wells: In addition to sending the form to
the address(es) above, also submit one copy of this form within 30 days of
completion of well construction to the county health department of the county
where constructed.
Form GW-I North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality Revised Jan. 2013

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
SynTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL ID: _3
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
A
FIELD PERSONNEL: -W
MEASURING POINT:
TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
2-
WELL DEPTH:
? 73Y5 (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER:
92, qb (FT)
WEATHER: ("SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX): 10 F
NOTES: ff //
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE: �•//�• �� /�2�Q
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer v 4�4�F,�i�
DATE TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
(" Celsius)
DO CONDUCTANCE
(mg/L) (AS/CM)
PH
_
(su)
ORP` TURBIDITY`
NOTES
(mV) (NTU)
3 W
ZD
3,
oD
7,33
oo
4444
_Z
Milos
o��
-7014
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLEOYES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
_VGOODI
WELL TAG
❑BAD ❑NONE
PROTECTIVE CASING
GOOD I
LOCK
BAD
❑NONE ,GOOD
CAP
❑BAD
❑ NONE
CONCRETE PAD
GOOD
❑BAD
❑NONE
GOOD
❑BAD FEINONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026\00 FIELD PAPERWORK1Well Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
SynTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] .[phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
WELL ID: '7L,8
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER: Z 0
WELL DEPTH: 1-75 (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT)
FIELD PERSONNEL:
WEATHER: P,SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX):(1) F
NOTES: "'t llu
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
/J
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer 1--Ak,
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
(° Celsius)
I
DO CONDUCTANCE
(mg/L) (µS/cm)
pH ORP•
TURBIDITY*
NOTES
(su)
(mV)
(NTU)
/%
0.23
/,/�
2-6
s,-)
16, le
i o5
tj
1.06
-5�3
.519z-
112B
Zs,
i7SS
15'
lfpy
114/0z-
9. S
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE zYES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ No.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as Ragged accordingly.
* SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK i CAP CONCRETE PAD
OOD ❑BAD ❑NONE GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE "GOOD BA❑D [INONE ���'i60DI []BAD ❑ NONE GOOD ❑BAD [I NONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORnWell Development Log - DEC doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www. synTerracorp. com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
WELL ID: -2rg7l)
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
WELL DEPTH: (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT)
FIELD PERSONNEL:
1�Q
WEATHER: SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX):/() F
NOTES: , GGG
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
DO
(mg/L)
CONDUCTANCE
(µS/cm)
i
pH ORP" TURBIDITY"
i
(Sul (mV) (NTU)
NOTES
(° Celsius)
. •/elvy
3.5
/
3. 7 9
,/0 3
le. //
Z7 V
4-1-14
=/ (o
2- go
y Gz,
9.�y
� YS
S
1-7
1 ` 0
9, zZ
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE, YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ No.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
GOOD ❑BAD ❑ NONE I GOOD [I BAD El NONE �JGOOD 9A❑D ❑NONE GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE GOOD ❑BAD ❑ NONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORK1Well Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG FIELD PERSONNEL: MA
WEATHER: fX SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX): �1 F
NOTES:
WELL ID:
-/gio
MEASURING POINT:
TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
WELL DEPTH:
(FT)
DEPTH TO WATER:
(FT)
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
111.5
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
(° Celsius)
DO
CONDUCTANCE
(PS/CM)
pH
ORP•
TURBIDITY*
NOTES
(mg/L)
(su)
(mV)
(NTU)
/
zip
�G7
6n2J5
D
f g
. Z
&S
so
/IJS
6-9
f4y
Z.lq
�' 3
01d
tzr;
_ a7
-
ZED
�-
���
Ida
s I S
SSS
f
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
' SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG
PROTECTIVE CASING
LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
^
GOOD [IBAD ❑ NONE
[I01
❑ GOOD [IBAD ❑ NONE
[IGOOD
BAD [INONE [IGOOD ElBAD ElNONE [IGOOD FEI BAD [INONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026\00 FIELD PAPERWORMWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
t
0
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOGS
FIELD PERSONNEL: VA Fri
WEATHER: 11M,SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX): 0 F
NOTES: 3 3 , y.3 y"/
h
WELL ID: , START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
MEASURING POINT: TOC END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
WELL DIAMETER: , D TOTAL VOL PURGED:
WELL DEPTH: (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: 4� (FT)
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump -P42 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP•
TURBIDITY'
NOTES
Celsius)
(mg/L)
(µ
(ysu)
(mV)
/ �
ss
it7
%(°
(tI
i
UUS/cm)
Z- (
7
C. ' li
%
�Q(NTU))
D �� T
�✓ 3 ,
/5
f(
.sa93
12.35
3.5
/3�
�v /3�. Ys
3 a 9 '�
/2, 6
- 2 , 1
IV6
&IL iS . 31
1
q
z /l/0
/Z-/
-�
//
�� la, -
30
01-6�
of -v
3 Z
i5
/11
z L
IoL /Z-V. yo
z
I
c
V
33
V7
/6
6J-7
/D, 3i
w1a
Z/6
�1. 7;77.00
020 �- Z_ & i s y. z i �.f /� �
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE 4CCE5Sff3LE YES ❑ NO
�� f/OI��z7 �8�Xt9 - 4rr.R t✓'+dttr rra,'�rt
Associated middaylemd-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) C] YES ❑ No.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE r,!f GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE 'GOOD d ❑NONE 'GOOD ❑BAD [I NONE .p G00� ❑BAD ❑NONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORKIWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
` FIELD PERSONNEL:
SynTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL ID: AlW
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER: z
WELL DEPTH: , :/f (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: p 'S�/o (FT)
DEVELOPMENT METHOD:
S7_
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX): F
NOTES:
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP"
TURBIDITY"
�. ..�
NOTES
(° Celsius)
(mg/L)
(PS/CM)
(su)
(mV)
lz 1 l
:/� f a
/S
/ L$
I'?off
1/6
/D i
12-3 -
a S
3 ,/ /
/a, yZ
- 3
-47
L13
s4o 14.
. l , r
�—
3 3
1 z, (/3
i Z
I
i3LY
-le)
16
if, z-v
/, 9 Z
15
73
113341
7Z
G
-
316_7
/Z.37
- 3
29
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK J CAP CONCRETE PAD
GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE �ffGOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE ��GOOD b ❑NONE JOOD ❑BAD ❑ NONE rKOOD ❑ BAD [INONE.
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026\00 FIELD PAPERWORKIWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
tip
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracarp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL: ?A, A TIT
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY�YOVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX),�6) F
WELL ID: F - / 13KD
MEASURING POINT:
TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
2 IN
WELL DEPTH:
Qe," I (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER:
9;e, J (FT)
DEVELOPMENT METHOD:
NOTES:
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
3- L7 • / �
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
j ,',S • / 7
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
/ 61
❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP• TURBIDITY"
NOTES
(° Celsius)
(mg/L)
(PS/CM)
(su)
(mV)
(NTU)
�zs
izz-7
15
, _7
I-E-4z
9y
Z351
0 2-5
---3
55
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
. SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG
II PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
[I GOOD i [I BAD 1 [I NONE ❑ GOOD [IBAD I ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD [I NONE [I GOOD [I BAD [I NONE [I GOOD [I BAD [I NONE
P:1Duke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORMWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL:
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www. synTe rracorp. corn
WELL ID: /
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER: 2 IN
WELL DEPTH: / (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: V �� / C, (FT)
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY 1f OVERCASTX RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX): i v F
NOTES: 3 G'C I = I t" -fl V-OI
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:'Z�S'
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED: I T -
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump F]' 12 dolt Pump Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
QQ
VOL
I
TEMPERATURE
DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP"
TURBIDITY"
NOTES
(° Celsius)
(mg/L)
(µS/cm)
(su)
(mV)
(NTU)
Z's Z-9
/Z . -3
Z
Y
l 6
5,15-7
11,0116
/Ss
1055
/
--
T ? 5
Zz)
Z
/ 90
/Yl0
lS
/561`/
6
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBL501YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
IEi00D ❑BAD I ❑ NONE ,J�KGOOD 1 ❑ BAD ❑ NONE Pld00D BA❑D [I NONE 'GOOD [IBAD [INONE XGOOD I ❑BAD ❑NONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress. 1 026\00 FIELD PAPERWORKIWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL ID: A- t-o'
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
WELL DEPTH: IFT1
DEPTH TO WATER: Z— (Fr)
DEVELOPMENT METHOD:
FIELD PERSONNEL:
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX): F
NOTES:
Ili-(/11r ��•L����
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE: j,ZZ �� /0 5 7
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
(° Celsius)
i
DO CONDUCTANCE
pH
(su)
ORP"
(mV)
TURBIDITY"
NOTES
(NTU)
(mg/L) (AS/CM)
r/V-
/0,2e
/(0
V6•5
a. z6)
/s g
33
i D
/l
-
/ S 3I
59
ZZ7
S"
/03—
60
I
f
✓'
0 6
�S
L
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ No.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG
PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK
❑ GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD ❑NONE
CAP CONCRETE PAD
❑ GOOD
❑ BAD
❑ NONE
GOOD
❑BAD
❑NONE ❑ GOOD
❑ BAD
[I NONE_
AB
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORK1Well Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
40
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] • [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL: D4 )`B 7—
WEATHER: ,E� SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX).� 6 F
WELL ID: �/�-Z6/z,19
MEASURING POINT: ~ TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
NOTES:19 r ' ��� G/G
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
WELL DEPTH: 277f.o( (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT)
i'/ Azir� 14 ciSS�H�X
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump J0 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP` TURBIDITY`
NOTES
(mV) (NTU)
Celsius)
(mg/L)
(µskrn)
(su)
Y-7
Z-0
/3
99
®, 2.
-7
Z-
//5y
Z5
/3
5
0157/
7 71)
�>~
z� z
30
l9
--
9 -
0. 0/
�ril -7
/2,0?
35
/3
--
ZG Vf
0, /0
1
rzv-1
(l5
13
X5
1oz
r
(n- %
5
/3
�36
i ,
.116,
z,79
ao
-7-4
13
2-3 Vi
- Z
//S
3Z1
.13z,-g
8-S
13
-
3 :7
9,71
I / 7
1323
13
00
/3
J
Z/9
4/
Wis
//o 1
/ -�
--
z l q
COMMENTS: , VEH CLE CCESSIBLEVYES ❑ NO 2
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG
PROTECTIVE CASING
LOCK
CAP CONCRETE PAD
(GOOD [IBAD ❑ NONE JXGOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE
DOD
lErh
El ❑ NONE
��GOOD
❑ BAD
❑ NONE
OODBAD
ElNONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORK1Well Development Log - DEC doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
3�zo� q
f �}
II
I%
r1
0
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] • [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL: -P%A
WELL ID: -z (-
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER: 2-
WELL DEPTH: 2-7 5,0 6 (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: 6)3 71 (FT)
WEATHER: )'SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPRO%):535 F
NOTES: Ar ,alil�f -it, 70 .�
wif ds o Top; hill
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE: 9
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump 12 Volt �Ump !L Polyethylene Bailer
DATE TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
(° Celsius)
DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP"
TURBIDITY"
NOTES
(mg/L)
(PS/CM)
(su)
(mV)
(NTU)
13
—
Z 1:
9.3 $
1,36
tl9Z-C
*
s 1-4
% S S
3
—
zzJ
l 3 y
Z17
15YZ
1770
13
Z/3
9,36
13J
Z.5Q
Z f
/ �Z
/l
4o
L
9 >
13
—7,09
9. 06
15
1-1) �
50
0
-06
q19
17,vell I/a 44
r I
2Z5
13
r N ;'EIS 111.3
:7
2-4 b
13
2-03
9.91
1 �3
o
q 02_
2- 5 S
l .3
Lv Z
S' 5 `1
155
13 �
�
LSD
/ 3
$� a;�
Za�
05 Z3
zee
1n
951
31
13
—
/G Y
# )
W 3
�' l
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE41 YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP
CONCRETE PAD
GOOD
❑BAD
❑NONE GOOD
❑BAD
❑NONE`GOOD
❑NONE GOOD
❑BAD
❑NONE
GOOD
❑BAD
❑ NONE
1rq�
'�Y
P:1Duke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORMWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL:
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] • [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com (�
WELL ID: � g i p)w
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER: Z
WELL DEPTH: z-72, 06 (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: 93, 11 (FT)
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX):5d F
NOTES:
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: Grundfos Pump12 Volt Pump [] Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP"
TURBIDITY"
NOTES
(° Celsius)
(mg/L)
(µs/cm)
(su)
(mv)
(NTU)
�J
/ 3
u z_
q.'�
zz
oS
.3
Z—1 &
r ►!1 �' a
a�
1 13
3 So
13
—
/98
j .9y
Vq
�v
/OZ/
3 S-
6
—
Zero
.0t)
r� 6
1
/6c.-8
2,90
13
Z()v
9,obi
M
51
IdI611
1/035
3 95
-3
19 - Z-6
I9-9
%
S S 44M
C
3
zoil
91-6
6C A
lOs�o
`/6-W
/3
2q, G
0A
C10 9
13
196
9-6�
8
3 C
X
1 3
---
1
G `t
l G, �i
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE [ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG
PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK
GOOD ❑ BAD I ❑ NONE []'GOOD BAD❑ NONE
CAP CONCRETE PAD
,.MOOD ❑ BAD 1 ❑ NONE
GOOD
❑BAD
❑ NONE I xOOOD [I BAD
[3 NONE
P� IxGt-
lvd�h�a
P:1Duke Energy Progress. 1 026\00 FIELD PAPERWORMWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
-rpv'P /s'/
40
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
WELL ID: -ZbAD
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER: Z-
WELL DEPTH: 17 d,6 (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: �, 7 {Fn
FIELD PERSONNEL: I% A ib r
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY X, OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX):56 F
NOTES:
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:'L1 J
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
i
TEMPERATURE
VOL
(° Celsius)
DO
CONDUCTANCE
pH ORP"
TURBIDITY"
NOTES
(mg/L)
(µs/cm)
(su)
(mV)
(NTU)
dW'
2100
-2, -7
Jq
56
0
(K
i b
IS
f01
, 971
15/
7, q
yj 53
5
C�
66
1 cj
A, bROA A� ,l
2Z !
G S
i 3
--
?_ o�
1/
�i
is
A I a
13 G s
r305
,' OZ-
q
3
/ 7f
/ZZ-
/3/9
1-190
!3
_
f, -
o z
(). 6
.a . 16Z
/3z5
495
'csg
1yz
��
►b�',
i332
(D
13
-
t6S
I yi
r/1L
13Yy
'10
/3
�0 1/
50
c
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ No.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly,
SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING
LOCK
CAP
CONCRETE PAD
❑ GOOD ❑BAD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD
❑ BAD
❑ NONE
❑ GOOD
11
❑ NONE
❑ GOOD
[IBAD
[INONE
❑ GOOD
❑ BAD
ElNONE
I
S
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORMWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] • [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL:
WELL ID: -L131z,1� ce/4
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
WELL DEPTH: (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT)
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX): F
NOTES:
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE DO
(° Celsius) (mg/L)
CONDUCTANCE
pH
ORP"
TURBIDITY"
(NTU)
NOTES
(PS/CM)
(su)
(mV)
IV q
) Y 5
l 3
-
N
' to
119
III
Z fLTW+nr
14sq
555
13
- -
!�
�170
166
o
q o M
�sz
sId
-71
70
575
/3
/9(,.�3
Z
/
►l
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ No.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK
CAP
CONCRETE PAD
❑ GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE I ❑ GOOD ❑ NONE
❑ GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE
❑ GOOD
❑ BAD
❑ NONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress 1026\00 FIELD PAPERWORKIWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL ID: e(�'3I3�
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
WELL'DEPTH: Z 73 "(S (FT)
DEPTH TO WATFR • a / (FT)
FIELD PERSONNEL: w P97
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY Er OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX):OF
NOTES: IT& 1-4 t(- S ()
I YX11 �
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE: ? •Z� % 16e10
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE: ^`
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump ,f 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TEMPERATURE
TIME VOL
(° Celsius)
DO CONDUCTANCE
pH
(su)
ORP"
(mV)
TURBIDITY"
(NTU)
NOTES
(mg/L)
(PS/CM)
&
--
/a
/1,3o
7y
-4
/ Zo
/0
/5
// 33
S3
J�f
A63
!
—j74
W
A
Y -5
I
JPi<1 vo'w 31e4ad
170
z C-)
I y
—
IN
�' 33
l3 `
Z
e L1cl,bflv,mi 0
916
7,5
/
_'
C 3
3-7
!` Z
5
101/0
Z
l s
--
S
P' (
I�/� dew o OA �
one
- y 1/
`w
-5
��
2
LJ3
/,,
V%D
Q8U
3
H
>` Z
9+
Zo3
S
5s''z
9,y,
6 5
9, yZ
f �
I
sz
9'5
1 S
—
9'Y
Z9
085ff
tlo'-,
$- O
u
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE �] YES ❑ NO qo
pe4e
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
GOOD ❑ BAD ❑NONE GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE GOOD [INONE GOOD FEI BAD [INONE GOOD [IBAD [INONE 10 BAD
J�
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORnWell Development Log - DEC.doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG �1
FIELD PERSONNEL: OA A T ji r
synTerra WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY JVovERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX):L10 F
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL ID: A3 , �, C! n
MEASURING POINT: TOC
WELL DIAMETER: Z
WELL DEPTH: 3 96 (FT)
DEPTH TO WATER• 2 v FT
NOTES: -21A 40 t�l[yll� r ? f! • 50
ir,) � 2 • `J
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED:
( )
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump �'2 Voit Pum p [I Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE DO
CONDUCTANCE
(µsknn)
pH
(su)
ORP'
(mV)
TURBIDITY`
(NTU)
NOTES
(° Celsius)
(mg/L)
//Z3
53
(y
(�
jL,s
ii0
61
1135
53
5
-
j17
J: 66
156
23
11q 3
60
3
9.511
l 6
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ NO.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
" SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
❑ GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD B [I NONE El GOOD [I BAD [I NONE I i❑ GOOD1. ❑ BAD ❑ NONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress 1026\00 FIELD PAPERWORMWell Development Log - DEC,doc

