The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0003425_Rox_Appendix E_20191231Corrective Action Plan Update December 2019 Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra APPENDIX E HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ,(VIP synTerra HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT 1700 DUNNAWAY ROAD SEMORA, NORTH CAROLINA 27343 DECEMBER 2019 PREPARED FOR DUKE ENERGY; PROGRESS DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC , 4z, d-, ed" � att Huddleston, Ph.D. Senior Scientist k6�v_ "nZA1- Heather Smith Environmental Scientist Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This human health and ecological risk assessment pertaining to the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (Roxboro or Site) was prepared on behalf of Duke Energy Progress, LLC (Duke Energy). The risk assessment focuses on the potential impacts of coal combustion residual (CCR) constituents from the Roxboro ash basins on groundwater, surface water, and sediment. Groundwater flow information was used to focus the risk assessment on areas where exposure of humans and wildlife to CCR constituents could occur. To assist in corrective action decision making, this risk assessment characterized potential effects on human health and the environment related to naturally occurring elements, associated with coal ash, present in environmental media. Corrective action will be implemented, if needed, with the goal of keeping future Site conditions protective of human health and the environment, as required by the 2014 North Carolina General Assembly Session Law 2014-122, Coal Ash Management Act (CAMA). The human health and ecological risk assessment is based on North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) risk assessment guidance. Conclusions of the risk assessment are: 1) there is no evidence of risks to on -Site or off -Site human receptors potentially exposed to CCR constituents that may have migrated from the ash basins; and 2) there is no evidence of risks to ecological receptors potentially exposed to CCR constituents that may have migrated from the ash basins. This risk assessment uses analytical results from groundwater, surface water, and sediment samples collected March 2015 through June 2019. The framework of the risk assessment follows a stepwise process: Step 1. Development of conceptual site models (CSMs) showing the type of affected media, exposure routes and pathways, and human and ecological receptors that might occur at the Site Step 2. Comparison of analytical data with applicable state and federal human health and ecological screening values (ESVs) to identify constituents of potential concern (COPCs) Step 3. Derivation of Site -specific human health risk -based concentrations (RBCs) for COPCs, derivation of exposure point concentrations (EPCs), and comparison of EPCs with the RBCs to draw conclusions about the potential human health risks at the Site Page ES-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Step 4. Development of Site -specific wildlife exposure concentrations for comparison with COPC-specific toxicity reference values (TRVs) to draw conclusions about potential risks to wildlife at the Site Human health and ecological CSMs were developed to help identify exposure pathways, exposure routes, and potential receptors for evaluation. The CSMs describe the sources and potential pathways through which groundwater migration from the ash basin might have transported CCR constituents to other environmental media (receiving media) and, in turn, to potential human and ecological receptors. Receiving media that could be affected by COPCs include: • Outdoor air • Groundwater • On -Site seep water and seep soil (AOW) • On -Site soil beneath the coal ash basins • On -Site surface water and sediment • Off -Site surface water, sediment, and fish Potential human receptors evaluated in the risk assessment were: • On -Site trespassers (current and future use) • On -Site commercial or industrial workers (current and future use) • On -Site construction workers (current and future use) • Off -Site residents (current and future use) • Off -Site recreational users, including people who swim, wade, boat, or fish in Hyco Reservoir No public or private drinking water wells or wellhead protection areas were found downgradient of the ash basins, therefore there is no exposure to current residential receptors. Additionally, Hyco Reservoir is not affected by groundwater flow from the ash basins, therefore, there is no exposure of CCR constituents to recreational users of Hyco Reservoir. The Intake Canal is part of Hyco Reservoir and is evaluated in this assessment. Evaluation of risks associated with AOW locations and soil beneath the ash basins are not subject to this assessment and will be evaluated at a later time. Page ES-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Receiving media from which ecological receptors could be exposed to COPCs include: • Outdoor air • Groundwater • On -Site seep water and seep soil (AOW) • On -Site soil beneath the coal ash basins • On -Site surface water, sediment, and biotic tissue • Off -Site surface water, sediment, and biotic tissue Ecological receptors are represented by "indicator" or "surrogate" organisms that represent other animals within their generic class, order, or family. Receptors considered in the ecological risk assessment included: • Benthic macroinvertebrates • Fish • Birds (e.g., mallard duck, great blue heron) • Mammals (e.g., muskrat, river otter) As stated, Hyco Reservoir is not affected by groundwater flow from the ash basins, therefore, there is no exposure of CCR constituents to wildlife using Hyco Reservoir. The Intake Canal is part of Hyco Reservoir and is evaluated in this assessment. Evaluation of risks associated with AOW locations and soil beneath the ash basins are not subject to this assessment and will be evaluated at a later time. The screening -level risk assessment identified the following human health COPCs: Medium/Location COPC Surface Water - On -Site Aluminum, barium, boron, chromium (VI), manganese, strontium, zinc Sediment - On -Site Aluminum, arsenic, cobalt, manganese, vanadium Groundwater- On -Site Aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, boron, chromium (total), chromium (VI), cobalt, lithium, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, radium (total), selenium, strontium, thallium, vanadium, zinc Page ES-3 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra The following COPCs were identified for ecological receptors: Medium/Location COPC Surface Water - Water intake basin Aluminum, barium, manganese, zinc Sediment - Water intake basin Barium, copper, manganese, selenium The identified COPCs were carried forward in the human health risk assessment and the baseline ecological risk assessment. Results of the human health risk assessment indicate the following: • On -site groundwater poses no unacceptable risk for the construction worker under these exposure scenarios. • On -site surface water, and sediment pose no unacceptable risk for the trespasser under these exposure scenarios. • Exposure to CCR constituents by current and future commercial/industrial worker, residences and recreational receptors is incomplete. Findings of the baseline ecological risk assessment include the following: • No HQs based on no observed adverse effects levels (NOAELs) or lowest observed adverse effects levels (LOAELs) were greater than unity for the mallard duck, great blue heron, river otter, and bald eagle exposed to surface water and sediments in the Water Intake Basin (WIB) exposure area. • Two endpoints, muskrat and killdeer, had limited modeled risk results greater than unity for aluminum and copper. The modeled risk is primarily NOAEL based and driven by concentrations in sediment. • With the exception of aluminum, no HQs based on NOEALS or LOAELs were greater than unity for the muskrat in the WIB Exposure Area. • With the exception of aluminum, no HQs based on LOAELs were greater than unity for the killdeer in the WIB Exposure Area. Exposure of the killdeer to aluminum and copper resulted in NOAEL based HQs greater than 1.0. LOAEL based HQs for copper were less than unity. • Multiple lines of evidence indicate the modeled risk to aluminum and copper are overestimated. In summary, there is no evidence of unacceptable risks to human and ecological receptors exposed to environmental media potentially affected by CCR constituents at Page ES-4 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Roxboro. Additionally, independent assessments carried out by Duke Energy have demonstrated that Hyco Reservoir has been a healthy and functioning ecosystem for almost 20 years. Data from the independent assessments indicate that the systems installed at the Roxboro Plant for the protection of the water quality, the aquatic community, and human health have been effective. Page ES-5 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................... ES-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Risk Assessment Framework..................................................................................1-3 1.2 Report Organization.................................................................................................1-4 2.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODELS.................................................................................2-1 2.1 Current and Future Land Uses............................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Human Health Conceptual Site Model.................................................................. 2-2 2.2.1 Receiving Media....................................................................................................2-2 2.2.2 Exposure Setting and Receptors......................................................................... 2-3 2.2.3 Exposure Routes.................................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.4 Potential Exposure Pathways by Receiving Media .......................................... 2-3 2.2.4.1 Outdoor Air................................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.4.2 Groundwater.................................................................................................2-4 2.2.4.3 Surface Water, Sediment, and Fish............................................................ 2-5 2.2.4.4 Seeps and Seep Soil......................................................................................2-6 2.2.4.5 Post -Excavation Soil..................................................................................... 2-6 2.3 Ecological Conceptual Site Model.......................................................................... 2-6 2.3.1 Sources and Release Mechanisms.......................................................................2-7 2.3.2 Exposure Pathways by Receiving Media.......................................................... 2-7 2.3.3 Ecological Receptors............................................................................................. 2-8 2.3.4 Exposure Routes.................................................................................................... 2-9 2.3.5 Exposure Pathways............................................................................................... 2-9 2.3.5.1 Surface Water, Sediment, and Biotic Tissue ........................................... 2-10 2.3.5.2 Seeps and Seep Soils...................................................................................2-11 2.3.5.3 Post -Excavation Soil................................................................................... 2-11 2.3.6 Ecological Exposure Areas................................................................................ 2-11 2.4 Revised Conceptual Site Models and Exposure Areas......................................2-12 3.0 DATA EVALUATION................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Data Sources.............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.1 On -Site Groundwater........................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Surface Water.........................................................................................................3-1 Page i Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) SECTION PAGE 3.1.3 Sediment.................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Background Data Used in Risk Assessment......................................................... 3-1 3.3 Data Summarization.................................................................................................3-2 4.0 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL SCREENING ...................................... 4-1 4.1 Purpose and Methods..............................................................................................4-1 4.2 Human Health Screening Levels............................................................................ 4-1 4.2.1 Groundwater......................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.2 Surface Water.........................................................................................................4-2 4.2.3 Sediment.................................................................................................................4-3 4.3 Ecological Screening Levels.....................................................................................4-4 4.3.1 Surface Water.........................................................................................................4-4 4.3.2 Sediment.................................................................................................................4-5 4.4 Results of Screening for Constituents of Potential Concern ............................... 4-5 4.4.1 Human Health Screening Results....................................................................... 4-6 4.4.2 Ecological Screening Results............................................................................... 4-7 5.0 HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT................................................................5-1 5.1 Risk -Based Concentrations...................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Exposure Point Concentrations.............................................................................. 5-1 5.3 Risk Calculation Approach...................................................................................... 5-2 5.4 Risk Calculations Using RBCs.................................................................................5-3 5.5 Human Health Risk Assessment Results.............................................................. 5-4 5.5.1 On -Site Construction Worker Exposure Scenario............................................5-4 5.5.2 On -Site Trespasser Exposure Scenario............................................................... 5-4 5.6 Findings of Drinking Water Supply Well Surveys .............................................. 5-5 5.7 Provision of Alternative Water Supply.................................................................5-6 5.7.1 Future Groundwater Use Area........................................................................... 5-6 5.8 Uncertainty Analysis................................................................................................ 5-6 6.0 BASELINE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT..................................................6-1 6.1 Problem Formulation............................................................................................... 6-1 6.1.1 Refinement of Constituents of Potential Concern ............................................ 6-2 Page ii Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) SECTION PAGE 6.1.2 Assessment and Measurement Endpoints........................................................ 6-4 6.1.3 Selection of Ecological Receptors of Interest ..................................................... 6-5 6.2 Exposure and Effects Characterization.................................................................. 6-6 6.2.1 Estimation of Exposure........................................................................................ 6-6 6.2.2 Effects Assessment.............................................................................................. 6-11 6.3 Risk Characterization............................................................................................. 6-12 6.4 Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment Results ..................................................... 6-13 6.5 Environmental Assessment of the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant .................... 6-14 6.6 Uncertainty Analysis.............................................................................................. 6-15 7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS......................................................................... 7-1 7.1 Human Health Risk Assessment............................................................................ 7-1 7.2 Ecological Risk Assessment..................................................................................... 7-1 8.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................ 8-1 Page iii Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 USGS Location Map Figure 2 Human Health Conceptual Site Model Figure 3 Ecological Conceptual Site Model Figure 4 Sample Location Map Figure 5 Ecological Exposure Areas LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 Risk Assessment Data Sets Attachment 2 Human Health Screening Tables Attachment 3 Ecological Screening Tables Attachment 4 Derivation of Risk -based Concentrations Attachment 5 Human Health Exposure Point Concentration Tables Attachment 6 Human Health Risk Estimates Attachment 7 Ecological Exposure Point Concentration Tables Attachment 8 Ecological Risk Estimates Attachment 9 Federal and State Listed Protected Species Attachment 10 Duke Energy Environmental Assessment of the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant Page iv Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ADD average daily dose AOW area of wetness AUF area use factor AWQC Ambient Water Quality Criteria BAF bioaccumulation factor BCF bioconcentration factor BERA Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment BTV background threshold value CAMA Coal Ash Management Act of 2014 CAP Corrective Action Plan CCR coal combustion residual COPC constituent of potential concern Cr(III) trivalent chromium Cr(VI) hexavalent chromium CSA Comprehensive Site Assessment CSM conceptual site model Duke Energy Duke Energy Progress, LLC EAB East Ash Basin Eco-SSLs USEPA Ecological Soil Screening Levels ELCR excess lifetime cancer risk EMC Environmental Management Commission EPC exposure point concentration EPCnc exposure point concentration (for a non -carcinogenic constituent) EPCc exposure point concentration (for a carcinogenic constituent) ERAGS Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund ESVs ecological screening values G.S. North Carolina General Statutes HI hazard index HQ hazard quotient IMAC Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations LOAEL lowest observed adverse effects level MCL maximum contaminant level MW megawatt NCAC North Carolina Administrative Code Page v Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (CONTINUED) NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources NCDEQ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality NCDHHS North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services NOAEL no observed adverse effects level NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System pCi/L Picocuries per liter PSRG Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal RBC risk -based concentration RBC c risk -based concentration (for a carcinogenic constituent) RBC nc risk -based concentration (for a non -carcinogenic constituent) ROI receptor of interest RSL risk -based screening level Roxboro Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SOC Special Order by Consent SMCL secondary maximum contaminant level SUF seasonal use factor TRV toxicity reference value UCL upper confidence limit OF uptake factor USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USGS United States Geological Survey WAB West Ash Basin Page vi Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 1.0 INTRODUCTION This human health and ecological risk assessment pertaining to Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (Roxboro or Site) was prepared on behalf of Duke Energy Progress, LLC (Duke Energy). The risk assessment focuses on the potential effects of coal combustion residual (CCR) constituents from the Roxboro ash basins on groundwater, surface water, and sediment. Groundwater flow information was used to focus the risk assessment on areas where exposure of humans and wildlife to CCR constituents could occur. Duke Energy owns and operates Roxboro, located in Semora, Person County, North Carolina (Figure 1). This human health and ecological risk assessment concludes that: 1) there is no evidence of risks to on -Site or off -Site human receptors potentially exposed to CCR constituents that may have migrated from the ash basins; and 2) there is no evidence of risks to ecological receptors potentially exposed to CCR constituents that may have migrated from the ash basins. This risk assessment incorporates results from groundwater, surface water, and sediment samples collected March 2015 through June 2019. Duke Energy has collected substantial data at Roxboro to support a groundwater corrective action plan (CAP) for Roxboro. This risk assessment was prepared in support of the CAP Update Report. Detailed descriptions of Site operational history, physical setting and features, and geology/hydrogeology are documented in the following reports: 1. Comprehensive Site Assessment Report — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2015a). 2. Corrective Action Plan Part 1— Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2015b). 3. Corrective Action Plan Part 2 — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2016a). 4. Comprehensive Site Assessment Supplement 1— Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2016b). 5. Ash Basin Extension Impoundments and Discharge Canals Assessment Report — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2016c) 6. Comprehensive Site Assessment Update — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2017). 7. 2018 CAMA Annual Interim Monitoring Report — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2019). Page 1-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Consistent with the iterative risk assessment process and guidance, updates to the risk assessment have been made to the original 2016 risk assessment (SynTerra 2016a) in order to incorporate new Site data and refine conceptual site models (CSMs). The original risk assessment was prepared in accordance with a work plan for risk assessment of CCR-affected media at Duke Energy sites (Haley & Aldrich, 2015). Risk assessment updates have largely followed the work plan procedures. Updates to the work plan procedures include: • CCR constituents evaluated in the risk assessment were conservatively assumed to be 100 percent bioavailable. • Ecological exposure parameters and toxicity data for some wildlife receptors were updated and cited in the ecological risk output tables. • No statistical treatment of background surface water and sediment data were performed. Instead, CCR constituent exposure concentrations are compared to measured background data for those media. The following risk assessment reports have been prepared: 1. Baseline Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment, Appendix F of Corrective Action Plan Part 2 (SynTerra, 2016a) 2. Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA) Update (SynTerra, 2017) 3. Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Summary Update for Roxboro Steam Electric Plant, Appendix B of Community Impact Analysis of Ash Basin Closure Options at the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (Exponent 2018) To help evaluate options for groundwater corrective action, this risk assessment characterized potential effects on human health and the environment related to naturally occurring elements, associated with coal ash, present in environmental media. Corrective action will be implemented with the goal of keeping future Site conditions protective of human health and the environment, as required by the 2014 North Carolina General Assembly Session Law 2014-122, Coal Ash Management Act (CAMA). This risk assessment follows the methods of the 2016 risk assessment (SynTerra 2016a) and is based on North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR, 2003), North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ, 2017), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) risk assessment guidance (USEPA, 1989; 1991a; 1998). The NCDEQ Technical Guidance for Risk -based Environmental Remediation of Sites contains a risk calculator for deriving human health risk -based Page 1-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra remediation goals (NCDEQ, 2017). While this risk assessment follows similar procedures, North Carolina's Session Law 2015-286 does not allow the technical guidance and risk calculator to be used at CAMA sites. Two ash basins are located on -Site. Those ash basins are referenced using each basin's relative location on the Site. The East Ash Basin (EAB) was constructed in 1966, and the West Ash Basin (WAB) was constructed in 1973. Areas of wetness (AOWs) associated with engineered structures, also referred to as "constructed seeps," are being addressed in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits and are not subject to this risk assessment due to the permitted status. Other AOWs (non -constructed seeps) are addressed under a Special Order by Consent (SOC) issued by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC SOC WQ S18-005) and therefore are also not subject to this risk assessment update. The AOWs are expected to reduce in flow or be eliminated after decanting of the ash basins as a component of basin closure. The SOC requires that seeps remaining after decanting are to be addressed with a CAP to "protect public health, safety, and welfare, the environment, and natural resources" (EMC SOC WQ S18-005, 2. d.). To accommodate closure of the WAB, decanting (removal) of free water from the basin began in August 2019, as required by the SOC. The SOC requires completion of decanting by June 30, 2020. 1.1 Risk Assessment Framework The framework for the risk assessment follows a stepwise process. The steps include: Step 1: Development of CSMs showing the type of affected media, exposure routes and pathways, and human and ecological receptors that might occur at the Site Step 2: Comparison of analytical data with applicable state and federal human health and ecological screening values (ESVs) to identify constituents of potential concern (COPCs) Step 3: Derivation of Site -specific human health risk -based concentrations (RBCs) for COPCs, derivation of exposure point concentrations (EPCs), and comparison of EPCs with the RBCs to draw conclusions about the potential human health risks at the Site Step 4: Development of Site -specific wildlife exposure concentrations for comparison with COPC-specific toxicity reference values (TRVs) to draw conclusions about potential risks to wildlife at the Site Page 1-3 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 1.2 Report Organization This report is organized into the following sections: Section 1 presents an introduction, regulatory context, and report organization. Section 2 presents the human health and ecological CSMs, describing source(s), potentially affected media, potential migration pathways, and applicable exposure routes. Section 3 describes the Site data used in the risk assessments, the investigation programs under which the data were collected, analytical methods used, and data quality. Section 4 presents a discussion of how data collected from environmental media at the Site were compared with human health and ecological screening levels. The section also describes the process used for the selection of COPCs. Section 5 presents the human health risk assessment. The risk assessment was conducted by calculating Site -specific RBCs, which were used as the basis for calculating potential human health risks. This section presents potential exposure scenarios, chemical -specific variables, and equations used to develop the RBCs. This section also summarizes the comparison of RBCs with EPCs for each environmental medium, and how the data were used to derive Site -specific risk estimates for human health. Section 6 presents the ecological risk characterization, including the ecological food web modeling results. Section 7 presents the risk assessment conclusions. Section 8 presents the references cited in this report. Page 1-4 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 2.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODELS Human health and ecological CSMs were developed to guide identification of exposure pathways, exposure routes, and potential receptors for evaluation. The CSM describes the sources and potential migration pathways through which groundwater migration from the ash basins might have transported CCR- derived COPCs to other environmental media (receiving media) and, in turn, to potential human and ecological receptors. The linkage between a source, the receiving medium, and a point of potential exposure is called an exposure pathway. For an exposure pathway to be complete, the following conditions must exist (USEPA, 1989): 1. A source and mechanism of chemical release to the environment 2. An environmental transport medium (e.g., air, water, soil) 3. A point of potential contact with the receiving medium by a receptor 4. A receptor exposure route at the point of contact (e.g., inhalation, ingestion, dermal contact) The CSM is meant to be a 'living" model that can be updated and modified as additional data and information become available. 2.1 Current and Future Land Uses Roxboro is located on the southeast side of Hyco Reservoir in Semora, Person County, North Carolina. The Site is situated on approximately 6,095 acres of company -owned property located between McGhees Mill Road to the east, Semora Road (Highway 57) to the south and Hyco Reservoir to the west and north (Figure 1). The EAB and WAB are the dominant features on the portion of the property west of McGhees Mill Road and north of Semora Road. Land use within a 0.5-mile radius of the Roxboro EAB and WAB compliance boundaries include an industrial facility (building materials manufacturing), agricultural land (pasture), rural residential parcels, wooded land, a school (Woodland Elementary School), and Hyco Reservoir. Properties located within a 500-foot radius of the EAB and WAB compliance boundaries are all contained within the Site. Municipal water supply lines are not present within a 0.5-mile radius of the EAB and WAB compliance boundaries. Page 2-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 2.2 Human Health Conceptual Site Model The human health risk assessment CSM for Roxboro was developed by: 1. Identifying receiving media where COPCs may be present 2. Identifying the exposure setting and current and future land uses, which allowed for identification of receptor populations 3. Identifying the exposure routes applicable to each of the receptor populations and receiving media The ultimate product of the CSM is identification of potentially complete exposure pathways for specific land -use populations. The original CSM for potential human receptors is presented in Figure 2-3 of the 2016 risk assessment (SynTerra, 2016a). Figure 2 presents the updated CSM, which serves as the basis of this human health risk assessment. 2.2.1 Receiving Media COPCs potentially could migrate from the ash basins to soil, groundwater, surface water, sediment, and air. Principal migration pathways could include: 1) infiltration and percolation of rainwater through the coal ash basins, resulting in leaching of COPCs into soil beneath the basins and subsequently to groundwater; 2) migration of COPCs in groundwater and subsequent discharge of groundwater to the land surface or directly to surface water; and 3) surface run-off and erosion into surface water bodies. Particles eroded into surface water can settle as submerged sediment. COPCs in groundwater discharge to surface water can adsorb to sediment. COPCs in soil and surface water can be potentially taken up by plants, fish, and other aquatic organisms. COPCs in unsaturated media may be entrained as dust in outdoor air. Potential receiving media at the Roxboro site include: • Outdoor air • Groundwater 0 On -Site seep water and seep soil (AOW) • On -Site soil beneath the coal ash basins • On -Site surface water and sediment • Off -Site surface water, sediment, and fish Page 2-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra The coal ash and ponded water in the basins are not considered direct exposure media for this risk assessment, as the ash basins are part of the permitted waste treatment system at the Site. 2.2.2 Exposure Setting and Receptors The ash basins are located on property owned by Duke Energy. Land use surrounding the property not under the control of Duke Energy may include undisturbed open space, rural areas, recreational areas, and water bodies. The land will be retained by Duke Energy. Based on this information, receptors on Duke Energy -controlled property (i.e., on -Site) could include: • Trespassers (current and future use) • Commercial or industrial workers (current and future use) • Construction workers (current and future use) Potential receptors on property not controlled by Duke Energy (i.e., off -site) could include: • Residents (current and future use) Recreational users, including people who swim, wade, boat, or fish in Hyco Reservoir who might be receiving media from coal ash -derived COPCs (current and future use) 2.2.3 Exposure Routes Exposure routes by which humans potentially can be exposed to COPCs in environmental media at the Site include ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation. More than one exposure route might be applicable to each of the exposure media. 2.2.4 Potential Exposure Pathways by Receiving Media Potential human receptor exposure pathways for each of the receiving media are described in the following sections. 2.2.4.1 Outdoor Air Particulates (i.e., dust) that are released from soil via wind erosion or human activity can migrate downwind with air dispersion. On -Site receptors potentially could inhale substances entrained in the dust. Page 2-3 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Construction activities that disturb soil (e.g., removal during closure) could expose construction workers to COPCs entrained in dust. Therefore, this is a potentially complete exposure pathway. 2.2.4.2 Groundwater Where groundwater is used as a source of drinking water, off -site residents might potentially be exposed to COPCs if leaching to groundwater and subsequent migration of groundwater to a potable well point occurs. Exposure of off -site receptors to COPCs in groundwater will only occur if there is a complete exposure pathway (i.e., groundwater containing COPCs migrates to an off -site receptor's water supply well). Section 5 of the Roxboro CAP Update provides a summary of municipal and water supply wells surrounding the property. No municipal water supply lines are available to residents within a 0.5-mile radius of the ash basin compliance boundary. No public or private drinking water wells or wellhead protection areas were found to be located downgradient of the ash basin. This finding has been supported by field observations, a review of public records, an evaluation of historical groundwater flow direction data, and results of groundwater flow and transport modeling. All of the private water supply wells identified are located either upgradient or side -gradient of the ash basin. Although results from local water supply well testing do not indicate effects from the source area, water supply wells identified within the 0.5-mile radius from ash basin compliance boundary have been offered a water treatment system, per G.S. 130A-309.211(cl) requirements. No sampled water supply wells were deemed impacted by groundwater from the ash basin. The drinking water pathway assumes that residents use groundwater as a source of water supply and are exposed via ingestion as drinking water and dermal contact during household uses and bathing/showering. The inhalation exposure route is not complete for non-volatile substances (e.g., metals) in groundwater. Duke Energy maintains control over the Roxboro property and uses it for industrial purposes. The Roxboro property is not used for residential purposes, and Site groundwater is not used as a source of drinking water. No residences are located hydraulically downgradient of on -Site groundwater. Consequently, no complete exposure pathway exists for Page 2-4 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra groundwater used for potable purposes. Future site use is anticipated to remain the same. On -Site construction workers potentially could be exposed to COPCs in groundwater via incidental ingestion and dermal contact if shallow groundwater is encountered during construction and maintenance activities such as excavation. Therefore, this is a potentially complete exposure pathway. Groundwater data from on -site wells sampled during the CSA program were used in calculating the exposure point concentration (EPC) for this scenario. This recent data was used in evaluating risk to construction workers as it is representative of conditions that exist at the Site. 2.2.4.3 Surface Water, Sediment, and Fish Potential exposures to COPCs that have migrated into surface water and sediment could occur through ingestion and dermal contact. However, the specific nature of potential exposures is dependent on the type of water body. Specifically: Dermal contact with shallow surface water (e.g., less than 3 feet in depth) can occur via wading. This exposure pathway is considered complete for on -Site trespassers. Incidental ingestion and dermal contact with deeper surface water (e.g., more than 3 feet in depth) could occur via swimming. Swimming is prohibited and access is restricted at the on -Site areas evaluated. On -Site tributaries are too shallow for swimming. Therefore, this exposure pathway is not considered complete for on - Site water bodies. • USEPA Region 4 (USEPA, 2014) provides the following with respect to potential exposure to sediments: "Sediments in an intermittent stream should be considered as surface soil for the portion of the year the stream is without water. In most cases it is unnecessary to evaluate human exposures to sediments that are always covered by surface water." In accordance with this guidance, incidental ingestion and dermal contact with sediment could occur for on -Site trespassers if the sediment is not submerged beneath surface water. In areas where Page 2-5 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra sediment is submerged, this exposure pathway is incomplete. However, this is a potentially complete exposure pathway in areas where sediment is exposed and dry. Ingestion of COPCs could occur if people catch and eat fish that have accumulated such substances in their edible tissues. In order for this pathway to be complete, fish species that are large enough for consumption would have to be present in off -Site waterbodies downgradient of the ash basins. Water bodies evaluated in this assessment do not support this exposure pathway. Hyco Reservoir is not affected by groundwater flow from the ash basin. Therefore, consumption of fish from Hyco Reservoir is not a complete exposure pathway. The Intake Canal is part of Hyco Reservoir and is evaluated in this assessment. The portion of the Water Intake Basin (WIB) exposure area evaluated does not support fish large enough for human consumption, fishing is prohibited, and access is limited. Human exposure to COPCs via fish consumption is incomplete. 2.2.4.4 Seeps and Seep Soil Exposure to seeps and seep soil tends to be limited due to their discrete size and isolated location; therefore, the applicable potential exposure pathway to seep water would be limited to dermal contact. Exposure to seep soil (i.e., the soil over which seep water is present) could also potentially occur through dermal contact. On -site receptors (trespasser, commercial/industrial worker) may be exposed to CCR constituents in seep water and seep soil. Because AOWs are currently being addressed in NPDES permits or the SOC, these receptors were not evaluated in this risk assessment, although the associated exposure pathways are considered complete. 2.2.4.5 Post -Excavation Soil Post -excavation soil is a medium for evaluation after basin closure is performed. It is included here as a receiving medium with a complete exposure pathway for evaluation in the future. 2.3 Ecological Conceptual Site Model The ecological CSM was developed in a similar manner as the human health CSM described above [i.e., identify sources and media where Site -related COPCs may be present, determine the exposure pathways, identify the types of receptors, and identify the exposure routes applicable to each of the receptor populations (principally direct or Page 2-6 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra indirect ingestion of COPCs)]. The original CSM for potential ecological receptors is presented in Figure 2-4 of the 2016 risk assessment (SynTerra, 2016a). The updated ecological CSM is presented in Figure 3 of this report. For surface water, the distribution of the constituents between the dissolved and particulate phases is relevant in characterizing exposures. Chemical and physical transformations that lead to a variety of chemical species, particularly for metals/metalloids, might occur. Those occurrences might have important implications for assessing the bioavailability of chemicals to ecological receptors and subsequent potential for adverse effects. Information developed for the CSM was used to develop the screening assessment (Section 4) and the development of the Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment (BERA). 2.3.1 Sources and Release Mechanisms Primary release mechanisms refer to how COPCs might be transported from the original sources; secondary sources are environmental media that receive direct or indirect chemical inputs from the primary source via chemical flow and transport mechanisms. Flow and transport mechanisms include infiltration into soils leaching in groundwater. Secondary sources include exposed soil (after events such as closure by removal of ash basins). Secondary release mechanisms include migration of COPCs from soil or groundwater to surface water and sediment. For the purpose of this risk assessment, the potential and known source of COPCs (principally metals) is associated with the coal ash basins. 2.3.2 Exposure Pathways by Receiving Media As shown on Figure 2, COPCs potentially could migrate from the coal ash basins to soil (beneath the coal ash basins), groundwater, surface water, sediment, and air. Principal migration pathways could include: 1) the infiltration and percolation of rainwater through the coal ash basins, resulting in leaching of COPCs into soil beneath the basins and subsequently to groundwater; 2) migration of COPCs in groundwater and subsequent discharge of groundwater to surface water; and 3) run-off of surface water and/or erosion into surface water bodies. Eroded particles in surface water can settle and be incorporated into sediment, and COPCs in groundwater discharge can adsorb to sediment particles. COPCs in soil and surface water also can be taken up by biota. Finally, COPCs in unsaturated media can be entrained as dusts in outdoor air. Receiving media include: • Outdoor air • Groundwater • On -Site seep water and seep soil (AOW) Page 2-7 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra • On -Site surface water, sediment, and biotic tissue • On -Site soil beneath the coal ash basins (post -excavation soils) • On -Site surface water, sediment, and biotic tissue • Off -Site surface water, sediment, and biotic tissue Groundwater and air are not traditionally evaluated in ecological risk assessments, as the exposure pathway is either incomplete (groundwater) or insignificant (air). Although consumption (drinking) of surface water is evaluated in the BERA, exposure via this pathway does not typically contribute substantially to exposure and subsequent effects from COPCs for ecological receptors. Risks associated with sediment exposure were estimated from CCR constituent concentrations in bulk samples. 2.3.3 Ecological Receptors Ecological receptors are represented by "indicator" or "surrogate" organisms that represent other animals within their generic class, order, or family. The receptor groups evaluated in the BERA were selected on the basis that they commonly occur on and nearby Duke Energy sites, and they represent most species with the potential for exposure to CCR constituents that may have migrated from the ash basin. While some receptor groups are not specifically evaluated, such as plant communities and amphibians and reptiles, the conservative assumptions and procedures inherent in the risk assessment process are likely protective of those potential receptors. Ecological receptors selected for this BERA include: • Benthic macroinvertebrates • Fish • Birds • Mammals As presented on Figure 3, birds and mammals can be classified as either aquatic or terrestrial. Aquatic species would represent organisms that forage or nest in streams, rivers, or lakes; for Duke Energy facilities, that can include both on -Site and off -Site areas. Terrestrial organisms would represent organisms that forage or nest in upland areas, which, for the Duke Energy facilities, are generally on - Site areas. At Roxboro the ecological exposure areas subject to this risk assessment are associated with aquatic habitat within and adjacent to the water Page 2-8 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra WIB exposure area. Other exposure areas, such as AOWs potentially frequented by terrestrial receptors, are not part of this current assessment. As such, aquatic receptors (benthic invertebrates, fish, birds, and mammals) were considered to be those most relevant for potential exposure to CCR constituents. The indicator species listed on Figure 3 are used to represent the aquatic receptors at Roxboro. Home range/foraging area sizes were considered when evaluating potential exposures for these receptor species. 