GROUNDWATER WELL DEVELOPMENT
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
synTerra
148 River Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
[phone] . [phone] Fax
www. synTerracorp. corn
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL:IA A T r
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY [IOVERCAST 'RAIN TEMPERATURE (APPROX):Z" ) F
WELL ID: W.%-3m-
MEASURING POINT:
TOC
WELL DIAMETER:
2 IN
WELL DEPTH:
�7, y�(FT)
DEPTH TO WATER:
, L� G' (FT)
NOTES:
START DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE: 07 ft
END DEVELOPMENT TIME/DATE:
TOTAL VOL PURGED: /
DEVELOPMENT METHOD: ❑ Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump ❑ Polyethylene Bailer
DATE
TIME
VOL
TEMPERATURE
DO
CONDUCTANCE pH
ORP*
TURBIDITY*
NOTES
(° Celsius)
(mg/L)
(PS/CM)
(su)
(mV)
(NTU)
3'zl�-o
9SZ
1-3
Z-4, 5
0.5c,
5-39
1s
- l
Z--I -
jqo
COMMENTS: FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE ❑ YES ❑ NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO, conductivity, pH within range? (See calibration sheet for this sample date) ❑ YES ❑ No.
If NO, which parameter . NOTE that reported data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
* SynTerra is not NC -certified for these parameters. Data collected for information purposes only
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
❑ GOOD I ❑ BAD ❑ NONE ❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE ❑ GOOD ❑ BAD ❑ NONE
P:IDuke Energy Progress.1026100 FIELD PAPERWORMWell Development Log - DEC.doc

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
ATTACHMENT B
SynTerra
USGS FLASH RESULTS AND CALCULATIONS

FLASH - Flow Log Analysis of Single Holes LAO
Irb
410
REQUIRED Wellname. AB-lBRD
INPUT:
Elevation of measuring point [FT] 0 un Solver n EsUnt ale Tr8t1am I551Vpy
Number of Flow zones[-] 26 OEstlmate ROl
Well diameter [IN] 7.7
Dmwdown [FT] 1910.
Depth to ambient water level [FT] 99.5 C, SO W without ReguMrl2atlon
Depth al bottom of casing [FT] 159.5
Depth at bottom of well [FT] 398.2 C' Solvewltll RequMRzatlon
Radius of influence (Re) [FT] 1000.0
Total tmnsmissivity (Trow) [FT'/day] 0.23
ABS(Ah) maximum 5.00E+00
Regularization weight 1.00E-04
Tfanor minimum[-] 1.00E-09
Flow above layer bottom depths
FRACTURES Bottom Depth [FT] Ambient [GPM] Stressed [GPM] Tfactor [FT -ID] Ah [FT] Farfield Mad [FT]
26
165
0.0095
0.0102
0.00
0.00
-99.50
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
18
15
14
13
12
11
10
6
5
a
a
1
SIMULATED PROFILES (DO NOT EDIT)
MSE [GPMrJ 1.532179E-04 Sum Tye, 1.000 Sum dh^2 O.Om 7638a75705
Ambient W L [FT] -99.50 Estimated Ttotal [FT'/day] 0.227 Regularized Mleft 0.00
Pumped WL[FT]-116.60
Ambient Stressed Ambient Stressed
Depth Flow above Flow above Error Error Zone T Fraction of total
FRACTURES: [FT] [GPM] [GPM] [GPM] [GPM] [FT'/day] transmisalvlly
28
25
24
23
2221
za
19
1a
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
is
s
6
5
4
3
2
1
Doehed lines
hdmote hte mtetione or meoeured
do..
sdia lines
hdic-imulotea les.
175
0.0101
0.0231
0.00
0.00
-99.50
185
0.0100
0.0196
0.12
0.00
-99.50
195
0.0068
o.o1a6
0.00
0.00
-99.50
205
0.0131
0.0164
0.04
0.00
-99.50
215
0.0109
0.0111
0.00
0.00
-99.50
225
0.0000
0.0155
0.00
0.00
-99.50
235
0.0129
0.0126
0.00
0.00
-99.50
243
0.0120
0.0199
0.00
0.00
-99.50
255
0.0099
0.0155
0.01
0.00
-99.50
265
0.0106
0.0127
0.00
0.00
-99.50
v5
0.0000
0.0167
0.17
0.00
-99.50
285
0.0054
0.0000
0.00
0.00
-99.50
z95
o.00sa
o.00sa
0.00
0.00
-99.50
305
0.0170
0.0205
0.00
0.00
-99.50
315
0.0115
0.0054
0.00
0.00
-99.50
325
0.0166
0.0080
0.00
0.00
-99.50
335
0.0175
0.0189
0.00
0.00
-99.50
345
0.0183
0.0000
0.00
0.00
-99.50
355
0.0205
0.0054
0.00
0.00
-99.50
360
0.0113
0.0169
0.00
0.00
-99.50
365
0.0146
0.0104
0.00
0.00
-99.50
370
0.0156
0.0121
0.00
0.00
-99.50
37a
o.o31a
o.00sa
0.00
0.00
-99.50
385
0.0380
0.0206
0.00
0.00
-99.50
395
0.0246
0.0350
0.67
0.l)4
-99.46
165.01
0.000
0.016
0.009
-0.007
0.000
0.000
174.92
0.000
0.016
0.010
0.005
0.000
0.000
184.99
0.000
0.018
0.010
0.002
0.027
0.117
194.99
0.000
0.016
0.009
-0.001
0.000
0.000
205.00
0.000
0.016
0.013
0.001
0.009
0.039
215.01
0.000
0.015
0.011
-0.004
0.000
0.000
224.95
0.000
0.015
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
235.01
0.000
0.015
0.013
-0.002
0.000
0.000
243.01
0.000
0.015
0.012
0.005
0.000
0.000
254.99
0.000
0.015
0.010
0.001
0.002
0.011
265.03
0.000
0.015
0.011
-0.002
0.000
0.000
275.01
0.000
0.015
0.000
0.002
0.038
0.167
285.01
0.000
0.012
0.005
-0.012
0.000
0.000
294.98
0.000
0.012
0.005
-0.006
0.000
0.000
305.02
0.000
0.012
0.017
0.009
0.000
0.000
315.00
0.000
0.012
0.011
-0.006
0.000
0.000
325.03
0.000
0.012
0.017
-0.004
0.000
0.000
335.03
0.000
0.012
0.017
0.007
0.000
0.000
344.57
0.000
0.012
0.016
-0.012
0.000
0.000
355.09
0.000
0.012
0.020
-0.006
0.000
0.000
359.95
0.000
0.012
0.011
0.005
0.000
0.000
365.07
0.000
0.012
0.015
-0.001
0.000
0.000
370.02
0.000
0.012
0.016
0.000
0.000
0.000
373.62
0.000
0.012
0.031
-0.006
0.000
0.000
384.73
0.000
0.012
0.036
0.009
0.000
0.000
394.92
0.000
0.012
0.025
0.023
0.152
0.667
Ambient Flow Profile
Pumped
Flow Profile
Upwartl Flow,in GPM
Upward Flow,In GPM
I
1
11
f
Il
r
I
-
�
1
I
1
1
-
0
I
I
11
11
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
11
1
A&1BRD FLASH