2.3.4 Exposure Routes Ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation are potential routes by which ecological receptors could be exposed at the Site. With the exception of benthic invertebrates and fish (with gill exposure), ingestion is considered to be the primary route contributing to food chain exposure (i.e., mammals and birds). While surface (drinking) water is addressed, this pathway is typically a minor contributor to risk, as many animals either obtain adequate hydration through ingestion of their prey or the volume of drinking water consumed is low compared to their overall body weight. Dermal exposure is not a significant pathway, as the presence of fur, feathers, or a thick integument prevents substantial exposure to soils (preening also results in the inadvertent ingestion of soils/sediment). 2.3.5 Exposure Pathways Although many types of birds and mammals might potentially be exposed to background and site -related COPCs, receptors selected as indicator receptors in this assessment are expected to be ubiquitous in terms of regional habitat. Ecological receptors, exposure media, and exposure routes are as follows: Benthic invertebrates: Surface water and sediment are the principal exposure pathways for benthic invertebrates, as these organisms are in intimate contact with these media. Fish: Surface water is a critical exposure pathway for fish, as their gill membrane is continuously exposed to this medium; metal toxicity to aquatic organisms is typically mediated at the surface water/gill interface. • Aquatic Birds: Mallard (omnivore) — Plants and benthic invertebrates are the primary exposure media via ingestion for dabbling ducks; sediment is inadvertently ingested when feeding on invertebrates at the bottom of the water body. Page 2-9 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Great blue heron and bald eagle (piscivore) — Ingestion of fish is the primary component of the diet, and therefore the primary route of exposure. Killdeer (invertivore) — Ingestion of small invertebrates such as midges, mayflies, flies (particularly their larvae), snails, crayfish, earthworms, and some terrestrial insects, grasshoppers, beetles, worms, snails, and small crustaceans is the primary food source. Diet may also consists of small seeds. Sediment is inadvertently ingested during feeding. • Aquatic Mammals: Muskrat (herbivore) — Ingestion of wetland plants is the primary component of the diet, and sediment is inadvertently ingested during feeding. River otter (piscivore) — Ingestion of fish is the primary component of the diet (no incidental ingestion of sediment), and therefore the primary route of exposure. As previously stated, select terrestrial birds and mammals identified on Figure 3 are not assessed for the exposure areas evaluated at this Site. Reptiles and amphibians likely inhabit the exposure areas evaluated in the risk assessment. However, there is limited toxicity and exposure information for food web modeling, which presents and uncertainty in the risk assessment. 2.3.5.1 Surface Water, Sediment, and Biotic Tissue Surface water and sediment are the principal exposure pathways for benthic invertebrates, as these organisms are in intimate contact with these media. Surface water is a critical exposure pathway for fish, as their gill membrane is continuously exposed to this medium; metal toxicity to aquatic organisms is typically mediated at the surface water/gill interface. Benthic invertebrates and plants can uptake metals from surface water and potentially accumulate them in tissue (i.e., bioconcentration). Some fish feed on invertebrates or plants and can, in turn, be exposed to the metals via ingestion that have been taken up by lower trophic level organisms. For fish, direct uptake from surface water is the predominant exposure pathway for metals. Piscivorous birds (e.g., herons) and mammals (e.g., river otter) consume fish as the main component of their diet. Omnivorous birds such as mallards also consume aquatic plants and benthic invertebrates. Exposure to site -related COPCs will therefore be indirect, i.e., accumulated Page 2-10 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra from surface water and sediment into fish, benthic invertebrates, or aquatic plants, which are then subsequently consumed. The inadvertent ingestion of sediment is also an important exposure pathway for some avian and mammalian receptors. Birds that feed off the bottom of a water body (e.g., dabbling ducks) and birds that glean insects or worms in the sediment or soil (e.g., stilts, killdeer, robins) can inadvertently ingest significant amounts of sediment, up to 30 percent of the weight of their diet. Similarly, mammals can inadvertently ingest soil or sediment when ingesting their prey. Surface water, sediment, and biotic tissue exposure evaluated in this risk assessment is associated with the WIB exposure area. As stated, Hyco Reservoir is not affected by groundwater flow from the ash basin. 2.3.5.2 Seeps and Seep Soils On -site receptors, such as mammals and birds, have the potential to be exposed to seeps and seep soil adjacent to the ash basin. Seeps may be evaluated separately from the surface water bodies as the potential for exposure may be limited due to the discrete size of each seep and isolated location(s). Potential exposure may occur to seeps soil via incidental ingestion of the soil or dietary ingestion of plants or invertebrates that have been exposed to metals from seep soil. Because AOWs are currently being addressed in NPDES permits or the SOC, they are not subject to this risk assessment. 2.3.5.3 Post -Excavation Soil Post -excavation soil is a medium for evaluation after basin closure is performed. It is included here as a receiving medium with a complete exposure pathway for evaluation in the future. 2.3.6 Ecological Exposure Areas The ecological risk assessment evaluated areas on -Site and off -site where wildlife would likely be exposed to CCR constituents that may have migrated from the ash basins through groundwater or surface water features. The 2016 BERA evaluated four ecological exposure areas (Figure 4): • Ecological Exposure Area 1, located within the 1966 East Ash Basin area • Ecological Exposure Area 2, located in the Gypsum pad area • Ecological Exposure Area 3, located Hyco Reservoir Page 2-11 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra • Ecological Exposure Area 4, located in the East Ash Basin Extension Impoundment • Ecological Exposure Area 5, located in the West Ash Basin Extension Impoundment Potentially affected areas on -Site were classified as aquatic and evaluated for exposure to COPCs. The aquatic habitat of Hyco Reservoir was included in the on -Site and off -Site exposure areas evaluated as part of the 2016 assessment. 2.4 Revised Conceptual Site Models and Exposure Areas New information regarding groundwater flow and the treatment of source areas other than the ash basins has resulted in refinement of exposure pathways and exposure areas. The CSMs (Figure 2 and Figure 3) reflect potentially complete exposure pathways with potential risks. Human health risks were evaluated throughout the Site and in adjacent areas as depicted in Figure 4. Ecological exposure areas evaluated in the BERA are depicted in Figure 5. Changes to the CSMs include: • Exposure to CCR constituents by Site workers is considered incomplete. Duke Energy maintains strict health and safety requirements and training, and the use of personal protective equipment (e.g., boots, gloves, safety glasses) and other safety behaviors exhibited by Site workers limits exposure to CCR constituents. • The number of human exposure areas reduced from two to one (Figure 4), and the number of ecological exposure areas reduced from five to two (Figure 5). Other exposure areas evaluated in the 2016 risk assessment were eliminated because either they are not influenced by groundwater migration from the ash basins (Hyco Reservoir) based on site monitoring data and flow and transport modeling evaluations or because they have been recognized as part of the ash basins (West Ash Basin Extension Impoundment and East Ash Basin Extension Impoundment). These areas are not included because they are considered part of the permitted wastewater treatment facilities. Off -site exposures at Hyco Reservoir have been excluded from this risk assessment. Surface water from the ash basins flows through NPDES-permitted outfalls before reaching Hyco Reservoir. Updated modeling shows no direct groundwater effects to Hyco Reservoir. Exclusion of AOWs from the current risk assessment also renders exposure of coal ash constituents to the commercial/industrial worker incomplete. Page 2-12 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 3.0 DATA EVALUATION Data evaluated for the risk assessment included samples of groundwater, surface water, and sediments collected from March 2015 to June 2019. Environmental samples were analyzed and reported under the quality assurance/quality control program of the Duke Energy Analytical Laboratory (Huntersville , NC). Data underwent Stage II data validation in general accordance with USEPA Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganics Analyses (USEPA, 1994, as updated). Data identified as usable during the validation process were included in the risk assessment dataset. 3.1 Data Sources Appendix C of the Roxboro CAP Update Report contains a comprehensive data summary for the Site. Attachment 1 of this report provides a summary of sample locations with associated data that were evaluated in this assessment. Sample locations are presented on Figure 4. 3.1.1 On -Site Groundwater Groundwater samples were collected from 134 monitoring wells located downgradient of the ash basins. 3.1.2 Surface Water Twelve surface water samples were collected in the WIB exposure area and are included in this assessment. 3.1.3 Sediment Twenty sediment samples were collected in the WIB exposure area and are included in this assessment. 3.2 Background Data Used in Risk Assessment Sampling locations considered background were not included in the risk assessment EPC calculations, but will be considered as part of the comparative results evaluation. Site -specific background locations were selected for groundwater, soil, surface water, and sediment as described in the Section 4 of the CAP Update Report (SynTerra, 2019). Background threshold values (BTVs) were not calculated for surface water and sediment; however, background locations for surface water and sediment were approved as part of the evaluation of potential groundwater -to -surface water impacts (Appendix J of the CAP Update). Background surface water sample locations are located upstream from, or outside of, potential groundwater effects from the source area to surface water. Page 3-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 3.3 Data Summarization Laboratory data were analyzed and summarized using data management software. From these data, screening tables were developed for the purposes of comparing detected concentrations of constituents in Site media with human health and ESVs to identify COPCs. These data were then analyzed using ProUCL (V. 5.0.00; USEPA, 2013a) to calculate EPCs of each COPC at the Site. Page 3-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 4.0 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL SCREENING Laboratory results from sample analyses were compiled and summarized for comparison with USEPA and NCDEQ human health and ESVs. Summarized data included the number of samples, frequency of detection, minimum and maximum concentrations, location of maximum value for each constituent, range of detection limits, concentration used for screening (i.e., maximum result), established screening values, screening value used, COPC identification, and COPC selection rationale. 4.1 Purpose and Methods Groundwater, surface water, and sediment data were evaluated using screening levels to select COPCs. Screening levels are concentrations of constituents in environmental media (e.g., soil) considered to be protective under most circumstances; their use requires a detailed understanding of the underlying assumptions in the CSM, including land use and the presence of sensitive populations. The presence of a constituent in environmental media at concentrations less than the media and constituent -specific screening level is generally assumed to not pose a significant threat to human health or the environment. If a constituent concentration is greater than the screening level, it does not necessarily indicate adverse effects on human health or the environment; it indicates only that additional evaluation might be warranted. Screening levels are used in this report to help identify COPCs, with the COPCs then being carried forward into the evaluation of risk at the Site. 4.2 Human Health Screening Levels Attachment 2 presents constituent screening levels protective of human health used in this evaluation, and the medium -specific screening levels are discussed below. For each medium, screening is conducted by comparing maximum detected concentrations of COPCs to one or more screening values that are applicable to the potentially complete exposure pathways for the medium. This method of evaluation follows USEPA's Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Part B (USEPA, 1991a). COPCs detected at concentrations greater than screening levels are retained for further evaluation in the human health risk assessment (Section 5). Screening levels utilized in the screening assessment are indicated in the tables provided in Attachment 2. At the time of the screening, the levels were considered the most recent published values. Screening levels are routinely updated. Page 4-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 4.2.1 Groundwater The maximum detected concentration of constituents in groundwater were compared with published screening levels listed below. Human health screening levels for groundwater are generally derived to be protective of the use of groundwater as a drinking water source. The human health screening levels for groundwater used in this analysis are from federal and state sources and address the drinking water exposure pathway. These sources, in the order in which they are used, are: • North Carolina 15A North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02L.0202 Groundwater Standards (02L) and Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations (IMACs) (NCDENR, 2013a) • North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (NCDHHS) Screening Levels for Water Supply Well Sampling Near Coal Ash Facilities (NCDHHS, 2015) • USEPA 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories, Spring 2012 (USEPA, 2012) • USEPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs), May 2019, values for tap water (USEPA, 2019) The screening levels obtained from these sources include: • USEPA's primary drinking water standards or maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) • USEPA's secondary drinking water standards or secondary maximum contaminant levels (SMCLs) • USEPA's tap water (drinking water) RSLs 4.2.2 Surface Water The maximum detected concentration of constituents detected in surface water were compared with the screening levels identified below. Human health screening levels for surface water are generally derived to be protective of the use of surface water as a drinking water source and the consumption of fish from a surface water body. The drinking water screening levels are also protective of recreational uses of a surface water body (such as swimming or boating) because drinking water exposure is of a higher magnitude and frequency. Federal and state human health screening levels for surface water are incorporated in this Page 4-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra analysis and address the drinking water exposure pathway and the fish consumption pathway (State of NC values). For surface water bodies that are a source of public drinking water, these screening level sources are used in the following order: • North Carolina 15A NCAC 02L.0202 Groundwater Standards and Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations (IMACs)s (NCDENR, 2013a) • North Carolina 15A NCAC 2B Human Health Surface Water Standards; Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina - values for WS - Water Supply and HH - Human Health Standards (NCDENR, 2013b) • USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for Human Health Consumption of Water and Organism and Consumption of Organism Only (USEPA, 2015a) • USEPA 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories, Spring 2018 (USEPA, 2018a) • USEPA RSLs, May 2019, values for tap water (USEPA, 2019) 4.2.3 Sediment For sediment, screening levels for soil are used as a surrogate in the absence of available published sediment screening levels. The maximum concentration of constituents detected in sediment is compared with the following screening levels, in the order in which they are used: North Carolina Preliminary Residential and Industrial Health Based Soil Remediation Goal (PSRG) (NCDEQ, 2019) • USEPA RSLs for residential and industrial soil (USEPA, 2018a) The NC PSRGs are risk -based screening levels that are based on the USEPA RSLs for residential and industrial soil (USEPA, 2019). The RSLs are protective for incidental ingestion, dermal contact, and dust inhalation exposure pathways. The residential RSLs are based on an exposure frequency of 350 days and exposure duration of 26 years, and the industrial soil RSLs are based on an exposure frequency of 250 days per year and exposure duration of 25 years for an adult worker. The RSLs are based on a target excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) of 1x10-6 and a non -cancer hazard quotient (HQ) of 1. The PSRGs were developed by NCDEQ by adjusting the non -cancer -based RSLs to a target hazard Page 4-3 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra index (HI, which is being used interchangeably with the term HQ) of 0.2 to account for multiple COPCs potentially acting on the same target organ (NCDEQ, 2015). To be consistent, the RSLs in Attachment 2 have also been adjusted to a target HI of 0.2 for non -carcinogens. The residential screening levels are used to evaluate non -worker exposures to soil (trespasser exposures), and the industrial screening levels are used to evaluate worker exposure to soil. These screening levels would also apply to post -excavation soils. 4.3 Ecological Screening Levels Surface water and sediment data were compared with ESVs (Attachment 3) that are designed to provide a conservative estimate of the concentration to which an ecological receptor can be exposed without experiencing adverse health effects. Due to the conservative methods used to derive screening levels, it can be assumed with reasonable certainty that concentrations less than screening levels will not result in any adverse effects to receptor survival, growth, and/or reproduction, and, therefore, no further evaluation is necessary. Concentrations greater than conservative risk -based screening levels, however, do not necessarily indicate that a potential ecological risk exists, but rather that further evaluation may be warranted. Attachment 3 presents the ecological screening levels that are used for the initial evaluation of COPCs, and the hierarchy for the media -specific screening levels is discussed below. For each medium, the initial screening is conducted by comparing maximum detected concentrations of COPCs with one or more screening values that are applicable to the potentially complete exposure pathways for the medium. This method of evaluation follows USEPA guidance for conducting screening level ecological risk assessments (USEPA, 2015c). Metals with concentrations that are greater than screening levels are retained as COPCs for further evaluation in the BERA (Section 6). 4.3.1 Surface Water Surface water quality criteria are calculated from controlled laboratory tests on freshwater or marine organisms that are protective of the most sensitive organism (often zooplankton, such as daphnids) for the most sensitive life stage (typically reproduction). The following criteria are used to evaluate the levels of metals in off -Site surface water, in the order in which they are to be used: • North Carolina 15A NCAC 2B Surface Water Standards; Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina; Freshwater Aquatic Life Chronic (NCDENR, 2013b) Page 4-4 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra • USEPA Region 4 Freshwater Chronic Screening Values (USEPA, 2015c) • USEPA AWQC Freshwater Chronic (USEPA, 2015b) 4.3.2 Sediment Sediment screening values, often called sediment quality values, are frequently based on a number of databases or consensus -based studies that determine a concentration less than which there is a low probability for adverse effects on benthic macroinvertebrates. Many of these values were developed from environmental samples that were "mixtures" of metals so that the actual response due to a single element or metal may be conservatively biased by a co - contaminant. USEPA Region 4 Ecological Screening Values for Sediment (USEPA, 2018b) are used to evaluate levels of metals in both on -site and off -site sediments. These ESVs generally represent the lowest value that will be protective of the most sensitive species and/or life stage for sediment -dwelling organisms. 4.4 Results of Screening for Constituents of Potential Concern The result of this screening is a list of COPCs to be further evaluated quantitatively in the risk assessment. The risk assessment results are used to evaluate the potential risk to humans and ecological receptors posed by constituent concentrations that are greater than regulatory risk targets. The medium at risk is identified. Screening levels for both human health and ecological receptors (Attachment 2 and Attachment 3) are employed, using the hierarchy for screening level selection for each medium as identified in the sections above to identify the appropriate screening level for each analyte. COPCs are identified as those constituents having a maximum detected concentration greater than the selected screening level. The following categories are used to determine if a constituent is considered a COPC: 1. The constituent is identified as a COPC because the maximum detected concentration is greater than the screening level. 2. The constituent is not identified as a COPC because all detected concentrations are less than the applicable screening level. 3. The constituent is not identified as a COPC because it was not detected at a concentration greater than the quantitation limit; and the quantitation limit is less than the screening level. Page 4-5 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 4. The constituent is not identified as a COPC because it was not detected at a concentration greater than the quantitation limit; however, the quantitation limit(s) is greater than the screening level. 5. The constituent was detected, but there is no current screening value available (for example, screening values are not available for essential nutrients such as calcium, potassium, magnesium, sodium) and the constituent is therefore not identified as a COPC. 6. The constituent is not identified as a COPC because it was not detected at a concentration greater than the quantitation limit and there is no current screening level available. Designation as Category 1 identifies a constituent as a COPC and advances it into further refinement and investigation in the human health and ecological risk assessments. Selection of Categories 2 through 6 result in a constituent not being included in the list of potential COPCs, and not advancing into the quantitative risk assessment. This screening process results in a list of COPCs that are then quantitatively evaluated in the risk assessments. While the CSM was developed to address potential source - migration pathway -receptor linkages for COPCs, it is important to note that the COPCs identified from the screening process are not necessarily coal -ash derived. Naturally occurring inorganic constituents can be present at concentrations greater than conservative risk -based screening levels. Background constituent levels will be considered in the discussion of the results of the risk assessment. 4.4.1 Human Health Screening Results Attachment 2 contains the human health screening tables. The following constituents were retained as COPCs for evaluation in the human health risk assessment. Medium/Location COPC Surface Water - On -Site Aluminum, barium, boron, chromium (VI), manganese, strontium, zinc Groundwater -On -Site Aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, boron, chromium (total), chromium (VI), cobalt, lithium, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, radium (total), selenium, strontium, thallium, vanadium, zinc Page 4-6 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 4.4.2 Ecological Screening Results Attachment 3 contains the ecological screening tables. The following constituents were retained as COPCs for evaluation in the baseline ecological risk assessment. Medium/Location Surface Water - Water intake basin Sediment - Water intake basin COPC Aluminum, barium, manganese, zinc Barium, copper, manganese, selenium Page 4-7 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 5.0 HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT 5.1 Risk -Based Concentrations The human health risk assessment was conducted by identifying receptor/exposure medium/exposure pathway combinations and, for each, developing a Site -specific RBC, using receptor -specific exposure factors and assumptions. The RBCs are essentially refined screening levels to account for the receptor population characteristics and exposure pathways applicable to each of the receiving media identified in the CSM. As such, human health RBCs are more realistic (less conservative) than screening levels and are better measures of potential risks. Methods for deriving RBCs, including exposure assumptions and toxicity values, are included in Attachment 4, which is excerpted from the 2015 risk assessment work plan (Haley & Aldrich, 2015). Exposure assumptions and toxicity values were confirmed as current for use in this risk assessment. As previously stated, the NCDEQ Technical Guidance for Risk -based Environmental Remediation of Sites contains a risk calculator for deriving human health risk -based remediation goals (NCDEQ, 2017). While this risk assessment follows similar procedures, North Carolina's Session Law 2015-286 does not allow the technical guidance and risk calculator to be used at CAMA sites. 5.2 Exposure Point Concentrations EPCs were calculated for each COPC in each medium (Attachment 5). USEPA defines the EPC as the representative chemical concentration a receptor might contact in an exposure area over the exposure period (USEPA, 1989). Separate EPCs are calculated for each exposure pathway for each scenario and each exposure area. The typical concept of human exposure within a defined exposure area is that an individual contacts the associated environmental medium on a periodic and random basis. Because of the repeated nature of such contact, the human exposure does not really occur at a fixed point but rather at a variety of points with equal likelihood that any given point within the exposure area will be the contact location on any given day. Thus, USEPA states that the EPCs should be the arithmetic averages of the chemical concentrations within the exposure area (USEPA, 2002). However, to account for uncertainty in estimating the arithmetic mean concentration that might occur due to matrix heterogeneity, spatial variability, and/or temporal variability, the USEPA recommends that an upper confidence limit (UCL) be used to represent the EPC (USEPA, 2002). The UCL values were calculated using the ProUCL software. The recommended UCL based on dataset distribution was relied upon for the development of EPCs (V. 5.0.00; USEPA, 2013a). In accordance with USEPA guidance, EPCs are based on the lesser of Page 5-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra the 95 percent UCL on the arithmetic mean concentration (95 percent UCL value) or the maximum detected concentration in the data set (USEPA, 2002). 5.3 Risk Calculation Approach RBCs were developed for each receptor/medium/exposure pathway/COPC combination. The RBCs were then used in a cumulative risk screening to calculate potential Site -specific risks by receptor. Both potentially carcinogenic and non -carcinogenic effects of COPCs are included in the RBC development. The RBCs based on non -cancer effects of COPCs were calculated based on a target hazard index, or HI of unity (HI =1), which corresponds to levels of exposure that people (including sensitive individuals such as children) could experience without expected adverse effects. The RBCs based on potentially carcinogenic effects were calculated based on a conservative target risk level of 1x10-4 (1 in 10,000 ELCR. This target risk level is within the target risk range of 1 in 1 million to 1 in 10,000 (USEPA, 1991b) and is consistent with the target risk level used for the derivation of the North Carolina fish tissue screening levels (NCDWR, 2014). Only one COPC, arsenic, is identified by USEPA as a carcinogen by the oral route of exposure. The USEPA has proposed that hexavalent chromium be classified as an oral carcinogen, but that review process is not yet completed. Nonetheless, USEPA does use an oral cancer toxicity value derived by the State of New Jersey in its risk -based screening level tables (USEPA, 2018b), and therefore, inhalation and oral/dermal cancer -based RBCs have been calculated for hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)). Rather than derive Site -specific RBCs for lead, the USEPA RSLs were used as RBCs. The residential soil RSL for lead of 400 mg/kg was used as the soil/sediment RBC for the on -Site child trespasser. The commercial/industrial soil RSL of 800 mg/kg was used as a surrogate for sediment in evaluation of the on -Site construction worker. The USEPA has also developed an action level of 15 µg/L for lead in drinking water (USEPA, 2012). For surface water and groundwater, the lead action level was used as the RBC for all receptor scenarios. Toxicity values used in the RBC calculations were selected from USEPA-approved sources following USEPA guidance regarding the hierarchy of sources of human health dose -response values in risk assessment (USEPA, 2003, as updated risk assessment (USEPA, 2013b), and as documented in the 2016 risk assessment workplan (Attachment 4). Page 5-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 5.4 Risk Calculations Using RBCs COPC EPCs were compared with their respective scenario -specific and media -specific RBCs for non -carcinogens (RBC nc) and carcinogens (RBC), as applicable (Attachment 6). The comparison is made through calculation of non -carcinogenic risk ratios (EPCnc/RBCnc) and carcinogenic risk ratios (EPC/RBCC). The total non - carcinogenic risk ratios for all COPCs that might produce non -carcinogenic health effects were then summed for each medium for each exposure scenario. Likewise, the total potentially carcinogenic risk ratios for all COPCs that produce carcinogenic health effects were then summed for each medium for each exposure scenario. A risk ratio equal to or less than 1 for a COPC indicates that the COPC EPC is not greater than the scenario -specific and medium -specific RBC. Conversely, a risk ratio greater than 1 for a COPC indicates that the COPC EPC is greater than the RBC for the scenario and medium being evaluated. The true utility of deriving risk ratios, however, is to evaluate the cumulative receptor risk associated with each exposure scenario. Cumulative receptor risk is calculated by summing the COPC risk ratios attributed to specific environmental media (media -specific risk ratio), and then the scenario -specific exposure area risk ratio are calculated by summing the media -specific risk ratios for all potential exposure media evaluated under a given scenario. These calculations are shown in the equations below. The calculation is performed separately for cancer and non -cancer based risk ratios. EPC1 EPC2 EPC3 Cancer Risk Ratio = (RBCciI + (RBCc2) + (RBCc3l Non -Cancer Risk Ratio = ( EPC1 ) + ( EPC2 ) + ( EPC3 RBCnc1 RBCnc2 RBCnc3 Parameter Definition (units) EPC Exposure Point Concentration RBCc Risk- Based Concentration based on carcinogenic effects RBCnc Risk- Based Concentration based on noncarcinogenic effects To calculate the potential risk associated with each summed ratio, the ratio is multiplied by the target risk used in the development of the RBCs. For non -carcinogenic health effects, the target HI used in the RBC calculations is 1. For potentially carcinogenic health effects, this is an ELCR target risk level used in the RBC calculations of 1x10-4. The ELCR is the probability of contracting cancer over and above the background cancer rate. The American Cancer Society estimates that the lifetime probability of Page 5-3 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra contracting cancer in the U.S. is 1 in 2 (5 x 10-1) for men and 1 in 3 (3 x 10-1) for women (American Cancer Society, 2019). Therefore, an ELCR of 1 x 10-4 among a hypothetical population of 10,000 generic men would result in one more case of cancer than the background probability total. In accordance with USEPA risk assessment guidance, the cumulative cancer risk (i.e., carcinogen additivity), is evaluated against the USEPA target ELCR of 1x10-6 to 1x10-4 for potentially carcinogenic constituents. Likewise, the cumulative non -cancer risk (i.e., non -carcinogen additivity), is evaluated against the USEPA target HI of 1 for non - carcinogenic constituents (that act on the same target organ by the same mechanism of action), as defined in USEPA guidance (USEPA, 1991b). Further evaluation is warranted for exposure areas where the cumulative HI is greater than 1 to evaluate whether the cumulative HI is comprised of chemical constituents that act on a common (single) target organ or on separate (multiple) target organs. Comparison of EPCs to scenario -specific and media -specific RBCs calculated for the hypothetical exposure scenarios and the resulting risk estimates are presented in Tables 6-1 through 6-4 of Attachment 6. 5.5 Human Health Risk Assessment Results There is no exposure to residential or other off -site receptors at Roxboro because groundwater migrating from the ash basins is not reaching off -Site receptors. Potential receptors on -Site include construction workers and trespassers. 5.5.1 On -Site Construction Worker Exposure Scenario Attachment 6, Table 6-3 presents the results of the risk calculations for groundwater exposure to the Construction Worker. The updated risk assessment found no evidence of non -carcinogenic or carcinogenic risks associated with exposure to groundwater by Site workers. 5.5.2 On -Site Trespasser Exposure Scenario Attachment 6, Tables 6-1 and 6-2 present the results of the risk calculations for surface water and sediment to a trespasser. Trespasser exposure was evaluated based on surface water and sediment samples collected from the shallow on -Site portions of the WIB. The updated risk assessment found no evidence of carcinogenic or non -carcinogenic risks for the trespasser. In summary, there is no evidence of risks to on -Site or off -Site human receptors potentially exposed to CCR constituents that have migrated from the ash basin. Page 5-4 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 5.6 Findings of Drinking Water Supply Well Surveys No sampled water supply wells were determined to be affected by CCR constituents in groundwater. Analytical results for supply wells associated with the Site are included in Appendix C, Table 5-1 of the CAP Update. No public or private drinking water wells or wellhead protection areas were found to be located downgradient of the ash basins; however, three public water supply and multiple private water supply wells have been identified within or in close proximity to the 0.5-mile off -set. This finding was supported by field observations and a review of public records. Based on the known groundwater flow direction, none of the wells identified in the water well survey are located downgradient of the ash basins. The location and relevant information pertaining to suspected water supply wells located upgradient of the facility, within 0.5 mile of the EAB and WAB compliance boundaries, were included in the survey reports noted below. To identify potential receptors for groundwater, surveys were conducted on public and private water supply wells (including irrigation wells and unused or abandoned wells) and surface water features within a 0.5-mile radius of the EAB and WAB compliance boundaries. The results of those surveys have been reported to NCDEQ: • Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2014a) • Supplement to Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2014b) • Update to Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey — Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (SynTerra, 2016d). Two public supply wells are located within a 0.5-mile radius of the EAB and WAB compliance boundaries. A building materials manufacturing facility has a public supply well approximately 2,500 feet northeast of the EAB beyond the Intake Canal Woodland Elementary School, owned by the Person County School District, has two wells approximately 2,000 feet southwest of the WAB discharge canal and upgradient of the WAB compliance boundary. The Woodland Elementary School wells were sampled. A total of 102 private water supply wells were identified within a 0.5-mile radius of the EAB and WAB compliance boundaries as part of the CAMA-required well survey. Most of the wells are associated with residences located to the east and upgradient of the Site. Page 5-5 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 5.7 Provision of Alternative Water Supply All of the private water supply wells are located upgradient of the ash basins' Provision of Alternative Water Supply. Therefore, there is no evidence of current residential exposure of CCR constituents via groundwater. Duke Energy identified a total of 87 eligible connections for a water treatment system within the 0.5-mile radius of the ash basin compliance boundaries. Property eligibility was contingent that the property did not include: • A business • A church • A school • Connection to the public water supplier • An empty lot Of the 87 eligible connections, three opted out of the option to connect to a water treatment system and three did not respond to the offer. One household will receive a water filtration system in the future due to an inoperable well pump. Duke Energy installed 80 water filtration systems at surrounding occupied residences. On August 30, 2018, Duke Energy provided completion documentation to NCDEQ to fulfill the requirements of House Bill 630. NCDEQ provided correspondence, dated October 12, 2018, to confirm that Duke Energy satisfactorily completed the alternate water provisions under G.S. 130A-309.211(cl) at Roxboro. Both documents are provided in Appendix D of the CAP Update. 5.7.1 Future Groundwater Use Area Under G.S. 130A-309.211(cl) (added by House Bill 630), Duke Energy provided permanent alternative water supply to all eligible households within a 0.5-mile radius of the ash basin compliance boundaries. It is anticipated that residences within a 0.5-mile of ash basin compliance boundaries will continue to rely on groundwater resources for water supply for the foreseeable future, with periodic maintenance of the water treatment systems provided by Duke Energy. Therefore, there is no evidence that future residential exposure to CCR constituents in groundwater will occur. 5.8 Uncertainty Analysis The risk assessment process involves assumptions that must be made due to a lack of absolute scientific knowledge. Some of the assumptions are supported by considerable scientific evidence, while others have less support. Every assumption introduces some Page 5-6 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra degree of uncertainty into the risk assessment process. Regulatory risk assessment methodology requires that in the absence of site -specific information, conservative assumptions be made throughout the risk assessment to aid in the protection of public health. Therefore, when all of the assumptions are combined, it is much more likely that risks are overestimated rather than underestimated. For some media, very few samples are available for use in the risk assessment. These results may be representative of site conditions, or may over- or under -estimate site concentrations. All COPCs have been included in the risk assessment without consideration of whether the concentrations are consistent with Site -specific background. CCR constituents not detected or constituents for which no screening level exists were not carried forward in the risk assessment as COPCs, which may underestimate risk. In accordance with Region 4 guidance, contact with submerged sediment is not likely to occur and does not require quantitative risk characterization. The evaluation of sediment data in this risk assessment using RBCs that are based on incidental ingestion and dermal contact exposures represents a conservative approach, which is protective for an assumption that sediment becomes exposed (i.e., not covered with surface water) at some point in the future. Radium was identified as a human health COPC in groundwater, but no RBC was derived. The radium EPC was 2.216 pCi/L, compared to the Site background range of non -detect to 20 pCi/L and the radium MCL of 5 pCi/L. Therefore, potential risk associated with exposure to radium in groundwater is considered negligible. Page 5-7 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 6.0 BASELINE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT The role of this BERA is to 1) evaluate whether unacceptable risks are posed to ecological receptors from chemical stressors and 2) provide the information necessary to make a risk management decision concerning the practical need and extent of remedial action. The BERA was developed consistent with the traditional ecological risk assessment paradigm: Problem Formulation, Exposure and Effects Characterization, and Risk Characterization. Because of the many permutations of conservative parameters, an Uncertainty Evaluation section is also included. The BERA generally adheres to the "Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (ERAGS): Process for Designing and Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments" (USEPA, 1997) as well the "Supplemental Guidance to ERAGS: Region 4, Ecological Risk Assessment" (USEPA, 2015d), and North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources "Guidelines for Performing Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessments" (NCDENR, 2003). Exposure point concentrations for potential ecological receptors were calculated for COPCs and provided in Attachment 7. Results are presented in Attachment 8. 