No[ea:
1. Following a logarithmic sensitivity analysis of [he FLASH model [o radius of influence, a conservative value of 3000
feet was used.
2. Objective function, F, for model incgpgrstes mean squared error (MSE) between interpreted and predicted flow profiles
and the sum of squared differences (Ah) between the borehole's water level and far -field heads. Model objective Is to
roinionime F; therefore, a value closer to zero indicates a better fit.
3. Model was run until no more Iterations produced changes in output.
4. FLASH Software: Day -Lewis, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Palllet, F.L., and Halford, K.J, 2011, FLASH: A Comra puter Progm for
Flow -Log Analysis of Single Holes v1.0: U.S. Geological Survey Software Release, 07 March 2011,
S. FLASH Report: Day-Lewls, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Palllet, F.L., and Halford, K.J., 2011, A computer program for flow -log
analysis of single hales (FLASH): Ground Water, https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00798.x
6. Highlighted cells indicate flow levels that do not have any observed open fractures and did not contribute to total
transmisslvity. These depth Intervals were not used for fracture spacing versus depth below top of rock figure because It
is assumed that there are no fractures in these intervals.
Total TransmissivityCalculated from Thiem Equation
Q (Spm) I Q (ft'/day) Drawdown, s (ft) k (ft) R„ (in) R„, (ft) TraTAL (ft'/tlay)
0.5 SS_ 19.1 1000 Jul 0.321 6.45
FLASH Total T and Fit Parameters
Radius Of
Transmissivity,
InFl uence, &
TT
MSE
Ab
F
(ft)
(ft'/tlay)
10D0
0.23
1.53E-04
1.76E-03
1.53E-04
Slug Test
Information - Completed
In open borehole
Screen Interval
Some, interval
Mid -point of screen
Transmis Wity
Hydraulic Aperture
HydrauIlc
b s
ft BTOR
interval
ft2 d.
Conductivit
240-250
250
171.5
167
34.23
0.26
3.42E+00
296-306
75
223
0.D3
00-2.76E-03
306
227.5
Borehole
NA
NA
NA
104
0.24
4.37E-01

FUR
FLASH - Flow Log Analysis of Single Holes
REQUIRED weuname. Belews Creek AB-21311
NPUT:
Elevation of measuring point [FT]
0
un Solver
n EsUnt ale Tranaml55lVlty
Number of Flow zones[-]
Well diameter [IN]
8
6
OEsgmale ROl
j
Drawdown [FT]
18.40
Depth to ambient water level [FT]
Depth at bottom of casing [FT]
44.4
156.7
OSolve whhout ReSIUM112afion
Depth at bottom of well [FT]
240.1
�' SGlve wltlt u Mrization
Req
Radius of influence (R.) [FT]
1000.0
Total tmnsmissivity (Tww) [FT'/day]
0,22
ABS(Ah) maximum
5.00E+00
Regularization weight
1.00E-04
Tr.nor minimum[-[
1.00E-09
Flow above layer bottom depth.
FRACTURES
Bottom Depth [FT] Ambient [GPM] Stressed [GPM]
Tfactor [FT -ID] An [FT] Farfield head [FT]
MSE [GPMrJ
4.051228E-05
Sum Ty�w, 1.G00
Sum dh^2
0.00039707Tsa90
Ambient W L [FT]
-04.40
Estimated Ttotal [FT'/day] 0.218
Regularized Misfit
0.00
Pumped WL[FT]
-62.80
Ambient
Stressed Ambient
Stressed
Depth
Flow above
Flow above Error
Error
Zone T
Fraction of total
FRACTURES: [FT]
[GPM]
[GPM] [GPM]
[GPM]
[FT'/day]
trammissivlly
�
ao
®
1111
111•
11
111
1111
1111
1111
111•
111:
111
1111
1111
11
1111
111•
111•
I11
1111
1111
1 111
1 111
1 11 •
1111
1 111
1 111
Ambient Flow Profile Pumped Flow Profile
Upward Flow, in GPM Upward Flow,in GPM
AB-2BR FLASH

AB-2BR FLASH Results and Individual Hydraulic Aperture Values
Flow Layer in
FLASH
Depth
(fee[ bgs)
Depth
(feel BTOR)
Depth of
Center of
Interval
(feet BTOR)
Interval
Lenth
(feet)
it of Fractures in
Flow Layer
Fracture
Spacing in
I(ferval
(feet)
Fraction of Total
Transmissivity
Transmissivity
(fit'/day)
CALIBRATED
smiss
Tran ivity
(ft'/day)
Transmissivity
(mz/s)
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(feet/day)
Viscosity of
Water, p3
(N s/m')
Density of
Water, pw3
(kg/m3)
Acceleration due to
Gravity, g
(m/s2)
Hydraulic Aperture,
(m)
Hytlraulic
Aperture, en
(mm)
1
165.23
46.23
41.97
8.53
1
5
8.5
0.428
0.093
0.590
6.35E-07
6.92E-02
1.20E-03
999.33
9.8
9.78E-05
0.10
2
175.15
56.15
51.19
9.92
2.0
0.000
0.000
0.000
3
185.02
66.02
61.09
9.88
1
0.000
0.000
0.000
4
195.05
]6.05
71.04
10.03
1
0.000
0.000
0.000
5
205.14
86.14
81.09
10.09
1
0.000
0.000
0.000
m
6
215.00
96.00
91.07
9.86
1
0.000
0.000
0.000
i
7
224.70
105.70
100.85
9.70
1
9.7
0.572
0.125
0.791
8.50E-07
8.15E-02
1.20E-03
999.33
9.8
1.08E-04
8
235.20
116.20
110.95
10.50
1
10.5
0.000
0.000
0.000
1
Open
Fractures Flow Layer In
Identified by FLASH
GEL
158 1
167
168
168 2
171
172
227 8
Flow Layer
AMBIENT FLOW
PUMPED FLOW
in FLASH
Depth (FT)
I Q (GPM)
Depth (FT)
Q (GPM)
145
0.0061
145
0.0055
1
155
165
0.0072
0.0094
155
166
0.0073
0.0158
2 175
0.0106
175
0.0067
3 185
4 195
0.0078
0.0076
185
195
0.0085
0.0082
5 205
0.0090
205
0.0088
6 215
0.0089
215
0.0125
7 225
0.0109
225
0.0096
8 235
0.0059
235
0.0000
Notes:
1. Following a logarithmic sensitivity analysis of the FLASH model to radius of influence, a conservative value of 1000 feet
2 aused.
0bjective function, F, for model incoporates mean squared error (MSE) between interpreted and predicted flow profiles
and the sum of squared differences (Ah) between the borehole's water level and is
heads. Model objective is to
min imi'e F; therefore, a value closer to zero indicates a better fit.
3. Model was run until no more iterations produced changes in output.
4. FLASH Software: Day -Lewis, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Pallet,F.L., and Halford, K.J, 2111, FLASH: A Computer Program for
Flow -Lag Analysis of Single Holes v1.0: U.S. Geological Survey Software Release, 07 March 2011,
5. FLASH Report: Day -Lewis, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Paillet, F.L., and Halford, K.J., 2011, A computer program for flow -log
analysis of single holes (FLASH): Ground Water, https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00798.x
6. Highlighted cells indicate flow levels that do not have any observed open fractures and did not contribute to total
transmissivity. These depth intervals were not used for fracture spacing versus depth below top of rock figure because it
is assumed that there are no fractures in these intervals.
Total Transmissivity Calculated from Thiem Equation
Q (gpm) ft3/da Drawdown, s (ft) R. (ft) R. (in) R.(ft) Tz -, (ft'/day)
0.1 19.25 18.4 1000 3 0.250 1.38
FLASH Total T and Fit Parameters
Radius of
TransmlSSl,Ity,
Influence, Ro
T-IAL
MSE
Ah
F
(ft)
(ft'/day)
1000
0.22
4.05E-OS
3.91E-04
4.06E-OS
Slu Test Information - Com leted in o en borehole
Screen Interval
,ft. s
Screen Interval
ft BTOR
Mid -point of Transmissivity Hydraulic Aperture
interval ft2 tla
een61
Hydraulk
Conductivity
175-185
1]5
56
0.22 0.07
2.19E-02
185
66