6.1 Problem Formulation The Problem Formulation step defines the objectives and scope of the BERA. This step identifies, evaluates, and/or quantifies the following: Identifying/Prioritizing COPCs: COPCs are chosen based on the type of source(s), concentration, background levels, frequency of detection, persistence, bioaccumulation potential, toxicity/potency, fate and transport (e.g., mobility to groundwater), and potential biological effects. A discussion of the first step of this process, which is screening conducted to identify COPCs, can be found in Section 4. Initial screening consists of comparing the maximum concentration of each constituent in the applicable media with conservative environmental screening levels. Section 4 discusses selection of COPCs (post -screening). Identification of Receptors: Individual organisms, populations, or communities that might be exposed to site -related constituents in environmental media are identified based on site location, setting, and available habitat at the site. Receptors are presented in Figure 3 (Ecological CSM). Selection of Endpoints: Assessment and measurement endpoints are used to evaluate the ecological health of a site. Assessment endpoints describe the Page 6-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra characteristics of an ecosystem that have an intrinsic environmental value that is to be protected (i.e., protection of warm -water fish community; no potential risk to endangered species). Typically, assessment endpoints and receptors are selected for their potential exposure, ecological significance, economic importance, and/or societal relevance. Because assessment endpoints often cannot be measured directly, a set of surrogate endpoints (measures of effect, or measurement endpoints) are generally selected for ecological risk assessment that relate to the assessment endpoints and have measurable attributes (e.g., comparison of media concentrations to screening benchmarks, results of food web models) (USEPA,1997; USEPA, 1998). These measures of effect provide a quantitative metric for evaluating potential effects of constituents on the ecosystem components potentially at risk. These endpoints are discussed in Section 6.1.2. The problem formulation culminates in a refined CSM, which identifies the primary and secondary source(s), receptors, and exposure pathways that are applicable to the Site. The ecological CSM described in Section 2 was refined based on the Site -specific information analyzed in the problem formulation. The CSM is an integral component in the specification of the objectives and scope of the BERA, and is amenable to adjustment as more information is gathered over time. 6.1.1 Refinement of Constituents of Potential Concern Per Step 3 of the Region 4 ecological risk assessment guidance, COPCs that have been retained using the risk -based screening described in Section 4 were evaluated using a multiple lines -of -evidence approach in the BERA. These lines - of -evidence include: Comparison to Background Concentrations: if sufficient data are available, site -related concentrations are compared to background (i.e., upstream or reference) concentrations. Nutrients: Constituents that are required minerals, electrolytes, or cofactors in the diet include: calcium, chloride, chromium, cobalt, copper, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, potassium, selenium, sodium, and zinc. Some of these may be readily eliminated from the COPC list, particularly for those that are relatively inert (e.g., calcium, potassium) or if the levels in applicable media are comparable to levels United States Geological Survey (USGS) report as naturally occur in the environment for a particular county or region (USGS, 1984; USGS, 2001). However, some of these constituents can be coal ash -related; therefore, for the purposes of Page 6-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra this screening, only calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium will be identified as essential nutrients and will not be included for quantitative evaluation in the BERA. Frequency, Magnitude, and Pattern of Detection: In general, COPCs with less than a 5 percent frequency of detection can be removed from consideration. Professional judgment may be exercised on metals that might have a higher frequency of detection but relatively low concentrations (e.g., compared with naturally occurring levels). Spatial patterns are also important to evaluate. Mode of Toxicity and/or Potential for Trophic Transfer: Some constituents will not be transported into the food web; therefore, consideration of persistence and/or toxicity may be an important line -of - evidence that should be discussed in COPC refinement. For example, boron might be taken up in plankton but it might not present a risk to upper level organisms; chromium may not be a concern in wetland sediments (reduced to insoluble trivalent chromium (Cr (III)); mercury and selenium may not be a concern in dry soils as there is low potential to be methylated to a more bioavailable and toxic organic form. Exposure Considerations: bioavailability and chemical form play integral parts in the actual exposure of ecological receptors to metals, particularly for solid phase metals that are not as easily absorbed as dissolved phase metals and/or organic compounds and for constituents such as arsenic, which are typically found in less toxic organic forms in the food chain. Yet most risk assessments conservatively assume that the bioavailability of substances in environmental media (e.g., sediment, food sources) is the same as the form used to establish dose -response information in toxicological testing. Often, the form used in toxicological testing has much greater relative bioavailability than forms naturally found in environmental media. For conservatism in this risk assessment, bioavailability of COPCs is considered 100 percent (i.e., metal uptake from soils to plants, soil to invertebrates, water to fish). Additionally, some animal species might have fairly large home ranges/foraging areas, thus decreasing their overall exposure in the environs of a discreet site. Seasonal migrations might also reduce site exposure time and is addressed by the use of a seasonal use factor (SUF) in the risk calculations, as described below. Wildlife exposure parameters used in this BERA are Page 6-3 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra listed in Attachment 8. Select wildlife exposure parameters were updated from the 2015 work plan and are considered appropriate for the Site. 6.1.2 Assessment and Measurement Endpoints According to USEPA guidance, assessment endpoints are explicit expressions of the actual environmental values (i.e., ecological resources) that are to be protected (USEPA, 1997). Assessment endpoints can be either measured directly or evaluated through indirect measures. Measurement endpoints represent quantifiable ecological characteristics that can be measured, interpreted, and related to the valued ecological component(s) chosen as the assessment endpoints. Assessment endpoints, and associated measurement endpoints, provide information to aid evaluation of the risk framework generated in the CSM. The following assessment and measurement endpoints were used to interpret data concerning ecological risks within the Site and areas that may be affected by the site: An assessment endpoint is defined as any adverse effect on bird and mammal populations resulting from exposures to constituents in applicable media and/or prey that could result in impairment of the growth, reproduction, or survival of the ecological community (USEPA, 1997). Prevention of these types of adverse effects allows the continued growth, reproduction, and survival of the ecological community. • A measurement endpoint is defined as a comparison of the estimated concentrations, or receptor average daily doses (ADD) of constituents (from environmental media), to conservative values known to be "safe" when administered to birds and mammals (USEPA, 1997). Measurement endpoints are as follows: o For fish and invertebrates that dwell in the water column, water quality criteria will be used to represent "safe" conservative benchmarks in surface water (Attachment 3). Surface water EPCs are compared directly with water quality criteria; EPCs that are less than these benchmarks represent levels that are not associated with ecological risks of concern. Concentrations greater than these levels indicate that additional evaluation is needed. o For benthic invertebrates, sediment EPCs will be compared with USEPA Region 4 Sediment Screening Values (Attachment 3). Page 6-4 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra o For mammals and birds, the ADD is calculated for each COPC, for each bird and mammal receptor of interest, and then compared to a TRV. The ADD represents the "dose" received by a receptor, in milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day. This dose was compared to an estimated "safe" dose, the TRV. The TRV is typically derived from a laboratory toxicity study on a bird or mammal that utilizes a soluble (and therefore more bioavailable) form of the metal. Since these forms do not typically exist under environmental conditions, TRVs are conservative and tend to overestimate risk. 6.1.3 Selection of Ecological Receptors of Interest A wildlife species that would be expected to be intimately associated with habitat is considered a receptor of interest (ROI). ROIs are identified for multiple trophic level within the ecosystem. The choice of ROIs is often dependent on the types of "indicator" or "surrogate" species (i.e., wildlife that is ubiquitous and anticipated to inhabit the site) that will also have extensively documented life histories and a documented set of allometric parameters allowing empirical modeling (USEPA, 1993). As such, a specific ROI may be used to represent one or more receptors of the same trophic level that are potentially present at a site. The selection of the ROIs is presented in Attachment 8. This table presents, for each individual ROI, each animal's body weight, normalized food and water ingestion rate (kg/kg body weight/day), composition of the diet, home range, area use factors (site area/home range), and seasonal use factors (months spent on site/12 months). The rationale for the selection of the ROIs is as follows: Benthic Invertebrates: Benthic invertebrates serve as prey for higher trophic level species (e.g., fish and aquatic birds discussed below). They are ubiquitous in aquatic waterbodies; therefore, the standard used to protect them includes established Surface Water Quality Criteria and Sediment Screening Levels discussed above (Section 4). • Fish: Like invertebrates, fish are also ubiquitous in most open water environs with suitable environmental conditions, and the benchmark used for their protection of long-term exposure to chemical constituents would also be ambient Surface Water Quality Criteria. Aquatic mammals: The muskrat (herbivore) and the river otter (piscivore) were selected as the ROIs, as they are common species and ubiquitous in the southeast. Page 6-5 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra • Aquatic birds: The mallard duck (omnivore), killdeer (invertivore), and great blue heron (piscivore) were chosen as ROIs inhabiting aquatic habitats. These species would be exposed to COPCs though consumption of prey items and ingestion of water and sediment. The mallard duck primarily consumes aquatic plants and invertebrates, and the killdeer primarily consumes invertebrates. The great blue heron was chosen as a higher trophic level species that primarily consumes fish. 6.2 Exposure and Effects Characterization The analysis phase of the ecological risk assessment consists of the technical evaluation of data addressing existing and potential exposures to COPCs and ecological effects thereof. The analysis is primarily based on empirical data collected in the field, but the analysis also includes additional assumptions to assist in the interpretation of the data. The analysis of exposure and effects is performed interactively, with the analysis of one informing the analysis of the other. The estimation of EPCs was conducted in accordance with USEPA ecological risk assessment guidance (USEPA, 1997; USEPA, 1998). For initial screening (Section 4), the maximum concentration within each exposure medium was used as the EPC; and for the refined analysis (as described below), the 95 percent UCL of the mean concentration, or the maximum concentration in the case of insufficient sample size, was used as the EPC. BERA calculations are presented in Attachment 8. 6.2.1 Estimation of Exposure Exposures of ROIs at the Site were calculated using site- and species -specific exposure models for two separate pathways: 1) indirect exposure to COPCs in food (consumption of forage, soil invertebrates, or prey), and 2) incidental ingestion of COPCs in surface water and sediments. Although ingestion of surface water by mammals and birds does occur, the pathway is negligible compared to other pathways and is generally not included quantitatively in a BERA; however, to be conservative, this pathway is included here. In the case of mammals and birds, the dose of COPCs is known to be negligible for the dermal and inhalation pathways and is, therefore, not quantitatively evaluated (USEPA, 2003b). The total ADD of COPCs for mammals and birds, therefore, is entirely based on consumption of food containing COPCs and, either directly or indirectly, soil and/or sediment. The dose received from consumption of prey is derived by calculating the COPC uptake into prey from surface water, sediment, and/or soil. Parameters used to describe ingestion rates, body weights, dietary composition, Page 6-6 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra and home ranges of mammalian and avian ROIs are used to calculate ADD values and are provided in Attachment 8. These allometric parameters were developed by USEPA and were obtained from the "Wildlife Exposure Factors Handbook" (USEPA, 1993). The ADD for each ROI is the sum of the ingestion of plant matter, the ingestion of animal matter, the ingestion of water, and the ingestion of sediment/soil (intentional or inadvertent). The ADD is also typically adjusted for the how the animal's behavior might affect exposure [i.e., the area use factor (AUF) accounts for the fraction of home range and the SUF accounts for the time spent away due to migration if applicable]. AUFs for selected ecological receptors for each exposure area on -Site are presented in Attachment 8. The general ADD equation is: Exposure = Total Average Daily Dose = [ADDP + ADDA + ADDs+ ADDw] x AUF x SUF where: ADDP = average daily dose by ingestion of plant matter ADDA = average daily dose by ingestion of animal matter ADDS = average daily dose by ingestion of soil ADDw = average daily dose by ingestion of water AUF = area use factor (area of site habitat/area of receptor home range) SUF = seasonal use factor (months inhabiting site/12 months per year) The ADD from ingestion of plants (ADDP) is estimated as follows: where: ADDP = EPC x NIRP x OF EPC = exposure point concentration in soil (mg COPC/kg soil) NIRP = normalized ingestion rate of plant material (mg/kg body weight/day) OF = plant uptake factor for COPCs (kg plant/kg soil) Page 6-7 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra and: NIRP = NIRf x PF NIRP = normalized ingestion rate of food (kg/kg body weight/day) PF = fraction of diet that is plant matter (unitless) The ADD from ingestion of prey/animals (ADDA) is estimated as follows: where: and: ADDA = EPC x NIRA x BAFi EPC = exposure point concentration in soil (mg COPC/kg soil) NIRA = normalized ingestion rate of animal material (kg/kg body weight/day) BAFi = soil -to -soil dwelling biota uptake factor for COPCs (kg tissue/kg soil) NIRA = NIRf x AF NIRP = normalized ingestion rate of food (kg/kg body weight/day) AF = fraction of diet that is animal matter (unitless) The ADD contributed by the ingestion of soil (ADDs) considers the mass of soil (dry weight) as a fraction of the total dietary (dry weight) mass (i.e., plant + animal): where: ADDs = EPC x NIRs EPC = exposure point concentration in soil (mg COPC/kg soil) NIRs = normalized ingestion rate of soil (kg/kg body weight/day) NIRs = NIRf x SF Page 6-8 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra NIRf = normalized ingestion rate of food (kg/kg body weight/day) SF = fraction of diet that is soil (unitless) For piscivorous receptors, the diet is assumed to consist of 100 percent fish. Fish tissue concentrations were measured directly when possible, or modeled using bioconcentration/bioaccumulation factor (BCFs/BAFs) when tissue concentration data are not available. The ADD equation below is for estimating the average daily dose to the avian piscivorous receptors. When applied to a mammalian receptor, the dose of the sediment/soil is incorporated by adding the ADDs term. The following ADDA equation was used for estimating the ADD of fish tissue when fish tissue data were not available: where: ADDA = EPC x NIRA x BAF (or BCF or BSAF) EPC = exposure point concentration in surface water (mg/L) or sediment (mg/kg) NIRA = NIRf x AF NIRf = normalized ingestion rate of food (kg/kg body weight/day) BAF = bioaccumulation factor, either a surface water to fish bioconcentration factor (BCF), or sediment to fish bioconcentration factor (BSAF) AF = fraction of diet that is animal (fish) matter (unitless) If the recommended fish tissue data are available, then the EPC and the BAF variables are replaced with the fish tissue wet weight COPC concentration data (i.e., ADDA = EPC x NIRA). Each set of equations (plant, animal, soil) provides an estimate of the expected environmental intake of COPCs as an ADD for the specific exposure pathway. The ADDs for all exposure pathways (plants, invertebrates, prey and sediment) are then summed to calculate a total ADD for each receptor for each COPC. For the exposure of COPCs in drinking water, the ADDw term is: where: ADDw = EPC x NIRw Page 6-9 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra EPC = exposure point concentration in surface water (mg/L) NIRw = normalized ingestion rate of surface water (liters/kg body weight/day) EPCs for soil, sediment, fish, and surface water are based on the 95 percent UCLs of each COPC. EPCs of COPCs in plants and/or earthworms are calculated using media EPCs with an uptake factor (UF) or from soil -to -plant or soil -to -earthworm regression equations developed by Baes et al. (1984) and Sample et al. (1997, 1998). Data from previously published bioaccumulation models are used to estimate concentrations of COPCs in plants (Efroymson et al., 1997). These data also represent the primary bioaccumulation data for inorganics integrated into the USEPA Ecological Soil Screening Levels (Eco-SSLs) (USEPA, 2015e). EPCs of COPCs in fish are used, in decreasing order of importance: a. measured site -specific concentrations of COPCs in fish tissue, b. residuals measured in tissue as part of a regional fish advisory study, if available (e.g., conducted by NCDEQ), c. concentrations in fish using bioconcentration factors estimated from studies conducted in the southeast, and d. concentrations in fish using bioconcentration factors estimated from laboratory studies or obtained from the scientific literature (e.g., regional studies that may have been performed by US Fish & Wildlife or USEPA as part of different investigations). For the Roxboro site, BCFs estimated from laboratory studies and/or literature were used (i.e., option 4). Once the ADDs are calculated using conservative dietary ingestion parameters (above), the exposure will be adjusted by taking into account the AUF (i.e., the acreage of the site divided by the area of receptor home range) and the SUF (i.e., adjusting the ADD based on period of time spent away from the site). For the ROIs with relatively small home ranges (e.g., meadow vole, muskrat and robin), the area of the site is anticipated to be greater than their home range, so the AUF is anticipated to be 1.0. For wildlife with larger home ranges, the AUF is Page 6-10 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra anticipated to be less than 1.0. With regard to time, as the Site is located in the southeast, all ROIs are expected to inhabit the Site all year round (i.e., SUF =1.0). The exposure concentrations may also be adjusted for relative bioavailability (i.e., bioavailability of substance in exposure medium as compared to bioavailability of substance in analyses used to establish the TRV) if regional studies/values are available, of which none were available. For this BERA, bioavailability of CCR constituents is conservatively assumed to be 100 percent. 6.2.2 Effects Assessment The ecological effects assessment consists of an evaluation of available toxicity or other effects information that can be used to interpret the significance of the exposures to COPCs relative to potential adverse effects to ecological receptors. Data that can be used include literature -derived chemical toxicity data, and if available, site -specific data (e.g. ambient media toxicity tests, and site -specific field surveys are used if applicable [Suter et al., 1994]). TRVs, which represent a daily exposure or dose that is considered to be "safe" for the ROI over the animal's lifetime, are used to evaluate if the site -related exposure concentration may present a hazard to wildlife. The TRVs incorporate the "bounded" no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) and lowest observed adverse effects levels ( LOAELs) associated with continuous chronic chemical exposures. TRVs for the ecological receptors are presented in Attachment 8. These values represent the "safe" doses anticipated for mammals and birds following chronic exposure to COPCs. TRVs were obtained from the published literature summarizing the "bounded" NOAELs and LOAELs associated with continuous chronic chemical exposures of mammals and birds to the COPCs selected for evaluation (USEPA, 2015e). The TRVs presented in Attachment 8 are conservative benchmarks because they represent some of the most sensitive effects published in literature, being culled from thousands of peer -reviewed articles and intended for use as screening criteria. Both NOAEL- and LOAEL- based TRVs are identified for wildlife (birds and mammals). The TRVs for birds and mammals were obtained from various sources, and focus was given to the most recent sources and/or those derived or endorsed by USEPA (e.g., Eco-SSLs). The toxicity studies used were initially selected from the Eco-SSLs (USEPA, 2015e). Other available literature may be used to refine TRVs depending on the ROI selected for each site (e.g., Sample et al.,1996; USACHPPM, 2004). Page 6-11 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 6.3 Risk Characterization Risk characterization essentially involves a quantitative estimation of risk followed by a description and/or interpretation of its meaning. The purpose of the risk characterization is to estimate the potential hazards associated with exposure to COPCs and their relative degree of significance. During risk estimation, the exposure assessment and effects assessment are integrated to evaluate the likelihood of adverse effects to wildlife ROIs (birds and mammals). The risk estimate is calculated by dividing the dose estimate (ADD) from the exposure assessment by the applicable TRV (derived from the available literature) to obtain an HQ: ADD HQ TRV The HQs are based on ADDs estimated using an EPC defined as 95 percent UCL of the mean. Per USEPA risk assessment guidance (USEPA, 1997), if an HQ is less than or equal to 1.0, it is reasonable to conclude that there is no significant risk. Alternatively, if an HQ is greater than 1.0, it does not necessarily mean that a significant ecological risk from exposure to COPCs exists, but that further evaluation is warranted. The HQs based on the ADD and TRV assume that the receptor obtains most of its food from each site. A table is generated for each class of ROIs (e.g., avian, mammalian) and each table presents HQs estimated for: 1) conservative TRVs that use NOAELs (or "TRV — Low'), and 2) more realistic TRVs that use LOAELs (or "TRV — High"). The use of the estimation of the HQ using the NOAEL is typically applied to individuals and/or special status species that need to be protected (e.g., rare, threatened or endangered), whereas the estimation of HQs using the LOAEL is typically interpreted as protective of site -wide populations and/or communities of concern. Attachment 9 presents protected species listed for Person County include included four flora species (e.g., tall larkspur (Delphinium exaltatum) and veined skullcap (Scutellaria nervosa); two fish species (mimic shiner (Notropis volucellus) and Carolina darter (Etheostoma collis); four amphibian species (e.g. Mole salamander (Ambystoma talpoideum) and gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor); and eight bivalves, including green floater (Lasmigona subviridis) and notched rainbow (Villosa constricta). The interpretation of the risk analysis typically employs both a multiple lines -of - evidence approach and an opinion based on the professional judgment of the ecological risk assessor. Both interpretations err on the side of conservatism, but for HQs that are Page 6-12 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra greater than 1.0, additional details, often addressed in the Uncertainty Evaluation (Section 6.5), may be needed to identify if the hazard is "real" or an artifact of compounding the various permutations of "worst case" exposure parameters. Additionally, some of the TRVs that were developed by USEPA in concert with the Eco- SSLs may need to be reexamined as these values, as discussed above, may not be representative of the true exposure and/or life history of the ROI. For example, most TRVs are based on highly bioavailable forms, but a review of the literature for selected metals may show that actual absorption following ingestion of environmental media may be substantially lower than the form used to derive the TRV. 6.4 Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment Results Attachment 8 presents the modeled risk results. No HQs based on NOAELs or LOAELs were greater than unity for the mallard duck, great blue heron, bald eagle, and river otter exposed to surface water and sediments in the WIB exposure area. Two endpoints, killdeer and muskrat had modeled risk results greater than unity for select constituents as described below: • Muskrat: With the exception of aluminum, no HQs based on NOEALS or LOAELs were greater than unity for the muskrat in the WIB Exposure Area. The aluminum NOAEL and LOAEL based HQ for the muskrat were 48.4 and 4.84. • Killdeer: With the exception of aluminum, no HQs based on LOAELs were greater than unity for the killdeer in the WIB Exposure Area (HQ=2.87). Exposure of the killdeer to aluminum and copper resulted in NOAEL based HQs greater than 1.0 (HQ =28.7 and 2.4). LOAEL based HQs for copper were less than unity. The exposure models likely overstate risks to aluminum and copper. The sediment EPC (22,000 mg/kg) is less than the ESV for aluminum of 25,000 mg/kg and the USEPA Region 4 refined screening value of 58,000 mg/kg (USEPA, 2018b). Aluminum occurs naturally in soil, sediment, and surface water in this area. Per the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), aluminum is the third most abundant element, after oxygen and silicon, in the Earth's crust (USGS, 2018), with the average concentration reported in soil in the United States of 72,000 mg/kg (USGS 1984). The modeled risk estimates for exposure of the muskrat and killdeer to aluminum is considered negligible. Copper concentrations detected in surface water samples collected in the WIB are within or less than background conditions. For example, the maximum surface water concentration of copper at the reference location, RSW- 6, was 0.0018 mg/L, compared Page 6-13 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra to the copper surface water EPC used in the risk assessment of 0.0017 mg/L. In sediments, the maximum copper concentration measured at reference RSW-6 was 55 mg/kg, compared to the EPC was 51 mg/kg. The modeled risk to the killdeer from exposure to copper (NOAEL based HQ = 2.4) is considered negligible. In summary, based on observations of natural and background conditions, there is no evidence of unacceptable risks to wildlife receptors potentially exposed to CCR constituents at Roxboro. 6.5 Environmental Assessment of the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant Duke Energy has monitored water quality and chemistry in Hyco Reservoir since the 1970s. Attachment 10 presents an overview of the sampling and assessment of water and biological tissue monitoring conducted by Duke Energy to meet the requirements of the NPDES permit for Hyco Reservoir (NPDES No. NC00003425). Monitoring requirement include surface water, sediment, and fish tissue sampling for select analysis and fish community assessment. Routine monitoring reports are submitted to NCDEQ to support the NPDES permit requirement and include detailed information on the results from this sampling program. Fish populations are key indicators of the overall health of aquatic systems because of they are influenced by exposure to the environment and impacts to other aquatic communities (e.g., aquatic vegetation and macroinvertebrates). In Hyco Reservoir the fish community is typical of southeastern piedmont man-made reservoirs with the sunfish family being the dominant family present in the system. From 2000 through 2018, the number of species collected by electrofishing annually ranged from 19 to 26 from eight families. Bluegill was the most abundant species in Hyco Reservoir serving as both an intermediate predator and prey within the aquatic community. Dominant fish in Hyco Reservoir exhibited cyclical increases and decreases in total numbers in annual surveys from 2000 through 2018. These fluctuations are indicative of expected population dynamics in systems through time that are normal responses to drivers such as predator -prey interactions, environmental variations (e.g., high rainfall and flow years, drought years, intensity of storms, reservoir drawdown, etc.) and to a lesser extent, single -species non -linear dynamics. Despite the cyclical density and biomass fluctuations, these species sustained healthy reproducing populations evident by the presence of both young and juvenile/adult groups within fish community through time (Progress Energy 2008; Duke Energy 2017). Fish muscle tissue sampling and analysis is performed annually in accordance with a NCDEQ study plan as required in the NPDES permit. Duke Energy collects multiple samples of fish from different trophic levels (prey and predators) annually for metals Page 6-14 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra analysis. Analytical results are submitted to the NCDEQ during each NPDES permit renewal. Historical impacts to the aquatic community have been documented during the 1970s and 1980s from selenium in the plant discharges. However, after the discovery of the cause and reduction of selenium in the discharges in 1989, the impacts were minimized and Hyco Reservoir has recovered and has maintained overall good health since the early 2000s. The independent assessments carried out by Duke Energy have demonstrated that Hyco Reservoir has been a healthy and functioning ecosystem for almost 20 years. Data from these assessments indicate that the systems installed at the Roxboro Plant for the protection of the water quality, the aquatic community, and human health have been effective. 6.6 Uncertainty Analysis The degree of uncertainty depends on the amount and quality of data available, information addressing site conditions, the accuracy of any assumptions, and how well the receptor may match the particular life history of the birds and mammals that are "actually" inhabiting each site. A qualitative evaluation of the major uncertainties associated with the assessment should include an evaluation of the following: • The number of samples obtained is relatively low compared to the fairly large areas observed for each exposure area. Therefore, some degree of uncertainty with regard to the spatial representativeness of each of the data sets for each individual exposure area exists. The study design, however, used a biased sampling strategy so that the concentrations of COPCs in environmental media would intentionally be overestimated rather than underestimated. For example, based on field observations and groundwater monitoring data, discreet samples were collected from areas of suspected influence from the ash basin, such as downgradient streams and seeps. • EPCs were inclusive of all sample data for the identified sample locations considered in this risk assessment. EPCs were calculated without removal of data points which may be considered outliers. This may overestimate or underestimate risk. Consideration of background and additional Site conditions will bracket the uncertainty. • CCR constituents not detected or constituents for which no screening level exists were not carried forward in the risk assessment as COPCs, which may underestimate risk. • The soil -to -tissue regression models for uptake of m into both plants and earthworms. The uptake factors used for the uptake of metals by vegetation, invertebrates, and fish may over or underestimate risk. Page 6-15 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra • Potential risks to benthic invertebrates were evaluated on the basis of comparing maximum concentrations of CCR constituents detected in surface water and bulk sediment samples to media -specific ESVs. Porewater was not analyzed in surface water bodies as a potential exposure medium for benthic invertebrates. The absence of porewater data in the risk assessment may underestimate risk for certain benthic invertebrates. However, the ESVs used in the ecological screening process are extremely conservative to account for porewater exposure. • The Eco-SSLs, which were used for selecting COPCs, are very conservative soil benchmarks that are known to be safe for a broad range of ecological receptor classes (mammal, bird, invertebrate, plant) over their lifespan. Therefore, selection of some COPCs may overestimate risk. • Elements/metals (including required nutrients) present (or deficient) in environmental media may interact with COPCs to produce effects that may be either greater or less than COPCs alone. For example, zinc is known to be a strong antagonist to cadmium in the diet (i.e., zinc decreases the toxicity of cadmium when both are ingested together). These elemental interactions could result in an over or under estimation of risk. • The dietary endpoints used to derive the TRVs are often biased toward a single study involving the exposure of birds or mammals to highly soluble forms of the metal (e.g., copper chloride, lead acetate), whereas the bioavailability of metals in the environment, especially in solid media, can be much lower. Bioavailability of COPCs was conservatively assumed to be 100% in the exposure models, which overestimates risk. • Food ingestion data specific for birds or mammals at each Site are not available. Literature -derived default wildlife ingestion rates, as well as other exposure parameters, may over or under estimate risk. • It is assumed that part or all of the home range of the receptor falls completely within the boundaries of each site. In reality, individuals and breeding pairs move around depending on a number of variables, including territoriality, food availability, and human disturbance, and this movement would result in lower exposure than was assumed in the risk assessment. • It is assumed that the types of mammals and birds in this assessment are receptive to the type of habitat at each site; the ROI were selected to be representative of what may be present in the vicinity of the site; however, the ash basin area specifically may not be considered habitat. Page 6-16 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra • Reptiles and amphibians likely inhabit the exposure areas evaluated in the risk assessment. However, there is limited toxicity and exposure information for food web modeling, which presents and uncertainty in the risk assessment. Page 6-17 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This risk assessment pertaining to the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant was prepared for Duke Energy as part of the CAP Update. Risks to both human health and ecological receptors were evaluated using analytical data from groundwater, surface water, and sediment samples. Both risk assessments employed North Carolina and USEPA guidance available for development of Site -specific risk assessments. The exposure scenarios and exposure and toxicity parameters employed were conservative such that the risk results are more likely to overestimate rather than underestimate the risks. Thus, the results can be used to inform decision -making regarding the Roxboro site. The conclusions for the human health and ecological risk assessments are summarized below. 7.1 Human Health Risk Assessment Current and future exposure scenarios were evaluated to assess potential human health risks. The following conclusions were made: • On -site groundwater, surface water, and sediment pose no unacceptable risk for the trespasser and construction worker under these exposure scenarios. • Exposure to CCR constituents by current and future residences and recreational receptors is incomplete. 7.2 Ecological Risk Assessment Based on NOAEL- and LOAEL-derived HQ, the BERA resulted in the following: • No HQs based on NOAELs or LOAELs were greater than unity for the mallard duck, great blue heron, river otter, and bald eagle exposed to surface water and sediments in the WIB exposure area. • Two endopoints, muskrat and killdeer, had limited modeled risk results greater than unity for aluminum and copper. The modeled risk is primarily NOAEL based and driven by concentrations in sediment. • Multiple lines of evidence indicate the modeled risk to aluminum and copper are overestimated. The modeled risks are considered negligible based on natural and background conditions. The exposure models likely overstate risks to aluminum and copper. In summary, there is no evidence of unacceptable risks to human and ecological receptors exposed to environmental media potentially affected by CCR constituents at Roxboro. Additionally, independent assessments carried out by Duke Energy have Page 7-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra demonstrated that Hyco Reservoir has been a healthy and functioning ecosystem for almost 20 years. Data from the independent assessments indicate that the systems installed at the Roxboro Plant for the protection of the water quality, the aquatic community, and human health have been effective. Page 7-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra 8.0 REFERENCES American Cancer Society. 2019; Cancer Facts and Figures. (2019). American Cancer Society. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer- org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/annual-cancer-facts-and- figures/2019/cancer-facts-and-figures-2019.pdf Baes III, C.F., R.D. Sharp, A.L. Sjoreen, and R.W. Shor. (1984). A Review and Analysis of Parameters for Assessing Transport of Environmentally Released Radionuclides Through Agriculture. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Health and Safety Research Division. ORNL-5786. September, 1984. DE85 000287. Duke Energy. (2017). Roxboro Steam Electric Plant 2016 environmental monitoring report. Duke Energy Progress, Raleigh, NC. Efroymson, R.A., M.E. Will, G.W. Suter II, and A.C. Wooten, (1997). Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Contaminants of Potential Concern for Effects on Terrestrial Plants: 1997 Revision. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. ES/ER/TM-85/R3. Environmental Restoration Division (ERD). (1999). Bioaccumulation and Bioconcentration Screening, ERD-AG-003. Available at: https://www.srs.gov/general/programs/soil/ffa/rdh/p74.PDF Exponent. (2018). Community Impact Analysis of Ash Basin Closure Options at the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant, November 15, 2018. Haley & Aldrich. (2015). Report on Risk Assessment Work Plan for CAMA Sites, Duke Energy, November 2015. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Waste Management (DWM). (2003). Guidelines for Performing Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessments Within the North Carolina Division of Waste Management. Available at: https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Waste%20Management/DWM/SLERA%20with%20not e.pdf North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). (2013a.) 15A NCAC 02L. Groundwater Rules. Groundwater Standards. Available at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/gwstandards Page 8-1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). (2013b). 15A NCAC 2B.0200s. Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina. Available at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/swstandards North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Division of Water Resources (DWR). (2014). North Carolina Division of Public Health Fish Tissue Screening Levels. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). (2017). Technical Guidance for Risk -based Environmental Remediation of Sites. Available at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Waste%20Management/DWM/risk_based_remediation/FINAL%2OTe chnical%20G u idance%2020170301.pdf North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). (2019). Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRG) Table. Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch. Available at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wm/sf/ihs/ihsguide. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources (NCDEQDWR). (2014). North Carolina Division of Public Health Fish Tissue Screening Levels. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (NCDHHS). (2015). Parameters for Water Supply Well Sampling Near Coal Ash Facilities. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. Division of Public Health, Epidemiology Section, Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch. [Online] URL: http:!/portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_1_id=1169848&folderl d=24814087 &name=DLFE-112704.pdf Progress Energy. (2008). Roxboro Steam Electric Plant 2007 environmental monitoring report. Progress Energy Carolinas, Raleigh, NC. Sample, BE, DM Opresko, and GW Suter II. (1996). Toxicological Benchmarks for Wildlife: 1996 Revision. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. 227 pp, ES/ER/TM-86/R3 Energy Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Sample, BE, Aplin, MS, Efroymson, RA, Suter, GW and Welsh, CJE. (1997). Methods and Tools for Estimation of the Exposure of Terrestrial Wildlife to Contaminants. Environmental Sciences Division Publication No 4650, Oak Ridge National Page 8-2 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Laboratory, US Department of Defense, Office of Policy and Assistance, Air, Water and Radiation Division. ORNL/TM-13391.October, 1997 Sample, BE, Beauchamp, JJ, Efroymson, RA, Suter, GW, and Ashwood, TL. (1998). Development and Validation of Bioaccumulation Models for Earthworms. USDOE, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Lockheed Martin, Environmental Restoration Program, ES/ER/TM-220. Suter, GW, Sample, BE, Jones, DS and Ashwood, TL. (1994). Approach and Strategy for Performing Ecological Risk Assessments for the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Reservation: 1994 Revision. Prepared by Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. August 1994. ES/ER/TM-33/R1SynTerra, 2014a SynTerra, (2014b). Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant. 2014. SynTerra. (2015a). Comprehensive Site Assessment Report- Roxboro Steam Electric Plant. 2015. SynTerra. (2015b). Corrective Action Plan Part 1 - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant. 2015. SynTerra. (2016a). Corrective Action Plan Part 2 - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant - February 2016. SynTerra. (2016b). Comprehensive Site Assessment Supplement 1 - - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant, February 2016. SynTerra. (2016c). Ash Basin Extension Impoundments and Discharge Canals Assessment Report. Roxboro Steam Electric Plant. 2016. SynTerra. (2016d) Update to Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant. 2016. SynTerra. (2017). Comprehensive Site Assessment Update, October 2017. SynTerra. (2019). Corrective Action Plan. USACHPPM. (2004). Development of Terrestrial Exposure and Bioaccumulation Information for the Army Risk Assessment Modeling System (ARAMS). U.S. Page 8-3 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (USACHPPM). Contract Number DAAD050-00-P-8365, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, 2004. Available at: http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/arams/pdfs/usachppm.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1989). Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume 1 - Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. EPA/540/1- 89/002. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1991a). Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume 1 - Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part B, Development of Risk -based Preliminary Remediation Goals). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. EPA/540/R-92/003. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1991b). Role of the Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy Selection Decisions. OSWER Directive #9355.0-30. April. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1993). Wildlife Exposure Factors Handbook. United States Environmental Protection Agency, ORD, Washington, D.C. Volumes I and II. EPA/600/R-93-187a,b. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1994). Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganics Analyses. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1997). Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund : Process for Designing and Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments. US Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste and Emergency Response, OSWER 9285.7-25. PB97-963211. EPA 540- R-97-006. June, 1997. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1998). Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. Washington, D.C. EPA/630/R-95/002F. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2002). Calculating Upper Confidence Limits for Exposure Point Concentrations at Hazardous Waste Sites. OWSWER 9285.6-10. December. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2003a). Human Health Toxicity Values in Superfund Risk Assessments. Office of Superfund Page 8-4 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra Remediation and Technology Innovation. OSWER Directive 9285.7- 53. December 5, 2003. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2003b). Guidance for Developing Ecological Soil Screening Levels. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. OSWER Directive 9285.7-55. Issued November 2003, revised February 2005, and revised April 2007. Available at: http://rais.ornl.gov/documents/ecossl.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2012). USEPA 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories, Spring 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at: http:!/water. epa. gov/action/advisories/drinking/upload/dwstandards2012.p df United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2013a). Statistical Software ProUCL 5.0.00 for Environmental Applications for Data Sets with and without Nondetect Observations. Software: http://www2.epa.gov/land- research/proucl-software, and User's Guide: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015- 03/documents/proucl_v5.0_user.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2013b). Tier 3 Toxicity Value White Paper, OSWER 9285.7-86. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2014). Region 4 Human Health Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance. January 2014. Draft Final. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2015a). Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for Human Health Consumption of Water and Organism and Consumption of Organism Only. 2015. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2015b). Final 2015 Updated National Recommended Human Health Water Quality Criteria. http://water.epagov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/current/hhfinal United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2015c). National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria. http://waterepa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/current/index Page 8-5 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC - Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2015d). Supplemental Guidance to ERAGS: Region 4, Ecological Risk Assessment. http://www2.epa. gov/sites/production/files/2015- 09/documents/r4_era_guidance_document_draft_final_8-25-2015.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2015e). USEPA Risk -Based Screening Levels. June 2015. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/risk/risk-based- screening-table-generic-tables United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2018a). USEPA Regional Screening Levels. May 2018 Update. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2018b). Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories, Spring 2018. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2018c). Region 4 Ecological Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance. Updated March 2018. Available at: https:Hrais.ornl.gov/documents/era_regional_supplemental_guidance_report -march-2018_update.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2019). USEPA Regional Screening Levels. May 2018 Update. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls United States Geological Survey (USGS). (1984). Element Concentrations in Soils and Other Surficial Materials of the Conterminous United States. H. Shacklette and J. Boerngen. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1270. United States Government Printing Office, Washington. United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2001). Geochemical Landscapes of the Conterminous United States —New Map Presentations for 22 Elements. N. Gustaysson, B. Bolviken, D.B. Smith, and R.C. Severson. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1648. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. November, 2001. Page 8-6 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant FIGURES SynTerra m 0 HANDLINGAREA POWER PLANTI II �\ B MAIN DAM 1 /,—\ I LCID LA DECOMMIS IONED BOU SLUICE LINE AREA- ( v^ � WAS MAIN DAM � ASH BASIN WASTE BOUNDARY A WESTERN DISCHARGE I WEST ASH BASIN m BORO PLANT PARCEL LINE 01 STORAGE AREA %_ EAST ASH BASIN I♦ I �L lH/IISST�OR�IC�A EASTERNLD/E(P/(O/SE CANAL TGyll ON AREAI U O ASH BASIN WASTE BOUNDARY � EASTERN DISCHARGE CANAL l SEPARATOR DIKE U� a INDUSTRIAL LANDFI_ L 7� 1 BOUNDARY SOLID WASTE LANDFILL sso Q COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY CURRENT SOSH BASIN' O COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY �sfo v 5� G Clw� 1. ALL BOUNDARIES ARE APPROXIMATE. 2. DUKE ENERGY PROPERTY LINES ARE REPRESENTED BASED ON DUKE ENERGY'S INTERPRETATION OF HISTORICAL DOCUMENTED PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AND CURRENT PERSON COUNTY GIS. LyJ] 3. 2016 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP, OLIVE HILL QUADRANGLE, OBTAINED \Q� FROM THE USGS STORE AT O .� https:Usto m.usgs.gov/map-locator. t DUKE PERSON COUNTY FIGURE 1 USGS LOCATION MAP ENERGY W/NSTON-SALEM HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT PROGRESS 0RALEIGH ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT SEMORA, NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE 2 DRAWN BY: J. KIRTZ DATE:06/11/2019 GRAPHIC SCALE REVISED BY: J. KIRTZ DATE: 12/26/2019 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 synTerra CHECKED BY: K. AWING DATE: 12/26/019 APPROVED BY: K. LAWING DATE: 12/26/2019 www.synterracorp.com PROJECT MANAGER: C. EADY (IN FEET) Primary Primary Secondary Secondary Sources Release Sources Release Mechanisms Mechanisms DuSt_ � Human Receptors Current/Future Current/Future Current/Future Current/Future Current/Future Current/Future Current/FutureCurrent/Future Potential Potential Off -Site On -Site Off -Site Off -Site Off -Site Off -Site On -site On -Site Exposure Exposure Recreational / Commercial/ Resident Recreational Recreational Recreational Recreational Construction Media Route Subsistence Industrial Adult/Child Trespasser Swimmer Wader Boater Fisher Worker Worker Outdoor Air Inhalation O OO T O O_F O OO Soil Remaining Coal Ash Basins Infiltration/'Post Excavation' Jo Post -Excavation Leaching Soil (b) Runoff/Flooding Infiltration/ Leaching Migration to Surface Water and Sediment Surface Water (Off -site) (c) Sediment (Off -site) (c) Fish Tissue (d) i Groundwater - Groundwater AOW Water (On -site) AOWs (a) Incidental O O O O O O O O Ingestion Dermal Contact O O O O O O O O Drinking Water O O O O O O O O Use (e) Incidental O O O O O O O O Ingestion Dermal Contact O O O O O O O O Incidental O O O O O O O O Ingestion Dermal Contact O O O O O O O O Ingestion O O O O O O O O :1 Drinking Water O O O O O O O O Use Incidental O O O O O O O O(e) Ingestion Dermal Contact O O O O O O O O(e) Dermal Contact O O O O O O O O AOW Soil NOTES (On -site) Dermal Contact O O O O O O O O 41 Potentially complete exposure pathway. Incidental O O O O O O O O Surface Water Ingestion O Pathway evaluated and found incomplete/insignificant. 10 (On -site) (a) Areas of wetness (AOWs) are addressed in the Special Order by Consent (SOC) and not Dermal Contact 0 • O O O O O O evaluated in the risk assessment update at this time. (b) Pathway incomplete as long as ash remains in place; re-evaluation upon excavation (if conducted) may be warranted. Incidental O O O O O O O O N Hyco Reservoir Sediment Ingestion (On -site) (d) Concentration of COPC in fish tissue modeled from surface water concentration. Dermal Contact 0 0 O O O O O O (e) Groundwater exposure evaluated in the risk assessment update, although an incomplete exposure pathway for construction worker. Primary Sources Primary Release Secondary Mechanisms Sources Active Coal Infiltration/ Post Excavation Ash Basin Leaching Soil Runoff/Flooding Infiltration/ Leaching Groundwater AOWs (a) AQUATIC RECEPTORS Avian Mammal SecondaryRelease Potential Potential Benthic Great Blue Bald River Mechanisms Exposure Media Exposure Fish(d) Inverte- Mallard Killdeer Muskrat p Heron Eagle Otter Route brates(d) (Omni- (Herbi- (Inverti- (Pisci- (Carni- (Pisci- vore) vore) vore) vore) vore) vore) Dust_ �oorAJInhalation O O O O O O O O Soil Remaining — Incidental O O O O O O O O Ingestion Post -Excavation (b) Direct Contact O O O O O O O O Biotic Tissue [ngestion O O O O • O O O Surface Water Ingestion O O O O O O O O (Off -site) Direct Contact O O O O O O O O Fand ration to ce Water Incidental Sediment 1 O O O O O O O O NOTES • Potentially complete exposure pathways. O Pathway evaluated and found incomplete/insignificant. O Potentially complete exposure but not evaluated at this siteor associated with Areas of Wetness (AOW). (a) AOWs are addressed in the Special Order by Consent (SOC) and not evaluated in th risk assessment u pd ate at t h is time. (b) Pathway complete if ash is excavated from theash basin in thefuture; terrestrial Exposureto post excavation soil is currently incomplete. (c) Biotic tissue consists of plant or pray (i.e., invertebrates, small mammals, fish, etc.) tissue, which are modeled from soil/sediment or surface water concentrations. (d) Based on screening agai nst aquatic life criteria. CSM reflects exposure pathways evaluated quantitatively in the risk assessment. e Sediment ngestlon (Off -site) Direct Contact O O O O O O O O Biotic Tissue (c) Ingestion • O • • • • • • Ingestion O O O O O O O O Groundwater Direct Contact O O O O O O O O AOW Water Ingestion O • O O • O O O (On -site) Direct Contact O • O O O O O O Incidental AOW Soil Ingestion O • O O O O O O (On -site) Direct Contact O • O O O O O O Ingestion • • • • • • • • Surface Water (On -site) Direct Contact • • O O O O O O Incidental • • • • O • • O Sediment Ingestion (On -site) Direct Contact • • O O O O O O DRAWN BY: C. PONCE DATE: 9/25/2019 (� DUKE ENERGY REVISED BY: K. SHECK PROGRESS CHECKED BY: H. SMITH APPROVED BY: PROJECT MANAGER: CRAIG EADY 40 synTerra www.synterracorp.com TERRESTRIAL RECEPTORS Avian Mammal Robin (Omni- vore) Red -Tailed Hawk (Carni- vore) Meadow Vole (Herbivore) Red Fox (Carnivore) O O O O O O O O O O O O • O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O • O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O • O O O O O O O • O O O O O O FIGURE 3 ECOLOGICAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT SEMORA, NORTH CAROLINA li ROXBORO PVPNZ MW-35SIDlE CW-2/D GMW-o1A MW-01/BRL � CCR-102BR S-01 .Y CCR-101 DIBR - S-02 s-o3 S-04 CW_5 C=R-100D CCR-100BR S-05 HWMW-016R .� S-�6 5-20 5-18 CCR-200BRr _ f�gC T {F * ICY _ CCR-208SIBR In CCR-210S/BR U 0 CCR- CCR-211S/BR •= ■ ♦ `AI=CCR-21413 215BR . � ♦ u t� M • '`♦ MW 316R CCR-2166R . CCR-217BR ♦ BG-i6RLIBRLR � � ♦ ♦ u CCR-218BR u CF-01 . - / `♦ ♦♦ 8R NN) CW-4 CJ �� WF-01 EF-OS BG-1 EF-01 - R02040-RAW3 ' WF-03 GF-03 Ro-10-2 sFM ♦ � . r RO2040-RAW4 OR4 RO ♦. ` to r MW-39D/E •�� • �� I� CF-05 GP M W-01 S/D/BR = 1 - RSW-6 �♦ - y G�W-02DIBR � �� 5L-1 RSW-8 U I-) ,'i— MW-36DBR �_i MW-276R �� CR-103BR ,�' cGMW-10 UU � 5-21 S 22 GMW-16 GMW-11 CCR-10513R U EAB-01 CCR-107BR U CCR-104BR �� O 'a PZ-14 _ M W-108BRLl CCR-108BR � ABMW-07BRL/BRLL EDC-00 Millia• CCR-109BR s-10 ® S-11 `l1 I� SD-06-OS _ ® PS-1 Y•� mm • 5-12 5-09 y • •= CCRCCR-111 � PSB38 MW-02� CV-02 PSB33 EA; EXTi PSB-4 PSB-5 PSB-34 RO-03 V ■ ` RO-04 ■ _ RO-13 MW-25BR r�, � • - - tEDUKE ERGY PROGRESS A, GRAPHIC SCALE 700 0 700 1,400 (IN FEET) DRAWN BY: J. KIRTZ DATE: 09/10/2019 REVISED BY: J. KIRTZ DATE: 09/13/2019 CHECKED BY: C. PONCE DATE: 09/13/2019 APPROVED BY: C. PONCE DATE: 09/13/2019 PROJECT MANAGER: C. EADY A r LEGEND 0 BOILAND GROUNDWATER SAMPLING LOCATION O GROUNDWATER SAMPLING LOCATION • CONSTRUCTED SEEP (APPROXIMATE) NON -CONSTRUCTED SEEP (APPROXIMATE) • DISPOSITIONED SEEP (APPROXIMATE) • SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOCATION ' SURFACE WATERAND SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATION O SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATION • LEACHATE SAMPLE LOCATION �- - • SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION ASH BASIN WASTE BOUNDARY ASH BASIN COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY LANDFILL BOUNDARY - DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS ROXBORO PLANT BOUNDARY EFFLUENT DISCHARGE CANAL } STREAM (JURISDICTIONAL/NON-JURISDICTIONAL) NOTES: DUKE ENERGY PROPERTY LINES ARE REPRESENTED BASED ON HISTORICAL DOCUMENTED PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AND CURRENT PERSON COUNTY GIS. DUKE ENERGY IS WORKING TO VERIFY PROPERTY LINE LOCATION IN THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE WEST ASH BASIN SOUTHERN EXTENSION IMPOUNDMENT. ALL BOUNDARIES ARE APPROXIMATE. THE UNLINED LANDFILL BOUNDARY IS NOT SHOWN FOR DRAWING CLARITY. NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT (NRTR) PREPARED BY AMEC FOSTER WHEELER INC., JULY 20TH, 2015. WSP SURVEY CONDUCTED APRIL 17, 2014. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED FROM GOOGLE EARTH PRO ON OCTOBER 11, 2017. AERIAL WAS COLLECTED ON JUNE 13, 2016. DRAWING HAS BEEN SET WITH A PROJECTION OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM FIPS 3200 (NAD83/2011). FIGURE 4 SAMPLE LOCATION MAP HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT SEMORA, NORTH CAROLINA �m r HYCO RESERVOIR HYCO RESERVOIR COOLING WATER ROXBORO STEAM INTAKE BASIN GYPSUM ELECTRIC PLANT STORAGE . EXPOSURE ac AREA AREA 1 ^� EXPOSURE ,. (SEE NOTE 3) AREA 3 HEATED WATER (SEE NOTE 4 _ ELECTRICA DISCHARGE POND _f SUBSTATIO ;ERVO/R > �- EASTASHBASIN i INDUSTRIAL LANDFILL EAB EXTENSION IMPOUNDMENT ^ 40- Z DDS 1 -'1 �' DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS tip synTerra GRAPHIC SCALE 700 0 700 1,400 (IN FEET) DRAWN BY: J. KIRTZ DATE: 09/10/2019 REVISED BY: J. KIRTZ DATE: 10/07/2019 CHECKED BY: C. PONCE DATE: 10/07/2019 APPROVED BY: C. PONCE DATE: 10/07/2019 PROJECT MANAGER: C. EADY LEGEND L. EXPOSUREAREA2 PROM--M&V EXPOSURE AREA AREA OF CONCENTRATION IN GROUNDWATER ABOVE NC21- (SEE NOTES) ASH BASIN WASTE BOUNDARY - — - — ASH BASIN COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY SOLID WASTE LANDFILL BOUNDARY - _ DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS ROXBORO PLANT SITE BOUNDARY STREAMS (AMEC NRTR) —77771 WETLANDS (AMEC NRTR) NOTES: 1. GENERALIZED AREAL EXTENT OF MIGRATION REPRESENTED BY NCAC 02L EXCEEDANCES OF BORON. 2. THERE ARE NO SURFACE WATER OR GROUNDWATER INPUTS TO HYCO RESERVOIR FROM THE ASH BASIN, EXCEPT FOR NPDES PERMITTED INPUTS. THEREFORE, HYCO LAKE WAS NOT EVALUATED AS PART OF THIS ASSESSMENT. 3. EXPOSURE AREA 1 WAS NOT EVALUATED DUE TO BEING CONSIDERED A FUTURE NPDES WASTE WATER FEATURE. 14. AOWs ARE NOT EVALUATED IN THIS ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, THIS EXPOSURE AREA WAS NOT EVALUATED. 5. WASTE WATER AND SOURCE AREAS ARE NOT EVALUATED IN THIS ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, THIS EXPOSURE AREA WAS NOT EVALUATED. 6. PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS. 7. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED FROM GOOGLE EARTH PRO ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2017. AERIAL WAS COLLECTED ON JUNE 13, 2016. 6. DRAWING HAS BEEN SET WITH A PROJECTION OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM FIPS 3200 (NAD83/2011). FIGURE 5 ECOLOGICAL EXPOSURE AREAS HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT SEMORA, NORTH CAROLINA Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENTS SynTerra Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT 1 RISK ASSESSMENT DATA SETS SynTerra ATTACHMENT 1 TABLE 1-1 RISK ASSESSMENT DATA SETS - GROUNDWATER HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Sample Location Used in the Risk Assessment Sample Location Excluded in the Risk Assessment Basis of Sample Location Exclusion Ash Basin ABMW-1BR ABMW-1 ash pore water ABMW-2BR ABMW-2 ash pore water ABMW-3BR ABMW-3 ash pore water ABMW-3BRL ABMW-4 ash pore water ABMW-4BR ABMW-5 ash pore water ABMW-5D ABMW-6 ash pore water ABMW-6BR ABMW-7 ash pore water ABMW-7BR BG-1 through BG-2BR background ABMW-7BRL CCR-112BR-BG background ABMW-7BRLL CCR-219BR-BG/D-BG background CCR-100BR/D through CCR-111BR MW-lOBR background CCR-113BR/D MW-14BR/D and MW-15BR/D background CCR-200BR through CCR-218BR MW-18BR/D and MW-19BRL background CW-1 through CW-5 MW-26BR, 29BR, 30BR upgradient GMW-lA, GMW-2 PZ wells not a monitoring well/ water level only GMW-6 through GMW-11 RO wells (private wells) private wells GPMW-1BR/D/S through GPMW-3BR/D --- --- HWMW-1BR --- --- MW-1/BR/BRLthrough MW-913R --- --- MW-108BRL/BRLL --- --- MW-1113R/D through MW-13BR --- --- MW-16BR and MW-17BR --- --- MW-205BRL/BRLL/BRLLL and MW-208BRL/BRLL/BRLLL --- --- MW-20BRL through MW-25BR --- MW-27BR and MW-28BR --- MW-31BR through MW-39BR/D --- Notes: --- no entry Rationales for exclusion of individual samples or analytical results from risk analysis: • Samples with turbidity greater than 10 and/or pH greater than 8.5 • Samples where either turbidity or pH were not measured • Analytical results with 'RO' flags • Sample dates prior to 2015 • Duplicate samples collected on the same date Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 1 TABLE 1-2 RISK ASSESSMENT DATA SETS - SURFACE WATER HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Sample Location Used in the Risk Assessment Sample Location Excluded in the Risk Assessment Basis of Sample Location Exclusion RSW-1 RSW-6 background RSW-2 RSW-7 Effluent channel / Future NPDES RSW-3 RSW-8 Effluent channel / Future NPDES RSW-4 RSW-9 No influence from basin RSW-5 SW-1 No influence from basin --- SW-2 No influence from basin --- SW-3 No influence from basin Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Notes• --- no entry Rationales for exclusion of individual samples or analytical results from risk analysis: • Analytical results with 'RO' flags • Sample dates prior to 2015 • Duplicate samples collected on the same date • Location has been physically removed/ engineered control Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 1 TABLE 1-3 RISK ASSESSMENT DATA SETS - SEDIMENT HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Sample Location Used in the Risk Assessment Sample Location Excluded in the Risk Assessment Basis of Sample Location Exclusion RSW-1 RSW-6 background RSW-2 RSW-7 Effluent channel / Future NPDES RSW-3 RSW-8 Effluent channel / Future NPDES RSW-4 RSW-9 No influence from basin RSW-5 EDC-1 through 5 Effluent channel / Future NPDES --- WDC-1 through 6 Effluent channel / current NPDES Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Notes: --- no entry Rationales for exclusion of individual samples or analytical results from risk analysis: • Analytical results with 'RO' flags • Sample dates prior to 2015 • Duplicate samples collected on the same date • Location has been physically removed/ engineered control Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT 2 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING TABLES SynTerra ATTACHMENT 2 TABLE 2-1 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING - GROUNDWATER HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Analyte CAS Number of Samples Frequency of Detection Range of Detection (Ng/L) Concentration Used for Screening (pg/L) 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Standard (a) (pg/L) 15A NCAC 02L .0202 IMAC (a) (pg/L) DHHS Screening Level (b) (pg/L) Federal MCL/ SMCL (c) (pg/L) Tap Water RSL HI = 0.2 (d) (Ng/L) Screening Value Used (Ng/L) COPC? Min. Max. Aluminum 7429-90-5 803 763 2.253 3790 3,790 NA NA 3,500 50 to 200 (e) 4,000 3,500 Y Antimony 7440-36-0 1,484 40 0.336 5.63 5.63 1 NA 1 6 1.56 M 1 Y Arsenic 7440-38-2 1,537 320 0.0842 26.4 26.4 10 NA 10 10 0.052 (g,h) 10 Y Barium 7440-39-3 1,480 1,453 5 1,610 1,610 700 NA 700 2,000 760 700 Y Beryllium 7440-41-7 1,413 13 1.02 17.3 17.3 NA 4 4 4 5 4 Y Boron 7440-42-8 1,537 821 3.9 53,800 53,800 700 NA 700 NA 800 700 Y Cadmium 7440-43-9 1,466 15 0.406 1 1 2 NA 2 5 1.84 2 N Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 1,537 445 0.034 69.7 69.7 10 NA 10 100 4,400 (i) 10 Y Chromium (VI) 18540-29-9 654 313 0.025 7.1 7.1 NA NA 0.07 NA 0.035 (h) 0.07 Y Cobalt 7440-48-4 1,484 537 0.335 755 755 NA 1 1 NA 1.2 1 Y Copper 7440-50-8 799 242 0.344 18.4 18.4 1,000 NA 1,000 1,300 (j) 160 1,000 N Lead 7439-92-1 1,480 15 0.0744 3.14 3.14 15 NA 15 15 (k) 30 15 N Lithium 7439-93-2 1,015 523 1.697 739 739 NA NA NA NA 8 8 Y Manganese 7439-96-5 856 699 0.231 30,000 30,000 50 NA 200 50 (e) 86 50 Y Mercury 7439-97-6 1,480 111 0.017 1.11 1.11 1 NA 1 2 1.14 (1) 1 Y Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1,484 1,196 0.096 3,140 3,140 NA NA 18 NA 20 18 Y Nickel 7440-02-0 799 401 0.345 808 808 100 NA 100 NA 78 (m) 100 Y Radium Total)(') 7440-14-4 1,056 878 0 58.8 58.8 NA NA NA 5 NA 5 Y Selenium 7782-49-2 1,537 361 0.103 416 416 20 NA 20 50 20 20 Y Silver 7440-22-4 53 9 0.318 7 7 20 NA NA NA 18.8 20 N Strontium 7440-24-6 790 789 67 9,370 9,370 NA NA 2,100 NA 2,400 2,100 Y Thallium 7440-28-0 1,480 85 0.082 0.762 0.76 0.2 NA 0.2 2 0.04 (n) 0.2 Y Vanadium 7440-62-2 797 737 0.121 41.5 41.5 NA NA 0.3 NA 17.2 0.3 Y Zinc 7440-66-6 799 250 1.64 1,060 1,060 1 NA 1 5,000 e 1,200 1 Y * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service COPC - Constituent of Potential Concern DHHS - Department of Health and Human Services HI - Hazard Index IMAC - Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level mg/L - milligrams per liter NA - Not Applicable NC - North Carolina NCAC - North Carolina Administrative Code RSL - Regional Screening Level SMCL - Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (a) - North Carolina 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater Standards & IMACs. http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=laa3fal3-2cOf-45b7-ae96-5427fbld25b4&groupId=38364 Amended April 2013. (b) - DHHS Screening Levels. Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Public Health, Epidemiology Section, Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch. http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_I_id=1169848&folderld=24814087&name=DLFE-112704.pdf (c) - USEPA 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories. March 2018. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-03/documents/dwtable2018.pdf (d) - USEPA Regional Screening Levels (May 2019). Values for Residential Soil, Industrial Soil, and Tap Water. HI = 0.2. https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-generic-tables (e) - Value is the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level. https://www.epa.gov/dwstandardsregulations/secondary-drinking-water-standards-guidance-nuisance-chemicals (f) - RSL for Antimony (metallic) used for Antimony. (g) - Value applies to inorganic form of arsenic only. (h) - Value based on a target risk of 1 x 10-6 (i) - Value for Chromium (III), Insoluble Salts used for Chromium. (j) - Copper Treatment Technology Action Level is 1.3 mg/L. (k) - Lead Treatment Technology Action Level is 0.015 mg/L. (1) - RSL for Mercuric Chloride used for Mercury. (m) - RSL for Nickel Soluble Salts used for Nickel. (n) - RSL for Thallium (Soluble Salts) used for Thallium. Prepared by: TCP Checked by: ARID lag/L - micrograms/liter USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency (o) - Total Radium concentrations are in units of picocurries per liter (pCi/L). Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 2 TABLE 2-2 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING - SEDIMENT - WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Analyte CAS Number of Samples Frequency of Detection Range of Detection (mg/kg) Concentration Used for Screening (mg/kg) es PSRG Res Health Screening Level (a) (mg/kg) Residential Soil RSL (b) HI = 0.2 (mg/kg) NC NC PSRG Industrial Health Screening Level (a) (mg/kg) Industrial Soil RSL (b) HI = 0.2 (mg/kg) Residential Screening Value Used (mg/kg) Industrial Screening Value Used (mg/kg) Residential COPC? Industrial COPC? Min. Max. Aluminum 7429-90-5 5 5 15,000 22,000 22,000 16,000 15,400 230,000 220,000 16,000 230,000 y N Antimony 7440-36-0 5 0 NA NA ND 6.3 (c) 6.2 (c) 93 (c) 94 (c) 6.3 93 N N Arsenic 7440-38-2 5 4 0.52 1.8 2 0.68 (d) 0.68 (d, e) 3 (e) 3 (d, e) 0.68 3 y N Barium 7440-39-3 5 5 16 100 100 3,100 3,000 47,000 44,000 3,100 47,000 N N Beryllium 7440-41-7 5 5 0.47 0.85 0.9 31 32 470 460 31 470 N N Boron 7440-42-8 5 2 1.5 1.9 2 3,100 3,200 47,000 46,000 3,100 47,000 N N Cadmium 7440-43-9 5 2 0.057 0.064 0.1 14 14.2 200 196 14 200 N N Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 5 5 16 31 31 23,000 (f) 24,000 (f) 350,000 (f) 360,000 (f) 23,000 350,000 N N Cobalt 7440-48-4 5 5 12 16 16 4.7 4.6 70 70 4.7 70 y N Copper 7440-50-8 5 5 33 51 51 630 620 9,300 9,400 630 9,300 N N Lead 7439-92-1 5 5 2 3.8 4 400 400 0) 800 800 0) 400 800 N N Manganese 7439-96-5 5 5 360 1,000 1,000 380 360 5,600 5,200 380 5,600 y N Mercury 7439-97-6 5 0 NA NA ND 4.7 (g) 4.6 (g) 70 (g) 70 (g) 4.7 70 N N Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5 0 NA NA ND 78 78 1,200 1,160 78 1,200 N N Nickel 7440-02-0 5 5 8.3 16 16 310 (h) 300 (h) 4,700 (h) 4,400 (h) 310 4,700 N N Selenium 7782-49-2 5 2 0.84 0.85 1 78 78 1,200 1,160 78 1,200 N N Silver 7440-22-4 5 5 0.23 0.63 0.63 78 78 1,200 1,160 78 1,200 N N Strontium 7440-24-6 5 5 35 130 130 9,400 9,400 140,000 140,000 9,400 140,000 N N Thallium 7440-28-0 5 3 0.081 0.11 0.11 0.16 (i) 0.156 (i) 2.3 (i) 2.4 (i) 0.16 2.3 N N Vanadium 7440-62-2 5 5 59 87 87 78 78 1,200 1,160 78 1,200 y N Zinc 7440-66-6 5 5 26 56 56 4,700 4,600 70,000 70,000 4,700 70,000 N N * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service NC - North Carolina COPC - Constituent of Potential Concern ND - Not Detected HI - Hazard Index PSRG - Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal mg/kg - milligrams/kilogram RSL - Regional Screening Level NA - Not Applicable USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency (a) - North Carolina Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRG) Table. HI = 0.2. May 2019. https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Waste%20Management/DWM/risk_based_remediation/PSRGs_May20l9_FINAL.pdf (b) - USEPA Regional Screening Levels (May 2019). Values for Residential and Industrial Soil. HI = 0.2. https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-generic-tables (c) - RSL for Antimony (metallic) used for Antimony. (d) - Value applies to inorganic form of arsenic. (e) - Value based on a target risk of 1 x 10-6 (f) - Value for Chromium (III), Insoluble Salts used for Chromium. (g) - RSL for Mercuric Chloride used for Mercury. (h) - RSL for Nickel (Soluble Salts) used for Nickel. (i) - RSL for Thallium (Soluble Salts) used for Thallium. (j) - HI=0.1 Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 2 TABLE 2-3 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING - SURFACE WATER - WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Analyte CAS Number of Samples Fre Frequency q y of Detection Range of Detection (Ng/L) Concentration Used for Screening (N9/L) 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Standard (a) (Ng/L) 15A NCAC 02L .0202 IMAC (a) (pg/L) 15A NCAC 02B Water Supply (WS) (N9/L) 15A NCAC 02B Human Health () (pg/LN9 USEPA AWQC Consumption of Water and Organism (c) (Ng/L) USEPA AWQC Consumption of Organism Only (c) (Ng/L) Federal MCL/ SMCL (d) (pg/L) Tap Water RSL HI = 0.2 (e) (N9/L) Screening Value Used (Ng/L) COPC? Min. Max. Aluminum 7429-90-5 19 19 145 5,460 5,460 NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 to 200 (f) 4,000 50 Y Antimony 7440-36-0 19 0 NA NA ND 1 NA NA NA 5.6 640 6 1.56 (g) 1 N Arsenic 7440-38-2 19 19 0.75 0.952 0.952 10 NA 10 10 0.018 (h) 0.14 (h) 10 0.052 (h, i) 10 N Barium 7440-39-3 19 19 28 4,990 4,990 700 NA 1,000 NA 1,000 NA 2,000 760 700 Y Beryllium 7440-41-7 19 1 0.358 0.358 0.358 NA 4 NA NA NA NA 4 5 4 N Boron 7440-42-8 19 19 594 5,510 5,510 700 NA NA NA NA NA NA 800 700 Y Cadmium 7440-43-9 19 1 0.114 0.114 0.114 2 NA NA NA NA NA 5 1.84 2 N Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 19 12 0.341 0.734 0.734 10 NA NA NA NA NA 100 4,400 (j) 10 N Chromium (VI) 18540-29-9 19 19 0.038 0.065 0.065 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.035 (i) 0.035 Y Cobalt 7440-48-4 19 0 NA NA ND NA 1 NA NA NA NA NA 1.2 1 N Copper 7440-50-8 19 19 1.47 2.02 2.02 1,000 NA NA NA 1,300 NA 1,300 (k) 160 1,000 N Lead 7439-92-1 19 1 0.925 0.925 0.925 15 NA NA NA NA NA 15 (1) 30 15 N Manganese 7439-96-5 19 19 48 5,110 5,110 50 NA NA NA 50 100 50 (f) 86 50 Y Mercury 7439-97-6 19 19 1.15E-03 0.00833 0.00833 1 NA NA NA NA NA 2 1.14 (m) 1 N Molybdenum 7439-98-7 19 19 2.82 3.4 3.4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 20 20 N Nickel 7440-02-0 19 19 0.629 0.958 0.958 100 NA 25 NA 610 4,600 NA 78 (n) 100 N Selenium 7782-49-2 19 19 0.616 0.809 0.809 20 NA NA NA 170 4,200 50 20 20 N Silver 7440-22-4 19 0 NA NA ND 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA 18.8 20 N Strontium 7440-24-6 19 19 112 4,990 4,990 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2,400 2,400 Y Thallium 7440-28-0 19 4 0.085 0.147 0.147 0.2 NA NA NA 0.24 0.47 2 0.04 (0) 0.2 N Vanadium 7440-62-2 19 19 1.18 2.21 2.21 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 17.2 17 N Zinc 7440-66-6 19 12 1.742 4,950 4,950 1 NA NA NA 7,400 26,000 5,000 (f) 1,200 1 Y * Data evaluation includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: pg/L - micrograms/liter IMAC - Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration mg/L - milligrams per liter WS - Water Supply AWQC - Ambient Water Quality Criteria MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level NCAC - North Carolina Administrative Code CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service NA - Not Applicable RSL - Regional Screening Level COPC - Constituent of Potential Concern NC - North Carolina SMCL - Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level HI - Hazard Index NO - Not Detected USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency -epared by: HEG/TCP Checked by: HES (a) - North Carolina 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater Standards & IMACs. http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=laa3fa13-2cOf-45b7-ae96-5427fbld25b4&groupId=38364 Amended April 2013. (b) - North Carolina 15A NCAC 02B Surface Water and Wetland Standards. Amended January 1, 2015. http: // repo rts. oa h. state. nc. us/ n ca c/title%2015a%20-%20e nv i ro n menta I%2Oq ua I i ty/chapter%2002%20-%20envi ron m e nta I%20 m a n a gem a nt/subchapter%20 b/subchapter%20 b%20 ru I es. pdf WS standards are applicable to all Water Supply Classifications. WS standards are based on the consumption of fish and water. Human Health Standards are based on the consumption of fish only unless dermal contact studies are available. (c) - USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. USEPA Office of Water and Office of Science and Technology. USEPA AWQC Human Health for the Consumption of Organism Only apply to total concentrations. https://www.epa.gov/wqc/national-recommended-water-quality-criteria-human-health-criteria-table (d) - USEPA 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories. March 2018. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-03/documents/dwtable2Ol8.pdf (e) - USEPA Regional Screening Levels (May 2019). Values for Tap Water. HI = 0.2. https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-generic-tables (f) - Value is the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level. https://www.epa.gov/dwstandardsregulations/secondary-drinking-water-standards-guidance-nuisance-chemicals (g) - RSL for Antimony (metallic) used for Antimony. (h) - Value applies to inorganic form of arsenic only. (i) - Value based on a target risk of 1 x 10-6 (j) - Value for Chromium (III), Insoluble Salts used for Chromium. (k) - Copper Treatment Technology Action Level is 1.3 mg/L. (1) - Lead Treatment Technology Action Level is 0.015 mg/L. (m) - RSL for Mercuric Chloride used for Mercury. (n) - RSL for Nickel Soluble Salts used for Nickel. (o) - RSL for Thallium (Soluble Salts) used for Thallium. Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT 3 ECOLOGICAL SCREENING TABLES SynTerra ATTACHMENT 3 TABLE 3-1 ECOLOGICAL SCREENING - SEDIMENT - WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Analyte CAS Number of Samples Frequency of Detection Range of Detection (mg/kg) Concentration Used for Screening (mg/kg) USEPA Region 4 Sediment Screening Values (a) (mg/kg) Screening Value Used (mg/kg) COPC? Min. Max. ESV RSV Aluminum 7429-90-5 5 5 15,000 22,000 22,000 25,000 (b) 58,000 (b) 25,000 N Antimony 7440-36-0 5 0 NA NA ND 2 (c) 25 (c) 2 N Arsenic 7440-38-2 5 4 0.52 1.8 1.8 9.8 (d) 33 (d) 9.8 N Barium 7440-39-3 5 5 16 100 100 20 (d) 60 (d) 20 Y Beryllium 7440-41-7 5 5 0.47 0.85 0.85 NA NA NA N Boron 7440-42-8 5 2 1.5 1.9 1 1.9 NA NA NA N Cadmium 7440-43-9 5 2 0.057 0.064 0.064 1 (d) 5 (d) 1 N Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 5 5 16 31 31 43.4 (d) 111 (d) 43.4 N Cobalt 7440-48-4 5 5 12 16 16 50 (e) NA (e) 50 N Copper 7440-50-8 5 5 33 51 51 31.6 (d) 149 (d) 31.6 Y Lead 7439-92-1 5 5 2 3.8 3.8 35.8 (d) 128 (d) 35.8 N Manganese 7439-96-5 5 5 360 1,000 1,000 460 (f) 1,100 (f) 460 Y Mercury 7439-97-6 5 0 NA NA ND 0.18 (d) 1.1 (d) 0.18 N Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5 0 NA NA ND NA NA NA N Nickel 7440-02-0 5 5 8.3 16 16 22.7 (d) 48.6 (d) 22.7 N Selenium 7782-49-2 5 2 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.8 (f) 1.2 (f) 0.8 Y Silver 7440-22-4 5 5 0.23 0.63 0.63 1 (d) 2.2 (d) 1 N Strontium 7440-24-6 5 5 35 130 130 NA NA NA N Thallium 7440-28-0 5 3 0.081 0.11 0.11 NA NA NA N Vanadium 7440-62-2 5 5 59 87 87 NA NA NA N Zinc 7440-66-6 5 5 26 56 56 121 (d) 459 (d) 121 N * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service mg/kg - milligrams/kilogram RSV - Refinement Screening Value COPC - Constituent of Potential Concern NA - Not Applicable USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency ESV - Ecoloigical Screening Value ND - Not Detected (a) - USEPA Region 4 Ecological Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance. March 2018 Update. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-03/documents/era_regiona I_supplementa I_g uida nce_report-march-2018_Update. pdf (b) - Los Alamos National Laboratory ECORISK Database. http://www.lani.gov/community-environment/environmental-stewardship/protection/eco-risk-assessment.php (c) - Long, Edward R., and Lee G. Morgan. 1991. The Potential for Biological Effects of Sediment-Sorbed Contaminants Tested in the National Status and Trends Program. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMA 52. Used effects range low (ER-L) for chronic and effects range medium (ER-M) for acute. (d) - MacDonald, D.D.; Ingersoll, C.G.; Smorong, D.E.; Lindskoog, R.A.; Sloane, G.; and T. Bernacki. 2003. Development and Evaluation of Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida Inland Waters. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, FL. Used threshold effect concentration (TEC) for the ESV and probable effect concentration (PEC) for the RSV. (e) - Persaud, D., R. Jaagumagi and A. Hayton. 1993. Guidelines for the protection and management of aquatic sediment quality in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Queen's Printer of Ontario. (f) - Los Alamos National Laboratory ECORISK Database. September 2017. http://www.lanl.gov/environment/protection/eco-risk-assessment.php Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 3 TABLE 3-2 ECOLOGICAL SCREENING - SURFACE WATER - WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Analyte CAS Number SampPles Frequency of Detection Range of Detection (Ng/L) Concentration Used for Screening (Ng/L) 15A NCAC 213 Freshwater Aquatic Life Chronic (a) (Ng/L) USEPA Region 4 Freshwater Chronic Screening Values (b) (Ng/L) USEPA AWQC (c) CCC (chronic) (Ng/L) Screening Value L) (N9/ ) COPC? Min. Max. Total Total Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 19 19 145 5,460 5,460 NA 87 (c) 87 87 y Antimony 7440-36-0 19 0 NA NA ND NA 190 (d) NA 190 N Arsenic 7440-38-2 19 19 0.75 0.952 0.952 NA 150 (c, e) 150 (e) 150 N Barium 7440-39-3 19 19 28 4,990 4,990 NA 220 (d) NA 220 y Beryllium 7440-41-7 19 1 0.358 0.358 0.358 NA 3.6 (f, d) NA 3.6 N Boron 7440-42-8 19 19 594 5,510 5,510 NA 7,200 (d) NA 7,200 N Cadmium 7440-43-9 19 1 0.114 0.114 0.114 NA 0.46 (f) 0.27 (g) 0.46 N Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 19 12 0.341 0.734 0.734 NA 48.8 (f, h) NA 48.8 N Chromium (VI) 18540-29-9 19 19 0.038 0.065 0.065 11 U) 11 U) 11 U) 11 N Cobalt 7440-48-4 19 0 NA NA ND NA 19 (d) NA 19 N Copper 7440-50-8 19 19 1.47 2.02 2.02 NA 5.16 (f) NA 5.16 N Lead 7439-92-1 19 1 0.925 0.925 0.925 NA 1.32 (f) NA 1.32 N Manganese 7439-96-5 19 19 48 5,110 5,110 NA 93 (d) NA 93 y Mercury 7439-97-6 19 19 1.15E-03 0.00833 0.00833 0.012 0.77 (c, i) NA 0.012 N Molybdenum 7439-98-7 19 19 2.82 3.4 3.4 NA 800 (d) NA 800 N Nickel 7440-02-0 19 19 0.629 0.958 0.958 NA 29 (f) NA 29 N Selenium 7782-49-2 19 19 0.616 0.809 0.809 5 5 (d) NA 5 N Silver 7440-22-4 19 0 NA NA ND NA 1.15 (k) NA 1.15 N Strontium 7440-24-6 19 19 112 4,990 4,990 NA 5,300 NA 5,300 N Thallium 7440-28-0 19 4 0.085 0.147 0.147 NA 6 (d) NA 6 N Vanadium 7440-62-2 19 19 1.18 2.21 2.21 NA 27 (d) NA 27 N Zinc 7440-66-6 19 12 1.742 4,950 1 4,950 1 NA 67 f 120 Ml 67 y * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: AWQC - Ambient Water Quality Criteria CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service CCC - Criterion Continuous Concentration COPC - Constituent of Potential Concern NA - Not Available NCAC - North Carolina Administrative Code ND - Not Detected pg/L - micrograms/liter USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency (a) - North Carolina 15A NCAC 02B Surface Water and Wetland Standards. Amended January 1, 2015. http://reports.oah.state. nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/subchapter%20b%20rules.pdf (b) - USEPA Region 4 Ecological Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance. March 2018 Update. https://www.epa. gov/sites/production/files/2018-03/documents/era_regional_su pplemental_guidance_report-march-2018_update. pdf (c) - USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. USEPA Office of Water and Office of Science and Technology. Accessed October 2018. https://www.epa.gov/wqc/national-recommended-water-quality-criteria-aquatic-life-criteria-table (d) - Great Lakes Initiative (GLI) Clearinghouse resources Tier II criteria revised 2013. http://www.epa.gov/gliclearinghouse/ (e) - Value applies to inorganic form of arsenic only. (f) - Criterion expressed as a function of total hardness, using a default hardness of 50 mg/L. (g) - Criterion expressed as a function of total hardness, using a default hardness of 100 mg/L. (h) - Value for Chromium (III), Insoluble Salts used for Chromium. (i) - Value for Inorganic Mercury. (j) - Value based on dissolved criteria. No total criteria available. (k) - Value based on total acute criteria. No total chronic criteria available. Prepared by: TCP Checked by: ARD Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra ATTACHMENT 4 DERIVATION OF RISK -BASED CONCENTRATIONS (EXTRACTED FROM HALEY AND ALDRICH 2015) Page] of4 TABLE 3-1 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL SCREENING LEVELS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Human Health Screening Levels Soil and Sediment Groundwater Surface Water INC PSRG Residential NC PSRG Industrial Soil 15A NCAC 15A NCAC 15A NCAC USEPA AWQC USEPA AWQC Residential Health Soil RSL (a) Industrial Health RSL (a) NC Protection 02L .0202 15A NCAC DHHS Tap Water RSL 02B 02B Consumption Consumption Screening Level HI = 0.2 Screening Level HI = 0.2 of Groundwater Standard 02L .0202 Screening Federal MCL/ HI = 0.2 Water Supply Human Health of Water and of Organism (hh) June 2015 (hh) June 2015 (PSRG ) (a) IMAC (a) Level (d) SMCL (c) 2015 (a) (WS) (f) (HH) (f) Organism (b) Only (b) Constituent CAS m Ik m /k m /k m /k m /k u /L u /L u /L u /L u /L u /L u /L u /L u /L Aluminum 7429-90-5 15,000 15,000 100,000 220,000 NA NA NA 3,500 50 to 200 (1) 4,000 NA NA NA NA Antimony 7440-36-0 6.2 (m) 6.2 (m) 94 (m) 94 (m) 0.9 (m) 1 NA 1 6 1.56 (m) NA NA 5.6 640 Arsenic 7440-38-2 0.68 (h) 0.68 (h) 3 (h) 3 (h) 5.8 (h) 10 NA 10 10 0.052 (h) 10 10 0.018 (h) 0.14 (h) Barium 7440-39-3 3,000 3,000 44,000 44,000 580 700 NA 700 2,000 760 1,000 NA 1,000 NA Beryllium 7440-41-7 32 32 460 460 63 NA 4 4 4 5 NA NA NA NA Boron 7440-42-8 3,200 3,200 46,000 46,000 45 700 NA 700 NA 800 NA NA NA NA Cadmium 7440-43-9 14 14.2 200 196 3 2 NA 2 5 1.84 NA NA NA NA Calcium 7440-70-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 24,000 (n) 24,000 (n) 100,000 (n) 360,000 (n) 360,000 (n) 10 NA 10 100 Q) 4,400 (n) NA NA NA NA Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 0.3 0.3 6.3 6.3 3.8 NA NA 0.07 NA 0.035 NA NA NA NA Chromium, Trivalent 16065-83-1 24,000 24,000 100,000 360,000 360,000 NA NA NA NA 4,400 NA NA NA NA Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.6 4.6 70 70 0.9 NA 1 1 NA 1.2 NA NA NA NA Copper 7440-50-8 620 620 9,400 9,400 700 1,000 NA 1,000 1,300 (k) 160 NA NA 1,300 NA Iron 7439-89-6 11,000 11,000 100,000 164,000 150 300 NA 2,500 300 (1) 2,800 NA NA NA NA Lead 7439-92-1 400 400 800 800 270 15 NA 15 15 (1) 15 NA NA NA NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Manganese 7439-96-5 360 360 5,200 5,200 65 50 NA 200 50 (i) 86 200 NA 50 100 Mercury 7439-97-6 4.6 (o) 4.6 (o) 3.1 (o) 70 (o) 1 (0) 1 NA 1 2 1.14 (o) NA NA NA NA Molybdenum 7439-98-7 78 78 1,200 1,160 NA NA NA 18 NA 20 NA NA NA NA Nickel 7440-02-0 300 (p) 300 (p) 4,400 (p) 4,400 (p) 130 (p) 100 NA 100 NA 78 (p) 25 NA 610 4,600 Potassium 7440-09-7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Selenium 7782-49-2 78 78 1,200 1,160 2.1 20 NA 20 50 20 NA NA 170 4,200 Sodium 7440-23-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 20,000 NA NA NA NA NA NA Strontium 7440-24-6 9,400 9,400 100,000 100,000 NA NA NA 2,100 NA 2,400 NA NA NA NA Thallium 7440-28-0 0.16 (q) 0.156 (q) 2.4 (q) 2.4 (q) 0.28 (q) 0.2 NA 0.2 2 0.04 (q) NA NA 0.24 0.47 Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 78 78 1,160 1,160 6 NA NA 0.3 NA 17.2 NA NA NA NA Zinc 7440-66-6 4,600 4,600 70,000 70,000 1,200 1 NA 1 5,000 (i) 1,200 NA NA 7,400 26,000 Alkalinity ALK NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chloride 7647-14-5 NA NA NA NA NA 250,000 NA 0.25 250,000 (i) NA 250,000 NA NA NA Methane 74-82-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Nitrate 14797-55-8 26,000 26,000 100,000 380,000 NA NA NA NA 10,000 6,400 10,000 NA 10,000 NA pH PH NA NA NA NA NA 6.5 - 8.5 NA NA 6.5 - 8.5 NA NA NA 5.0 - 9.0 NA Sulfate 7757-82-6 NA NA NA NA NA 250,000 NA 250,000 (w) 250,000 (1) NA 250,000 NA NA NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Dissolved Solids TDS NA NA NA NA NA 500,000 NA NA 500,000 (1) NA 500,000 NA 250,000 NA Total Organic Carbon TOC NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Suspended Solids TSS NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 2015-1217-HAI Screening -e Ie Update 1.Al ,ALL 1/11/2016 Page 2 of 4 TABLE HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL SCREENING LEVELS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Ecological Screening Levels Soil Sediment Eco-SSL (ee) Eco-SSL (ee) Eco-SSL (ee) Eco-SSL (ee) ORNL (ff) ORNL (gg) USEPA Region 4 USEPA Region 4 Avian Soil Invertebrate Soil Mammalian Plants Soil Invertebrate Soil Plant Sediment Soil Screening Screening Screening Soil Screening Screening Screening Screening Screening Values (g) Benchmark (g) Benchmark Benchmark Benchmark Benchmark Benchmark Benchmark m /k Constituent CAS m /k m Ik m /k m /k m /k m /k m /k ESV RSV Aluminum 7429-90-5 50 NA NA NA NA NA 50 25,000 (x) 58,000 (x) Antimony 7440-36-0 0.27 NA 78 0.27 NA NA 5 2 (y) 25 (y) Arsenic 7440-38-2 18 43 NA 46 18 60 10 9.8 (z) 33 (z) Barium 7440-39-3 330 NA 330 2,000 NA NA 500 20 (z) 60 (z) Beryllium 7440-41-7 10 NA 40 21 NA NA 10 NA NA Boron 7440-42-8 7.5 NA NA NA 0.5 NA 0.5 NA NA Cadmium 7440-43-9 0.36 0.77 140 0.36 32 20 4 1 (z) 5 (z) Calcium 7440-70-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 28 26 (n) NA 34 (n) NA 0.4 1 43.4 (z) 111 (z) Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 0.35 NA NA 130 NA 0.4 1 NA NA Chromium, Trivalent 16065-83-1 18 26 NA 34 NA NA NA NA NA Cobalt 7440-48-4 13 120 NA 230 13 NA 20 50 (aa) NA (aa) Copper 7440-50-8 28 120 NA 230 13 50 100 31.6 (z) 149 (z) Iron 7439-89-6 200 NA NA NA NA NA NA 20,000 (aa) 40,000 (aa) Lead 7439-92-1 11 11 1700 56 120 500 50 35.8 (z) 128 (z) Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Manganese 7439-96-5 220 4,300 450 4,000 220 NA 500 460 (bb) 1,100 (bb) Mercury 7439-97-6 0.1 NA 0.1 NA 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.18 (z) 1.1 (z) Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2 NA NA NA 2 NA 2 NA NA Nickel 7440-02-0 38 210 280 130 38 200 30 22.7 (z) 48.6 (z) Potassium 7440-09-7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Selenium 7782-49-2 0.52 1.2 4.1 0.63 0.52 70 1 11 (bb) 20 (bb) Sodium 7440-23-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Strontium 7440-24-6 96 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Thallium 7440-28-0 0.22 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.8 7.8 NA 280 2 NA 2 NA NA Zinc 7440-66-6 46 46 120 79 160 100 50 121 (z) 459 (z) Alkalinity ALK NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chloride 7647-14-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Methane 74-82-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Nitrate 14797-55-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA pH PH NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Sulfate 7757-82-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 39 (bb) 61 (bb) Total Dissolved Solids TDS NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Organic Carbon TOC NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Suspended Solids TSS NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 2015-1217-HAI Screening -e Ie Update 1.Ae , ALL 1/11/2016 Page 3 of4 TABLE HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL SCREENING LEVELS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Ecological Screening Levels Surface Water 15A NCAC 2B 15A NCAC 2B USEPA Region 4 USEPA Region 4 USEPA USEPA Freshwater Aquatic Life Freshwater Aquatic Life Freshwater Acute Screening Freshwater Chronic Screening AWQC (b) AWQC (b) Acute (f) Chronic (f) Values (g) Values (g) CMC (acute) CCC (chronic) u IL u /L OWL) OWL) u /L u /L Constituent CAS Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total I Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 NA NA NA NA 750 (b) NA 87 (b) NA 750 NA 87 NA Antimony 7440-36-0 NA NA NA NA 900 (cc) NA 190 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Arsenic 7440-38-2 NA 340 NA 150 340 (b, h) 340 (b, h) 150 (b, h) 150 (b, h) 340 (h) 340 (h) 150 (h) 150 (h) Barium 7440-39-3 NA NA NA NA 2000 (cc) NA 220 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Beryllium 7440-41-7 NA 65 NA 6.5 31 (r, cc) NA 3.6 (r, cc) NA NA NA NA NA Boron 7440-42-8 NA NA NA NA 34,000 (cc) NA 7,200 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Cadmium 7440-43-9 NA 0.82 (u) NA 0.15 (u) 1.1 (r) 1.0 (r) 0.16 (r) 0.15 (r) 2.13 (r) 2.01 (r) 0.27 (r) 0.25 (r) Calcium 7440-70-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA 116,000 (dd) NA NA NA NA NA Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3 NA 183 (n, u 50 24 (n, u 1,022 (n, r) 323 (n, r) 48.8 (n, r) 42.0 (n, r) 1,803 (n, r) 570 (n, r) 86.2 (n, r) 74.1 (n, r) Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 NA 16 NA 11 16 (b) 15.4 (b) 11 (b) 10.6 (b) NA NA NA NA Chromium, Trivalent 16065-83-1 NA 183 (u) NA 24 (u) 1,022 (r) 323 (r) 48.8 (r) 42.0 (r) 1,803 (r) 570 (r) 86.2 (r) 74.1 (r) Cobalt 7440-48-4 NA NA NA NA 120 (cc) NA 19 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Copper 7440-50-8 NA 3.6 (u) NA 2.7 (u) 7.3 (r) 7.0 (r) 5.16 (r) 4.95 (r) 14.0 (r) 13.4 (r) 9.33 (r) 8.96 (r) Iron 7439-89-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1,000 (b) NA NA NA 1,000 NA Lead 7439-92-1 NA 14 (u) NA 0.54 (u) 33.8 (r) 30.1 (r) 1.32 (r) 1.17 (r) 81.6 (r) 64.6 (r) 3.18 (r) 2.52 (r) Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA NA NA NA NA NA 82,000 (dd) NA NA NA NA NA Manganese 7439-96-5 NA NA NA NA 1,680 (cc) NA 93 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Mercury 7439-97-6 NA NA 0.012 NA 1.4 (b, s) 1.2 (b, s) 0.77 (b, s) 0.65 (b, s) 1.4 (s) 1.2 (s) 0.77 (s) 0.65 (s) Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NA NA NA NA 7,200 (cc) NA 800 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Nickel 7440-02-0 NA 145 (u) NA 16 (u) 261 (r) 260 (r) 29.0 (r) 28.9 (r) 469 (r) 468 (r) 52.2 (r) 52.0 (r) Potassium 7440-09-7 NA NA NA NA NA NA 53,000 (dd) NA NA NA NA NA Selenium 7782-49-2 NA NA 5 NA 20 (cc) NA 5 (cc) NA 12.82 (t) NA 5 (t) NA Sodium 7440-23-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA 680,000 (dd) NA NA NA NA NA Strontium 7440-24-6 NA NA NA NA 48,000 (cc) NA 5,300 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Thallium 7440-28-0 NA NA NA NA 54 (cc) NA 6 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 NA NA NA NA 79 (cc) NA 27 (cc) NA NA NA NA NA Zinc 7440-66-6 NA 36 (u) NA 36 (u) 67 (r) 65 (r) 67 (r) 66 (r) 120 (r) 117 (r) 120 (r) 118 (r) Alkalinity ALK NA NA NA NA NA NA 20,000 NA NA NA 20,000 NA Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chloride 7647-14-5 NA NA 230,000 (v) NA 860,000 (b) NA 230,000 (b) NA 860,000 NA 230,000 NA Methane 74-82-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Nitrate 14797-55-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA pH PH NA NA 6.0 - 9.0 NA NA NA 6.5 - 9.0 (b) NA NA NA 6.5 - 9.0 NA Sulfate 7757-82-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2 NA Total Dissolved Solids TDS NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Organic Carbon TOC NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Suspended Solids TSS NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 2015-1217-HAI Screening -e Ie Update 1.Al ,ALL 1/11/2016 Page 4 of 4 TABLE 3-1 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL SCREENING LEVELS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Notes: AWQC - Ambient Water Quality Criteria. DENR - Department of Environment and Natural Resources. mg/kg - milligrams/kilogram. RSV - Refinement Screening Value. CAMA - Coal Ash Management Act. DHHS - Department of Health and Human Services. NA - Not Available. SMCL - Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level. North Carolina Session Law 2014-122, ESV - Ecological Screening Value. NC - North Carolina. SSL - Soil Screening Level. http://www.ncleg.nettSessions/2013/Bills/Senate/PDF/S729v7.pdf HH - Human Health NCAC - North Carolina Administrative Code. su - Standard units. CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service. HI - Hazard Index. ORNL - Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ug/L - micrograms/liter. CCC - Criterion Continuous Concentration. IMAC - Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration. PSRG - Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal. USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency. CMC - Criterion Maximum Concentration. MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level. RSL - Regional Screening Level. WS - Water Supply. (a) - USEPA Regional Screening Levels (June 2015). Values for Residential Soil, Industrial Soil, and Tap Water. HI = 0.2. Accessed November 2015. http://www2. epa.gov/risk/risk-based-screening-table-generic-tables (b) - USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. USEPA Office of Water and Office of Science and Technology. Accessed April 2015. http://water. epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/cu rrenttindex.cfm USEPA AWQC Human Health for the Consumption of Organism Only apply to total concentrations. (c) - USEPA 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories. Spring 2012. Accessed April 2015. http://water.epa. gov/action/advisories/drinking/upload/dwstandards2012. pdf (d) - DHHS Screening Levels. Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Public Health, Epidemiology Section, Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch. http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_I_id=1169848&folderld=24814087&name=DLFE-112704.pdf (a) - North Carolina 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater Standards & IMACs. http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=taa3fa13-2cOf-45b7-ae96-5427fbld25b4&groupld=38364 Amended April 2013. (f) - North Carolina 15A NCAC 02B Surface Water and Wetland Standards. Amended January 1, 2015. http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title % 2015a / 20- / 20environmental / 20quality/chapter / 2002 / 20- / 20environmental / 20managementtsubchapter / 20b/subchapter / 20b / 20rules.pdf WS standards are applicable to all Water Supply Classifications. WS standards are based on the consumption of fish and water. Human Health Standards are based on the consumption of fish only unless dermal contact studies are available. For Class C, use the most stringent of freshwater (or, if applicable, saltwater) column and the Human Health column. For a WS water, use the most stringent of Freshwater, WS and Human Health. Likewise, Trout Waters and High Quality Waters must adhere to the most stingent of all applicable standards. (g) - USEPA Region 4. 2015. Region 4 Ecological Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance Interim Draft. August. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/r4 era_guidance_ document_ draft_final 8-25-2015.pdf (h) - Value applies to inorganic form of arsenic only. (i) - Value is the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level. 0) - Value for Total Chromium. (k) - Copper Treatment Technology Action Level is 1.3 mg/L. (1) - Lead Treatment Technology Action Level is 0.015 mg/L. (m) - RSL for Antimony (metallic) used for Antimony. (n) - Value for Chromium (III), Insoluble Salts used for Chromium. (o) - RSL for Mercuric Chloride used for Mercury. (p) - RSL for Nickel Soluble Salts used for Nickel. (q) - RSL for Thallium (Soluble Salts) used for Thallium. (r) - Criterion expressed as a function of total hardness (mg/L). Value displayed corresponds to a default total hardness of 100 mg/L. (s) - Value for Inorganic Mercury. (t) - Acute AWQC is equal to 1/[(f1/CMC1) + (f2/CMC2)] where f1 and f2 are the fractions of total selenium that are treated as selenite and selenate, respectively, and CMC1 and CMC2 are 185.9 ug/L and 12.82 ug/L, respectively. Calculated assuming that all selenium is present as selenate, a likely overly conservative assumption. (u) - Criterion expressed as a function of total hardness (mg/L). Value displayed corresponds to a default total hardness of 25 mg/L. (v) - Chloride Action Level for Toxic Substances Applicable to NPDES Permits is 230,000 ug/L. (w) - Applicable only to persons with a sodium restrictive diet. (x) - Los Alamos National Laboratory ECORISK Database. http://www.lanl.gov/community-environmentlenvironmental-stewardship/protection/eco-risk-assessment.php (y) - Long, Edward R., and Lee G. Morgan. 1991. The Potential for Biological Effects of Sediment-Sorbed Contaminants Tested in the National Status and Trends Program. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMA 52. Used effects range low (ER-L) for chronic and effects range medium (ER-M) for acute. (z) - MacDonald, D.D.; Ingersoll, C.G.; Smorong, D.E.; Lindskoog, R.A.; Sloane, G.; and T. Bernacki. 2003. Development and Evaluation of Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida Inland Waters. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, FL. Used threshold effect concentration (TEC) for the ESV and probable effect concentration (PEC) for the RSV. (aa) - Persaud, D., R. Jaagumagi and A. Hayton. 1993. Guidelines for the protection and management of aquatic sediment quality in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Queen's Printer of Ontario. (bb) - Washington State Sediment Management Standards, Cleanup Objections. http:/Avww.ecy.wa.gov/programs/tcp/smu/sed_standards.htm (cc) - Great Lakes Initiative (GLI) Clearinghouse resources Tier 11 criteria revised 2013. http://www.epa.gov/gliclearinghouse/ (dd) - Suter, G.W., and Tsao, C.L. 1996. Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Potential Contaminants of Concern for Effects on Aquatic Biota: 1996 Revision. ES/ER/TM-96/R2. hftp://www.esd.ornl.gov/programs/ecorisk/documents/tm96r2.pdf (ee) - USEPA. 2015. Interim Ecological Soil Screening Level Documents. http://www2.epa.gov/chemical-research/interim-ecological-soil-screening-level-documents (ff) - Efroymson, R.A., M.E. Will, and G.W. Suter II, 1997a. Toxicological Benchmarks for Contaminants of Potential Concern for Effects on Soil and Litter Invertebrates and Heterotrophic Process: 1997 Revision. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. ES/ER/TM-126/R2. (Available at http://www.esd.ornl.gov/programs/ecorisk/documents/tml26r2l.pdo (gg) - Efroymson, R.A., M.E. Will, G.W. Suter 11, and A.C. Wooten, 1997b. Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Contaminants of Potential Concern for Effects on Terrestrial Plants: 1997 Revision. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. ES/ER/TM-85/R3. (Available at http://www.esd.orni.gov/programs/ecorisk/documents/tm85r3.pdf) (hh) - North Carolina Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRG) Table. HI = 0.2. September 2015. http://porLal.nedenr.org/Gtdocument_library/get_file?uuid=0f60lffa-574d-4479-bbb4-253af0665bf5&groupld=38361 Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 2015-1217-HAI Screening -e Ie Update 1.Al , ALL 1/11/2016 Page 1 of 5 TABLE 4-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Current/Future On -Site Current/Future Off -Site Resident Trespasser Cument/Future Off -Site Recreational Swimmer Child (Age <6) Adult Child and Adult (Ages 1-26) Adolescent (6-<16 years) Child (Age <6) Adolescent (6-<16 years) Adult Child, Adolescent and Adult (Ages 1 - 26) Parameter Units Standard Parameters Body Weight BW kg 15 USEPA, 80 USEPA, NA 44 USEPA, 2011 15 USEPA, 44 USEPA, 80 USEPA, NA 2014a 2014a [7] 2011 [1] 2011 [1] 2014a Exposure Duration ED years 6 Ages <6 20 Balance of 26 USEPA, 10 Ages 6 - <16 6 Ages <6 10 Ages 6 - <16 10 Balance of 26 Site- 26-yr 2014a 26-yr specific exposure exposure Non —carcinogenic Averaging Time Atnc days 2190 ED 7300 ED 9490 ED 3650 ED expressed 2190 ED 3650 ED 3650 ED 9490 ED expressed in expressed expressed in days expressed in expressed in expressed in expressed days in days in days days days days in days Carcinogenic Averaging Time Ate days 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime Incidental Ingestion of Soil Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA 45 USEPA, NA NA NA NA 2014b Soil Ingestion Rate IR mg/day NA NA NA 100 USEPA, 2011 NA NA NA NA [4) Fraction Ingested FI unitless NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific NA NA NA NA [s] Age -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Rate IFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 23 NA NA NA NA Aye -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day 68 Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Soil Exposed Skin Surface Area SA em2 NA NA NA 3160 USEPA, 2011 NA NA NA NA [7] Soil Adherence Factor AF mg/cm' NA NA NA 0.10 USEPA, 2011 NA NA NA NA [s] Fraction Dermal EV event/day NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific NA NA NA NA [6] Aye -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 72 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM 215 mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic Particulate Inhalation Exposure Time ETA hours/day NA NA NA 2 Site -specific NA NA NA NA 2) Incidental Ingestion of Sediment Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141, 20141, 20141, 20141, 20141, Sediment Ingestion Rate IR mg/day NA NA NA 10 USEPA, 2011 10 USEPA, 10 USEPA, 5 USEPA, NA [4] 2011 [4] 2011 [4] 2011 [4] Fraction Ingested FI unitless NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [s] [s] [s] [s] specific Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Rate IFSadj mg-yr/kgday NA NA NA 2 NA NA NA 7 Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 7 NA NA NA 29 Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Sediment Exposed Skin Surface Area SA ten' NA NA NA 3820 USEPA, 2011 6378 USEPA, 13350 USEPA, 20900 USEPA, NA [12] 2014a 2011 [11] 2014a Sediment Adherence Factor AF mg/cm' NA NA NA 0.10 USEPA, 2011 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.07 USEPA, NA [9] 2011 [9] 2011 [9] 2011 [8] Fraction Dermal EV event/day NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [6] [6] [6] [6] specific Aye -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 87 NA NA NA 741 Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM NA NA NA 260 NA NA NA 2454 mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic 1/11/2016 Page 2 of 5 TABLE 4-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Current/Future On -Site Current/Future Off -Site Resident Trespasser Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Swimmer Child and Adult (Ages Adolescent (6-<16 Adolescent (6-<16 Child, Adolescent Child (Age <6) Adult 1 -26) Child (Age <6) Adult and Adult (Ages 1 - Parameter Units years) years) 26) Incidental Ingestion of Groundwater [17] Exposure Frequency EF dayslyear NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Water Ingestion Rate IR L/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA I NA NA NA Dermal Exposure with Groundwater Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposed Skin Surface Area SA crn' NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposure Time t-event hr/event NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Events per Day EV event/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Incidental Ingestion of Surface Water [17] Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141, 20141b 2014b 2014b 20141b Water Ingestion Rate IR Llday NA NA NA 0.02 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, NA 2014b [13] 2014b [13] 2014b [13] 2014b [13] Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [5] [5] [5] [5] specific Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Rate IFWadj L/kg NA NA NA 0.2 NA NA NA 3.4 Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Factor- IFWM L/kg NA NA NA 0.6 NA NA NA 13.2 Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Surface Water Exposure Frequency EF dayslyear NA NA NA 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b Exposed Skin Surface Area SA ten' NA NA NA 3820 USEPA, 2011 6378 USEPA, 13350 USEPA, 20900 USEPA, NA [12] 2014a 2011 [11] 2014a Exposure Time t-event hr/event NA NA NA 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 [5] [s] [s] [s] Events per Day EV event/day NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [5] [5] [5] [5] specific Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFWadj eventscm'/kg NA NA NA 39068 NA NA NA 368901 Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFWM events-cm'/kg NA NA NA 117205 NA NA NA 1139453 Mutagenic Ingestion of Fish - Subsistence Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Ingestion of Fish - Recreational Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1/11/2016 Page 3 of 5 TABLE 4-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY CurrentlFuture Off -Site Recreational Wader Current/Future On- Current/Future On - Parameter Units Current/Future Off- Site Recreational Boater Current/Future OffSite Fisher Site Commercial/ Industrial Worker Site Construction Worker Child (Age <6) Adolescent (6-<16 yedre) Adult Child, Adolescent and Adult (Ages 1 - 26) Standard Parameters Body Weight BW kg 15 USEPA, 44 USEPA, 80 USEPA, NA 80 USEPA, 80 USEPA, 2014a 80 USEPA, 80 USEPA, 2011 [1] 2011 [1] 2014a 2014a 2014a 2014a Exposure Duration ED years 6 Ages <6 10 Ages 6 - <16 10 Balance of 26 Site- 10 Balance of 10 Balance of 26-yr 25 USEPA, 1 USEPA, 2002 26-yr specific 26-yr exposure 2014a exposure exposure Non —carcinogenic Averaging Time Atnc days 2190 ED 3650 ED 3650 ED 9490 ED 3650 ED 3650 ED expressed in 9125 ED 365 ED expressed in expressed in expressed in expressed expressed in days expressed in expressed in days days days in days days days days Carcinogenic Averaging Time Atc days 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year lifetime 25550 70 year 25550 70 year lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime Incidental Ingestion of Soil Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA 250 USEPA, 60 Site -specific 2014a 1161 Soil Ingestion Rate IR mg/day NA NA NA NA NA NA 100 USEPA, 330 USEPA, 2014a 2002 Fraction Ingested FI unitless NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 USEPA, 1.0 USEPA, 2002 2014a Age -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Rate IFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Soil Exposed Skin Surface Area SA cm2 NA NA NA NA NA NA 3470 USEPA, 3470 USEPA, 2014a 2014a Soil Adherence Factor AF rrig/cm' NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.12 USEPA, 0.3 USEPA, 2002 2014a Fraction Dermal EV event/day NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 USEPA, 1.0 USEPA, 2002 2014a Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic Particulate Inhalation Exposure Time ETA hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA 4 Site -specific 8 USEPA, [141 2014a Incidental Ingestion of Sediment Exposure Frequency days/year 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 2014b 12 Site -specific NA 2014b 2014b 2014b 2014b 2014b [14] Sediment Ingestion Rate [IFSadj mg/day 10 USEPA, 10 USEPA, 5 USEPA, NA 5 USEPA, 5 USEPA, 2011 5 USEPA, 2011 NA 2011 [41 2011 [41 2011 [41 2011 [41 [41 [4] Fraction Ingested unitless 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Sil 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific [6] 1.0 USEPA, NA [6] [6] [6] specific [6] 2014a Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Rate mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 7 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 29 NA NA NA NA Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Sediment Exposed Skin Surface Area SA an' 1770 USEPA, 3820 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, NA 5790 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, 2011 670 USEPA, 2011 NA 2011[121 2011[121 2011[121 2011[121 [121 [151 Sediment Adherence Factor AF mgl 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.07 USEPA, NA 0.1 USEPA, 0.1 USEPA, 2011 0.1 USEPA, NA 2011 [9] 1 2011 [9] 1 2011 [8] 2011 [8] 1 181 2014a Fraction Dermal EV event/day 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific [6] 1.0 USEPA, NA [6] [6] [6] specific [6] 2014a Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 208 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM NA NA NA 689 NA NA NA NA mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic 1/11/2016 Page 4 of 5 TABLE 4-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Wader Current/Future On- Current/Future On - Current/Future Off- Site Commercial/ Site Construction Child, Adolescent Child (Age <6) Adolescent (6-<16 Adult and Adult (Ages 1 - Site Recreational Current/Future OffSite Industrial Worker Worker Parameter Units years) 26) Boater Fisher Incidental Ingestion of Groundwater [17] Exposure Frequency EF dayslyear NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 60 Site -specific 1161 Water Ingestion Rate IR L/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.004 USEPA, 2011 [101 Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Assumption Dermal Exposure with Groundwater Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 60 Site -specific [16] Exposed Skin Surface Area SA crri' NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 670 USEPA, 2011 1151 Exposure Time t-event hr/event NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.6 Site -specific [16] Events per Day EV event/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Assumption Incidental Ingestion of Surface Water [17] Exposure Frequency EF days/year 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, NA NA NA NA 20141, 20141b 20141b 20141b Water Ingestion Rate IR L/day 0.10 USEPA, 0.02 USEPA, 0.02 USEPA, NA NA NA NA NA 2014b [13] 2014b [13] 2014b [13] Fraction Ingested FI unilless 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- NA NA NA NA 151 151 151 specific Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Rate IFWad] Ukg NA NA NA 2.12 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Factor- IFWM L/kg NA NA NA 10.33 NA NA NA NA Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Surface Water Exposure Frequency EF days/year 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141b 12 Site -specific NA 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b [14] Exposed Skin Surface Area SA crri' 1770 USEPA, 3820 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, NA 5790 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, 2011 670 USEPA, 2011 NA 2011 [121 2011 [121 2011 [121 2011 [121 [12] [151 Exposure Time t-event hr/event 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific [5] 4 Site -specific NA 151 [5] 151 151 [14] Events per Day EV event/day 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- 1 Site -specific 1 Site -specific [5] 1.0 Assumption NA [5] 151 151 specific [5] Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFWadj events-cm2/kg NA NA NA 103497 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFWM event_2/kg NA NA NA 319693 NA NA NA NA Mutagenic Ingestion of Fish - Subsistence Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA Adult: 170 USEPA, 2000 NA NA [18] Child: 98 USEPA, 2011 [20] Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific. NA NA Assumes 100 offish is from the Site. Exposure Frequency EF days/year I NA NA NA NA NA 365 NA NA Ingestion of Fish - Recreational Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA Adult: 17.5 USEPA, 2000 NA NA [19] Adolescent: USEPA, 2011 7.6 [211 Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific. NA NA Assumes 100 of fish is from the Site. Exposure Frequency JEF days/year I NA I NA I NA I NA I NA 1 365 1 NA I NA 1/11/2016 Page 5 of 5 TABLE 4-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Notes and Abbreviations USEPA, 2000. Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories. Volume 1, Fish Sampling and Analysis, Third Edition. EPA 823-B-00-007. USEPA Office of Water. 2000. USEPA, 2002 - Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. OWSWER 9355.4-24 USEPA, 2011 - Exposure Factors Handbook. USEPA/600/R-10/030. October, 2011. USEPA, 2014a - Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors. OSWER 9200.1-120. February 6, 201. USEPA, 20141, - Region 4 Human Health Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance. January 2014. Draft Final. [1] - Table 8-1 of USEPA (2011). [2] - Assumes 2 hours per day. [3] - One -tenth of the value for swimming (49 ml/hour; Table 3-5 of USEPA (2011)) used to approximate incidental ingestion during wading in washes during storm water events. [4] - Table 5-1 of USEPA (2011), recommended value for soil plus dust. For sediment, these values are adjusted by a factor of 0.1 to account for the lower sediment exposure potential. [5] - Assumes 2 hours per event and that on days when play in water occurs, all daily exposure to water is derived from locations at the Site. [6] - Assumes that on days when visitation to the Site occurs , all daily exposure to soil is derived from locations at the Site. [7] - Based on surface area of face, hands, forearms, lower legs. [8] - Based on weighted skin adherence factor for'sports-oudoom'. [9] - Based on weighted skin adherence factor for'activities with soil'. [10] - One -tenth of the value for swimming (21 ml/hour; Table 3-5 of USEPA (2011)) used to approximate incidental ingestion during wading. [11] - Based on weighted average of mean values for 6- 16 years. [12] - Based on surface area of hands, forearms, lower legs, and feet. [13] - Ingestion of 50 milliliter per hour (.1/hour) of surface water should be used for exposures to water during swimming. Intake rates for exposure to surface water during wading should be 50 ml/hour for children 1-6 and 10 ml/hour for adolescents and adults. The water ingestion rate in liters/day is calculated as follows: ingestion (ml/hr) x exposure time (hr/event)/1000 (mill). [14] - Assumes contact with surface water and sediment in a seep area and/or on -site tributary one day per month for half a day (4 hours). [15] - Based on surface area of hands and forearms. [16] - Assumes that excvation work occurs a total of 12 work -weeks over the duration of a one year construction project and that contact with groundwater in a trench occurs for a portion of each excavation work -day. [17] - Drinking water will be evaluated by comparison of groundwater and surface water data to drinking water criteria. [18] - Value is the 95th percentile for Native American subsistence fishers (USEPA, 2000). [19] - Value is the 95th percentile for recreational fishers (USEPA, 2000). [20] - Value is the 95th percentile for Native American subsistence fishers ages 0 - 5 from same source used to derive 95th percentile for adult Native American subsistence fishers (EFH, Table 10-6). [21] - Value is the average of mean ingestion rates for children of consuming recreational anglers ages 6 - 20 (EFH, Table 10-5). Values are based on time -weighted average of child, adolescent, and adult exposure values, calculated as follows: Soil EF = (child EF x child ED) + (adolescent EF x adolescent ED)+ (adult EF x adult ED) / total scenario ED IFSadj = (child ED x child IR / child BW)+ (adolescent ED x adolescent IR / adolescent BW) + (adult ED x adult IR / adult BW) DFSadj = (child ED x child SA x child AF / child BW)+ (adolescdent ED x adolescent SA x adolescent AF / adolescent BW) + (adult ED x adult SA x adult AF / adult BW) ET = (child ET x child ED) + (adolescent ET x adolescent ED)+ (adult ET x adult ED) / total scenario ED Soil - mutagenic IFSM = (child ED [0-2] x child IR [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child IR [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6])+ (older child ED [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16])+ (adult ED x adult IR x adult ADAF / adult BW) DFSM = (child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child AF [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child AF [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6-16] x older child AF [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]) + (adult ED x adult SA x adult AF x adult ADAF / adu INHF = [(child ET [0-2] x child EF [0-2] x child ED [0-2] x ADAF [0-2]) + (child ET [2-6] x child EF [2-6] x child ED [2-6] x ADAF [2-6]) + (older child ET [6-16] x older child EF [6-16] x older child ED [6-16] x ADAF [6-16]) + (adult ET x adult EF x adult ED x adult ADAF)] Water IFWadj = (child ED [0-2] x child EF [0-2] x child IR [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child EF [2-6] x child IR [2-6] / child BW [2-6])+ (older child ED [6-16] x older child EF [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]) + (adult ED x adult EF x adult IR / adult BW) DFWadj = (child EF [0-2] x child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child EV [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child EF [2-6] x child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child EV [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child EF [6-16] x older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6-16] x older child EV [6-16] / older child BW [6-16])+ (adult EF x adult ED x adult SA x a Water - mutagenic IFWM = (child ED [0-2] x child EF [0-2] x child IR [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child EF [2-6] x child IR [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child ED [6-16] x child EF [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]) + (adult ED x adult EF x adult IR x adult ADAF / adult BW) DFWM = (child EF [0-2] x child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child EV [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2])+ (child EF [2-6] x child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child EV [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child EF [6-16] x older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6-16] x older child EV [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-1E (adult EF x adult ED x adult SA x adult EV x adult ADAF / adult BW) USEPA guidance for early life exposure to carcinogens (USEPA, 2005) requires that risks for potentially carcinogenic constituents that are presumed to act by a mutagenic mode of action be calculated differently than for constituents that do not act via a mutagenic mode of action. Therefore, the age -dependent adjustment factors (ADAF) will be applied for calculations involving children under the age of 16. The ADAFs are as follows: Age 0 to 2 years (2 year interval from birth until 2nd birthday)—ADAF = 10 Ages 2 to 16 years (14 year interval from 2nd birthday to 16th birthday)—ADAF = 3 Ages 16 and up (after 16th birthday) — no adjustment - ADAF = 1 1/11/2016 TABLE 4-2 Page 1 of 5 HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY VALUES - CANCER AND INHALATiON NON -CANCER RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Constituent CAS Chronic Inhalation Reference Concentration RfC-i mg/m3 REF Subchronic Inhalation Reference Concentration RfC-i mg/m3 REF Oral Cancer Slope Factor CSF-o 1/(mg/kg/day) REF Dermal Cancer Slope Factor CSF-d 1/(mg/kg/day) REF Inhalation Unit Risk IUR 1/(Ng/m3) REF Mutagen Metals Aluminum 7429-90-5 5.0E-03 P 5.0E-03 Cr N Antimony 7440-36-0 N Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E-05 C 1.5E-05 Cr 1.5E+00 I 1.5E+00 I 4.3E-03 I N Barium 7440-39-3 5.0E-04 H 5.0E-03 H N Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.0E-05 I 2.0E-05 H 2.4E-03 I N Boron 7440-42-8 2.0E-02 H 2.0E-02 H N Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.0E-05 C 2.0E-05 Cr 1.8E-03 I N Calcium 7440-70-2 N Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 N Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 A 8.4E-02 I N Chromium VI (hexavalent) (a) 18540-29-9 1.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 A 5.0E-01 J 8.4E-02 I Y Chromium III 16065-83-1 N Cobalt 7440-48-4 6.0E-06 P 2.0E-05 P 9.0E-03 P N Copper 7440-50-8 N Iron 7439-89-6 N Lead 7439-92-1 N Magnesium 7439-95-4 N Manganese (b) 7439-96-5 5.0E-05 I 5.0E-05 Cr N Mercury 7439-97-6 3.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 H N Molybdenum 7439-98-7 N Nickel 7440-02-0 9.0E-05 A 2.0E-04 A 2.4E-04 I N Potassium 7440-09-7 N Selenium 7782-49-2 2.0E-02 C 2.0E-02 Cr N Sodium 7440-23-5 N Strontium 7440-24-6 N Thallium 7440-28-0 N Titanium 7440-32-6 1.0E-04 A N Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.0E-04 A 1.0E-04 A N Zinc 7440-66-6 N General Chemistry Alkalinity ALK N Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB N Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB N Chloride 7647-14-5 N Methane 74-82-8 N Nitrate 14797-55-8 N pH PH N Sulfate 7757-82-6 N Sulfide 18496-25-8 N Total Dissolved Solids TDS N Total Organic Carbon TOC N Total Suspended Solids TSS N Notes: A - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Minimum Risk Level (MRL) C - California Environmental Protection Agency. CAMA - Coal Ash Management Act 2014, North Carolina Session Law 2014-122. Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\Work Plan\Tables\Tables for External Consultants\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Inhalation and Cancer 1/11/2016 TABLE 4-2 Page 2 of 5 HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY VALUES - CANCER AND INHALATiON NON -CANCER RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Chronic Subchronic Inhalation Inhalation Reference Reference Oral Dermal Concentration Concentration Cancer Slope Cancer Slope Inhalation RfC-i RfC-i Factor Factor Unit Risk CSF-o CSF-d IUR Constituent CAS mg/m3 REF mg/m3 REF 1/(mg/kg/day) REF 1/(mg/kg/day) REF 1/(Ng/m3) REF Mutagen CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service Cr - Chronic value. EN - Essential Nutrient. I - Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). H - Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). J - New Jersey; as provided on the USEPA RSL table. mg/kg-day - Milligrams per kilograms body weigl Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\Work Plan\Tables\Tables for External Consultants\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Inhalation and Cancer 1/11/2016 TABLE 4-3 HUMAN HEALTH ORAL NONCANCER TOXICITY VALUES RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Page 3 of 5 Constituent CAS Chronic Oral Reference Dose RfD-o i (mg/kg-day) REF Chronic Dermal Reference Dose RfD-d (mg/kg-day) REF USEPA Confidence Level Combined Uncertainty/ Modifying Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint Subchronic Oral Reference Dose RfD-o (mg/kg-day) REF Subchronic Dermal Reference Dose RfD-d (mg/kg-day) REF USEPA Confidence Level Combined Uncertainty/ Modifying Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint Metals Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.0E+00 P 1.0E+00 P Low 100 Neurological Neurological Toxicity 1.0E+00 A 1.0E+00 A NA 30 Neurological Neurological Toxicity Antimony 7440-36-0 4.0E-04 I 6.0E-05 I Low 1000 Mortality, Blood Longevity, blood glucose, and cholesterol 4.0E-04 P 6.0E-05 P Low 1000 Mortality, Blood Longevity, blood glucose, and cholesterol Hyperpigmentation, keratosis and possible Hyperpigmentation, keratosis and possible Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 I Medium 3 Skin, Vascular vascular complications 3.0E-04 Cr 3.0E-04 Cr Medium 3 Skin, Vascular vascular complications Barium 7440-39-3 2.0E-01 I 1.4E-02 I Medium 300 Kidney Nephropathy 2.0E-01 A 1.4E-02 A Medium 300 Kidney Nephropathy Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.0E-03 I 1.4E-05 I Low/Medium 300 Gastrointestinal Small intestinal lesions 5.0E-03 H 5.0E-03 H Low/Medium 300 Gastrointestinal Small intestinal lesions Boron 7440-42-8 2.0E-01 I 2.0E-01 I High 66 Developmental Decreased fetal weight (developmental) 2.0E-01 A 2.0E-01 A High 66 Developmental Decreased fetal weight (developmental) Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E-03 I 2.5E-05 I High 10 Kidney Significant proteinuria 1.0E-03 Cr 2.5E-05 Cr High 10 Kidney Significant proteinuria Calcium 7440-70-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.5E+00 I 2.0E-02 I Low 100 No effects observed No effects observed 1.5E+00 H 2.0E-02 H Low 100 No effects observed No effects observed Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.0E-03 I 7.5E-05 I Low 900 None reported None reported 5.0E-03 A 1.3E-04 A NA 100 Blood Microcytic, hypochromic anemia Chromium VI (hexavalent) (a) 18540-29-9 3.0E-03 I 7.5E-05 I Low 900 None reported None reported 5.0E-03 A 1.3E-04 A NA 100 Blood Microcytic, hypochromic anemia Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.5E+00 I 2.0E-02 I Low 100 None No effects observed 1.5E+00 H 2.0E-02 H Low 100 None No effects observed Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.0E-04 P 3.0E-04 P Low/Medium 3000 Thyroid Decreased iodine uptake 3.0E-03 P 3.0E-03 P Low/Medium 300 Thyroid Decreased iodine uptake Copper 7440-50-8 4.0E-02 H 4.0E-02 H NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal system irritation 4.0E-02 Cr 4.0E-02 Cr NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal system irritation Iron 7439-89-6 7.0E-01 P 7.0E-01 P NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal toxicity 7.0E-01 P 7.0E-01 P NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal toxicity Lead 7439-92-1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CNS Effects (Other Effect: Impairment of CNS Effects (Other Effect: Impairment of Manganese (b) 7439-96-5 1.4E-01 I 5.6E-03 I Medium 3 Neurological Neurobehavioral Function) 1.4E-01 H 5.6E-03 H Medium 3 Neurological Neurobehavioral Function) Mercury 7439-97-6 3.0E-04 1 2.1E-05 I High 1000 Immune Autoimmune 2.0E-03 A 1.4E-04 A NA 100 Kidney Renal effects Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.0E-03 I 5.0E-03 I Medium 30 Urinary Increased uric acid levels 5.0E-03 H 5.0E-03 H Medium 30 Urinary Increased uric acid levels Nickel 7440-02-0 2.0E-02 I 8.0E-04 I Medium 300 General Decreased body and organ weights 2.0E-02 H 8.0E-04 H Medium 300 Decreased body and organ weights Potassium 7440-09-7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.0E-03 I 5.0E-03 I High 3 Skin, Nails, Hair,B Clinical selenosis 5.0E-03 H 5.0E-03 H High 3 Skin, Nails, Hair,B Clinical selenosis Sodium 7440-23-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Strontium 7440-24-6 6.0E-01 I 6.0E-01 I Medium 300 Musculoskeletal Rachitic bone 2.0E+00 A 2.0E+00 A NA 90 Musculoskeletal Skeletal toxicity Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0E-05 X 1.0E-05 X 3000 Hair Hair follicle atrophy 1.0E-05 X 1.0E-05 X 3000 Hair Hair follicle atrophy Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA Hematological alterations and blood Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.0E-03 I 1.3E-04 I Low 100 Hair Decreased hair cystine 1.0E-02 A 1.0E-02 A NA 10 Blood pressure Decreases in erythrocyte Cu, Zn-superoxide Decreases in erythrocyte Cu, Zn-superoxide dismutase (ESOD) activity in dismutase (ESOD) activity in Zinc 7440-66-6 3.0E-01 I 3.0E-01 I Medium/High 3 Blood healthy adult male and female volunteers 3.0E-01 A 3.0E-01 A NA 3 Blood healthy adult male and female volunteers General Chemistry Alkalinity ALK NA NA NA NA NA NA Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB NA NA NA NA NA NA Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB NA NA NA NA NA NA Chloride 7647-14-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA Methane 74-82-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA Early clinical signs of methemoglobinemia in Early clinical signs of methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% (0-3 months old infants excess of 10% (0-3 months old infants Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.6E+00 I 1.6E+00 I High 1 Blood formula) 1.6E+00 Cr 1.6E+00 Cr High 1 Blood formula) pH PH NA NA NA NA NA NA Sulfate 7757-82-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Dissolved Solids TDS NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Organic Carbon TOC NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Suspended Solids TSS NA NA NA NA NA NA Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\Work Plan\Tables\Tables for External Consultants\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Chronic Subch Oral Derm NC 1/11/2016 TABLE 4-3 HUMAN HEALTH ORAL NONCANCER TOXICITY VALUES RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Page 4 of 5 Subchronic Chronic Oral Chronic Dermal Subchronic Oral Dermal Reference Dose Reference Dose Combined Reference Dose Reference Dose Combined RfD-o RfD-d USEPA Uncertainty/ RfD-o RfD-d USEPA Uncertainty/ Confidence Modifying Confidence Modifying Constituent CAS (mg/kg-day) REF (mg/kg-day) REF Level Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint (mg/kg-day) REF (mg/kg-day) REF Level Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint Notes: A - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Minimum Risk Level (MRL) C - California Environmental Protection Agency. CAMA - Coal Ash Management Act 2014, North Carolina Session Law 2014-122. CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service Cr - Chronic value. EN - Essential Nutrient. I - Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). H - Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). J - New Jersey; as provided on the USEPA RSL table. mg/kg-day - Milligrams per kilograms body weight per day. mg/m3 - Milligrams per cubic meter. N - No. P - Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV). REF - Reference. RSL - Risk -based Screening Level. ug/m3 - Micrograms per cubic Meter. USEPA - US Environmental Protection Agency. X - Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) Appendix. Y - Yes. (a) - The basis of the draft oral cancer toxicity value used in the calculation of the RSL has been questioned by USEPA's Science Advisory Board. (b) - RfD for food used because manganese is expected to be present in a less bioavailable form in environmental media, particularly given the presence of iron which will reduce manganese absorption. Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42055_Duke\002\Work Plan\Tables\Tables for External Consultants\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Chronic Subch Oral Derm NC 1 /11 /2016 Page 5 of 5 TABLE 4-4 DERMAL ABSORPTION FACTORS AND DERMAL PERMEABILITY CONSTANT; RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Constituent CAS Dermal Absorption Fraction (ABSd) (unitless) Dermal Permeability Constant (Kp) (cm/hr) (b) Metals Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.0E-03 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.0E-03 Arsenic 7440-38-2 0.03 1.0E-03 Barium 7440-39-3 1.0E-03 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.0E-03 Boron 7440-42-8 1.0E-03 Cadmium 7440-43-9 0.001 1.0E-03 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.0E-03 Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.0E-03 Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 0.1 2.0E-03 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.0E-03 Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.0E-04 Copper 7440-50-8 1.0E-03 Iron 7439-89-6 1.0E-03 Lead 7439-92-1 1.0E-04 Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.0E-03 Manganese 7439-96-5 1.0E-03 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.0E-03 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.0E-03 Nickel 7440-02-0 2.0E-04 Potassium 7440-09-7 2.0E-04 Selenium 7782-49-2 1.0E-03 Sodium 7440-23-5 6.0E-04 Strontium 7440-24-6 1.0E-03 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0E-03 Titanium 7440-32-6 1.0E-03 Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.0E-03 Zinc 7440-66-6 6.0E-04 General Chemistry Alkalinity ALK NA Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB NA Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB NA Chloride 7647-14-5 NA Methane 74-82-8 NA Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.0E-03 pH PH NA Sulfate 7757-82-6 NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Total Dissolved Solids TDS NA Total Organic Carbon TOG NA Total Suspended Solids TSS NA Notes: ABS - absorption factor. CAMA - Coal Ash Management Act 2014. (a) - USEPA, 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Volume 1, Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment. Exhibit 4-1. Where USEPA, 2004 does not recommend adjustments, no value is listed. (b) - USEPA, 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Volume 1, Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\Work Plan\Tables\Tables for External Consultants\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Dermal values (2) 1 /11 /2016 TABLE 4-5 WATER TO FISH BIOCONCENTRATION FACTORS (BCFs) USED IN THE FOOD CHAIN MODEL' RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Analyte Chemical Abstract Number Bioconcentration Factor Reference Aluminum 7429-90-5 2.7 USEPA, 1999 Antimony 7440-36-0 40 USEPA, 1999 Arsenic 7440-38-2 114 USEPA, 1999 Barium 7440-39-3 633 USEPA, 1999 Beryllium 7440-41-7 62 USEPA, 1999 Boron 7440-42-8 0.3 WHO, 1998 Cadmium 7440-43-9 907 USEPA, 1999 Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 19 USEPA, 1999 Cobalt 7440-48-4 400 IAEA, 2012 Copper 7440-50-8 710 USEPA, 1999 Cyanide 57-12-5 633 USEPA, 1999 Lead 7439-92-1 0.1 USEPA, 1999 Lithium 7439-93-2 1 NCRP, 1996 Manganese 7439-96-5 2.4 IAEA, 2012 Mercury 7439-97-6 4500 IAEA, 2012 Nickel 7440-02-0 71 USEPA, 1999 Selenium 7782-49-2 1000 OEHHA, 2010 Silver 7440-22-4 87.7 USEPA, 1999 Strontium 7440-24-6 30 USNRC, 1977 Thallium 7440-28-0 190 USEPA, 1999 Uranium 7440-61-1 2.4 IAEA, 2012 Vanadium 7440-62-2 290 IAEA, 2012 Zinc 7440-66-6 2059 USEPA, 1999 'The values are typically the maximum value cited in the Reference. If the maximum value was not chosen (based on professional judgment), the value generally falls within the range cited in the scientific literature. Page 1 of 1 Table 5-1 Exposure Parameters for Selected Ecological Receptors Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment Duke Energy (a) Receptor Body Weight Food Ingestion Rate g Water Intake Dietary Composition Home Range g Area Use(`) Factor Seasonal(d) Use Factor Plants Animal Soil Algorithm ID BW IRF IRW PF AF SF HR AUF SUF Units kg kg/kg BW/day L/kg BW/day % % % hectares % % HERBIVORE Meadow Vole 0.033 0.33 0.330 100% 0.0% 2.4% 0.027 100% 100% Muskrat 1.17 0.30 0.980 95% 5% 2.0% 0.13 100% 100% OMNIVORE Mallard Duck 1.16 0.60 0.057 90% 10% 3.3% 435 100% 100% American Robin 0.08 1.20 0.140 50% 50% 5.0% 0.25 100% 100% CARNIVORE Red -Tailed Hawk 1.06 0.18 0.058 0% 100% 0% 876 100% 100% Red Fox 4.54 0.10 0.085 4.6% 95% 2.8% 504 100% 100% PISCIVORE River Otter 7.36 0.19 0.081 0% 100% 0% 348 100% T 100% Great Blue Heron 2.34 0.18 0.045 0% 100% 0% 0.6 100% 1 100% BW, body weight; IRF, Ingestion Rate (food); IRW, Ingestion Rate (water); PF, Fraction Plants; AF, Fraction Animal; SF, Fraction Soil/Sediment; HR, Home Range; AUF, Area Use Factor; SUF, Seasonal Use Factor (a)Most values cited were obtained from USEPA's Wildlife Exposure Factors Handbook (1993). Missing values were obtained from U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (2004) or USEPA's Hazardouse Waste Identification Rule document (USEPA, 1999). (b)The amount of soil that is inadvertantly ingested during feeding is expressed a the percentage (by weight) of the total diet (Beyer, 1994). (c)The Area Use Factor is the receptors foraging area at the Site divided by the animals total home range area (sometimes called foraging range). These factors change with each receptor and operable unit, and are typically always unity (1) for small mammals and birds with small territories. (d)Seasonal Use Factor (SUF) calculated by dividing residence time at the site (months) by 12 months/year. Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058—Duke\002\Work Plan\Tables\2016-0105-HAI-BERA Risk Calcs-D3.xlsx 1/5/2016 Page 1 of 1 TABLE 5-2 AVIAN ECOLOGICAL TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES (TRVs) DUKE ENERGY Constituent CAS Avian TRVs NOAEL (mg/kg/d) LOAEL (mg/kg/d) Basis Value Ref. Basis Value Ref. Aluminum 7429-90-5 Ringed Dove 110 [a, b] Ringed Dove 1100 [b] Antimony 7440-36-0 NA NA Arsenic 7440-38-2 Mallard Duck 9.3 a Mallard Duck 40.3 a Barium 7440-39-3 Chick (1 -day old 20.8 a, c Chick (1 -day old 41.7 a, c Beryllium 7440-41-7 NA NA Boron 7440-42-8 Mallard Duck 28.8 a, d Mallard Duck 100 a, d Cadmium 7440-43-9 Multiple Species 1.47 a Chicken 2.37 a Calcium 7440-70-2 EN EN Chromium Total 7440-47-3 Black Duck 1 d Black Duck 5 d Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 NA NA Chromium, Trivalent 16065-83-1 Chicken 2.66 a] Black Duck 2.78 a Cobalt 7440-48-4 Multiple Species 7.61 a] Chicken 7.8 a Copper 7440-50-8 Chicken 4.05 [a] Chicken 12..1 a Iron 7439-89-6 EN EN Lead 7439-92-1 Chicken 1.63 [a] Chicken 3.26 a Magnesium 7439-95-4 EN EN Manganese 7439-96-5 Multiple Species 179 a Chicken 348 a Mercury 7439-97-6 Mallard Duck 0.068 a Mallard Duck 0.37 a Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Chicken 3.53 a, a Chicken 35.3 a, e Nickel 7440-02-0 Multiple Species 6.71 a Chicken 11.5 a Potassium 7440-09-7 EN EN Selenium 7782-49-2 Chicken 0.29 a Chicken 0.579 a Sodium 7440-23-5 EN EN Strontium 7440-24-6 NA NA Thallium 7440-28-0 NA NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 Chicken 0.344 a Chicken 0.688 a Zinc 7440-66-6 Multiple Species 66.1 a Chicken 66.5 a Nitrate 1 14797-55-8 Notes: CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service. EN - Essential Nutrient. LOAEL - Lowest Observable Adverse Effects Level. mg/kg/d - milligram per kilogram body weight per day. NA - Not Available. NOAEL - No Observed Adverse Effects Level. TRVs - Toxicity Reference Values. [a] CH2M Hill. 2014. Tier 2 Risk -Based Soil Concentrations Protective of Ecological Receptors at the Hanford Site. CHPRC-01311. Revision 2. July. http://pdw.hanford.gov/arpir/pdf.cfm?accession=0088115 [b] Sample et al. 1996. LOAEL derived from NOAEL. [c] Sample et al. 1996. NOAEL and LOAEL derived from subchronic NOAEL and LOAEL, respectively. [d] Sample et al. 1996. [e] Sample et al. 1996. NOAEL derived from LOAEL. Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 2015-1116-HAI TRVs.xlsx, Avian 11/25/2015 Page 1 of 1 TABLE 5-3 MAMMAL ECOLOGICAL TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES (TRVs) DUKE ENERGY Constituent CAS Mammalian TRVs NOAEL (mg/kg/d) LOAEL (mg/kg/d) Basis Value Ref. Basis Value Ref. Aluminum 7429-90-5 Mouse 1.93 [a, d] Mouse Rat 19.3 0.59 [a, d] a Antimony 7440-36-0 Rat 0.059 a] Arsenic 7440-38-2 Dog 1.04 a] Dog 1.66 a Barium 7440-39-3 Rat 45 [a] Rat 75 [a] Beryllium 7440-41-7 Rat 0.532 a] Rat 6.6 [b] Boron 7440-42-8 Rat 28 a, c Rat 93.6 a, c Cadmium 7440-43-9 Rat 1 a, cl Rat 10 a, c Calcium 7440-70-2 EN EN Chromium Total 7440-47-3 Rat 2740 b Rat 27400 b Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 Multiple Species 9.24 a Rat 40.0 a Chromium, Trivalent 16065-83-1 Multiple Species 2.4 a Mouse 9.625 a Cobalt 7440-48-4 Multiple Species 7.33 a Rat 10.9 a Copper 7440-50-8 Pig 5.6 a Pig 9.34 a Iron 7439-89-6 EN EN Lead 7439-92-1 Rat 4.7 a Rat 8.9 a Magnesium 7439-95-4 Manganese 7439-96-5 Multiple Species 51.5 a Rat 71 a Mercury 7439-97-6 Rat 0.032 a Rat 0.16 a Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Mouse 0.26 a, d Mouse 2.6 a, d Nickel 7440-02-0 Mouse 1.7 a Mouse 3.4 a Potassium 7440-09-7 EN EN Selenium 7782-49-2 Pig 0.143 a Pig 0.215 a Sodium 7440-23-5 EN EN Strontium 7440-24-6 Rat 263 a, b Rat 2630 b Thallium 7440-28-0 Rat 0.015 a Rat 0.075 a Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 Mouse 4.16 a Mouse 8.31 a Zinc 7440-66-6 Multiple Species 75.4 a Multiple Species 75.9 a Nitrate 14797-55-8 Guinea Pi 507 c Guinea Pi 1130 c Notes: CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service. EN - Essential Nutrient. LOAEL - Lowest Observable Adverse Effects Level. mg/kg/d - milligram per kilogram body weight per day. NA - Not Available. NOAEL - No Observed Adverse Effects Level. TRVs - Toxicity Reference Values. [a] CH2M Hill. 2014. Tier 2 Risk -Based Soil Concentrations Protective of Ecological Receptors at the Hanford Site. CHPRC-01311. Revision 2. July. hftp://pdw.hanford.gov/arpir/pdf.cfm?accession=0088115 [b] Sample et al. 1996. LOAEL derived from NOAEL. [c] Sample et al. 1996. [d] Sample et al. 1996. NOAEL derived from LOAEL. Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 2015-1116-HAI TRVs.xlsx, Mammal 11/25/2015 Human Health Site -Specific Risk Based Concentrations (RBCs) Site -specific risk based concentrations (RBCs) are risk -based screening levels that are refined to account for the receptor population characteristics and exposure pathways applicable to each of the receiving media identified in the conceptual site model (CSM). As such, the site -specific RBCs are less conservative, i.e., more realistic, than screening levels and are, therefore, useful for evaluating whether constituents of potential concern (COPCs) may have the potential to pose health risks above risk thresholds. For example, whereas surface water that is used as a recreational water body for swimming is screened for COPCs using drinking water standards which assume that people are drinking and bathing in the water daily, site -specific RBCs for surface water developed here reflect incidental ingestion and dermal contact at an exposure rate and magnitude commensurate with swimming activities. This appendix provides documentation of the derivation of RBCs. Section 1 describes the exposure scenarios that are used to develop the RBCs, Section 2 documents the toxicity values and other chemical -specific inputs that are used to derive RBCs, and Section 3 provides the equations that are used to derive the RBCs. RBCs for each exposure scenario, for each exposure medium are presented in tables that accompany Section 4 of this appendix. 1. Human Health Exposure Scenarios Exposure scenarios are used to quantitatively describe the COPC exposures that could theoretically occur for each land use and exposure pathway evaluated. In 'forward' risk calculations that derive estimates of cancer and non -cancer risk, the exposure scenarios are used in conjunction with exposure point concentrations (EPCs) to derive quantitative estimates of COPC intake or exposure. In the derivation of RBCs, the exposure scenarios are used in combination with target risks to derive COPC concentrations that are protective for the exposure scenario at the target risk levels. The ultimate goal of developing exposure scenarios, as defined in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guidance, is to identify the combination of exposure parameters that results in the most intense level of exposure that may "reasonably" be expected to occur under the current and future site conditions (USEPA, 1989). As such, a single exposure scenario is often selected to provide a conservative evaluation for the range of possible receptors and populations that could be exposed under a given land use. Exposure scenarios use numerical parameters that include ingestion rates, dermal contact areas, body weights, exposure times, exposure frequencies, and exposure durations. The specific numerical values for each of these parameters are selected in consideration of the receptor activities and ages that the exposure scenarios are modeling, and are generally selected as the upper - end (generally 951" percentile) values for each quantitative parameter. Using receptor scenarios that are protective for all potentially exposed populations associated with a given land use, with numerical parameters that are generally based on the upper -end distributions, result in reasonable maximum exposure (RME) scenarios. 1.1 EXPOSURE PARAMETERS Exposure parameters are developed from USEPA Region 4 (USEPA, 2014b) and USEPA national guidance (USEPA, 2002; 2011; 2014a). The exposure parameters used to quantify exposures for each of the scenarios described in this section are provided in Table 1-1. 1.1.1 Exposure Durations Exposure duration refers to the total amount of time in years that a receptor population is assumed to be exposed to the media that are being evaluated. USEPA has established standard exposure durations of 26 years for residential land use, 25 years for commercial/industrial land use, and 1 year for construction work. These values are based on upper percentile values for the length of time that people live at the same residence (26 years), and the length of time that people stay at the same place of employment (25 years). The duration for construction work is based on an assumption that the earth moving and excavation portions of a construction project would generally not continue for more than one year. For other receptor scenarios (e.g., trespasser), the exposure duration is based on the age range of the receptor evaluated. For example, the exposure duration for a 6 through 16 year old is 10 years, based on the premise that an individual begins the exposure activity at age 6 and continues to age 16. 1.1.2 Ingestion Rates Ingestion rates quantify the amount of media that is ingested. All soil, surface water, and groundwater ingestion rate values are USEPA default values as follows: Soil: 200 mg/day for children ages 1 through 6 100 mg/day for the trespassing adolescent and commercial/industrial workers 330 mg/day for construction workers Groundwater: • 0.004 L/day for the construction worker [Note that drinking water uses were evaluated by directly comparing groundwater or surface water concentrations to drinking water criteria, where this is a complete exposure pathway. If groundwater does not migrate to a private well, the groundwater drinking water pathway was not evaluated. ] Surface water: • 50 mL/hour (applies to swimming scenarios only), 50 mL/hour for children ages 1 through 6 • 10 ml/hour for adolescents and adults (wading scenarios) [Note that drinking water uses were evaluated by directly comparing groundwater or surface water concentrations to drinking water criteria, where this is a complete exposure pathway. If the adjacent surface water body is not used as a source of drinking water, the surface water drinking water pathway was not evaluated.] Sediment • 10 mg/day for children and adolescents • 5 mg/day for adults The soil ingestion rates are intended to represent total daily exposure to all sources of soil (i.e., soil within a yard, playground, athletic field, as well as dust indoors). In accordance with Region 4 guidance (USEPA, 2014b), only unsubmerged sediment is available for potential exposure. Unsubmerged sediment is generally only present along water body shorelines. Activities involving potential exposure to water bodies, such as wading, swimming, and boating, would not involve long durations of exposure to shoreline sediments. Therefore, potential exposure to unsubmerged sediment would represent only a small portion of total daily exposure to soil. To account for this, the sediment ingestion values represent one -tenth the USEPA default soil ingestion rates. It is important to recognize that the ingestion rates used for soil, sediment, surface water, and groundwater are based on total ingestion of those media each day. In other words, the ingestion rate for soil is based on incidental ingestion of soil from all sources throughout a day, including soil that is translocated indoors as household dust. The assumption that receptors who access a site incur their total daily ingestion of soil while at the site is likely to overestimate potential exposures, particularly for non-residential land uses. In addition, summation of risks across multiple media, such as soil and sediment, results in double -counting the daily soil ingestion rate, since each medium (i.e., soil and sediment) is evaluated using the total ingestion rates shown above. 1.1.3 Dermal Contact Rates Dermal contact rates quantify the amount of media that contacts the skin and is, therefore, a potential source for absorption of COPCs through the skin. Soil and sediment dermal contact rates are based on the skin surface area assumed to contact the soil or sediment, and the adherence of the soil or sediment to the skin. Skin surface area and adherence factors for recreational, commercial/industrial, and construction work scenarios are specified by USEPA (USEPA, 2014a; 2011; 2002). The surface area values used to evaluate recreational visitor wading exposures to surface water and sediment were calculated as the average of 50th percentile body surface areas, for the body parts assumed to be exposed to surface water and sediment, for males and females within the age range evaluated. Body surface area values are obtained from USEPA references (USEPA, 2011). 1.1.4 Body Weights Body weights are specified by USEPA for children ages 1 through 6 (15 kg) and adults (80 kg). Body weights for the adolescent (6-<16 years) age group were calculated using body weight data provided in USEPA references (USEPA, 2011), as the average of 50th percentile weights for males and females within the age range evaluated. 1.1.5 Exposure Times The exposure time quantifies the amount of time that potential exposure to air or water occurs. The exposure time parameter is used to quantify inhalation exposures, dermal exposures to water, and incidental ingestion exposures to water (i.e., during swimming). Exposure time parameters used in the RBC derivations are based on USEPA-recommended exposure times for time spent indoors and time spent outdoors (used for residential and recreational exposures), or site -specific exposure time is provided. Exposure time parameters for commercial/industrial worker and construction worker scenarios are based on an assumed 8-hour work day (assuming four hours of contact with surface water and sediment in a seep area and/or on -site tributary in the commercial/industrial scenario, and four hours of contact with groundwater in a trench for the construction worker). Variables related to exposure time also include fraction ingested, fraction dermal, and event -day, which describe the number of exposure events that are assumed to occur each day that exposure at the site takes place. For all scenarios, these parameters were established at a value of 1. 1.1.6 Exposure Frequencies Exposure frequency describes the number of days per year (or number of events per year) in which exposure to a medium at a site occurs. Exposure frequency parameters are based on USEPA default values for residential, trespasser, recreational, and construction worker scenarios. Exposure frequency for the current/future on -site commercial worker is site -specific and assumes contact with site soil, sediment, and surface water one day per month for 12 months. Receptor scenarios are described below, and are summarized in the CSM in Figure 1-1. The exposure parameters are provided in Table 1-1. 1.2 RECEPTORS 1.2.1 Current/Future Off -Site Resident The drinking water pathway is only potentially complete for those residents who use groundwater or surface water as a drinking water source. Drinking water uses were evaluated by directly comparing groundwater or surface water concentrations to drinking water criteria, where this is a complete exposure pathway. 1.2.2 Current/Future On -Site Trespasser Trespassers may potentially contact soil remaining post -excavation directly via incidental ingestion and dermal contact. Additionally, trespassers may inhale coal ash -derived particulates entrained in dusts. Trespassers may also be exposed to seep water and seep soil via dermal contact, and to on -site surface water and sediment (via incidental ingestion and dermal contact) at on -site surface water bodies. This scenario assumes an adolescent trespasser (ages 6 to 16) trespasses on -site for 45 days per year (USEPA, 2014b), for two hours per day. Given that the on -site water bodies are located on Duke -owned commercial -use properties where trespassers are the only potential off -site receptors, it is assumed that only wading exposures could potentially occur at the on -site surface water bodies. Coal ash basins will be de -watered in the future, thereby removing on -site water bodies as potential exposure media. 1.2.3 Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Swimmer Recreational swimmers may contact coal ash -derived COPCs in surface water or in sediment (via incidental ingestion and dermal contact) while swimming in off -site surface water bodies. This scenario assumes that a child (ages 1to 6), adolescent (ages 6 to 16) and adult swim at nearby off -site surface water bodies for 45 days per year (USEPA, 2014b), for two hours per day. 1.2.4 Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Wader Recreational waders may contact coal ash -derived COPCs in off -site surface water bodies while wading via dermal contact with surface water and incidental ingestion and dermal contact with sediment. This scenario assumes that a child (ages 1 to 6), adolescent (ages 6 to 16), and adult wade at nearby off -site surface water bodies for 45 days per year (USEPA, 2014b), for two hours per day. The principal differences between the wading and swimming scenarios are that more body surface area is assumed to contact surface water, and a greater incidental ingestion rate of surface water, is assumed to occur during swimming activities. Potential contact with unsubmerged sediment is assumed to be the same for both wading and swimming scenarios. 1.2.5 Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Boater Recreational boaters may contact coal ash -derived COPCs in off -site surface water bodies while boating via incidental ingestion with surface water and incidental ingestion and dermal contact with sediment. This scenario assumes that an adult boater is present at nearby off -site surface water bodies for 45 days per year (USEPA, 2014b), for two hours per day. 1.2.6 Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Fisher Recreational fishers may contact coal ash -derived COPCs in off -site surface water bodies while wading during fishing activities (via incidental ingestion with surface water and via incidental ingestion and dermal contact for sediment). Recreational fishers may also contact coal ash -derived COPCs via fish tissue ingestion. This scenario assumes that an adult fishes and wades at nearby off -site surface water bodies for 45 days per year (USEPA, 2014b), for two hours per day. Children are not assumed to accompany adults in angling activities. However, children (i.e., family members) were considered in the selection of fish ingestion rates under the assumption that family members consume fish that is caught by adults. Two fish ingestion rates are used to evaluate the range of potential exposures. Subsistence Angling: North Carolina Division of Public Health Fish Tissue Screening Levels (NCDWR, 2014) were developed based on a fish ingestion rate of 170 g/day, which represents the 95th percentile value for Native American subsistence fishers (USEPA, 2000). The same study used to support this value also derived a 95`" percentile fish ingestion rate for children ages birth to 5 yrs of age of 98 g/day. These values are used to represent the most sensitive receptor population for fish ingestion. Recreational Angling: Based on the information provided in USEPA (2000), a recreational fish ingestion rate of 17.5 g/day is used to represent the general recreational adult fisher population. Recreational fish ingestion rate data on children and adolescents is limited. However, USEPA (2011) cites average rates for consuming recreational anglers of 7.9 g/day for children ages 6 to 10 and 7.3 g/day for children ages 11 to 20. The average of these values (7.6 g/day) is used as the fish ingestion rate for children ages 6 to 16. 1.2.7 Current/Future On -Site Commercial/Industrial Workers On -site commercial/industrial workers may potentially contact coal ash -derived COPCs in post - excavation soil directly via incidental ingestion and dermal contact. Additionally, commercial/industrial workers may inhale coal ash -derived particulates entrained in dusts. Commercial/industrial workers may also be exposed to seep water and seep soil via dermal contact, and to on -site surface water and sediment (via incidental ingestion and dermal contact), in the case of on -site surface water bodies. It is assumed that an on -site commercial/industrial worker would potentially be exposed to on -site soil for 250 days per year and to sediment or surface water one day per month for twelve months of the year, while doing maintenance and/or landscaping activities at the site. It is also assumed that the worker would only contact site media for half of the day (four hours). USEPA default exposure factors are used for the commercial/industrial worker, however it is assumed that the worker would contact sediment and surface water on hands and forearms only. 1.2.8 Current/Future On -Site Construction Workers The construction worker scenario is designed to evaluate conditions pre- or post -remedy. This receptor is not intended to describe potential exposures to remediation workers. Construction workers may potentially contact coal ash -derived COPCs in post -excavation soil directly via incidental ingestion and dermal contact. Additionally, construction workers may inhale coal ash -derived particulates entrained in dusts. Construction workers may also directly contact COPCs in groundwater via incidental ingestion and dermal contact if groundwater is encountered during excavation. The construction worker scenario is evaluated to characterize risks associated with high intensity, short duration exposures to soil. Construction workers are not expected to be exposed to surface water or sediment. Exposures are characterized using USEPA national standardized parameters for construction worker scenarios, which allow for use of a site -specific exposure frequency. An exposure frequency of 60 days per year is used to accommodate the assumption that a large-scale development project would involve soil excavation activities over a total of 12 weeks in a one-year take up to a year to complete. It is assumed that contact with groundwater would occur for 20% of the total exposure frequency and time (50 days and 1.6 hours per day). 2. Chemical -Specific Inputs 2.1 Toxicity Values The toxicity values used to derive the RBCs were obtained from USEPA-approved sources of toxicity values, following USEPA's guidance regarding the hierarchy of sources of human health dose -response values in risk assessment (USEPA, 2003), as updated (USEPA, 2013). The sources include: • USEPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) JUSEPA, 2015bl; • National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) provisional peer reviewed toxicity values (PPRTVs) (USEPA, 2014c), • California Environmental Protection Agency (CALEPA) toxicity values (CALEPA, 2011 and 2014), and • Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR's) Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) (ATSDR, 2014). Toxicity values, including cancer slope factors (CSFs), inhalation unit risk values (IURs), and inhalation reference concentrations (RfCs) are provided in Table 2-1. Chronic and sub -chronic oral reference doses (RfDs), including target organs, are provided in Table 2-2. Chronic toxicity values were used to derive RBCs for all scenarios except the construction worker. Sub -chronic RfD and RfC values, when available, are used to derive RBCs for the construction worker exposure scenario. Dermal CSF and RfD values were derived using oral absorption factors in accordance with USEPA guidance (USEPA, 2004). 2.2 Mutagenic Mode of Action USEPA guidance for early life exposure to carcinogens (USEPA, 2005) requires that risks for potentially carcinogenic constituents that are presumed to act by a mutagenic mode of action be calculated differently than for constituents that do not act via a mutagenic mode of action. Of the constituents on Table 2-1, only hexavalent chromium, based on a draft evaluation, is considered to act by a mutagenic mode of action. Therefore, the age -dependent adjustment factors (ADAF) are applied in the oral and inhalation intake calculations involving children under the age of 16. The ADAFs are as follows: Age 0 to 2 years (2 year interval from birth until 2nd birthday) — ADAF = 10 Ages 2 to 16 years (14 year interval from 2nd birthday to 16th birthday) — ADAF = 3 Ages 16 and up (after 16th birthday) — no adjustment - ADAF = 1 Where a receptor group addressed in the exposure assessment spans one or more of these categories, the highest (most conservative) ADAF is used. 2.3 Dermal Absorption Factors Dermal absorption factors were obtained from USEPA guidance (USEPA, 2004). The dermal absorption factors (ABScl) for COPCs in soil and sediment accounts for lower absorption through the skin. USEPA (2004) provides constituent -specific dermal absorption fractions for a limited number of COPCs. Table 2-3 shows the dermal absorption factors. The estimation of exposure dose resulting from incidental dermal contact with groundwater or surface water requires the use of a dermal permeability constant (Kp) in units of centimeters per hour (cm/hr). The Kp values are derived from EPA (2004) Exhibit 3-1. Table 2-3 shows the dermal permeability constants. 2.4 Oral Absorption Factors USEPA has determined that the bioavailable fraction of arsenic in soil and sediment typically does not exceed 60%, and because the arsenic toxicity values are based on a highly absorbable form (dissolved in water), EPA has therefore published a default relative oral absorption fraction (ABSing) of 0.6 for arsenic in soils relative to arsenic in water, which is the basis of exposure for the toxicity value (USEPA, 2012a). This value will be used to derive RBCs for soil and sediment. No relative bioavailability adjustments were for all other COPCs for soil, sediment, and water. 2.5 Lead RBCs for lead are derived using biokinetic models. USEPA has developed risk -based screening levels (RSLs) for lead in soil using biokinetic models; the RSLs have been derived by USEPA for a standard residential and a standard commercial exposure scenario (USEPA, 2015a). Rather than derive site - specific RBCs for lead in this appendix, the USEPA RSLs are used as RBCs. The residential soil RSL for lead of 400 mg/kg was used as the soil/sediment RBC for exposure scenarios which incorporate children: the on -site trespasser, off -site swimmer, and off -site wader. The commercial/industrial RSL of 800 mg/kg was used for exposure scenarios which are limited to adults: the off -site boater, off -site recreational fisher, on -site commercial/industrial worker, and on -site construction worker. USEPA has also developed an action level of 15 ug/L for lead in drinking water (USEPA, 2012b). For surface water and groundwater, the lead action level was used as the RBC for all receptor scenarios. For sites in which lead EPCs exceed these screening levels, biokinetic models will be used with site - specific EPCs to derive estimates of blood lead concentrations. The estimated blood lead concentrations will be compared to USEPA blood lead thresholds to describe risks associated with potential exposures to lead. 3. RBC Equations The RBCs are calculated using the equations in the following sections. The lower of the site -specific RBCs developed based on potential cancer and noncancer effects for the applicable age group is used as the selected site -specific RBC. The RBCs are calculated using a target ELCR of 1x10-4 (one in ten thousand) and a target HI value of 1, which corresponds to levels of exposure that people (including sensitive individuals such as children) could experience without expected adverse effects. The target ELCR is within the target risk range of one in one million to one in ten thousand (USEPA, 1991) and is consistent with the target risk level used for the derivation of the North Carolina fish tissue screening levels (NCDWR, 2014). As noted in Section 2, only one constituent, arsenic, is identified by USEPA as a carcinogen by the oral route of exposure; hexavalent chromium has been proposed by USEPA to be classified as an oral carcinogen but that review process is not yet completed. Nonetheless, USEPA does use an oral cancer toxicity value derived by the State of New Jersey in its Risk -based Screening Levels (RSL) tables (USEPA, 2015a). Parameter definitions and units are also provided below and receptor -specific exposure parameter values are provided in Table 1-1. 3.1 Calculation of RBCs for Sediment and Soil Incidental ingestion and dermal contact with sediment is assumed to potentially occur for off -site recreational receptors (swimmer, wader, boater, and fisher). Incidental ingestion and dermal contact with soil and inhalation of particulates from soil is assumed to potentially occur for on -site receptors (trespasser, commercial/industrial worker, and construction worker). The following equations will be used to calculate RBCs if COPCs are identified in sediment or soil for any of the off -site recreational receptors or the on -site receptors. Parameter definitions and units are also provided below and receptor -specific exposure parameter values are provided in Table 1-1. 3.1.1 Noncarcinogenic Soil/Sediment RBCs RBC for Incidental Ingestion of Soil/Sediment - Noncarcinogenic: RBCsoil/sednc (mg/kg) - THQ x ATnc x BW EF x ED x RfD10 x IR x ABSing x CF RBC for Dermal Contact with Soil/Sediment- Noncarcinogenic: THQ xATnc x BW RBCsoil/sednc (mg/kg) - EF x ED xR1fDd x SA x AF x ABSd x CF RBC for Inhalation of Particulates from Soil- Noncarcinogenic: THQ x ATnc RBCsoilnc (mg/kg) — EF x ED x ET x 1 x ( 1 ) RfC FEF Total i RBCsednc (mg/kg) Ingestion RBCsednc + Dermal RBCsednc 1 RBCsoilnc (mg/kg) = 1 1 1 Ingestion RBCsoilnc + Dermal RBCsoilnc+Inhalation RBCsoilnc 3.1.2 Carcinogenic Soil/Sediment RBCs RBC for Incidental Ingestion of Soil/Sediment - Carcinogenic: RBCsoil/sednc (mg/kg) _ TRxATc xBW CSFo x ABSing x ED x EF x IR For receptors that include more than one age group (e.g., recreational visitors), BW, ED, and IR are replaced by IFSodj, where: IFSadi (mg-yr/kg-day) = Age group 1 BW ED x [R +Age group 2 BW ED x IR +Age group 3 ED x IR BW RBC for Dermal Contact with Soil/Sediment— Carcinogenic: _ TRxATcxBW RBCsoil/sednc (mg/kg) — CSFd x EF x SA x AF x ABSd x CF For receptors that include more than one age group (e.g., recreational visitors), BW, ED, AF, and SA are replaced by DFScdj where: DFSadi (mg-yr/kg-day) = Age group 1 BW EDxSAxAF + Age group 2 BW EDxSAxAF + Age group 3 EDxSAxAF BW RBC for Inhalation of Particulates from Soil— Carcinogenic: Total TR x ATc RBCsoilc (mg/kg) _ EF x ED x ET x IUR x �PEF� i RBCsednc= 1 1 Ingestion RBCsedc +Dermal RBCsedc 1 RBCsoilc (mg/kg) = i i 1 Ingestion RBCsoilc + Dermal RBCsoilc + Inhalation RBCsoilc Parameter Definition (units) ABSd Dermal Absorption Fraction (compound -specific) (unitless) ABSing Oral Absorption Fraction (compound -specific) (unitless) AF Soil/Sediment Adherence Factor (mg/cmz) ATc Averaging time - Carcinogenic (days) ATnc Averaging time - noncarcinogenic (days) BW Body weight (kg) Parameter Definition (units) CF Conversion factor (106 kg/mg) CSFd Dermal Cancer Slope Factor (mg/kg-day)-1 CSFo Oral Cancer Slope Factor (mg/kg-day)-1 DFSadj Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor (mg-yr/kg-day) ED Exposure duration (years) EF Exposure frequency (days/year) ET Exposure Time (hours/event) IFSadj Age -Adjusted Soil/Sediment Ingestion Rate (mg-yr/kg-day) IR Soil/Sediment Ingestion Rate (mg/day) IUR Inhalation Unit Risk (ug/m3)-1 PEF Particulate Emission Factor (m3/kg) RBCsoil/sedc Soil/Sediment RBC - Carcinogenic RBCsoil/sednc Soil/Sediment RBC - Noncarcinogenic RfDd Dermal Reference Dose (mg/kg-day) RfDo Oral Reference Dose (mg/kg-day) SA Exposed Skin Surface Area (cmz) THQ Target Hazard Quotient TR Target Risk The soil and sediment RBC calculations for each scenario are summarized in Section 4. Derivation of the PEF value is based on the climactic zone for Raleigh, NC, and an assumed 30-acre site with 50% vegetative cover. To facilitate transparency of the RBC calculations, the equations above were broken into two steps: Step 1 derives an intake associated with a nominal media COPC concentration of '1 mg/kg' and Step 2 incorporates the intake with the toxicity value and target risk to derive the RBC. This is shown in the equations and associated calculations which document the RBC derivation (Section 4). 3.2 Calculation of RBCs for Groundwater, Surface Water, and Seep Water Incidental ingestion and dermal contact with groundwater is assumed to potentially occur for the on -site construction worker if groundwater is encountered at the construction trench. Incidental ingestion and dermal contact with surface water is assumed to potentially occur for both off -site recreational swimmer and wader receptors and on -site receptors (trespasser, commercial/industrial worker, and construction worker) if on -site and off -site surface water bodies are present. Off -site boater and fisher receptors are assumed to contact surface water through incidental ingestion only. The following equations will be used to calculate RBCs if COPCs are identified in groundwater or surface water. Parameter definitions and units are also provided below and receptor -specific exposure parameter values are provided in Table 1-1. The surface water RBCs derived for the trespasser and commercial worker scenarios will be used to evaluate seep water, under the conservative assumption that seep water is representative of surface water quality for water bodies into which seep water migrates. 3.2.1 Noncarcinogenic Groundwater/Surface Water RBCs RBC for Incidental Ingestion of Groundwater/Surface Water - Noncarcinogenic: ( g/) _ THQxATncxBWxCF RBCGW/SWnc U EF x ED x 1 x IR x ABS1ng x FI RBC for Dermal Contact with Inorganics in Groundwater/Surface Water — Noncarcinogenic: Total DAevent x (1000 cm3/L) RBCGw/swnc (Ug/L) = KP x t—event Where DAevent for inorganics = 2 THQ x ATnc x CF x BW DAevent (ug/cm -event) = (( 1 \RfDd)xEVxEDxEFxSA RBCGw/swnc 1 (Ug/L) = t t + Ingestion RBCswnc Dermal RBCswnc 3.2.2 Carcinogenic Groundwater/Surface Water RBCs RBC for Incidental Ingestion Groundwater/Surface Water - Carcinogenic: TRxATcxCFxBW RBCGw/swc (Ug/L) = CSFo x IR x EF x ED x ABSing For receptors that include more than one age group (e.g., recreational visitors), BW, ED, EF, and IR are replaced by IFWpd;, where: ED x EF x IR ED x EF x IR ED x EF x IR IFWadi (L/kg) =Age group 1 BW +Age group 2 BW +Age group 3 BW RBC for Dermal Contact with Groundwater/Surface Water — Carcinogenic: Total DAevent x (1000 cm3/L) RBCGw/swc (Ug/L) = Kp x t—event Where DAevent for inorganics = DAevent (Ug/Cm2-event) = TR x ATnc x CF x BW CSFdxEVxEDxEFxSA For receptors that include more than one age group (e.g., recreational visitors), BW, ED, EV EF, and SA are replaced by DFWpd/ where: DFW events-cm2 k Age group 1 Ev x ED x EF x sA + Age group 2 Ev x ED x EF x sA + Age group add ( / g) = g g p BW g g p BW g g p 3 EVxEDxEFxSA BW 1 RBCGw/swc (ug/L) Ingestion RBCswc + Dermal RBCswc Parameter Definition (units) ABSing Oral Absorption Fraction (compound -specific) (unitless) ATc Averaging time - Carcinogenic (days) ATnc Averaging time - noncarcinogenic (days) BW Body weight (kg) CF Conversion factor (1000 ug/mg) CSFd Dermal Cancer Slope Factor (mg/kg-day)-1 CSFo Oral Cancer Slope Factor (mg/kg-day)-1 DAevent Absorbed dose per event (µg/cm2 - event) DFWadj Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor (events-cm2/kg) ED Exposure duration (years) EF Exposure frequency (days) ET Exposure Time (hours) FI Fraction Ingested (unitless) t-event Exposure Time (dermal contact; hours) IFWadj Age -Adjusted Ingestion Factor (L/kg) EV Event time (events/day) IR Ingestion Rate (L/day) Kp Dermal Permeability Constant (cm/hour) PC Permeability Constant (cm/hr) RBCgw/swc Groundwater/Surface Water RBC—Carcinogenic (ug/L) RBCgw/swnc Groundwater/Surface Water RBC— Noncarcinogenic (ug/L) RfDd Dermal Reference Dose (mg/kg-day) RfDo Oral Reference Dose (mg/kg-day) THQ Target Hazard Quotient TR Target Risk The surface water and groundwater RBC calculations for each scenario are summarized in Section 4. To facilitate transparency of the RBC calculations, the equations above were broken into two steps: Step 1 derives an intake associated with a nominal media concentration of'1 ug/L' and Step 2 incorporates the intake with the toxicity value and target risk to derive the RBC. This is shown in the equations and associated calculations which document the RBC derivation (Section 4). Calculation of RBCs for Fish Ingestion Fish ingestion RBCs were derived as both tissue RBCs and surface water RBCs. The tissue RBCs are expressed as mg/kg COPC wet weight concentrations in fish tissue. These values can be compared to measured fish tissue concentrations (in wet weight). Surface water RBCs were derived using bioconcentration factors (BCFs) that relate surface water COPC concentration to fish tissue concentration. Surface water RBCs protective for consumption of fish were derived by dividing the fish tissue RBCs by the BCF. BCFs are provided in Table 2-4. RBC for Ingestion of Fish Tissue - Noncarcinogenic: _ THQxATncxBW RBCfishnc (mg/kg) - EF x ED x 1 x IR x ABSing x CF RfDo RBC for Ingestion of Fish Tissue - Carcinogenic: RBCf; he (mg/kg) _ TR x ATc CSFo x ABSing x EF x ED x IR x CF Parameter Definition (units) ABSing Gastrointestinal Absorption Factor (unitless) ATc Averaging time - Carcinogenic (days) ATnc Averaging time - noncarcinogenic (days) BW Body weight (kg) CF Conversion factor (103 kg/g) CSFo Oral Cancer Slope Factor (mg/kg-day)-1 ED Exposure duration (years) EF Exposure frequency (days/year) IR Fish Ingestion Rate (g/day) RBCfishc Fish Tissue RBC - Carcinogenic RBCfishnc Fish Tissue RBC - Noncarcinogenic RfDo Oral Reference Dose (mg/kg-day) THQ Target Hazard Quotient TR Target Risk 3.2 Calculation of RBCs for Hexavalent Chromium As described in Section 2.2, hexavalent chromium is evaluated as a carcinogen by the inhalation route that acts through a mutagenic mode of action based on a draft USEPA assessment. In accordance with USEPA guidance, ADAFs are applied to the intake algorithms to account for increased early life susceptibility (USEPA, 2008). For scenarios which involve children under the age of 16, separate RBC calculations are provided for hexavalent chromium. To accommodate the assignment of ADAF values to specific age ranges, the young child (age 0 to 6) scenario was broken into 0 to 2 and 2 to 6 year age groups. Exposure parameters for the 0 to 6 year age group (Table 1-1) were assigned to both the 0 to 2 and 2 to 6 year ages. Cancer -based RBCs are derived using the same equations provided in subsection 3.1 and 3.2., however, the age -adjusted intake factors are adjusted to include four age groups and the ADAFs, as follows: IFSM is used in place of IFSadj, and is derived as: IFSM = {(child ED [0-2] x child IR [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]1 + {(child ED [2-6] x child IR [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]} + {(older child ED [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]1 + {(adult ED x adult IR x adult ADAF / adult BW)} DFSM is used in place of DFSadj, and is derived as: DFSM = {(child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child AF [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]1 + {(child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child AF [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + {(older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6- 16] x older child AF [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]1 + {(adult ED x adult SA x adult AF x adult ADAF / adult BW)} IFWM is used in place of IFWadj, and is derived as: IFWM = {(child ED [0-2] x child EF [0-2] x child IR [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]1 + {(child ED [2-6] x child EF [2-6] x child IR [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]1 + {(older child ED [6-16] x child EF [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]1 + {(adult ED x adult EF x adult IR x adult ADAF / adult BW)1 DFWM is used in place of DFWadj, and is derived as: DFWM = {(child EF [0-2] x child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child EV [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]1 + {(child EF [2-6] x child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child EV [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]1 + {(older child EF [6-16] x older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6-16] x older child EV [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16])1 + {(adult EF x adult ED x adult SA x adult EV x adult ADAF / adult BW)1 4. Summary of RM Calculations of the RBCs for each receptor scenario are provided in attachments to this appendix and are summarized in Tables 4-1 through 4-17, as follows: • Current/Future On -Site Trespasser o Soil: Table 4-1 and Attachment A o Sediment: Table 4-2 and Attachment B o Surface Water: Table 4-3 and Attachment C • Current/Future On -Site Commercial/Industrial Worker o Soil: Table 4-4 and Attachment D o Sediment: Table 4-5 and Attachment E o Seep Water: Table 4-6 and Attachment F • Future On -Site Construction Worker o Soil: Table 4-7 and Attachment G o Groundwater: Table 4-8 and Attachment H • Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Swimmer o Sediment: Table 4-9 and Attachment I o Surface Water: Table 4-10 and Attachment H • Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Wader o Sediment: Table 4-11 and Attachment J o Surface Water: Table 4-12 and Attachment K • Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Boater o Sediment: Table 4-13 and Attachment L o Surface Water: Table 4-14 and Attachment M • Current/Future Off -Site Fisher o Sediment: Table 4-15 and Attachment N o Surface Water: Table 4-16 and Attachment 0 o Recreational Fish Tissue / Surface Water: Table 4-17 and Attachment P o Subsistence Fish Tissue / Surface Water: Table 4-18 and Attachment Q Within each attachment cited above, three tables are provided which document: 1) The RBC algorithms and receptor -specific parameters used; 2) The chemical -specific parameters and derivation of cancer -based RBCs 3) The chemical -specific parameters and derivation of non -cancer based RBCs As discussed in section 2.5, RBCs were not calculated for lead. The residential soil RSL for lead of 400 mg/kg was used as the soil/sediment RBC for the on -site trespasser, off -site swimmer, and off -site wader. The commercial/industrial RSL of 800 mg/kg was used for the off -site boater, off -site recreational fisher, on -site commercial/industrial worker, and on -site construction worker. For surface water and groundwater, the lead action level of 15 ug/L was used as the RBC for all receptor scenarios. S. References 1. ATSDR. 2014. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Minimal Risk Levels, updated October 2015. Available at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/mrllist.asp 2. CALEPA. 2011. California Environmental Protection Agency, Cancer Slope Factors, December 2011. Available at: http://oehha.ca.gov/risk/chemicaldb/index.asp 3. CALEPA. 2014. California Environmental Protection Agency, Reference Exposure Levels, June 2014. Available at: http://oehha.ca.gov/risk/chemicaldb/index.asp 4. NCDWR. 2014. North Carolina Division of Water Resources Baseline Assessment of Fish Tissue Metal in the Dan River Following the Eden Coal Ash Spill. Available at: http://Portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?uuid=7f2740ed-5495-4933-aa8b- 5127bf813c8d&groupld=38364 5. USEPA. 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part A. EPA/540/1-89/002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, DC. December. 6. USEPA. 1991. Role of the Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy Selection Decisions. OSWER Directive #9355.0-30. April. 7. USEPA. 2000. Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories. Volume 1, Fish Sampling and Analysis, Third Edition. EPA 823-B-00-007. USEPA Office of Water. 2000. 8. USEPA. 2002. Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites OWSWER 9355.4-24 9. USEPA. 2003. Human Health Toxicity Values in Superfund Risk Assessments. Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. OSWER Directive 9285.7-53. December 5, 2003. 10. USEPA. 2004. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume 1, Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment, Interim), Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA/540/R/99/005. 11. USEPA. 2005. Supplemental Guidance from Early -Life Exposure to Carcinogens. EPA/630/R- 03/003F. 2005. 12. USEPA, 2008. Handbook for Implementing Supplemental Cancer Guidance at Waste and Cleanup Sites. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. 13. USEPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition. EPA/600/R-09/052F. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. September. 14. USEPA. 2012a. Compilation and Review of Data on Relative Bioavailability of Arsenic in Soil. OSWER No. 9200.1-113; December. 15. USEPA. 2012b. USEPA 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories, Spring 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at: http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm 16. USEPA. 2014a. Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors. OSWER 9200.1-120. February 6, 2011. 17. USEPA. 2014b. Region 4 Human Health Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance. January 2014. Draft Final. 18. USEPA. 2014c. Provisional Peer Reviewed Reference Toxicity Values (PPRTVs). November 2014. http://hhpprtv.ornl.gov/ 19. USEPA. 2015a. USEPA Risk -Based Screening Levels. June 2015. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/risk/risk-based-screening-table-generic-tables 20. USEPA. 2015b. Integrated Risk Information System. http://www2.epa.gov/iris Tables Page 1 of 5 TABLE 1-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Current/Future On -Site Current/Future Off -Site Resident Trespasser Cument/Future Off -Site Recreational Swimmer Child (Age <6) Adult Child and Adult (Ages 1-26) Adolescent (6-<16 years) Child (Age <6) Adolescent (6-<16 years) Adult Child, Adolescent and Adult (Ages 1 - 26) Parameter Units Standard Parameters Body Weight BW kg 15 USEPA, 80 USEPA, NA 44 USEPA, 2011 15 USEPA, 44 USEPA, 80 USEPA, NA 2014a 2014a [7] 2011 [1] 2011 [1] 2014a Exposure Duration ED years 6 Ages <6 20 Balance of 26 USEPA, 10 Ages 6 - <16 6 Ages <6 10 Ages 6 - <16 10 Balance of 26 Site- 26-yr 2014a 26-yr specific exposure exposure Non —carcinogenic Averaging Time Atnc days 2190 ED 7300 ED 9490 ED 3650 ED expressed 2190 ED 3650 ED 3650 ED 9490 ED expressed in expressed expressed in days expressed in expressed in expressed in expressed days in days in days days days days in days Carcinogenic Averaging Time Ate days 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime Incidental Ingestion of Soil Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA 45 USEPA, NA NA NA NA 2014b Soil Ingestion Rate IR mg/day NA NA NA 100 USEPA, 2011 NA NA NA NA [4) Fraction Ingested FI unitless NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific NA NA NA NA [s] Age -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Rate IFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 23 NA NA NA NA Aye -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day 68 Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Soil Exposed Skin Surface Area SA em2 NA NA NA 3160 USEPA, 2011 NA NA NA NA [7] Soil Adherence Factor AF mg/cm' NA NA NA 0.10 USEPA, 2011 NA NA NA NA [s] Fraction Dermal EV event/day NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific NA NA NA NA [6] Aye -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 72 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM 215 mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic Particulate Inhalation Exposure Time ETA hours/day NA NA NA 2 Site -specific NA NA NA NA 2) Incidental Ingestion of Sediment Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141, 20141, 20141, 20141, 20141, Sediment Ingestion Rate IR mg/day NA NA NA 10 USEPA, 2011 10 USEPA, 10 USEPA, 5 USEPA, NA [4] 2011 [4] 2011 [4] 2011 [4] Fraction Ingested FI unitless NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [s] [s] [s] [s] specific Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Rate IFSadj mg-yr/kgday NA NA NA 2 NA NA NA 7 Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 7 NA NA NA 29 Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Sediment Exposed Skin Surface Area SA ten' NA NA NA 3820 USEPA, 2011 6378 USEPA, 13350 USEPA, 20900 USEPA, NA [12] 2014a 2011 [11] 2014a Sediment Adherence Factor AF mg/cm' NA NA NA 0.10 USEPA, 2011 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.07 USEPA, NA [9] 2011 [9] 2011 [9] 2011 [8] Fraction Dermal EV event/day NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [6] [6] [6] [6] specific Aye -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 87 NA NA NA 741 Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM NA NA NA 260 NA NA NA 2454 mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic 1/11/2016 Page 2 of 5 TABLE 1-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Current/Future On -Site Current/Future Off -Site Resident Trespasser Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Swimmer Child and Adult (Ages Adolescent (6-<16 Adolescent (6-<16 Child, Adolescent Child (Age <6) Adult 1 -26) Child (Age <6) Adult and Adult (Ages 1 - Parameter Units years) years) 26) Incidental Ingestion of Groundwater [17] Exposure Frequency EF dayslyear NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Water Ingestion Rate IR L/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA I NA NA NA Dermal Exposure with Groundwater Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposed Skin Surface Area SA crn' NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposure Time t-event hr/event NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Events per Day EV event/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Incidental Ingestion of Surface Water [17] Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141, 20141b 2014b 2014b 20141b Water Ingestion Rate IR Llday NA NA NA 0.02 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, NA 2014b [13] 2014b [13] 2014b [13] 2014b [13] Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [5] [5] [5] [5] specific Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Rate IFWadj L/kg NA NA NA 0.2 NA NA NA 3.4 Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Factor- IFWM L/kg NA NA NA 0.6 NA NA NA 13.2 Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Surface Water Exposure Frequency EF dayslyear NA NA NA 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b Exposed Skin Surface Area SA ten' NA NA NA 3820 USEPA, 2011 6378 USEPA, 13350 USEPA, 20900 USEPA, NA [12] 2014a 2011 [11] 2014a Exposure Time t-event hr/event NA NA NA 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 [5] [s] [s] [s] Events per Day EV event/day NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- [5] [5] [5] [5] specific Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFWadj eventscm'/kg NA NA NA 39068 NA NA NA 368901 Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFWM events-cm'/kg NA NA NA 117205 NA NA NA 1139453 Mutagenic Ingestion of Fish - Subsistence Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Ingestion of Fish - Recreational Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1/11/2016 Page 3 of 5 TABLE 1-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY CurrentlFuture Off -Site Recreational Wader Current/Future On- Current/Future On - Parameter Units Current/Future Off- Site Recreational Boater Current/Future OffSite Fisher Site Commercial/ Industrial Worker Site Construction Worker Child (Age <6) Adolescent (6-<16 yedre) Adult Child, Adolescent and Adult (Ages 1 - 26) Standard Parameters Body Weight BW kg 15 USEPA, 44 USEPA, 80 USEPA, NA 80 USEPA, 80 USEPA, 2014a 80 USEPA, 80 USEPA, 2011 [1] 2011 [1] 2014a 2014a 2014a 2014a Exposure Duration ED years 6 Ages <6 10 Ages 6 - <16 10 Balance of 26 Site- 10 Balance of 10 Balance of 26-yr 25 USEPA, 1 USEPA, 2002 26-yr specific 26-yr exposure 2014a exposure exposure Non —carcinogenic Averaging Time Atnc days 2190 ED 3650 ED 3650 ED 9490 ED 3650 ED 3650 ED expressed in 9125 ED 365 ED expressed in expressed in expressed in expressed expressed in days expressed in expressed in days days days in days days days days Carcinogenic Averaging Time Atc days 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year 25550 70 year lifetime 25550 70 year 25550 70 year lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime lifetime Incidental Ingestion of Soil Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA 250 USEPA, 60 Site -specific 2014a 1161 Soil Ingestion Rate IR mg/day NA NA NA NA NA NA 100 USEPA, 330 USEPA, 2014a 2002 Fraction Ingested FI unitless NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 USEPA, 1.0 USEPA, 2002 2014a Age -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Rate IFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Soil Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Soil Exposed Skin Surface Area SA cm2 NA NA NA NA NA NA 3470 USEPA, 3470 USEPA, 2014a 2014a Soil Adherence Factor AF rrig/cm' NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.12 USEPA, 0.3 USEPA, 2002 2014a Fraction Dermal EV event/day NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 USEPA, 1.0 USEPA, 2002 2014a Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic Particulate Inhalation Exposure Time ETA hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA 4 Site -specific 8 USEPA, [141 2014a Incidental Ingestion of Sediment Exposure Frequency days/year 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 2014b 12 Site -specific NA 2014b 2014b 2014b 2014b 2014b [14] Sediment Ingestion Rate [IFSadj mg/day 10 USEPA, 10 USEPA, 5 USEPA, NA 5 USEPA, 5 USEPA, 2011 5 USEPA, 2011 NA 2011 [41 2011 [41 2011 [41 2011 [41 [41 [4] Fraction Ingested unitless 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Sil 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific [6] 1.0 USEPA, NA [6] [6] [6] specific [6] 2014a Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Rate mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 7 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Sediment Ingestion Factor- IFSM mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 29 NA NA NA NA Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Sediment Exposed Skin Surface Area SA an' 1770 USEPA, 3820 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, NA 5790 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, 2011 670 USEPA, 2011 NA 2011[121 2011[121 2011[121 2011[121 [121 [151 Sediment Adherence Factor AF mgl 0.10 USEPA, 0.10 USEPA, 0.07 USEPA, NA 0.1 USEPA, 0.1 USEPA, 2011 0.1 USEPA, NA 2011 [9] 1 2011 [9] 1 2011 [8] 2011 [8] 1 181 2014a Fraction Dermal EV event/day 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific [6] 1.0 USEPA, NA [6] [6] [6] specific [6] 2014a Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFSadj mg-yr/kg-day NA NA NA 208 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFSM NA NA NA 689 NA NA NA NA mg-yr/kg-day Mutagenic 1/11/2016 Page 4 of 5 TABLE 1-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Current/Future Off -Site Recreational Wader Current/Future On- Current/Future On - Current/Future Off- Site Commercial/ Site Construction Child, Adolescent Child (Age <6) Adolescent (6-<16 Adult and Adult (Ages 1 - Site Recreational Current/Future OffSite Industrial Worker Worker Parameter Units years) 26) Boater Fisher Incidental Ingestion of Groundwater [17] Exposure Frequency EF dayslyear NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 60 Site -specific 1161 Water Ingestion Rate IR L/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.004 USEPA, 2011 [101 Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Assumption Dermal Exposure with Groundwater Exposure Frequency EF days/year NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 60 Site -specific [16] Exposed Skin Surface Area SA crri' NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 670 USEPA, 2011 1151 Exposure Time t-event hr/event NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.6 Site -specific [16] Events per Day EV event/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Assumption Incidental Ingestion of Surface Water [17] Exposure Frequency EF days/year 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, NA NA NA NA 20141, 20141b 20141b 20141b Water Ingestion Rate IR L/day 0.10 USEPA, 0.02 USEPA, 0.02 USEPA, NA NA NA NA NA 2014b [13] 2014b [13] 2014b [13] Fraction Ingested FI unilless 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- NA NA NA NA 151 151 151 specific Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Rate IFWad] Ukg NA NA NA 2.12 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Water Ingestion Factor- IFWM L/kg NA NA NA 10.33 NA NA NA NA Mutagenic Dermal Exposure with Surface Water Exposure Frequency EF days/year 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 45 USEPA, 20141b 12 Site -specific NA 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b 20141b [14] Exposed Skin Surface Area SA crri' 1770 USEPA, 3820 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, NA 5790 USEPA, 5790 USEPA, 2011 670 USEPA, 2011 NA 2011 [121 2011 [121 2011 [121 2011 [121 [12] [151 Exposure Time t-event hr/event 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific 2 2 Site -specific 2 Site -specific [5] 4 Site -specific NA 151 [5] 151 151 [14] Events per Day EV event/day 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site -specific 1.0 Site- 1 Site -specific 1 Site -specific [5] 1.0 Assumption NA [5] 151 151 specific [5] Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor DFWadj events-cm2/kg NA NA NA 103497 NA NA NA NA Age -Adjusted Dermal Contact Factor- DFWM event_2/kg NA NA NA 319693 NA NA NA NA Mutagenic Ingestion of Fish - Subsistence Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA Adult: 170 USEPA, 2000 NA NA [18] Child: 98 USEPA, 2011 [20] Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific. NA NA Assumes 100 offish is from the Site. Exposure Frequency EF days/year I NA NA NA NA NA 365 NA NA Ingestion of Fish - Recreational Angler Fish Ingestion Rate IR g/day NA NA NA NA NA Adult: 17.5 USEPA, 2000 NA NA [19] Adolescent: USEPA, 2011 7.6 [211 Fraction Ingested FI unilless NA NA NA NA NA 1.0 Site -specific. NA NA Assumes 100 of fish is from the Site. Exposure Frequency JEF days/year I NA I NA I NA I NA I NA 1 365 1 NA I NA 1/11/2016 Page 5 of 5 TABLE 1-1 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKEENERGY Notes and Abbreviations USEPA, 2000. Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories. Volume 1, Fish Sampling and Analysis, Third Edition. EPA 823-B-00-007. USEPA Office of Water. 2000. USEPA, 2002 - Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. OWSWER 9355.4-24 USEPA, 2011 - Exposure Factors Handbook. USEPA/600/R-10/030. October, 2011. USEPA, 2014a - Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors. OSWER 9200.1-120. February 6, 201. USEPA, 20141, - Region 4 Human Health Risk Assessment Supplemental Guidance. January 2014. Draft Final. [1] - Table 8-1 of USEPA (2011). [2] - Assumes 2 hours per day. [3] - One -tenth of the value for swimming (49 ml/hour; Table 3-5 of USEPA (2011)) used to approximate incidental ingestion during wading in washes during storm water events. [4] - Table 5-1 of USEPA (2011), recommended value for soil plus dust. For sediment, these values are adjusted by a factor of 0.1 to account for the lower sediment exposure potential. [5] - Assumes 2 hours per event and that on days when play in water occurs, all daily exposure to water is derived from locations at the Site. [6] - Assumes that on days when visitation to the Site occurs , all daily exposure to soil is derived from locations at the Site. [7] - Based on surface area of face, hands, forearms, lower legs. [8] - Based on weighted skin adherence factor for'sports-oudoom'. [9] - Based on weighted skin adherence factor for'activities with soil'. [10] - One -tenth of the value for swimming (21 ml/hour; Table 3-5 of USEPA (2011)) used to approximate incidental ingestion during wading. [11] - Based on weighted average of mean values for 6- 16 years. [12] - Based on surface area of hands, forearms, lower legs, and feet. [13] - Ingestion of 50 milliliter per hour (.1/hour) of surface water should be used for exposures to water during swimming. Intake rates for exposure to surface water during wading should be 50 ml/hour for children 1-6 and 10 ml/hour for adolescents and adults. The water ingestion rate in liters/day is calculated as follows: ingestion (ml/hr) x exposure time (hr/event)/1000 (mill). [14] - Assumes contact with surface water and sediment in a seep area and/or on -site tributary one day per month for half a day (4 hours). [15] - Based on surface area of hands and forearms. [16] - Assumes that excvation work occurs a total of 12 work -weeks over the duration of a one year construction project and that contact with groundwater in a trench occurs for a portion of each excavation work -day. [17] - Drinking water will be evaluated by comparison of groundwater and surface water data to drinking water criteria. [18] - Value is the 95th percentile for Native American subsistence fishers (USEPA, 2000). [19] - Value is the 95th percentile for recreational fishers (USEPA, 2000). [20] - Value is the 95th percentile for Native American subsistence fishers ages 0 - 5 from same source used to derive 95th percentile for adult Native American subsistence fishers (EFH, Table 10-6). [21] - Value is the average of mean ingestion rates for children of consuming recreational anglers ages 6 - 20 (EFH, Table 10-5). Values are based on time -weighted average of child, adolescent, and adult exposure values, calculated as follows: Soil EF = (child EF x child ED) + (adolescent EF x adolescent ED)+ (adult EF x adult ED) / total scenario ED IFSadj = (child ED x child IR / child BW)+ (adolescent ED x adolescent IR / adolescent BW) + (adult ED x adult IR / adult BW) DFSadj = (child ED x child SA x child AF / child BW)+ (adolescdent ED x adolescent SA x adolescent AF / adolescent BW) + (adult ED x adult SA x adult AF / adult BW) ET = (child ET x child ED) + (adolescent ET x adolescent ED)+ (adult ET x adult ED) / total scenario ED Soil - mutagenic IFSM = (child ED [0-2] x child IR [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child IR [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6])+ (older child ED [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16])+ (adult ED x adult IR x adult ADAF / adult BW) DFSM = (child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child AF [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child AF [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6-16] x older child AF [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]) + (adult ED x adult SA x adult AF x adult ADAF / adu INHF = [(child ET [0-2] x child EF [0-2] x child ED [0-2] x ADAF [0-2]) + (child ET [2-6] x child EF [2-6] x child ED [2-6] x ADAF [2-6]) + (older child ET [6-16] x older child EF [6-16] x older child ED [6-16] x ADAF [6-16]) + (adult ET x adult EF x adult ED x adult ADAF)] Water IFWadj = (child ED [0-2] x child EF [0-2] x child IR [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child EF [2-6] x child IR [2-6] / child BW [2-6])+ (older child ED [6-16] x older child EF [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]) + (adult ED x adult EF x adult IR / adult BW) DFWadj = (child EF [0-2] x child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child EV [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child EF [2-6] x child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child EV [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child EF [6-16] x older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6-16] x older child EV [6-16] / older child BW [6-16])+ (adult EF x adult ED x adult SA x a Water - mutagenic IFWM = (child ED [0-2] x child EF [0-2] x child IR [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2]) + (child ED [2-6] x child EF [2-6] x child IR [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child ED [6-16] x child EF [6-16] x older child IR [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-16]) + (adult ED x adult EF x adult IR x adult ADAF / adult BW) DFWM = (child EF [0-2] x child ED [0-2] x child SA [0-2] x child EV [0-2] x ADAF [0-2] / child BW [0-2])+ (child EF [2-6] x child ED [2-6] x child SA [2-6] x child EV [2-6] x ADAF [2-6] / child BW [2-6]) + (older child EF [6-16] x older child ED [6-16] x older child SA [6-16] x older child EV [6-16] x ADAF [6-16] / older child BW [6-1E (adult EF x adult ED x adult SA x adult EV x adult ADAF / adult BW) USEPA guidance for early life exposure to carcinogens (USEPA, 2005) requires that risks for potentially carcinogenic constituents that are presumed to act by a mutagenic mode of action be calculated differently than for constituents that do not act via a mutagenic mode of action. Therefore, the age -dependent adjustment factors (ADAF) will be applied for calculations involving children under the age of 16. The ADAFs are as follows: Age 0 to 2 years (2 year interval from birth until 2nd birthday)—ADAF = 10 Ages 2 to 16 years (14 year interval from 2nd birthday to 16th birthday)—ADAF = 3 Ages 16 and up (after 16th birthday) — no adjustment - ADAF = 1 1/11/2016 TABLE 2-1 Page 1 of 5 HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY VALUES - CANCER AND INHALATiON NON -CANCER RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Constituent CAS Chronic Inhalation Reference Concentration RfC-i mg/m3 REF Subchronic Inhalation Reference Concentration RfC-i mg/m3 REF Oral Cancer Slope Factor CSF-o 1/(mg/kg/day) REF Dermal Cancer Slope Factor CSF-d 1/(mg/kg/day) REF Inhalation Unit Risk IUR 1/(Ng/m3) REF Mutagen Metals Aluminum 7429-90-5 5.0E-03 P 5.0E-03 Cr N Antimony 7440-36-0 N Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E-05 C 1.5E-05 Cr 1.5E+00 I 1.5E+00 I 4.3E-03 I N Barium 7440-39-3 5.0E-04 H 5.0E-03 H N Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.0E-05 I 2.0E-05 H 2.4E-03 I N Boron 7440-42-8 2.0E-02 H 2.0E-02 H N Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.0E-05 C 2.0E-05 Cr 1.8E-03 I N Calcium 7440-70-2 N Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 N Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 A 8.4E-02 I N Chromium VI (hexavalent) (a) 18540-29-9 1.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 A 5.0E-01 J 8.4E-02 I Y Chromium III 16065-83-1 N Cobalt 7440-48-4 6.0E-06 P 2.0E-05 P 9.0E-03 P N Copper 7440-50-8 N Iron 7439-89-6 N Lead 7439-92-1 N Magnesium 7439-95-4 N Manganese (b) 7439-96-5 5.0E-05 I 5.0E-05 Cr N Mercury 7439-97-6 3.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 H N Molybdenum 7439-98-7 N Nickel 7440-02-0 9.0E-05 A 2.0E-04 A 2.4E-04 I N Potassium 7440-09-7 N Selenium 7782-49-2 2.0E-02 C 2.0E-02 Cr N Sodium 7440-23-5 N Strontium 7440-24-6 N Thallium 7440-28-0 N Titanium 7440-32-6 1.0E-04 A N Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.0E-04 A 1.0E-04 A N Zinc 7440-66-6 N General Chemistry Alkalinity ALK N Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB N Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB N Chloride 7647-14-5 N Methane 74-82-8 N Nitrate 14797-55-8 N pH PH N Sulfate 7757-82-6 N Sulfide 18496-25-8 N Total Dissolved Solids TDS N Total Organic Carbon TOC N Total Suspended Solids TSS N Notes: A - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Minimum Risk Level (MRL) C - California Environmental Protection Agency. CAMA - Coal Ash Management Act 2014, North Carolina Session Law 2014-122. Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\HH P RGs\201 6-01 04-HAI -Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Inhalation and Cancer 1/11/2016 TABLE 2-1 Page 2 of 5 HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY VALUES - CANCER AND INHALATiON NON -CANCER RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Chronic Subchronic Inhalation Inhalation Reference Reference Oral Dermal Concentration Concentration Cancer Slope Cancer Slope Inhalation RfC-i RfC-i Factor Factor Unit Risk CSF-o CSF-d IUR Constituent CAS mg/m3 REF mg/m3 REF 1/(mg/kg/day) REF 1/(mg/kg/day) REF 1/(Ng/m3) REF Mutagen CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service Cr - Chronic value. EN - Essential Nutrient. I - Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). H - Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). J - New Jersey; as provided on the USEPA RSL table. mg/kg-day - Milligrams per kilograms body weigl Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\HH P RGs\201 6-01 04-HAI -Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Inhalation and Cancer 1/11/2016 TABLE 2-2 HUMAN HEALTH ORAL NONCANCER TOXICITY VALUES RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Page 3 of 5 Constituent CAS Chronic Oral Reference Dose RfD-o (mg/kg-day) REF Chronic Dermal Reference Dose RfD-d (mg/kg-day) REF USEPA Confidence Level Combined Uncertainty/ Modifying Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint Subchronic Oral Reference Dose RfD-o (mg/kg-day) REF Subchronic Dermal Reference Dose RfD-d (mg/kg-day) REF USEPA Confidence Level Combined Uncertainty/ Modifying Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint Metals Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.0E+00 P 1.0E+00 P Low 100 Neurological Neurological Toxicity 1.0E+00 A 1.0E+00 A NA 30 Neurological Neurological Toxicity Antimony 7440-36-0 4.0E-04 I 6.0E-05 I Low 1000 Mortality, Blood Longevity, blood glucose, and cholesterol 4.0E-04 P 6.0E-05 P Low 1000 Mortality, Blood Longevity, blood glucose, and cholesterol Hyperpigmentation, keratosis and possible Hyperpigmentation, keratosis and possible Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.0E-04 I 3.0E-04 I Medium 3 Skin, Vascular vascular complications 3.0E-04 Cr 3.0E-04 Cr Medium 3 Skin, Vascular vascular complications Barium 7440-39-3 2.0E-01 I 1.4E-02 I Medium 300 Kidney Nephropathy 2.0E-01 A 1.4E-02 A Medium 300 Kidney Nephropathy Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.0E-03 I 1.4E-05 I Low/Medium 300 Gastrointestinal Small intestinal lesions 5.0E-03 H 5.0E-03 H Low/Medium 300 Gastrointestinal Small intestinal lesions Boron 7440-42-8 2.0E-01 I 2.0E-01 I High 66 Developmental Decreased fetal weight (developmental) 2.0E-01 A 2.0E-01 A High 66 Developmental Decreased fetal weight (developmental) Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E-03 I 2.5E-05 I High 10 Kidney Significant proteinuria 1.0E-03 Cr 2.5E-05 Cr High 10 Kidney Significant proteinuria Calcium 7440-70-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.5E+00 I 2.0E-02 I Low 100 No effects observed No effects observed 1.5E+00 H 2.0E-02 H Low 100 No effects observed No effects observed Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.0E-03 I 7.5E-05 I Low 900 None reported None reported 5.0E-03 A 1.3E-04 A NA 100 Blood Microcytic, hypochromic anemia Chromium VI (hexavalent) (a) 18540-29-9 3.0E-03 I 7.5E-05 I Low 900 None reported None reported 5.0E-03 A 1.3E-04 A NA 100 Blood Microcytic, hypochromic anemia Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.5E+00 I 2.0E-02 I Low 100 None No effects observed 1.5E+00 H 2.0E-02 H Low 100 None No effects observed Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.0E-04 P 3.0E-04 P Low/Medium 3000 Thyroid Decreased iodine uptake 3.0E-03 P 3.0E-03 P Low/Medium 300 Thyroid Decreased iodine uptake Copper 7440-50-8 4.0E-02 H 4.0E-02 H NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal system irritation 4.0E-02 Cr 4.0E-02 Cr NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal system irritation Iron 7439-89-6 7.0E-01 P 7.0E-01 P NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal toxicity 7.0E-01 P 7.0E-01 P NA NA Gastrointestinal Gastrointestinal toxicity Lead 7439-92-1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CNS Effects (Other Effect: Impairment of CNS Effects (Other Effect: Impairment of Manganese (b) 7439-96-5 1.4E-01 I 5.6E-03 I Medium 3 Neurological Neurobehavioral Function) 1.4E-01 H 5.6E-03 H Medium 3 Neurological Neurobehavioral Function) Mercury 7439-97-6 3.0E-04 1 2.1E-05 I High 1000 Immune Autoimmune 2.0E-03 A 1.4E-04 A NA 100 Kidney Renal effects Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.0E-03 I 5.0E-03 I Medium 30 Urinary Increased uric acid levels 5.0E-03 H 5.0E-03 H Medium 30 Urinary Increased uric acid levels Nickel 7440-02-0 2.0E-02 I 8.0E-04 I Medium 300 General Decreased body and organ weights 2.0E-02 H 8.0E-04 H Medium 300 Decreased body and organ weights Potassium 7440-09-7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.0E-03 I 5.0E-03 I High 3 Skin, Nails, Hair,B Clinical selenosis 5.0E-03 H 5.0E-03 H High 3 Skin, Nails, Hair,B Clinical selenosis Sodium 7440-23-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Strontium 7440-24-6 6.0E-01 I 6.0E-01 I Medium 300 Musculoskeletal Rachitic bone 2.0E+00 A 2.0E+00 A NA 90 Musculoskeletal Skeletal toxicity Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0E-05 X 1.0E-05 X 3000 Hair Hair follicle atrophy 1.0E-05 X 1.0E-05 X 3000 Hair Hair follicle atrophy Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA Hematological alterations and blood Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.0E-03 I 1.3E-04 I Low 100 Hair Decreased hair cystine 1.0E-02 A 1.0E-02 A NA 10 Blood pressure Decreases in erythrocyte Cu, Zn-superoxide Decreases in erythrocyte Cu, Zn-superoxide dismutase (ESOD) activity in dismutase (ESOD) activity in Zinc 7440-66-6 3.0E-01 I 3.0E-01 I Medium/High 3 Blood healthy adult male and female volunteers 3.0E-01 A 3.0E-01 A NA 3 Blood healthy adult male and female volunteers General Chemistry Alkalinity ALK NA NA NA NA NA NA Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB NA NA NA NA NA NA Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB NA NA NA NA NA NA Chloride 7647-14-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA Methane 74-82-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA Early clinical signs of methemoglobinemia in Early clinical signs of methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% (0-3 months old infants excess of 10% (0-3 months old infants Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.6E+00 I 1.6E+00 I High 1 Blood formula) 1.6E+00 Cr 1.6E+00 Cr High 1 Blood formula) pH PH NA NA NA NA NA NA Sulfate 7757-82-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Dissolved Solids TDS NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Organic Carbon TOC NA NA NA NA NA NA Total Suspended Solids TSS NA NA NA NA NA NA Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\HH PRGs\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Chronic Subch Oral Derm NC 1/11/2016 TABLE 2-2 HUMAN HEALTH ORAL NONCANCER TOXICITY VALUES RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Page 4 of 5 Subchronic Chronic Oral Chronic Dermal Subchronic Oral Dermal Reference Dose Reference Dose Combined Reference Dose Reference Dose Combined RfD-o RfD-d USEPA Uncertainty/ RfD-o RfD-d USEPA Uncertainty/ Confidence Modifying Confidence Modifying Constituent CAS (mg/kg-day) REF (mg/kg-day) REF Level Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint (mg/kg-day) REF (mg/kg-day) REF Level Factors Primary Target Critical Endpoint Notes: A - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Minimum Risk Level (MRL) C - California Environmental Protection Agency. CAMA - Coal Ash Management Act 2014, North Carolina Session Law 2014-122. CAS - Chemical Abstracts Service Cr - Chronic value. EN - Essential Nutrient. I - Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). H - Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). J - New Jersey; as provided on the USEPA RSL table. mg/kg-day - Milligrams per kilograms body weight per day. mg/m3 - Milligrams per cubic meter. N - No. P - Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV). REF - Reference. RSL - Risk -based Screening Level. ug/m3 - Micrograms per cubic Meter. USEPA - US Environmental Protection Agency. X - Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) Appendix. Y - Yes. (a) - The basis of the draft oral cancer toxicity value used in the calculation of the RSL has been questioned by USEPA's Science Advisory Board. (b) - RfD for food used because manganese is expected to be present in a less bioavailable form in environmental media, particularly given the presence of iron which will reduce manganese absorption. Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42055_Duke\002\HH PRGs\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Chronic Subch Oral Derm NC 1 /11 /2016 Page 5 of 5 TABLE 2-3 DERMAL ABSORPTION FACTORS AND DERMAL PERMEABILITY CONSTANT; RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Constituent CAS Dermal Absorption Fraction (ABSd) (unitless) Dermal Permeability Constant (Kp) (cm/hr) (b) Metals Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.0E-03 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.0E-03 Arsenic 7440-38-2 0.03 1.0E-03 Barium 7440-39-3 1.0E-03 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.0E-03 Boron 7440-42-8 1.0E-03 Cadmium 7440-43-9 0.001 1.0E-03 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.0E-03 Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.0E-03 Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 0.1 2.0E-03 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.0E-03 Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.0E-04 Copper 7440-50-8 1.0E-03 Iron 7439-89-6 1.0E-03 Lead 7439-92-1 1.0E-04 Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.0E-03 Manganese 7439-96-5 1.0E-03 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.0E-03 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.0E-03 Nickel 7440-02-0 2.0E-04 Potassium 7440-09-7 2.0E-04 Selenium 7782-49-2 1.0E-03 Sodium 7440-23-5 6.0E-04 Strontium 7440-24-6 1.0E-03 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0E-03 Titanium 7440-32-6 1.0E-03 Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.0E-03 Zinc 7440-66-6 6.0E-04 General Chemistry Alkalinity ALK NA Bicarbonate Alkalinity ALKBICARB NA Carbonate Alkalinity ALKCARB NA Chloride 7647-14-5 NA Methane 74-82-8 NA Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.0E-03 pH PH NA Sulfate 7757-82-6 NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Total Dissolved Solids TDS NA Total Organic Carbon TOC NA Total Suspended Solids TSS NA Notes: ABS - absorption factor. CAMA - Coal Ash Management Act 2014. (a) - USEPA, 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Volume 1, Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment. Exhibit 4-1. Where USEPA, 2004 does not recommend adjustments, no value is listed. (b) - USEPA, 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Volume 1, Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Haley & Aldrich, Inc. G:\42058_Duke\002\HH PRGs\2016-0104-HAI-Toxicity Factors.xlsx, Dermal values (2) 1/11/2016 TABLE 2-4 WATER TO FISH BIOCONCENTRATION FACTORS (BCFs) USED IN THE FOOD CHAIN MODEL' RISK ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN FOR CAMA SITES DUKE ENERGY Analyte Chemical Abstract Number Bioconcentration Factor Reference Aluminum 7429-90-5 2.7 USEPA, 1999 Antimony 7440-36-0 40 USEPA, 1999 Arsenic 7440-38-2 114 USEPA, 1999 Barium 7440-39-3 633 USEPA, 1999 Beryllium 7440-41-7 62 USEPA, 1999 Boron 7440-42-8 0.3 WHO, 1998 Cadmium 7440-43-9 907 USEPA, 1999 Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 19 USEPA, 1999 Cobalt 7440-48-4 400 IAEA, 2012 Copper 7440-50-8 710 USEPA, 1999 Cyanide 57-12-5 633 USEPA, 1999 Lead 7439-92-1 0.1 USEPA, 1999 Lithium 7439-93-2 1 NCRP, 1996 Manganese 7439-96-5 2.4 IAEA, 2012 Mercury 7439-97-6 4500 IAEA, 2012 Nickel 7440-02-0 71 USEPA, 1999 Selenium 7782-49-2 1000 OEHHA, 2010 Silver 7440-22-4 87.7 USEPA, 1999 Strontium 7440-24-6 30 USNRC, 1977 Thallium 7440-28-0 190 USEPA, 1999 Uranium 7440-61-1 2.4 IAEA, 2012 Vanadium 7440-62-2 290 IAEA, 2012 Zinc 7440-66-6 2059 USEPA, 1999 'The values are typically the maximum value cited in the Reference. If the maximum value was not chosen (based on professional judgment), the value generally falls within the range cited in the scientific literature. 1of18 Table 4-1 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 3.6E+06 3.6E+06 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E+03 2.4E+03 1.5E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.1E+05 7.1E+05 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.1 E+03 8.7E+08 7.1 E+03 nc Boron 7440-42-8 7.1 E+05 7.1 E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 3.2E+03 1.2E+09 3.2E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 5.4E+06 5.4E+06 nc Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.1E+04 1.7E+03 1.7E+03 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 5.4E+06 5.4E+06 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.1E+03 2.3E+08 1.1E+03 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.4E+05 1.4E+05 nc Iron 7439-89-6 2.5E+06 2.5E+06 nc Lead 7439-92-1 4.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 5.0E+05 5.0E+05 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 7.1 E+04 8.7E+09 7.1 E+04 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.1E+06 2.1E+06 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 3.6E+01 3.6E+01 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.1E+06 1.1E+06 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 5.7E+06 5.7E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 2of18 ble 4-2 mmary of Risk Based Concentrations rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment I -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) uman Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites uke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer I (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 3.6E+07 3.6E+07 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.4E+04 1.4E+04 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.1 E+03 9.5E+03 6.1 E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.1 E+06 7.1 E+06 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.1 E+04 7.1 E+04 nc Boron 7440-42-8 7.1 E+06 7.1 E+06 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.4E+04 1.4E+04 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 5.4E+07 5.4E+07 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.1E+05 1.7E+04 1.7E+04 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 5.4E+07 5.4E+07 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.1E+04 1.1E+04 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.4E+06 1.4E+06 nc Iron 7439-89-6 2.5E+07 2.5E+07 nc Lead 7439-92-1 4.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 5.0E+06 5.0E+06 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.1E+04 1.1E+04 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 7.1 E+05 7.1 E+05 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.1E+07 2.1E+07 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 3.6E+02 3.6E+02 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.1E+07 1.1E+07 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 5.7E+07 5.7E+07 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 3of18 Table 4-3 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water & Seep Water ON -SITE TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-06) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer (mg/L) Final (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.3E+04 1.3E+04 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 2.0E+00 2.0E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.9E+00 6.0E+00 3.9E+00 nc Barium 7440-39-3 5.5E+02 5.5E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 6.4E-01 6.4E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.6E+03 2.6E+03 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.1 E+00 1.1 E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.8E+02 8.8E+02 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.7E+00 2.6E-01 2.6E-01 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 8.8E+02 8.8E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.6E+00 4.6E+00 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.2E+02 5.2E+02 nc Iron 7439-89-6 9.0E+03 9.0E+03 nc Lead 7439-92-1 1.5E-02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 8.3E-01 8.3E-01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.5E+01 6.5E+01 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.5E+01 6.5E+01 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.7E+03 7.7E+03 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.7E+00 5.7E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.4E+03 4.4E+03 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1 E+04 2.1 E+04 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 4of18 Ae 4-4 mmary of Risk Based Concentrations rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil WMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) ICancer I (mg/kg) Final I (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.2E+06 1.2E+06 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 4.7E+02 4.7E+02 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.8E+02 3.0E+02 3.0E+02 c Barium 7440-39-3 2.3E+05 2.3E+05 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.3E+03 3.1E+07 2.3E+03 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.3E+05 2.3E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E+03 4.2E+07 1.0E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+06 1.8E+06 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.5E+03 6.5E+02 6.5E+02 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+06 1.8E+06 nc Cobalt 7440-484 3.5E+02 8.3E+06 3.5E+02 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.7E+04 4.7E+04 nc Iron 7439-89-6 8.2E+05 8.2E+05 nc Lead 7439-92-1 8.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-954 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.6E+05 1.6E+05 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.5E+02 3.5E+02 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.3E+04 3.1E+08 2.3E+04 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.0E+05 7.0E+05 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.5E+05 3.5E+05 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+06 1.9E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 5of18 de 4-5 nmary of Risk Based Concentrations ivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment MMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final I (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 4.9E+08 4.9E+08 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.9E+05 1.9E+05 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E+05 9.1 E+04 9.1 E+04 c Barium 7440-39-3 9.7E+07 9.7E+07 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 9.7E+05 9.7E+05 nc Boron 7440-42-8 9.7E+07 9.7E+07 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 3.2E+05 3.2E+05 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 7.3E+08 7.3E+08 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.5E+06 2.7E+05 2.7E+05 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 7.3E+08 7.3E+08 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.5E+05 1.5E+05 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.9E+07 1.9E+07 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.4E+08 3.4E+08 nc Lead 7439-92-1 8.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 6.8E+07 6.8E+07 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.5E+05 1.5E+05 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 9.7E+06 9.7E+06 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.9E+08 2.9E+08 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 4.9E+03 4.9E+03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.5E+08 1.5E+08 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.8E+08 7.8E+08 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 6of18 Table 4-6 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Seep Water COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalat No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available; remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) I Cancer (mg/L) I Final (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 9.1 E+05 9.1 E+05 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.4E+01 5.4E+01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.7E+02 1.7E+02 1.7E+02 c Barium 7440-39-3 1.3E+04 1.3E+04 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.3E+01 1.3E+01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.4E+01 6.4E+00 6.4E+00 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 6.8E+02 6.8E+02 nc Copper 7440-50-8 3.6E+04 3.6E+04 nc Iron 7439-89-6 6.4E+05 6.4E+05 nc Lead 7439-92-1 1.5E-02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 5.1 E+03 5.1 E+03 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.9E+01 1.9E+01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 4.5E+03 4.5E+03 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 3.6E+03 3.6E+03 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 4.5E+03 4.5E+03 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 5.4E+05 5.4E+05 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.5E+05 4.5E+05 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.5E+06 1.5E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 7of18 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil CONSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy - chemical of potential concern Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Taraet Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) I Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-JU-b l.bL+Ub i.bL+Ub nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.9E+02 5.9E+02 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.4E+02 9.9E+03 6.4E+02 nc Barium 7440-39-3 2.9E+05 2.9E+05 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.4E+03 1.6E+09 7.4E+03 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.9E+05 2.9E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.3E+03 2.2E+09 1.3E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 2.2E+06 2.2E+06 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 7.4E+03 2.1E+04 7.4E+03 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.2E+06 2.2E+06 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.4E+03 4.3E+08 4.4E+03 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.9E+04 5.9E+04 nc Iron 7439-89-6 1.0E+06 1.0E+06 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 2.0E+05 2.0E+05 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 2.9E+03 2.9E+03 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 7.4E+03 7.4E+03 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.9E+04 1.6E+10 2.9E+04 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 7.4E+03 7.4E+03 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.9E+06 2.9E+06 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.5E+04 1.5E+04 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.4E+05 4.4E+05 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 8of18 Table 4-8 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Groundwater CONSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available; remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer (mg/L) Final (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 9.6E+04 9.6E+04 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.7E+01 1.7E+01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.9E+01 4.5E+02 2.9E+01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 5.0E+03 5.0E+03 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 4.8E+02 4.8E+02 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.9E+04 1.9E+04 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.6E+03 8.6E+03 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.8E+01 7.6E+01 2.8E+01 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.3E+02 3.3E+02 nc Copper 7440-50-8 3.8E+03 3.8E+03 nc Iron 7439-89-6 6.7E+04 6.7E+04 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 2.2E+03 2.2E+03 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 5.0E+01 5.0E+01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 4.8E+02 4.8E+02 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 4.8E+02 4.8E+02 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 1.9E+05 1.9E+05 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 9.6E+02 9.6E+02 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.1 E+04 3.1 E+04 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.5E+05 1.5E+05 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 9of18 Table 4-9 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL SWIMMER - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) I Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.2E+07 1.2E+07 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 4.9E+03 4.9E+03 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E+03 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 c Barium 7440-39-3 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.4E+04 2.4E+04 nc Boron 744042-8 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 3.4E+03 3.4E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.7E+04 3.9E+03 3.9E+03 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Cobalt 7440-484 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.9E+05 4.9E+05 nc Iron 7439-89-6 8.5E+06 8.5E+06 nc Lead 7439-92-1 4.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-954 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.7E+06 1.7E+06 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.4E+05 2.4E+05 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.3E+06 7.3E+06 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.7E+06 3.7E+06 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+07 1.9E+07 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 10 of 18 Table 4-10 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL SWIMMER - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer (mg/L) Final (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 2.6E-01 2.6E-01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.2E-01 4.1E-01 3.2E-01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 8.6E+01 8.6E+01 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.2E+02 2.2E+02 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.7E+02 1.7E+02 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.3E-01 2.0E-02 2.0E-02 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.7E+02 1.7E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.5E-01 3.5E-01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.3E+01 4.3E+01 nc Iron 7439-89-6 7.6E+02 7.6E+02 nc Lead 7439-92-1 1.5E-02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 4.1 E+01 4.1 E+01 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.4E+00 5.4E+00 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.5E+01 1.5E+01 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.4E+00 5.4E+00 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 6.5E+02 6.5E+02 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.4E+02 3.4E+02 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.7E+03 1.7E+03 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 11 of 18 Table 4-11 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL WADER - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.2E+07 1.2E+07 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 4.9E+03 4.9E+03 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.2E+03 3.6E+03 3.2E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.4E+04 2.4E+04 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 7.1 E+03 7.1 E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.7E+04 3.9E+03 3.9E+03 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.9E+05 4.9E+05 nc Iron 7439-89-6 8.5E+06 8.5E+06 nc Lead 7439-92-1 4.