weunam.. Belews Creek AB-2BRD
Elevation of measuring point [FT]
0
Number of Flow zones[-]
20
Well diameter [IN]
5.8
Drawdown [FT]
18.50
Depth to ambient water level [FT]
95.7
Depth at bottom of casing [FT]
210
Depth at bottom of well [FT]
397.2
Radius of influence (Re) [FT]
1000.0
Total tmnsmissivity (T..) [FT'/day]
9.36
Flow above layer bottom depth.
Bottom Depth [FT[ Ambient [GPM] Stressed [G
[-' Estimate Tren5m I551" 1
I
n Estlmale ROI
C' Solve whhout Regularl2afion
C' SGlvewlth Requ MDzetlon
ABS(Ah) maximum 5.00E+00
Regularization weight 1.00E-04
Tfanormiaimnm[-t 1.00E-09
dh rFTI Farfield Mad
225
0.0000
0.4819
0.04
0.00
-95.70
235
0.0072
0.4543
0.04
0.00
-95.76
245
0.0054
0.4295
0.09
0.00
-95.70
255
0.0102
0.3679
0.00
0.00
-95.76
265
0.0108
0.3679
0.51
0.10
-95.60
275
0.0109
0.0149
0.00
0.00
-95.76
280
0.0111
0.0233
0.01
0.00
-95.70
286
0.0145
0.0139
0.01
0.00
-95.70
295
0.0164
0.0081
0.00
0.00
-95.70
305
0.0186
0.0091
0.00
0.00
-95.70
315
0.0141
0.0075
0.00
0.00
-95.76
325
0.0156
0.0119
0.00
0.00
-95.70
335
0.0153
0.0055
0.00
0.00
-95.76
345
0.0144
0.0085
0.00
0.00
-95.70
355
0.0183
0.0140
0.00
0.00
-95.76
365
0.0170
0.0090
0.00
0.00
-95.70
376
0.0176
0.0136
0.00
0.00
-95.70
386
0.0166
0.0118
0.01
0.01
-95.69
395
0.0054
0.0054
0.01
0.02
-95.68
MSE [GPN19 8.717768E-05
Ambient W L [FT] -95.70
Pumped WL[FT]-114.20
FRACTURES:
20
19
1a
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
ie
Depth
Sum Tyr 1.000 Sum dhA2 0.077079772s79s
Estimated Ttotal[FT'/day] 9.363 Regularized Misfit 0.00
Ambient Stressed Ambient Stressed
Flow above Flow above Eno Eno Zone T Fraction of total
214.84
0.002
0.681
-0.002
0.000
2.744
0.293
225.36
0.002
0.482
-0.002
0.000
0.381
0.041
235.30
0.002
0.454
0.005
0.000
0.343
0.037
245.43
0.002
0.429
0.003
0.000
0.848
0.091
255.23
0.002
0.368
0.008
0.000
0.000
0.000
265.27
0.002
0.368
0.009
0.000
4.785
0.511
275.25
0.000
0.019
0.011
-0.004
0.000
0.000
280.13
0.000
0.019
0.011
0.004
0.072
0.008
285.52
0.000
0.014
0.014
0.000
0.055
0.006
295.12
0.000
0.010
0.016
-0.002
0.000
0.000
305.37
0.000
0.010
0.019
-0.001
0.000
0.000
315.38
0.000
0.010
0.014
-0.002
0.000
0.000
325.33
0.000
0.010
0.016
0.002
0.000
0.000
335.24
0.000
0.010
0.015
-0.004
0.000
0.006
344.94
0.000
0.010
0.014
-0.001
0.000
0.000
355.28
0.000
0.010
0.018
0.004
0.000
0.000
365.25
0.000
0.010
0.017
-0.001
0.000
0.000
375.52
0.000
0.010
0.018
0.004
0.000
0.006
385.65
0.000
0.010
0.017
0.002
0.062
0.007
395.27
0.000
0.005
0.005
0.000
0.075
0.008
Ambient Flow Profile
Pumped
Flow Profile
Upward Flow, in GPM
T
121
upward Flow, in GPM
1
s
•
1
•
Lfi
1
Su
1
1
s
r
II
}
f
a
s
+I
I
r
a
410
A 2BRD FLASH

AS-2BRD FLASH Results and Individual Hydraulic Aperture Values
i i
00 i-i
i.00
-
Open
Fractures Flow Layer in
Identlfled by FLASH
GEL
224 2
242
245 4
245
272
272
272
273 7
273
273
274
262
282 9
284
288 10
391 20
391
Flow Layer
in FLASH
AMBIENT FLOW
PUMPED FLOW
Depth (FT)
Q (GPM)
Depth (FT)
Q (GPM)
195
0.0000
195
0.4543
1
206
215
0.0000
0.0000
205
215
0.5862
0.6808
2
225
0.0000
226
0.4819
3
4
235
245
0.0072
0.0054
235
245
0.4543
0.4295
S
6
255
265
0.0102
0.0108
255
265
0.3679
0.3679
7
B
275
280
0.0109
0.0111
275
280
0.0149
0.0233
9
10
286
295
0.0145
0.0164
285
1 295
0.0139
0.0081
11
305
0.0186
305
0.0091
12
315
0.0141
315
0.0075
13
325
0.0156
325
0.0119
14
335
0.0153
335
0.0055
15
345
0.0144
345
0.0085
16
355
0.0183
355
0.0140
17
365
0.0170
365
0.0090
18
376
0.0176
375
0.0136
19
386
0.0166
386
0.0118
20
395
0.0054
395
1 0.0054
Nntes:
1. Following a logarithmic sensitivity analysis of the FLASH model to radius of influence, a conservative value of 1000 feet
ws used.
2 a0bjective function, F, for model incoporates mean squared error (MSE) between interpreted and predicted flow profiles
and the sum of squared differences (4h) between the borehole's water level and far -field heads. Model objective is to
minimize F; therefore, a value closer to zero indicates a better fit.
3.Model was run until no more iterations produced changes in output.
4. FLASH Software: Day -Lewis, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Paillet, F.L., and Halford, K.3, 2011, FLASH: A Computer Program for
Flow -Log Analysis of Single Holes v1.0: U.S. Geological Survey Software Release, 07 March 2011,
5. FLASH Report: Day -Lewis, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Paillet, F.L., and Halford, K.J., 2011, A computer program for flow -log
analysis of single holes (FLASH): Ground Water, https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00798,x
6. Highlighted cells indicate flow levels that do not have any observed open fractures and did not contribute to total
transmissivity. These depth intervals were not used for fracture spacing versus depth below top of rock figure because it
is assumed that there are no fractures in these intervals.
Total Transmissivity Calculated from Thiem Equation
Q (gpm) Q (fts/day) Drawtlo In, s (it) R. (fit) R.(In) R.(ft) TTo (ft2/day)
0.9 173.25 18.5 1000 2.9 U.242 I 12.41
FLASH Total T and Fit Parameters
Radius of
Transmissivity,
Influence, Ro
TTorac
MSE
Ah
F
(ft)
(Re/day)
1000
S.36
8.72E-OS
1.11E-02
8.83E-OS
Slug Test Information - Completed
in open borehole
5veen Interval
b s
Screen Interval
ft BTOR
Mid -point of
ee interval
Transmissivity
ft2 da
Hydraulic
Aperture m
Hydraulic Conductivity
ftda
266-276
266
141
146
46.01
0.22
4.60E+00
276
151
280-290
280
1"
160
4.21
0.12
4.21E-01
290
161
296-306
176
0.03
0.04
2.84E-03
306
181
Borehole
NA
NA
NA
831.76
0.42
4.44E+00

FLASH - Flow Log Analysis of Single Holes LAO
REQUIRED wrila . Belews Creek AB-3BRD
INPUT:
Elevation of measuring point [FT] 0 un Solver n EsUnt ale Trat15m I55IVpy
Number of Flow zones[-] 26 OEstlmate ROl
Well diameter [IN] 5.8
Dmwdown [FT] 1.50
Depth to ambient water level [FT] 84.7 C, SOW without Reg uMrl2atlon
Depth at bottom of casing [FT] 180.2
Depth at bottom of well [FT] 399.1 C' SGlvewltll RequMRzatlon
Radius of influence (Re) [FT] 1000.0
Total tmnsmissivity (Truly) [FT'/day] 149.81
ABS(Ah) maximum 5.00E+00
Regularization weight 1.00E-04
Tfanor mini-[-] 1.00E-09
Flow above layer bottom depths
FRACTURES Bottom Depth [FT1 Ambient [GPM] Stressed [GPM] Tfactor [FT -ID] ah [FT] Farfield Mad [FT]
26
186
0.0000
0.8855
0.05
-0.01
-84.71
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
18
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
6
5
a
3
z
1
SIMULATED PROFILES (DO NOT EDIT)
MSE [GPMrJ 9.706013E-05 Sum Tyro, 1.000 Sum dh^2 O.00SOa835a9a60
Ambient W L [FT] -84.70 Estimated Ttotal [FT'/day] 149.814 Regularized Misfit 0.00
Pumped WL[FT] -86.20
Ambient Stressed Ambient Stressed
Depth Flow above Flow above Error Error Zone T Fraction of total
FRACTURES: [FT] [GPM] [GPM] [GPM] [GPM] [FT'/day] tratrsmisslvlly
2e
25
24
23
22
21
9
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
S
7
6
5
4
z
1
Doehed lines
indmote-nketione
or meoeawd
do..
sdia lines ins-i-lotea
les.
196
0.0000
0.8064
0.00
0.00
-84.70
206
0.0000
0.8351
0.00
0.00
-84.70
216
0.0072
0.8655
0.04
-0.02
-84.72
217
0.0085
0.8064
0.90
0.01
-84.69
221
-0.0153
-0.0072
0.00
0.00
-84.70
225
0.0000
-0.0048
0.00
0.00
-84.70
231
0.0000
-0.0073
0.00
0.00
-84.70
236
0.0000
0.0066
0.00
0.00
-84.70
246
0.0000
0.0057
0.00
0.00
-84.70
255
0.0000
0.0076
0.00
0.00
-84.70
260
0.0000
0.0112
0.00
0.00
-84.70
264
0.0079
0.0062
0.00
0.00
-84.70
276
0.0089
0.0100
0.00
0.00
-84.70
285
0.0076
0.0085
0.00
0.00
-84.70
296
0.0073
0.0096
0.00
0.00
-84.70
305
0.0089
0.0098
0.00
0.00
-84.70
315
0.0076
0.0094
0.00
0.00
-84.70
326
0.0078
0.0119
0.00
0.00
-84.70
336
0.0107
0.0099
0.00
0.00
-84.70
346
0.0069
0.0083
0.00
0.00
-84.70
356
0.0080
0.0000
0.00
0.00
-84.70
366
0.0074
0.0076
0.00
0.00
-84.70
376
0.0076
0.0091
0.00
0.00
-84.70
386
0.0084
0.0072
0.00
0.00
-84.70
396
0.0076
0.0054
0.01
0.07
-84.63
185.69
0.003
0.884
-0.003
0.002
7.114
0.047
196.02
0.003
0.842
-0.003
-0.036
0.000
0.000
205.83
0.003
0.842
-0.003
-0.007
0.000
0.000
215.53
0.003
0.842
0.004
0.043
6.217
0.041
217.35
0.004
0.806
0.005
0.000
135.485
0.904
220.61
0.000
0.006
-0.016
-0.013
0.000
0.000
225.47
0.000
0.006
0.000
-0.011
0.000
0.000
230.66
0.000
0.006
0.000
-0.013
0.000
0.000
235.51
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
245.68
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
255.39
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
259.61
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.005
0.000
0.000
2fi4.35
0.000
0.006
0.006
0.000
0.000
0.000
275.60
0.000
0.006
0.009
0.004
0.000
0.000
285.45
0.000
0.006
0.007
0.002
0.000
0.000
295.73
0.000
0.006
0.007
0.003
0.000
0.000
305.39
0.000
0.006
0.009
0.004
0.000
0.000
315.48
0.000
0.006
0.007
0.003
0.000
0.000
325.95
0.000
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.000
0.000
335.94
0.000
0.006
0.010
0.004
0.000
0.000
345.60
0.000
0.006
0.007
0.002
0.000
0.000
355.62
0.000
0.006
0.006
-0.006
0.000
0.000
3fi5.52
0.000
0.006
0.007
0.002
0.000
0.000
375.61
0.000
0.006
0.007
0.003
0.000
0.000
385.63
0.000
0.006
0.006
0.001
0.000
0.000
395.56
0.000
0.006
0.007
-0.001
0.997
0.007
Ambient Flow Profile
Pumped
Flow Profile
Upwartl Flow,in GPM
Upward Flow,In GPM
•
•
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
3
r
II
I
I
1
i
I
r
1
3
A&3BRD FLASH

AB-3BRD FLASH Results and Individual Hydraulic Aperture Values
H,d-u 'ic
Conductivity
Viscosity of
Water, V3
E 03
Open
Fractures Flow Layer in
Identified by FLASH
GEL
219 7
260 13
335 335 21
Flow
m FLASH Layer
AMBIENT FLOW
PUMPED FLOW
Depth (FT)
166
I Q (GPM)
1 0.0000
Depth (FT)
165
Q (GPM)
0.9792
1
176
186
1 0.0000
0.0000
176
186
0.8855
0.8855
2
196
0.0000
195
0.8064
3
4
206
216
0.0000
0.0072
206
215
0.8351
0.8855
5
6
217
221
0.0085
-0.0153
217
221
0.8064
-0.0072
7
8
225
231
0.0000
0.0000
226
231
-0.0048
-0.0073
9
10
236
246
0.0000
0.0000
236
246
0.0066
0.0057
11
255
0.0000
256
0.0076
12
260
0.0000
260
0.0112
13
264
0.0079
265
0.0062
14
276
0.0089
276
0.0100
15
285
0.0076
286
0.0085
16
296
0.0073
296
0.0096
17
305
0.0089
306
0.0098
I6
315
0.00]6
316
0.0094
19
326
0.0078
326
0.0119
20
336
0.0107
336
0.0099
21
346
0.0069
346
0.0083
22
356
0.0080
355
0.0000
23
24
366
376
0.0074
0.0076
366
376
0.0076
0.0091
25
26
386
396
0.0084
0.0076
385
395
0.0072
0.0054
Nntes;
1. Following a logarithmic sensitivity analysis of the FLASH model to radius of influence, a conservative value of 1000 feet
2 aused.
0bjective function, F, for model incoporates mean squared error (MSE) between interpreted and predicted flow profiles
and the sum of squared differences (Ah) between the borehole's water level and far -field heads. Model objective is to
ze F; therefore, a value closer to zero indicates a better fit.
3.I Model was run until no more iterations produced changes in output.
4. FLASH Software: Day -Lewis, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Paillet, F.L., and Halford, K.J, 2011, FLASH: A Computer Program for
Flow -Lag Analysis of Single Holes v1.0: U.S. Geological Survey Software Release, 07 March 2011,
5. FLASH Report: Day -Lewis, F.D., Johnson, C. D., Paillet, F.L., and Halford, K.J., 2011, A computer program for flow -log
analysis of single holes (FLASH): Ground Water, https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00798.,
6. Highlighted cells indicate flow levels that do not have any observed open factures and did not contribute to total
tmnsmissivity. These depth intervals were not used for fracture spacing versus depth below top of rock figure because it
is assumed that there are no fractures in these intervals.
Total Transmissivity Calculated from Thiem Equation
Q (glim) Q (fe/day) Drawdown, s (ft) Ft. (ft) Aw CIn) R. (ft) T-L (ft'/day)
1 192 5 1 5 1000 1.9 1 0 242 11 170 10
FLASH Total T and Fit Parameters
Radius of
Transmissivity,
Influence, R.
T10-
MSE Ah
F
(fit)
(ftz/day)
1000
149.81
9.71E-OS
5.05E-03
9.76E-OS
Slug Test Information
- Completed
in open borehole
Screen Interval
fit b s
Screen Interval (ft
BTOR
Mid -point of
ee interval
Transmissivity
ft2 da
Hydraulic
A ertu re m
Hydraulic
on Cductivit
203-213
203
100
105
18.21
0.31
1.82E+00
213
110
236-246
138
0.26
0.07
2.61E-02
246
143
260-270
260
162
0.26
0.07
2.61E-02
157
375-385
385
282
277
0.26
0.07
2.61E-02
Borehole
NA
NA
NA
2266.27
0.96
1.04E+01

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
ATTACHMENT C
GEOPHYSICAL LOGGING REPORT
SynTerra

Solutions
821 Livingston Court, Suite E
Marietta, GA 30067
770.980.1002
Geophysical Logging Report
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina
Performed for:
SynTerra
April 25, 2019
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-1BRD, AB-2BR, AB-2BRD, AB-313RD
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
SignaturePage..................................................................................................................................ii
ExecutiveSummary.........................................................................................................................iii
1.0 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Equipment and Methodology................................................................................................ 1
2.1 Acoustic Televiewer...................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Optical Televiewer........................................................................................................ 2
2.3 3-Arm Caliper................................................................................................................ 2
2.4 Fluid Temperature........................................................................................................ 2
2.5 Fluid Conductivity......................................................................................................... 2
2.6 Single Point Resistance(SPR)........................................................................................ 3
2.7 Spontaneous Potential (SP).......................................................................................... 3
2.8 Heat Pulse Flowmeter(HPF)......................................................................................... 3
3.0 Field Procedures.................................................................................................................... 3
4.0 Data Processing and Results.................................................................................................. 4
Appendices
Appendix 1 Fracture Summary Table
Appendix 2 Schmidt Stereonets and Rose Diagrams
Appendix 3 Heat Pulse Flowmeter Logs and Fracture Characteristics
Appendix 4 Geophysical Logs
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-16RD, AB-2BR, A13-2131113, A13-361113, April 25, 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina (synt00118) Page ii
SIGNATURE PAGE
This report, entitled "Geophysical Logging Report, AB-1BRD, AB-2BR, AB-213RD, AB-36RD, Belews Creek
Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina" has been prepared for SynTerra located in Greenville, South
Carolina. It has been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Jorgen Bergstrom at the request of and the
exclusive use of SynTerra. This report has been prepared in accordance with accepted quality control
practices and has been reviewed by the undersigned.
GEL Solutions. LLC
A Member of the GEL Group, Inc.
Alk-
Jorgen Bergstrom, P.Gp.
Senior Geophysicist
Nicholas Rebman
Geophysical Specialist
April 25, 2019
Date
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-1BRD, AB-21311, AB-2BRD, AB-3BRD, April 25, 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina (synt00118) Page iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
GEL Solutions performed geophysical borehole logging services in four borings located at Belews Creek
Steam Station in Belews Creek, North Carolina. The field investigations were performed between March 6,
2019 and March 11, 2019. This investigation was conducted to aid SynTerra in evaluating potential pathways
for groundwater migration through fractured bedrock at the site. The geophysical logs consisted of acoustic
televiewer, optical televiewer, caliper, fluid conductivity, fluid temperature, single point resistance (SPR),
spontaneous potential (SP), and heat pulse flowmeter (HPF).
The logging data was analyzed to determine the location and orientation of fractures and other features.
In addition to these data sets, synthetic caliper logs were calculated from the acoustic televiewer travel time
data to aid in the interpretation. Dip and azimuth (dip direction) were calculated for each detected fracture
based on the televiewer dataset. HPF data was analyzed to detect water producing fractures.
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-16RD, AB-21311, A13-2131113, A13-361113, April 25, 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina (synt00118) Page 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
GEL Solutions performed geophysical borehole logging services in four borings located at Belews Creek
Steam Station in Belews Creek, North Carolina. The geophysical logs consisted of acoustic and optical
televiewer, 3-arm caliper, fluid conductivity, fluid temperature, single point resistance (SPR), spontaneous
potential (SP), and heat pulse flowmeter (HPF). The field investigation was performed between March 6, 2019
and March 11, 2019. The logging data was analyzed to determine the location and orientation of fractures and
other features. In addition to these data sets, synthetic caliper logs were calculated from the acoustic
televiewer travel time data to aid in the interpretation.
2.0 EQUIPMENT AND METHODOLOGY
The information below is an overview of the geophysical methodologies used for this investigation. The
intent of this overview is to give the reader a better understanding of each method, and background information
as to what is actually measured, the resolution of the method, and the limitations imposed by site -specific
subsurface conditions.
2.1 Acoustic Televiewer
Acoustic televiewer (ATV) logging produces a high resolution, magnetically oriented digital image of the
borehole wall to map the location and orientation of intersecting fractures, foliations, and lithologic contacts.
The Acoustic televiewer tool emits a rotating, narrow, acoustic beam that is reflected off the borehole wall.
The travel time and amplitude of the reflected wave are recorded by the tool and used to create borehole
images. Both datasets are useful for identifying the location and orientation of fractures. The amplitude of the
reflected signal will decrease at the location of fractures and the travel time will increase. The travel time data
can also be used for developing a high resolution caliper log for a more comprehensive analysis of fractures.
Acoustic televiewers can only be used in fluid filled boreholes. However, the fluid does not have to be optically
clear for the method to work.
When operating the ATV, a "time window" is set based on the borehole diameter. The time window is
the time interval in which the ATV instrument searches for an echo from the borehole wall. For smaller
increases in borehole diameter around fractures and sections of weaker rock, the ATV typically records an
accurate borehole diameter (correlates well with three -arm caliper data). However, if borehole openings are
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-16RD, AB-21311, AB-2BRD, AB-3BRD, April 25, 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina (synt00118) Page 2
much larger than the borehole diameter, the echo from the borehole wall may fall outside the time window, or
be too weak to be detected. In these situations, borehole diameters recorded with ATV may be inaccurate.
Since ATV only records the reflection from the borehole wall, the data cannot be used to determine how far a
fracture extends from the borehole. The acoustic televiewer has a vertical resolution of 2 millimeters.
2.2 Optical Televiewer
Optical televiewer (OTV) logging is used to record and digitize a 360-degree color image of the borehole
wall. Planar features such as fractures, foliation, and lithologic contacts can be identified directly on the
images. The tool is magnetically oriented in order to determine the orientation of features. Televiewers have a
vertical resolution of 2mm, which is significantly better than many other geophysical tools. As a result, it is able
to see features other tools cannot resolve. Optical images can be collected above or below the water surface,
provided the water is sufficiently clear for viewing the borehole wall.
2.3 3-Arm Caliper
Caliper logging is used to generate a profile of the borehole diameter with depth. The tool measures the
borehole diameter using three spring -loaded arms. Narrow enlargements in the borehole diameter can, in
most cases, be attributed to fractures. Caliper logging can be conducted above and below the water surface.
2.4 Fluid Temperature
Fluid temperature logging is used to identify where water enters or exits the borehole. In the absence of
fluid flow, a gradual increase on water temperature of approximately 1°F per 100 feet of depth is expected.
Rapid changes in the fluid temperature indicate water -producing or water -receiving zones. Little or no
temperature gradient indicates intervals of vertical flow.
2.5 Fluid Conductivity
Fluid conductivity logging is used to measure the electrical conductivity of the fluid in the borehole.
Variations in fluid conductivity can be contributed to concentration variations of dissolved solids. These
differences can occur when sources of water have contrasting chemistry and have come from different
transmissive zones. Fluid temperature and conductivity are measured concurrently using the same logging
tool.
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-1BRD, AB-21311, AB-2BRD, A13-36RD, April 25, 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina (synt00118) Page 3
2.6 Single Point Resistance (SPR)
Single point resistance logging involves passing an alternate current between a surface electrode and a
probe electrode and measuring the voltage difference created by the current. SPR is then calculated using
Ohm's law. SPR is the sum of cable resistance, and the resistance based on the composition of the medium,
the cross sectional area and length of the path through the medium. Therefore, the single point resistance log
does not provide quantitative data. In general, SPR increases with increasing grain size and decreases with
increasing borehole diameter, fracture density, and the concentration of dissolved solids in the water. Single -
point resistance logs are useful in the determination of lithology, water quality, and location of fracture zones.
2.7 Spontaneous Potential (SP)
SP logging is conducted to measure naturally occurring voltage differences along a borehole. The method
has been found useful for delineating sandstone/shale layering and other boundaries between permeable and
impermeable beds. The measurements are made with reference to an electrode at ground level. Therefore, SP
logging does not provide quantitative data.
2.8 Heat Pulse Flowmeter (HPF)
HPF logging measures the direction and rate of vertical fluid flow in a borehole by heating up a small
volume of water and monitoring temperature variations as the heated water moves with the fluid flow in the
borehole. Under ambient conditions, differences in hydraulic head between two transmissive fractures
produce vertical flow in the borehole. However, if the hydraulic head is the same, no flow will occur under
ambient conditions. Therefore, HPF logging is also conducted under low -rate pumping conditions. HPF
readings are point readings at the location of fractures. The location and number of these readings can be
determined after analyzing the other geophysical logs for fractures. HPF can be used for measuring vertical
flows in the borehole between 0.005 gallons per minute (gpm) and approximately 1.5 gpm. In HPF data,
upward flow is shown as positive flow, and downward flow is shown as negative flow.
3.0 FIELD PROCEDURES
All GEL Solutions activities on -site were supervised by a senior geophysicist. For this investigation, GEL
Solutions used a Mount Sopris Matrix logging system. Pumping tests during HPF testing were conducted using
a Grundfos Redi-Flow-2 water pump with variable speed control box and an in -situ Mini -Troll pressure
transducer with logging capabilities. The pump is placed in the casing above the open hole section of the
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-1BRD, AB-21311, AB-2BRD, AB-3BRD, April 25, 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina (synt00118) Page 4
borehole. HPF logging under pumping conditions commenced after the borehole water level had stabilized.
HPF logging was conducted at every 10 feet throughout the logging intervals under ambient and pumping
conditions. More closely spaced readings were then conducted at sections with abrupt changes in flow. A
summary of the configuration of the boreholes, pumping rates, and water levels is provided below. All depth
measurements are referenced from the ground surface. All borings are surface cased and open hole below the
casing.
Logging Configuration Summary
Well ID:
AB-1BRD
AB-2BR
AB-2BRD
AB-3BRD
Casing material:
PVC
PVC
PVC
PVC
Casing diameter (in):
8.0
8.0
6.0
6.0
Open hole (ft):
159.5-398.2
156.7-240.1
210.0-397.2
180.2-399.1
Open hole diameter (in):
8.0 (159.5-303.1 ft)
6.0 (303.1-398.2 ft)
6.0
5.8
5.8
Pumping rate (gpm):
0.5
0.1
0.9
1.0
Pump depth (ft):
135
75
130
115
Water level before pumping (ft):
99.5
44.4
95.7
84.7
Water level at equilibrium (ft):
118.6
62.8
114.2
86.2
4.0 DATA PROCESSING AND RESULTS
The logs were analyzed for fractures and other features using WellCAD software, manufactured by
Advanced Logic Technology. The travel time data from the acoustic televiewer log was used to develop a
maximum caliper log. Fractures were interpreted through a complete data analysis of all logs. Dip and azimuth
(dip direction) were calculated for each detected fracture. The fracture data was corrected from apparent to
true dip and azimuth using deviation logs included with the televiewer dataset, and from magnetic north to
true north by rotating the fracture azimuths 8.4° counterclockwise. Magnetic north is 8.4° west of true north at
the site (according to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). The reported azimuth or dip
direction is measured clockwise from true north (Figure 1). A fracture summary table including fracture
attributes is provided in Appendix 1. Dominating water producing fractures based on flow logging or other
evidence are highlighted and shown in bold and italics text. Minor water producing fractures based on flow
logging are shown in bold.
problem solved

Geophysical Logging Report, AB-1BRD, AB-21311, AB-2BRD, AB-3BRD, April 25, 2019
Belews Creek Steam Station, Belews Creek, North Carolina (synt00118) Page 5
Schmidt stereonets (lower hemisphere) with fracture characteristics and fracture rose diagrams are
presented on Appendix 2. HPF logs and fracture characteristics are shown on Appendix 3. All logs are
presented on Appendix 4. All depths are referenced from ground surface.
Gi�ert
Past
Rela6ns beh"an Do and A#nrutb angle
Figure 1: Explanation of azimuth and dip for fractures
problem solved

APPENDIX 1

Belews Creek Steam Station, North Carolina
Fracture Data from Geophysical Logging
AB-1BRD
Depth Azimuth Dip
ft deg deg
158.5 98 76
163.3 85 52
163.9 177 51
166.1 86 83
170.8 271 70
173.2 170 39
180.8 9 14
180.8 86 4
182.2 28 2
184.9 16 8
184.9 90 5
185.2 120 14
191.5 15 11
194.5 13 12
210.6 186 8
216.3 5 13
227.7 302 66
238.9 316 10
239.5 178 6
239.7 211 9
247.3 144 17
247.3 354 34
247.8 175 11
248.4 23 39
248.6 244 43
250.3 173 3
250.4 149 24
251.1 176 23
253.5 358 30
254.1 279 11
258.5 10 32
258.5 153 39
264.8 242 65
266.9 196 11
267.0 167 21
269.8 68 29
270.7 221 30
270.8 28 9
270.9 193 39
271.5 358 19
271.9 171 56
274.5 14 13
277.2 93 52
277.4 75 61
277.8 78 52
278.6 109 41
279.5 114 66
280.4 88 51
280.9 351 38
281.3 31 8
281.4 336 26
282.1 92 11
282.9 107 15
283.8 119 67
283.9 124 29
287.4 10 21
287.7 27 42
296.8 346 32
298.2 174 47
298.4 317 31
298.9 2 15
299.1 351 31
299.6 347 30
299.9 354 22
300.0 2 18
300.4 23 9
300.4 359 15
300.8 5 13
AB-1BRD
Depth
Azimuth
Dip
ft
deg
deg
310.5
148
71
312.6
3
26
312.7
176
42
314.5
145
41
314.9
90
13
318.5
180
34
326.0
159
30
326.3
212
26
351.0
359
22
352.1
186
20
357.4
190
89
361.9
175
70
362.1
176
71
362.2
156
77
364.7
322
14
365.2
163
71
369.6
100
77
371.0
93
74
371.4
138
69
373.9
211
4
376.0
5
21
389.4
39
48
392.9
273
11
393.4
40
7
AB-2BR
Depth
Azimuth
Dip
ft
deg
deg
157.3
22
29
157.5
39
47
158.1
48
75
161.4
172
52
161.5
347
65
162.8
83
66
163.6
352
11
163.8
320
13
163.9
275
17
164.4
172
12
164.5
137
13
166.0
356
67
166.2
1
15
167.1
127
50
168.1
358
16
168.3
349
20
168.6
347
15
171.0
92
74
171.2
45
52
172.1
35
24
174.8
155
25
176.3
103
27
181.0
89
60
184.2
87
45
189.8
307
10
189.9
1
12
189.9
4
10
195.6
127
52
196.2
72
11
204.7
4
10
205.8
22
12
206.0
1
15
206.2
3
14
211.8
96
73
226.8
270
78
235.3
75
63
Major open fractures are highlighted and shown in bold and italics text. Minor open fractures are shown in bold. Closed fractures are shown in plain text.

Belews Creek Steam Station, North Carolina
Fracture Data from Geophysical Logging
AB-2BRD
Depth Azimuth Dip
ft deg deg
212.3 172 19
216.5 359 7
223.8 100 54
224.8 4 9
232.0 354 11
232.5 2 11
232.9 354 11
239.1 163 64
240.2 4 9
240.8 69 9
241.9 256 51
242.2 268 44
242.4 286 44
243.3 281 25
244.7 324 21
245.0 270 32
245.2 282 23
248.6 359 45
248.9 188 36
251.3 265 74
253.6 152 64
254.1 281 67
260.2 307 31
262.7 311 48
263.2 335 35
265.3 281 26
271.7 290 7
272.2 296 18
272.3 321 14
273.2 226 29
273.3 4 21
273.3 172 35
274.4 349 21
275.4 126 36
275.4 345 46
276.4 184 30
277.0 326 36
277.9 357 18
280.2 338 27
280.6 172 48
281.1 8 17
281.5 16 21
281.8 93 23
282.2 292 7
283.9 169 37
285.0 104 19
285.2 140 44
287.8 194 11
289.9 213 59
307.7 8 12
309.1 6 12
313.7 7 11
314.0 354 15
323.8 339 84
327.4 2 89
330.1 354 89
330.6 183 90
334.1 199 90
334.9 21 84
343.9 359 18
354.0 16 86
360.2 5 13
360.6 9 10
361.1 103 6
365.2 356 83
366.1 353 68
368.3 16 8
369.3 17 8
AB-2BRD
Depth
ft
Azimuth
deg
Dip
deg
372.2
9
11
372.3
15
8
372.9
15
8
374.0
7
14
374.3
10
11
375.4
13
11
381.2
5
11
385.4
7
18
385.5
160
13
386.1
347
12
387.0
189
7
387.1
217
6
388.6
19
7
389.4
18
7
390.6
18
8
390.7
2
13
390.9
55
30
392.5
18
8
392.7
13
9
AB-3BRD
Depth Azimuth Dip
ft deg deg
188.68 176.91 35.52
189.08 186.77 21.17
189.58 354.53 6.48
189.72 0.81 6.58
192.68 352.34 26.33
193.36 285.84 24.96
193.64 304.18 12.47
199.8 95.45 12.18
200.51 93.32 42.97
200.8 128.01 41.11
203.71 163.77 12.42
214.22 152.16 16.13
218.54 348.29 8.84
220.32 83.07 36.43
224.35 128.55 42.18
226.97 103.94 55.67
229.41 319.8 15.35
230.67 331.16 13.07
233.57 357.64 16.53
234.04 297.08 18.51
239.15 29.62 31.66
240.11 3.61 49.62
240.77 25.15 36.24
241.2 180.15 55.01
242.34 0.17 26.16
245.27 1.93 36.65
245.99 16.2 31.47
248.48 347.35 22.6
249.02 138.97 2.95
249.49 358.6 20.43
251.09 3.87 79.75
254.65 3.56 16.27
255.86 135.72 20.12
256.54 208.29 22.72
259.3 111.47 9.7
259.95 137.59 43.79
262.96 126.52 25.99
263.36 104.28 28.44
266.18 74.58 8.08
279.85 191.09 72.36
282.28 145.05 65.17
285.5 30.3 67.77
286.92 26.5 32.23
312.66 13.45 79.31
317.81 173.95 26.41
322.76 18.3 13.98
333.76 10.47 13.96
334.75 154.2 73.61
334.84 157.51 68.98
342.74 2.69 15.87
349.61 15.32 11.58
349.83 15.79 11.67
350.7 8.76 15.94
352.39 18.81 32.88
353.97 351.92 33.54
358.74 45.72 8.01
359.19 55.24 5.79
372.69 15.79 11.84
375.4 11.73 14.45
384.53 305.92 60.71
392.84 13.15 13.1
393.19 4.87 25.72
396.25 6.81 18.94
396.43 357.15 15.97
Major open fractures are highlighted and shown in bold and italics text. Minor open fractures are shown in bold. Closed fractures are shown in plain text.

APPENDIX 2

Depth Fractures Poles - Dip - Lower Hemisphere Great Circles - Strike - Lower Hemisphere
1ft:500ft 0 90 Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
150
Well
ID:
AB-1
BIRD
175
200
Schmidt Plot - LH - Type
Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
Depth: 146.65 [ft] to 414.76 [ft]
Depth: 147.44 [ft] to 417.52 [ft]
225
0°
80
0°
70
O
80
o -
i o_
5I0
250
0
30
510
30
20
20 \ JJ
275
270° 10 20-30-40-50-8 70, 80 90°
-- �
270° \ 10 20-30-40-50-60-70-80 90°
F
300
80"
325
180°
Counts Dip[deg] Azi[deg]
Counts Dip[deg] Strike[deg]
Mean 92 6.80 91.89
Mean 92 6.80 1.89
O 81 5.78 92.54
O 81 5.78 2.54
350
0 11 16.14 90.62
11 16.14 0.62
375
Major
open fracture
Minor
open fracture
400
� Closed
fracture
425
Page 1

Depth Fractures Poles - Dip - Lower Hemisphere Great Circles - Strike - Lower Hemisphere
1ft:200ft 0 90 Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
Well ID:
150
AB-2BR
160
Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
170
Depth: 146.65 [ft] to 242.45 [ft] Depth: 146.72 [ft] to 242.59 [ft]
0, 6.
80 -- _- --80- ..
/
18 0
I I
7I ., ,..._ ._- 7I _......
50 O So-
I 1\
30 30-
20 / 2
1
190
10 10
270° 1020-30-40-50-60-70 0 90° 270° 1 20I; 30-4 50 0-70� 80 90,
O
200
• r
O
210
180`
Counts Dip[deg] Azi[deg] Counts Dip[deg] Strike[deg]
Mean 36 17.49 55.67 Mean 36 17.49 325.67
220
29 14.95 59.72 O 29 14.95 329.72
O 7 33.24 48.71 • 7 33.24 318.71
230
Major open fracture
Minor open fracture
Closed fracture
240
Page 1

Depth Fractures Poles - Dip - Lower Hemisphere Great Circles - Strike - Lower Hemisphere
1ft:500ft 0 90 Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
175
200
Well ID:
AB-2BRD
225
Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
Depth: 197.75 [ft] to 405.59 [ft] Depth: 198.08 [ft] to 405.92 [ft]
0° 0°
250
-- %
80 -� 80—
7o 70--
0 i X 60
50 5I0 \
275
0 0
� 30 r l � 30 O \
20 20
10
I
270750-60-70-80 90° 270" -10 20-30. 0-5i0-60-70-80 90"
300
O
\
I
O
325
180° 180'
Counts Dip[deg] Azi[deg] Counts Dip[deg] Strike[deg]
350
Mean 87 8.32 336.88 Mean 87 8.32 246.88
70 10.30 342.72 O 70 10.30 252.72
O 13 4.88 323.45 0 13 4.88 233.45
375
0 4 10.82 223.18 0 4 10.82 133.18
Major open fracture
400
Minor open fracture
Closed fracture
Page 1

Depth Fractures Poles - Dip - Lower Hemisphere Great Circles - Strike - Lower Hemisphere
1ft:500ft 0 90 Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
175
200
Well ID:
AB-3BRD
225
Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
Depth: 177.38 [ft] to 411.63 [ft] Depth: 177.38 [ft] to 411.80 [ft]
0° o°
0 sow
250
io io
o so
50� / 50
0 0
(0
/ 30
2
275
2i 2
-10
270° 10-20-30-40-50-so-70-80 90° 270° i 10-20-30� 4Of50�60-70-80 90°
O
O /
300
325
1'0° 1'0°
Counts Dip[deg] Azi[deg] Counts Dip[deg] Strike[deg]
Mean 64 10.15 35.12 Mean 64 10.15 305.12
350
60 11.02 29.37 0 60 11.02 299.37
O 1 8.84 348.29 0 1 8.84 258.29
O 3 62.29 151.18 0 3 62.29 61.18
375
AO
0 Major open fracture
&— Minor open fracture
400
CD Closed fracture
Page 1

Depth Fractures Poles - Dip - Lower Hemisphere Great Circles - Strike - Lower Hemisphere
1ft:500ft 0 90 Schmidt Plot - LH - Type Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
125
150
All
Wells
175
200
Schmidt Plot - LH - Type
Schmidt Plot (Strike) - LH - Type
Depth: 140.42 [ft] to 404.36 [ft]
o,
Depth: 140.75 [ft] to 404.61 [ft]
80
6.
80 ---_ .....,
2 2 5
70
__-
\ =
0
O -4 -
3030
250
0
20
O
270° O 10 20-30) 401150 60 70 0 90°
270 10-[phone] 90'
275
O
300
{\ -
----------
180°
Counts Dip[deg] Azi[deg]
180°
Counts Dip[deg] Strike[deg]
325
Mean 279 6.99 34.29
Mean 279 6.99 304.29
O 240 7.40 30.01
240 7.40 300.01
O 34 9.38 73.50
• 34 9.38 343.50
0 5 7.21 238.74
• 5 7.21 148.74
350
375
Major
open fracture
Minor
open fracture
Closed
fracture
400
Page 1

Depth Fractures Rose Diagram - Dip Direction Rose Diagram - Dip
1ft: 500ft 90 0 Azimuth - Absolute (Count) Dip Count - Absolute (Count)
175
40
200
Azimuth -Absolute (Count)
Depth: 150.00 [ft] to 399.34 [ft]
225
0°
Dip Count -Absolute (Count)
1
Depth: 150.10 [ft] to 399.34 [ft]
01
Well ID:
250
24
AB-1 BIRD
8 10
275
300
- 62024
Counts: 92.00
Mean (3D): 6.80
180°
Min: 2.46
Components: Azimuth
Max: 89.44
325
Counts: 92.00
Mean (3D): 91.89
Min: 2.33
Max: 359.37
350
375
Page 1

Depth Fractures Rose Diagram - Dip Direction Rose Diagram - Dip
1ft:200ft
90 0 Azimuth - Absolute (Count) Dip Count - Absolute (Count)
150
160
170
Azimuth -Absolute (Count)
Depth: 150.00 [ft] to 248.27 [ft]
180
0.
Dip Count -Absolute (Count)
Depth: 150.10 [ft] to 248.37 [ft]
190
0°
-
8A8VWell
ID:
200AB-2
BR
Counts: 36.00
210
Mean (3D): 17.49
180'
Min: 9.56
Components: Azimuth
Max: 78.17
220
Counts: 36.00
Mean (3D): 55.67
Min: 0.59
Max: 358.13
230
240
IN-
250
Page 1

Depth Fractures Rose Diagram - Dip Direction Rose Diagram - Dip
1ft:500ft 0 90 Azimuth - Absolute (Count) Dip Count - Absolute (Count)
200
225
IN-
Azimuth -Absolute (Count)
250
Depth: 207.06 [ft] to 409.49 [ft]
0°
1
Dip Count -Absolute (Count)
1
Depth: 207.22 [ft] to 409.49 [ft]
275
�L
lU
0°
6
300%
Well ID:
AB-2 BIRD
Z :36
325
Counts: 87.00
Mean (3D): 8.32
1800
Min: 5.54
350
Components: Azimuth
Max: 89.93
Counts: 87.00
Mean (3D): 336.88
Min: 1.58
375
Max: 359.30
400
Page 1

Depth Fractures Rose Diagram - Dip Direction Rose Diagram - Dip
1ft:500ft 0 90 Azimuth - Absolute (Count) Dip Count - Absolute (Count)
175
200
225
Azimuth -Absolute (Count)
Depth: 177.55 [ft] to 409.49 [ft]
0°
250
Dip Count -Absolute (Count)
1
Depth: 177.55 [ft] to 409.49 [ft]
fA h.�
0°
275
I-
A)—
300
Well ID:
L—-1
q7F
AB-3 BIRD
Counts: 64.00
325
Mean (3D): 10.15
180°
Min: 2.95
Components: Azimuth
Max: 79.75
Counts: 64.00
350
Mean (3D): 35.12
Min: 0.17
Max: 358.60
375
400
Page 1

APPENDIX 3

Depth Caliper - from AN Fractures Pumping Flow
1ft:200ft 6 in 7 0 90 0 Gal./min. 0.05
Caliper Ambient Flow
5.7 in. 6.2 0 Gal./min. 0.05
150.0
Well ID:
AB-1 BIRD
Bottom of Casing
160.0
170.0
180.0
190.0
Major open fracture
Minor open fracture
Closed fracture
i
200.0
210.0
220.0
230.0
240.0
250.0
260.0
270.0
280.0
290.0
Page 1

Depth Caliper - from AN Fractures Pumping Flow
1ft:200ft 6 in 7 0 90 0 Gal./min. 0.05
Caliper Ambient Flow
5.7 in. 6.2 0 Gal./min. 0.05
300.0
310.0
320.0
330.0
340.0
350.0
360.0
370.0
380.0
390.0
Page 2

Depth Caliper - max from AN Fractures HPF - Ambient
1ft:200ft 5.8 in 6.8 0 90 0 gpm 0.02
Caliper HPF - Pumping
6.1 in. 6.4 0 gpm 0.02
155.0
Bottom of Casing
160.0
165.0
170.0
175.0
180.0
185.0
190.0
195.0
200.0
205.0
Major open fracture
Minor open fracture
Closed fracture
1 T
210.0
215.0
220.0
225.0
230.0
235.0
Page 1

Depth Caliper Fractures Ambient Flow
1ft:200ft 5.5 in. 6 0 90 0 Gal./min. 0.8
ATV - Caliper Pumping Flow
5.5 in 6.5 0 Gal./min. 0.8
200.0
Well
AB - 2
ID:
BIRD
Bottom Of Casing
210.0
220.0
230.0
240.0
Major open fracture
Minor open fracture
® Closed fracture
250.0
260.0
270.0
280.0
290.0
300.0
310.0
320.0
330.0
Page 1

Depth Caliper Fractures Ambient Flow
1ft:200ft 5.5 in. 6 0 90 0 Gal./min. 0.8
ATV - Caliper Pumping Flow
5.5 in 6.5 0 Gal./min. 0.8
350.0
360.0
370.0
380.0
390.0
Page 2

Depth Caliper Fractures HPF - Ambient
1ft:200ft 5.3 in. 5.8 0 90 -0.02 gpm 1
Caliper from AN HPF - Pumping
5.5 in 7.5 -0.02 gpm 1
175.0 180.0
Well ID:
AB-3 BIRDBottom
of Casing
185.0
190.0
195.0
200.0
205.0
Major open fracture
Minor open fracture
Closed fracture
210.0
215.0
220.0
225.0
230.0
235.0
240.0
245.0
250.0
255.0
260.0
265.0
270.0
275.0
280.0
285.0
290.0
295.0
300.0
305.0
310.0
315.0
Page 1

325.0
330.0
335.0
340.0
345.0
350.0
355.0
360.0
365.0
370.0
375.0
380.0
385.0
390.0
395.0
Page 2

APPENDIX 4

Bollorn of Casing
®M.
-7-Y'A
5� �.3
ti, ia.•
1
-y
�-

:� -- - -
y
C:
l
r.
ter.

OR
R _ruvwk.

3 .
•e i
y.
'ry G'.y�
y
3 �111 •a — J�.v
. . .
..r Y _

I

Vi
- I £� -
Ur
16,
Lim
b

M -33-
19-- �
1
Wgi,
Wt- Z
isr-
NR
3sm
r
�: • . e �`� ` �- sip 3��1 �` -
_
M
*Mi�
ROME�.�
_

=MENEM
EMERN
MINEEMME
SOMEONE
Mommi'Lls
MlMEMMml
MENNEN
MEMEMSE
011001110111
�mllmmml
imommon
imommom
111100111110111
IMEMEME�
1=0mmm�Ni
111111111111101111
111101111110111
1111100111111111111
1111101111111111111
11111011111111111
11MMINSEPH
11MMININE11
�mwjiimllq

is 'i� :ti.= _.�`
..•-�
-M,
A
Mi
Pf'�

��", __
--.
Mir
�'

I�hbls
I
I_Ijlmmmi
I_Mmmm

Z5
_ i
.ice
�y
'��
•fir.
aiT
mi, t
_
� � �
� Y
- '_ice_-
_ .. •-ram __ .-� ��..
`tc
_
1 31-71- Mfl-
h.
INOW
WNIN_ _ 0F --

. :moor

INNE .
NON■

'Y9�_.`i6; i � _ '••ram.,.
t
Not
f•yL` C_1•sr 45c.- -F ►ate � i_.

41 WE!, _

:4r
VON�' ;t
om
�- ONr

ki04:7
ow
Now IS
ff- M-
2k
NO
•:i

9
3
_
1

�®�=,
ti
_
��'fa1 r -
- � ®'a4

? ~���
� 2
ar� �� �
»/5 /�� s 2 .�
\«;&�£.z`\

;. yA
FR f
NWIR
-, WO �0W. �}

iAL�jll A
�„�-xT � .. •ram'-��
- -
1
•Yvi
s
aL "

�.
L
.�
di
moo
Not,
momt-
Ammml]Nook
� 4 � Vs- �• ._
R'L'?io'V--.Mw&l AMMOF
- :- ll-N:we —'�- ll.rid�lr� � - -
�1

pp-
1
�iii�
Alm^.
fie. �' �4r iiT

ALE,. J
<
•ik :;}- _ r
Own
az r i.
y;

RIC N WOP
P,7

F Mv
milli
offim
ENE,
OffingUr,
ON-

Emma

NAM

� aa
I <
ti.•eix iw%LO
L�ia _Yh
RV.-
rAlm
sm NFr4 r_
UFA-mot-
-
' n
EMU a -
-
IL
NX
�:�p- � rryy •x�
r+

• � S+� . ter. - - ..
.R y • r *
aAn2!`
V• t•J `G yt� -
�
- _ -
3 Ll n,
s --
MEW(
parr ;�• 1 -
a g � N.,� —
vffi2w._
z�
Fx f
ter`' ` •
f� y-
i

of
r 4T� —sot�F

WNW �
f { - _ •F�IF :yam �- S ~ - '�_ v .
i

�•�?r��'_ _i+� = sue.. i�--
"�.. s �= �•a3. > _
r yi Y
.1 lzlm
fir- �:,••.�
T�
* TMWML2�
low
' "�' � � a� _ ''SAS - � •Kr;..t - - _
•'�
_
•1f
A
7�i-vt

- V " rS-t - • - #'sue'_ -
,�yyaa p�gj} t
� � • ERR

ng
'- Jc=c �• �:�MAMMA, • �.' ,+-a TE- "�'� cam-`,.
r
x-
rT(r-'WM�
ME mw'-
m - -
a.
ayes-�,°
,rT3 � $d• S"
or
° _ J - sL��-- � - � €=Ass•. Rook
pwlllls� WE -
NONE
' r
OEMaYiic - . •• - _ .
R`5-'1'91�'..11-4`2—i—�'-Il
F _ EMME
F
61
R-Eff-W.
§; .
A a

s
yy yyr.
�
C
wo
- m Hr v` k yam. iw• . k 5`'' MEMO
NONE
YLi
r- s+'� A.
4
W"M
NOOK
WIN

ANN&
_ .4•_._M
ems°" '.
So,IWO
y
t -
'
-_w
"6 Am'

V!,

5
AM
i door
-IMF
SEC. i% S
,-
or
ILA
`71-mw
"mom
ok,
Emma_'
xY
'��:yf�ac �^�_ �. �.• f. '-��; - - ..ter
S
_-0000.
� ''ram l
s�
. -■■■
0. -L
ipm,
N
_mpg
Nook
i--0. I
- M& R
dMMA"`-

Fractured Bedrock Evaluation
December 2019
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC — Belews Creek Steam Station
ATTACHMENT D
SynTerra
PETROGRAPHIC EVALUATION OF CORE SAMPLES

Umm Lab
AESIA10012t arrnNaARl
PETROLEUM SERVICES
Petrographic Evaluation
Of Core Samples
SynTerra Corporation
Belews Creek 1026-20-24 Project
August 2019
Core Laboratories, Inc.
Houston Advanced Technology Center
6316 Windfern Road
Houston, Texas 77040
Houston ATC Job File No.: 1902256G
The analytical results, opinions or interpretations contained in this report are based upon information and material supplied by the client for whose
exclusive and confidential use this report has been made. The analytical results, opinions or interpretations expressed represent the best judgment of
Core Laboratories. Core Laboratories, however, makes no warranty or representation, expressed or implied, of any type, and expressly disclaims
same as to the productivity, proper operations or profitableness of an oil, gas, coal or other mineral, property, well or sand in connection with which
such report is used or relied upon for any reason whatsoever. This report shall not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without the written approval of
Core Laboratories.

PETROGRAPHIC SUMMARY
Two core samples from Belews Creek 1026-20-24 project were selected for thin
section petrographic analysis (Table 1). The analytical program and petrographic
summary are presented in Table 1. Thin section photomicrographs and
descriptions are provided in Plates 1 — 2.
• Both samples are metamorphic rocks with a foliated fabric (i.e., the
elongated minerals are oriented parallel to each other or form some bands).
The principal minerals are biotite, quartz, muscovite, and plagioclase. These
metamorphic rocks are classified as mica schist (Table 1).
• Accessory minerals consist of garnet, pyrite, K-feldspar, tourmaline,
staurolite, zircon, magnetite, and apatite.
• Plagioclase crystals are locally altered into sericite. Biotite is rarely altered
into chlorite. Fe -dolomite is rare, replacing other minerals such as
plagioclase.
• Fracture pores are rare. Micropores are probably rare to minor in
abundance.
Thank you for choosing Core Laboratories to perform this study. Please feel free
to contact us if you have any questions or comments concerning this report.
rSincerely,
Yong Q. Wu PhD
Staff Geologist
Reservoir Geology
Core Laboratories - Houston
Phone: [phone]
E-mail: Yong.WuCo)corelab.com

ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
THIN SECTION PETROGRAPHY
Thin sections were prepared by first impregnating the samples with epoxy to augment
cohesion and to prevent loss of material during grinding. Each thinly sliced sample was
mounted on a frosted glass slide and then grounded to an approximate thickness of 30
microns. The thin sections were stained with the following: Alizarin Red-S to
differentiate calcite (stains red) from clear dolomite (does not stain); potassium
ferricyanide to identify ferroan dolomite (stains dark blue) and ferroan calcite (stains
purple to dark blue depending on acid concentration and iron content of the sample).
They were also stained with sodium cobaltinitrite for potassium feldspar (stains yellow).
The thin sections were analyzed using standard petrographic techniques.

TABLE 1
SynTerra Corp., Belews Creek 1026-20-24 Project
ANALYTICAL PROGRAM AND SAMPLE SUMMARY
Sample ID:
Depth (ft)
TS
Lithology:
Classification:
Plate No.
GWA-20BR
74.5
X
Metamorphic Rock
Mica Schist
1
AB-1 BR
83.2
X
Metamorphic Rock
Mica Schist
2

PLATE 1
Thin Section Petrography
Company: SynTerra Corp. Sample Description
Project: Belews Creek 1026-20-24 Lithology: Metamorphic Rock
Location: na
Sample ID: GWA-20BR Classification: Mica Schist
Depth (ft) 74.5 Crystal Size (mm): 0.17
Structures:
A Foliation
B
100uM
Relative Abundances:
Rare
<1 %
Minor
1-5%
Moderate
5-10%
Common
10-20%
HESERVOIR Abundant
>20%
Principal Minerals:
abundant quartz; abundant biotite, moderate plagioclase;
moderate muscovite
Accessory Minerals:
rare to minor garnet, pyrite, magnetite, potassium feldspar,
zircon, and apatite
Alteration and Replacement:
rare to minor plagioclase crystals are altered into sericite;
rare biotite crystals are altered into chlorite; rare Fe -
dolomite
Pore Types:
rare fracture pores
Photomicrograph Caption
The principal minerals are biotite (Bi), quartz (Q), muscovite
(Mus), and plagioclase (Plag) in this metamorphic rock
(mica schist). In general, these mineral crystals show a
foliated fabric, with the elongated minerals being oriented
parallel to each other or forming some bands. Accessory
minerals include garnet (Gn), pyrite (Py), K-feldspar, apatite
and zircon. The plagioclase is locally altered into sericite.
Biotite is rarely altered into chlorite. Fractures are very rare.
Micropores are probably rare to minor in abundance. The
green box in Image A indicates the location of Image B.

PLATE 2
Thin Section Petrography
Company: SynTerra Corp.
Project: Belews Creek 1026-20-24
Location: na
Sample ID: AB-1 BR
Depth (ft) 83.2
A
B
lop Plag
r� S
Relative Abundances:
Rare
<1 %
Minor
1-5%
Moderate
5-10%
Common
10-20%
HESERVOIR Abundant
>20%
Sample Description
Lithology: Metamorphic Rock
Classification: Mica Schist
Crystal Size (mm): 0.23
Structures:
Foliation
Principal Minerals:
abundant quartz; abundant biotite, moderate plagioclase;
moderate muscovite
Accessory Minerals:
rare to minor garnet, pyrite, potassium feldspar, tourmaline,
staurolite, zircon, magnetite, and apatite
Alteration and Replacement:
minor plagioclase crystals are altered into sericite; rare
biotite crystals are altered into chlorite; rare Fe -dolomite
Pore Types:
rare fracture pores
Photomicrograph Caption
Biotite (Bi) and quartz (Q) are the most abundant minerals,
followed by muscovite (Mus) and plagioclase (Plag) in this
metamorphic rock (mica schist). These minerals show a
foliated fabric, i.e., the elongated minerals are oriented
parallel to each other or form some bands. Accessory
minerals consist of garnet (Gn), pyrite (Py), potassium
feldspar, tourmaline, staurolite, zircon, magnetite, and
apatite. Some plagioclase crystals are partly altered into
sericite. Biotite is locally altered into chlorite. Fractures are
very rare. Micropores are probably rare to minor in
abundance. The green box in Image A indicates the
location of Image B.