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.7E+06 1.7E+06 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.1 E+04 6.1 E+04 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.4E+05 2.4E+05 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.1 E+04 6.1 E+04 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.3E+06 7.3E+06 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.1 E+04 6.1 E+04 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.7E+06 3.7E+06 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+07 1.9E+07 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 12 of 18 Table 4-12 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL WADER - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) I Cancer (mg/L) Final (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.2E+03 1.2E+03 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 3.9E-01 3.9E-01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.5E-01 7.3E-01 3.5E-01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 1.6E+02 1.6E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 4.0E-01 4.0E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 5.0E-01 5.0E-01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 4.9E+02 4.9E+02 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 9.5E-01 8.3E-02 8.3E-02 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 4.9E+02 4.9E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.6E-01 3.6E-01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.7E+01 4.7E+01 nc Iron 7439-89-6 8.2E+02 8.2E+02 nc Lead 7439-92-1 1.5E-02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 9.0E+01 9.0E+01 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 2.4E-01 2.4E-01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.9E+00 5.9E+00 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.1 E+01 2.1 E+01 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.9E+00 5.9E+00 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.1 E+02 7.1 E+02 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.6E+00 2.6E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.6E+02 3.6E+02 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+03 1.9E+03 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 13 of 18 Table 4-13 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer I(mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.3E+08 1.3E+08 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.2E+04 5.2E+04 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 9.6E+03 1.5E+04 9.6E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.6E+05 2.6E+05 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.3E+04 2.3E+04 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.9E+05 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.2E+06 5.2E+06 nc Iron 7439-89-6 9.1 E+07 9.1 E+07 nc Lead 7439-92-1 4.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.6E+06 2.6E+06 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.8E+07 7.8E+07 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.3E+03 1.3E+03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.9E+07 3.9E+07 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1E+08 2.1E+08 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 14 of 18 Table 4-14 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) I Cancer (mg/L) Final (mg/L) I Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 5.6E+04 5.6E+04 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 3.4E+00 3.4E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E+01 2.6E+01 1.7E+01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.8E+02 7.8E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.8E-01 7.8E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.1 E+04 1.1 E+04 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.1 E+00 9.8E-01 9.8E-01 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.2E+01 4.2E+01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 2.2E+03 2.2E+03 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Lead 7439-92-1 1.5E-02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 3.1 E+02 3.1 E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.2E+00 1.2E+00 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.2E+02 2.2E+02 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 3.4E+04 3.4E+04 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.3E+00 7.3E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 2.8E+04 2.8E+04 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 9.0E+04 9.0E+04 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 15 of 18 Ae 4-15 mmary of Risk Based Concentrations rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment CREATIONAL FISHER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) uman Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites uke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.3E+08 1.3E+08 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.2E+04 5.2E+04 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 9.6E+03 1.5E+04 9.6E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.6E+05 2.6E+05 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.3E+04 2.3E+04 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.9E+05 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.2E+06 5.2E+06 nc Iron 7439-89-6 9.1E+07 9.1E+07 nc Lead 7439-92-1 8.0E+02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.6E+06 2.6E+06 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.8E+07 7.8E+07 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.3E+03 1.3E+03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.9E+07 3.9E+07 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1E+08 2.1E+08 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 16 of 18 Table 4-16 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER - RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalat No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available; remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 7429-90-5 5.6E+04 5.6E+04 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 3.4E+00 3.4E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E+01 2.6E+01 1.7E+01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.8E+02 7.8E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.8E-01 7.8E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.1E+04 1.1 E+04 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.1 E+00 9.8E-01 9.8E-01 c Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.2E+01 4.2E+01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 2.2E+03 2.2E+03 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Lead 7439-92-1 1.5E-02 nc Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 3.1 E+02 3.1 E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.2E+00 1.2E+00 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.2E+02 2.2E+02 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 3.4E+04 3.4E+04 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.3E+00 7.3E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 2.8E+04 2.8E+04 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 9.0E+04 9.0E+04 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/15/2016 17 of 18 Table 4-17 Summary of Risk Based Concentrations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - RECREATIONAL (ADULT AND ADOLESCENT) Exposure Routes EvalL Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Ingestion Duke Energy Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) Target Cancer Risk(per Chemical COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index BCF - Bioconcentration Factor [a] - Cancer -based RBCs incorporates ADAF of 3 for z c - Risk Based Concentration based on cam NA - no toxicitv value available: Risk Based Concentration not calculat Surface water RBC = Fish Tissue RBC / BCF Risk Based Concentration - Fish Tissue Lowest Non- Lowest Cancer BCF Risk Based Concentration - Si Adult Adolescent Non -Cancer Cancer Final Basis Non -Cancer Cancer Final Basis Non -Cancer Cancer Final COPC CASRN Cancer RBC (unitless) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) RBC Value Value (mg/L) (mg/kg) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-9U-5 4.6E+03 4.6E+U3 nc 5.8E+03 5.dE+03 nc 4.6E+U3 2.1 1.[E+U3 1.(E+U3 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.8E+00 1.8E+00 nc 2.3E+00 2.3E+00 nc 1.8E+00 40 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.4E+00 2.1 E+00 1.4E+00 nc 1.7E+00 2.7E+00 1.7E+00 nc 1.4E+00 2.1 E+00 114 1.2E-02 1.8E-02 1.2E-02 Barium 7440-39-3 9.1 E+02 9.1 E+02 nc 1.2E+03 1.2E+03 nc 9.1 E+02 633 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 Beryllium 744041-7 9.1 E+00 9.1 E+00 nc 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 nc 9.1 E+00 62 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 Boron 744042-8 9.1 E+02 9.1 E+02 nc 1.2E+03 1.2E+03 nc 9.1 E+02 0.3 3.0E+03 3.0E+03 Cadmium 744043-9 4.6E+00 4.6E+00 nc 5.8E+00 5.8E+00 nc 4.6E+00 907 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 Calcium 7440-70-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 6.9E+03 6.9E+03 nc 8.7E+03 8.7E+03 nc 6.9E+03 19 3.6E+02 3.6E+02 Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.4E+01 6.4E+00 6.4E+00 c 1.7E+01 2.7E+00 2.7E+00 c 2.7E+00 2.7E+00 NA NA NA NA Chromium III 16065-83-1 6.9E+03 6.9E+03 nc 8.7E+03 8.7E+03 nc 6.9E+03 19 3.6E+02 3.6E+02 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 nc 1.4E+00 400 3.4E-03 3.4E-03 Copper 7440-50-8 1.8E+02 1.8E+02 nc 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 nc 1.8E+02 710 2.6E-01 2.6E-01 Iron 7439-89-6 3.2E+03 3.2E+03 nc 4.1E+03 4.1E+03 nc 3.2E+03 NA NA NA Lead 7439-92-1 NA NA NA 0.1 3.9E+01 3.9E+01 Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA NA NA NA NA NA Manganese 7439-96-5 6.4E+02 6.4E+02 nc 8.1E+02 8.1E+02 nc 6.4E+02 2.4 2.7E+02 2.7E+02 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 nc 1.4E+00 4500 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 nc 2.3E+01 NA NA NA Nickel 7440-02-0 9.1 E+01 9.1 E+01 nc 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc 9.1 E+01 71 1.3E+00 1.3E+00 Potassium 7440-09-7 NA NA NA NA NA NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 nc 2.3E+01 1000 2.3E-02 2.3E-02 Sodium 7440-23-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.7E+03 2.7E+03 nc 3.5E+03 3.5E+03 nc 2.7E+03 30 9.1 E+01 9.1 E+01 Thallium 7440-28-0 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 nc 5.8E-02 5.8E-02 nc 4.6E-02 190 2.4E-04 2.4E-04 Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 nc 2.3E+01 290 7.9E-02 7.9E-02 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 nc 1.7E+03 1.7E+03 nc 1.4E+03 2059 6.7E-01 6.7E-01 Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.3E+03 7.3E+03 nc 9.3E+03 9.3E+03 nc 7.3E+03 NA NA NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1/15/2016 18 of 18 mmary of Risk Based Concentrations rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - SUBSISTENCE )ULT AND CHILD) man Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites ke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - Risk Based Concentration based on non -cancer hazard index BCF - Bioconcentration Factor [a] - Cancer -based RBCs incorporates ADAF of 10 for child. c - Risk Based Concentration based on cancer NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculat, Surface water RBC = Fish Tissue RBC / BCF Risk Based Concentration - Fish Tissue Lowest Risk Based Concentration - Surface V1 Lowest Adult Child Non- BCF Cancer ased Concen Cancer Final Basis Non -Cancer Cancer Final Basis Non -Cancer Cancer Final COPC CASRN Cancer (unitless) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) RBC Value RBC Value (mg/L) (mg/kg) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 4.7E+02 4.7E+02 nc 1.5E+02 1.5E+02 nc 1.5E+02 2.7 5.7E+01 5.7E+01 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 nc 6.1 E-02 6.1 E-02 nc 6.1 E-02 40 1.5E-03 1.5E-03 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.4E-01 2.2E-01 1.4E-01 nc 4.6E-02 1.2E-01 4.6E-02 nc 4.6E-02 1.2E-01 114 4.0E-04 1.1E-03 4.0E-04 Barium 7440-39-3 9.4E+01 9.4E+01 nc 3.1E+01 3.1E+01 nc 3.1E+01 633 4.8E-02 4.8E-02 Beryllium 7440-41-7 9.4E-01 9.4E-01 nc 3.1E-01 3.1E-01 nc 3.1E-01 62 4.9E-03 4.9E-03 Boron 7440-42-8 9.4E+01 9.4E+01 nc 3.1E+01 3.1E+01 nc 3.1E+01 0.3 1.0E+02 1.0E+02 Cadmium 7440-43-9 4.7E-01 4.7E-01 nc 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 nc 1.5E-01 907 1.7E-04 1.7E-04 Calcium 7440-70-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 7.1E+02 7.1E+02 nc 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 nc 2.3E+02 19 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.4E+00 6.6E-01 6.6E-01 c 4.6E-01 3.6E-02 3.6E-02 c 4.6E-01 3.6E-02 NA NA NA NA Chromium III 16065-83-1 7.1E+02 7.1E+02 nc 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 nc 2.3E+02 19 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 Cobalt 744048-4 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 nc 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 nc 4.6E-02 400 1.1E-04 1.1E-04 Copper 7440-50-8 1.9E+01 1.9E+01 nc 6.1E+00 6.1E+00 nc 6.1E+00 710 8.6E-03 8.6E-03 Iron 7439-89-6 3.3E+02 3.3E+02 nc 1.1E+02 1.1E+02 nc 1.1E+02 NA NA NA Lead 7439-92-1 NA NA NA 0.1 4.0E+00 4.0E+00 Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA NA NA NA NA NA Manganese 7439-96-5 6.6E+01 6.6E+01 nc 2.1E+01 2.1E+01 nc 2.1E+01 2.4 8.9E+00 8.9E+00 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 nc 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 nc 4.6E-02 4500 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 nc 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 nc 7.7E-01 NA NA NA Nickel 7440-02-0 9.4E+00 9.4E+00 nc 3.1E+00 3.1E+00 nc 3.1E+00 71 4.3E-02 4.3E-02 Potassium 7440-09-7 NA NA NA NA NA NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 nc 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 nc 7.7E-01 1000 7.7E-04 7.7E-04 Sodium 7440-23-5 NA NA NA NA NA NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc 9.2E+01 9.2E+01 nc 9.2E+01 30 3.1E+00 3.1E+00 Thallium 7440-28-0 4.7E-03 4.7E-03 nc 1.5E-03 1.5E-03 nc 1.5E-03 190 8.1E-06 8.1E-06 Titanium 7440-32-6 NA NA NA NA NA NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 nc 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 nc 7.7E-01 290 2.6E-03 2.6E-03 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.4E+02 1.4E+02 nc 4.6E+01 4.6E+01 nc 4.6E+01 2059 2.2E-02 2.2E-02 Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.5E+02 7.5E+02 nc 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 nc 2.4E+02 NA NA NA Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1/15/2016 Attachments Page 1 of 5 Particulate to Outdoor Air EPC Calculations Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil ON -SITE TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy EQUATIONS: EPCIEARTicuuaEl = EPCIsoa1 x PARTICULATEIAlm x 1 E-06 [kg/mg] where: PARTICULATEIAiR1= (1IPEF * 1 E+09 ug/kg) or Measured/Modelled and: PEF (m3/kg) = Q1C x [(3600 slhr) / ((0.036 x (1-V) x (Um7Ur)3 x F(x))] PARAMETER/DEFINITION UNITS DEFAULT Source PARTICULATEIari / Particulate concentration in air ug/m 0.03279 Calculated or measured Measured or modeled PARTICULATEIA,RI ug/m3 Measured value PEF / Particulate emission factor m3/kg Guidance value PEF / Particulate emission factor m3/kg 3.05E+10 Calculated here Q/C / inverse of the mean concentration at the center of a 0.5-acre-square source g/m'-s per kg/m3 36.80 Calculated / USEPA, 2014 V / Fraction of vegetative cover unitless 0.5 Site -specific, estimated Um / mean annual windspeed m/s 3.44 Site -specific / USEPA, 2014 U, / equivalent threshold value of wind speed at 7 m m/s 11.32 USEPA, 2014 F(x) / function dependant on U,,,/Ut derived using Cowherd at al. (1985) unitless 8.60E-03 Calculated / USEPA, 2014 USEPA, 2014. Regional Screening Levels. Climactic zone: Phoenix Arizona Area of Source: Specific to size of Exposure Area CASRN COPC EPC Soil (mg/kg) EPC Particulate (ug/m') 7429-90-5 Aluminum 1 3.3E-08 7440-36-0 Antimony 1 3.3E-08 7440-38-2 Arsenic 1 3.3E-08 7440-39-3 Barium 1 3.3E-08 7440-41-7 Beryllium 1 3.3E-08 744042-8 Boron 1 3.3E-08 7440-43-9 Cadmium 1 3.3E-08 7440-70-2 Calcium 1 3.3E-08 7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 1 3.3E-08 16065-83-1 Chromium III 1 3.3E-08 7440484 Cobalt 1 3.3E-08 7440-50-8 Copper 1 3.3E-08 7439-89-6 Iron 1 3.3E-08 7439-92-1 Lead 1 3.3E-08 7439-954 Magnesium 1 3.3E-08 7439-96-5 Manganese 1 3.3E-08 7439-97-6 Mercury 1 3.3E-08 7439-98-7 Molybdenum 1 3.3E-08 7440-02-0 Nickel 1 3.3E-08 7440-09-7 Potassium 1 3.3E-08 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 5 Attachment A - Table 4-1 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil ON -SITE TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this emosure route NV - not volatile EC - emosure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN Intakelpgpsdpp (mg/kg/day) DAD-.., (mg/kg/day) ECpp (uglirrm�wp�p EC_P. (ug/m') ABSING (unitless) ABSd (unitless) CSFprpl (mg/kg/day)-' CSFd1 e,,,,, (mg/kg/day)-' IUR (ug/m3)-' RBCln—timn RISC—1 RBCppnmpl_ RBC„ppp, RBC_.j Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.4E-08 3.8E-09 4.8E-11 NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 2.8E+03 1.8E+04 4.8E+08 NE 2.4E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC 4.8E-11 NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC 8.7E+08 NE 8.7E+08 Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC INC NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC 4.8E-11 NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC 1.2E+09 NE 1.2E+09 Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC INC NC NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC 4.8E-11 NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC 2.3E+08 NE 2.3E+08 Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NC NE 1 NC NC NC NE Magnesium 7439-954 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC 4.8E-11 NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC 8.7E+09 NE 8.7E+09 Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 5 Attachment A - Table 4-1 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil ON -SITE TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-e16) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential Concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values Intake)„„t (mg/kg/clay)" DADder- (mg/kg/day) ECp„t;cuo (mg/m3) EC-P., (mg1m3) ABSING (unitless) ABSds (unities RfD«I (mglkg/day) RfDd,.,l (mg/kg/day) RfC (m COPC CASRN RBCI,,tp, RBCd,,,1 RBCpd;cuo RBC__ RBCa,i Aluminum 7429-90-5 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 3.6E+06 1.5E+10 NE 3.6E+06 Antimony 7440-36-0 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 1.4E+03 NTV NE 1.4E+03 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E-07 2.7E-08 3.4E-13 NE 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 1.8E+03 1.1E+04 4.5E+07 NE 1.5E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 7.1E+05 1.5E+09 NE 7.1E+05 Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 7.1E+03 5.9E+07 NE 7.1E+03 Boron 7440-42-8 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 7.1E+05 5.9E+10 NE 7.1E+05 Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.8E-07 8.9E-10 3.4E-13 NE 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 3.6E+03 2.8E+04 5.9E+07 NE 3.2E+03 Calcium 7440-70-2 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 5.4E+06 NTV NE 5.4E+06 Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 5.4E+06 NTV NE 5.4E+06 Cobalt 7440-48-4 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 1.1E+03 1.8E+07 NE 1.1E+03 Copper 7440-50-8 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 1.4E+05 NTV NE 1.4E+05 Iron 7439-89-6 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 2.5E+06 NTV NE 2.5E+06 Lead 7439-92-1 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Manganese 7439-96-5 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 5.0E+05 1.5E+08 NE 5.0E+05 Mercury 7439-97-6 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 1.1E+03 8.9E+08 NE 1.1E+03 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 1.8E+04 NTV NE 1.8E+04 Nickel 7440-02-0 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 7.1E+04 2.7E+08 NE 7.1E+04 Potassium 7440-09-7 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Selenium 7782-49-2 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 1.8E+04 5.9E+10 NE 1.8E+04 Sodium 7440-23-5 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Strontium 7440-24-6 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 2.1E+06 NTV NE 2.1E+06 Thallium 7440-28-0 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 3.6E+01 NTV NE 3.6E+01 Titanium 7440-32-6 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 1.8E+04 3.0E+08 NE 1.8E+04 Zinc 7440-66-6 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 1.1E+06 NTV NE 1.1E+06 Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 5.7E+06 NTV NE 5.7E+06 Sulfide 18496-25-8 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1/8/2016 Page 4 of 5 Attachment A - Table 4-1 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy concern Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Taraet Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; remedial goal not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-JU-b 3.bL+Ub 3.bL+Ub nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E+03 2.4E+03 1.5E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.1E+05 7.1E+05 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.1E+03 8.7E+08 7.1E+03 nc Boron 7440-42-8 7.1 E+05 7.1 E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 3.2E+03 1.2E+09 3.2E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 5.4E+06 5.4E+06 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 5.4E+06 5.4E+06 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.1 E+03 2.3E+08 1.1E+03 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.4E+05 1.4E+05 nc Iron 7439-89-6 2.5E+06 2.5E+06 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 5.0E+05 5.0E+05 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.1 E+03 1.1E+03 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 7.1 E+04 8.7E+09 7.1 E+04 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.1E+06 2.1E+06 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 3.6E+01 3.6E+01 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.1 E+06 1.1E+06 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 5.7E+06 5.7E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /8/2016 Page 5 of 5 Table 4.1 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCrotal = [(1/RBC1ngest1or) + (1/RBCd1ona) + (1/RBCpa) + (1/RBC ap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngeanon= TR / Intakeng* CSF [EPC]aon * IR * ABSINO * FI * EF * ED * C1 Intakeng (age group,)= BW. * ATIff uma Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCden aI = TR / DAD * CSF DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED DADderm(age group ,)= BW. * ATlrcauma DAEvent = [EPC]ag;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion THI RBCmgaanon= Intakeng / RfD Intakeng = [EPC]aaI * IR * ABSIng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW*AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCden„aI= THI DAD / RfD DADder. = DAE„ent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAEvent = [EPC]ag;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalauon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan (age _ [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]vAPoR * ETvep * EF * ED g g oup.)- 24 * AT Ircauma Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBClnhalatlon= THI ECno / RfC ECno = [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPCI.POR * ETvap* EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECoan Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-nt Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/ma HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]ao;I Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment A- TABLE Attachment A- TABLE ug/m' EPC [ ]VAPOR Attachment A- TABLE Attachment A- TABLE ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 44 44 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 day IR 100 100 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA 3160 3160 cm2 AF 0.1 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day ETPart 2 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 8 8 hours/day 1 /8/2016 Page 1 of 4 ant A - Table 4-1 to to Outdoor Air EPC Calculations n of Risked Based Concentrations - Soil TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) In Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy = EPC[so,L] x PARTICULATEtAiRI x 1 E-06 [kg/mg] LATEIAiRI = (1/PEF * 1E+09 ug/kg) or Measured/Modelled (m'/kg) = O/C x [(3600 s/hr) / ((0.036 x (1-V) x (Um/Ur)' x F(x) )] METER/DEFINITION UNITS DEFAULT Source PARTICULATEIarI / Particulate concentration in air ug/m 0.03 Calculated or measured Measured or modeled PARTICULATEIAiRI ug/m3 Measured value PEF / Particulate emission factor m'/kg PEF / Particulate emission factor m3/kg 3.05E+10 Calculated here Q/C / inverse of the mean concentration at the center of a 0.5-acre-square source g/m2-s per kg/m' 36.8 USEPA, 2014 V / Fraction of vegetative cover unitless 0.5 USEPA, 2014 Um / mean annual windspeed m/s 3.44 USEPA, 2014 U, / equivalent threshold value of wind speed at 7 m m/s 11.32 USEPA, 2014 F(x) / function dependant on Um/U, derived using Cowherd et al. (1985) unitless 8.60E-03 USEPA, 2014 USEPA, 2014. Regional Screening Levels. Climactic region: Raleigh, NC; Site Area: 30 acres CASRN COPC EPC Soil EPC Particulate (mg/kg) I (uglm') 18540-29-9 Chromium VI (hexavalent) 1 3.3E-08 Page 2 of 4 Attachment A - Table 4-1 Risk Based Concentrations -Cancer-Based Derivation of Risked Based Concentrations - Soil ON -SITE TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE6-<16) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC - not carcinooenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors iMutagenici Cancer Toxici Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intakei„s„ne„ DADa..a ECwnmm+r. EC�,,.r AB$ING ABSa MOA? CSFo,+i CSFa„m,i IUR RBCinase.n RBCd„m,i RBCo,nmm+r. RBC„,p„ RBCmmi (mglkg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (ug/m') (ug/m') (unitless) (unitless) (mg/kglday)' (mglkg/day)'' (uglm)-' Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 1.2E-07 FALSE 1.4E-10 NE 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 1.7E+03 8.2E+06 NE 1.7E+03 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment A - Table 4-1 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -Cancer -Based Derivation of Risked Based Concentrations - Soil ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No TaRBCet Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of Dotential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dennally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intake;ns„�;on DADa„m,i ECt„h;�„„„ EC,,.np, ABSING ABSa RfDo„ i RfDa„m,i RfC RBC;s„r;o„ RBCa,,,,,,i RBCpar;�„„ re RBCx,np, RBCrpr,i (mg/kg) (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') (mglm') (unitless) (unities (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 2.8E-07 3.4E-13 NE 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 1.1E+04 3.0E+08 NE 1.1E+04 1/8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment A - Table 4.1 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCrotal = [(1 /RBCingestlor) + (1 /RBCdarma) + (1 /RBCpan) + (1 /RBCvap)] Cancer -Based Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,,,gaat;o = TR / Intakgng* CSF [EPC]aon *[IFSadj - OR - IFSM] * ABSING * FI * EF * C1 Intakeng (age group.)= BW. * AT Ircauma Cancer -Based Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdarn,al = TR / DAD * CSF DADdarmiagagroup.)= DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW. * ATlneaa,e DAEvent = [EPC]an;I * [DFSadj - OR - DFSM] * C1 Cancer -Based Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalauon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan (age [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED g group _ 24 * AT Ircauma For muta ens, IHHM is used in place of ED Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion THI RBC;ngeet;on = Intakengng / RfD Intakeng = [EPC]aojI * IR * ABSIng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCden„aI= THI DAD / RfD DADdarn, = DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAEvant = [EPC]ag;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalat;on= THI ECno / RfC ECno = [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPCI.POR * ETvap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECoan Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-ut Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/rn' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]aaI Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment A - TABLE 4-1 Attachment A - TABLE 4-1 ug/m' [EPC]VAPOR -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW NA 44 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IFSadj 23 mg-yr/kg-day IFSM 68 -- mg-yr/kg-day IR NA 100 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA NA 3160 cm2 AF NA 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day DFSadj 72 -- mg-yr/kg-day DFSM 215 -- mg-yr/kg-day ETPart 2 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 ug/mg WHIM 2700 unitless 1 /8/2016 Page 1 of 4 :hment B - Table 4-2 Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment ;ITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - eposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - Risk Based Concentration NTV - no towcity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values Intake;n,„u„ (mglkglday) DAD-- (mglkglday) EC,,,W,re (ug/m') EC,,,p« (uglm') (ABS,.. unitless) ABSa (unitless) CSF«,i (mglkglday)-' CSF—..' (mg/kg, IUR (uglin COPC CASRN RBCi„a„rbn RBCa .,i RBCmn ,i,r, RBC,,,,, RBCrorai Aluminum 7429-90-5 INC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.4E-09 4.6E-09 NE NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 2.8E+04 1.5E+04 NE NE 9.5E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC NE NE Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NE NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC NE NE Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC NE NE Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NE NE 1 NC NC NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC NE NE Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment B - Table 4-2 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment ON -SITE TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV -not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - Risk Based Concentration COPC - chemical of potential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN I Intake;n-timn I DADd,rmal EC„m,m,t, EC-P. ABSING ABSa RfD,r,i RfDd,rm,i RfC RBC;noe n RBCde--I RBC., ..„„ RBC,,,,,,, RBCto„I (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mglm3) (mg/m') (unitless) (unities (mg/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/m') Aluminum 7429-90-5 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 3.6E+07 NE NE 3.6E+07 Antimony 7440-36-0 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 1.4E+04 NE NE 1.4E+04 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E-08 3.2E-08 NE NE 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 1.8E+04 9.3E+03 NE NE 6.1E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 7.1E+06 NE NE 7.1E+06 Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 7.1E+04 NE NE 7.1E+04 Boron 7440-42-8 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 7.1E+06 NE NE 7.1E+06 Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.8E-08 1.1E-09 NE NE 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 3.6E+04 2.3E+04 NE NE 1.4E+04 Calcium 7440-70-2 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 5.4E+07 NE NE 5.4E+07 Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 5.4E+07 NE NE 5.4E+07 Cobalt 7440-48-4 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 1.1E+04 NE NE 1.1E+04 Copper 7440-50-8 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 1.4E+06 NE NE 1.4E+06 Iron 7439-89-6 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 2.5E+07 NE NE 2.5E+07 Lead 7439-92-1 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 5.0E+06 NE NE 5.0E+06 Mercury 7439-97-6 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 1.1E+04 NE NE 1.1E+04 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 1.8E+05 NE NE 1.8E+05 Nickel 7440-02-0 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 7.1E+05 NE NE 7.1E+05 Potassium 7440-09-7 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 1.8E+05 NE NE 1.8E+05 Sodium 7440-23-5 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 2.1E+07 NE NE 2.1E+07 Thallium 7440-28-0 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 3.6E+02 NE NE 3.6E+02 Titanium 7440-32-6 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 1.8E+05 NE NE 1.8E+05 Zinc 7440-66-6 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 1.1E+07 NE NE 1.1E+07 Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 5.7E+07 NE NE 5.7E+07 Sulfide 18496-25-8 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment B - Table 4-2 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment ON -SITE TRESPASSER -ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy concern Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Taraet Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-JU-b 3.bL+Uf 3.bL+ut nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.4E+04 1.4E+04 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.1E+03 9.5E+03 6.1E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.1E+06 7.1E+06 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.1E+04 7.1E+04 nc Boron 7440-42-8 7.1 E+06 7.1 E+06 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.4E+04 1.4E+04 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 5.4E+07 5.4E+07 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 5.4E+07 5.4E+07 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.1 E+04 1.1E+04 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.4E+06 1.4E+06 nc Iron 7439-89-6 2.5E+07 2.5E+07 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 5.0E+06 5.0E+06 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.1 E+04 1.1E+04 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 7.1 E+05 7.1 E+05 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.1E+07 2.1E+07 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 3.6E+02 3.6E+02 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.1 E+07 1.1E+07 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 5.7E+07 5.7E+07 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4.2 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC1 r 1= [(1 /RBC;ngaamn) + (1 /RBCda na) + (1 /RBCpa) + (1 /RBC ap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngaanon= TR / Intakeng* CSF [EPC]aol; * IR * ABSING * FI * EF * ED * C1 Intakeng (age group,)= BW. * ATIff uroa Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdan a; = TR / DAD * CSF DADderro(agegroup,)= DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW. * ATIburre DAE—t = [EPC].,, * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngaanon= THI Intakeng / RfD Intakeng = [EPC]aou * IR * ABS;ng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCd... I= THI DAD / RfD DADdar,n = DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAE—t = [EPC]aa;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBClnhalatlon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan (age [EPC]PART * ETPad * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED (s group •)— _ 24 * AT urearoe Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBC;nnaladon= ECno / RfC ECnu, = [EPC]PART * ETPa,t * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED * C2 24 *AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day EC.an Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-nt Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/m' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]ao;I Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment B - TABLE Attachment B - TABLE ug/m' [EPC]vAPOR Attachment B - TABLE Attachment B - TABLE ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 44 44 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 day IR 10 10 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA 3820 3820 cm2 AF 0.1 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day ETPart 2 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 8 8 hours/day 1 /8/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment B - Table 4-2 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 - <16) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors IMutagenici Cancer Toxici Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intakei„s„ne„ DADa..a ECwnmm+r. EC�,,.r ABSING ABSa MOA? CSFo,+i CSFa„m,i IUR RBCina„n.. RBCa.rm,i RBCo,nmm+r. RBC.+wr RBCmmi (mglkg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (ug/m') (ug/m') (unitless) (unitless) (mg/kglday)' (mglkg/day)'' (uglm)-' Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 1.2E-08 FALSE NE NE 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 1.7E+04 NE NE 1.7E+04 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment B - Table 4-2 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 - <16) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of Dotential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dennally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intakes„�;o„ DADa„m,i ECt„h;�„„„ EC,,.np, ABSING ABSa RfDo„ i RfDa„m,i RfC RBC;s„r;o„ RBCa,,,,,,i RBCpar;�„„ re RBCx,np, RBCrpr,i (mg/kg) (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') (mglm') (unitless) (unities (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 2.8E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 1.1E+05 NE NE 1.1E+OS 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Based Concentration Summary ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment ITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 - <16) man Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites ke Energy COPC - chemical of potential concern c - risk based concentration based on EPCs Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.1E+05 1.7E+04 1.7E+04 c 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment B - Table 4.2 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCrotal = [(1 /RBCingestlor) + (1 /RBCdarna) + (1 /RBCpan) + (1 /RBCvap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,,,gaat;o = TR / Intakeng* CSF [EPC]aon *[IFSadj - OR - IFSM] * ABSING * FI * EF * C1 Intakeng (age group.)= BW. * AT Ircauma Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdarn,al = TR / DAD * CSF DADdarmiagagmup.)= DAEvant * SA * EV * EF * ED BW. * ATlneame DAEvent = [EPC]ao;I * [DFSadj - OR - DFSM] * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalauon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan (age [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED g group _ 24 * AT Ircauma For muta ens, IHHM is used in place of ED Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion THI RBC;ngeet;on = Intakemgn9 / RfD Intakeng = [EPC]aojI * IR * ABSIng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCden aI= THI DAD / RfD DADda,n, = DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAEvant = [EPC]ao;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalat;on= THI ECno / RfC ECno = [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPCI.POR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECoan Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-ut Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/rn' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]aaI Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' [EPC]VAPOR -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW NA 44 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IFSadj 2 mg-yr/kg-day IFSM 7 -- mg-yr/kg-day IR NA 10 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA NA 3820 cm2 AF NA 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day DFSadj 87 -- mg-yr/kg-day DFSM 260 -- mg-yr/kg-day ETPart 2 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 ug/mg WHIM 2700 unitless 1 /6/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment C - Table 4-3 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6.16) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CANIA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value oval [(1/RBC;nsa) + (1/RBCden,,, DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potenital concern Intake Calculations Ta water Dermal Parameters Cancer ToxicityValues COPC CASRN EPC Fntk;ng„r;,n DP,�„n DADae,n,; ECwnor B i t• Kp FA In EPD? CSF_ CSFd-1 IUR RBC;ng„mn RBC-11 RBC.p„ RBCt(mg/L)glday) (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (uglm') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) YIN) (mg/kg/day)-' (mglkg/day)-' (uglm')-' (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 8.0E-09 2.0E-09 3.1E-09 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 8.3E+00 2.2E+Ot NE 6.0E+00 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Beryllium 744041-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.4E-03 NC NC NE Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cadmium 744043-9 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.8E-03 NC NC NE Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium, Total 744047-3 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium 111 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cobalt 744048-4 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 9.0E-03 NC NC NE Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.4E-04 NC NC NE Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Selenium 778249-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE 111112016 Page 2 of 4 .hment C - Table 4-3 Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water IITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6- 16) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 - chemical of Dotenital concern NTV - no toxicity value avai [(1/RBC;ngagr;o„) + (1/RBCda, DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Intake;ng 1i- DA -n DADde - EC,,,e„ B [* Kp FA In EPD? RfD„a� RfDde,m,i RfC RBC;nge,d,n RBCd --- I RBC„ _ RBC„r,i (mg/L) (mg/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mglkg/day) (mglm') (unities.) (hr/event) (hr) (cm/hr) (unities.) (Y/N) (mg/kglday) (mg/kglday) (mglm') (mg/L) (mg/L) (mglL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.8E+04 4.7E+04 NE 1.3E+04 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 7.1E+00 2.8E+00 NE 2.0E+00 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 5.6E-OS 2.0E-09 2.1E-OS NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 0.6 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 5.4E+00 1.4E+01 NE 3.9E+00 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 3.6E+03 6.5E+02 NE 5.5E+02 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 3.6E+01 6.5E-01 NE 6.4E-01 Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 3.6E+03 9.3E+03 NE 2.6E+03 Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.8E+01 1.2E+00 NE 1.1E+00 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 2.7E+04 9.1E+02 NE 8.8E+02 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 2.7E+04 9.1E+02 NE 8.8E+02 Cobalt 7440-48-0 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 8.0E-10 8.6E-09 NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 5.4E+00 3.5E+01 NE 4.6E+00 Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 7.1E+02 1.9E+03 NE 5.2E+02 Iron 7439-859-6 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 1.2E+04 3.3E+04 NE 9.0E+03 Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-10 2.1E-09 NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 2.5E+03 2.6E+02 NE 2.4E+02 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 5.4E+00 9.8E-01 NE 8.3E-01 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 8.9E+01 2.3E+02 NE 6.5E+01 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 4.0E-10 4.3E-09 NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 3.6E+02 1.9E+02 NE 1.2E+02 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 4.0E-10 4.3E-09 NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Selenium 778249-2 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 8.9E+01 2.3E+02 NE 6.5E+01 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 1.2E-09 1.3E-08 NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 1.1E+04 2.8E+04 NE 7.7E+03 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 8.9E+01 6.1E+00 NE 5.7E+00 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 1.2E-09 1.3E-08 NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 5.4E+03 2.3E+04 NE 4.4E+03 Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 2.0E-09 2.1E-08 NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 2.9E+04 7.5E+04 NE 2.1E+04 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 7.9E-10 8.5E-09 NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE 1/11/2016 Page 3 of 4 ttachment C - Table 4-3 isk Based Concentration Summary arivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water N-SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based , [0/RBC,nq.ti.n) + (1/RBCdermal NA - no toxicity value available; remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis /Aluminum /4Zy-yU-0 L6t+U4 I.St+U4 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 2.0E+00 2.0E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.9E+00 6.0E+00 3.9E+00 nc Barium 7440-39-3 5.5E+02 5.5E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 6.4E-01 6.4E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.6E+03 2.6E+03 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.1E+00 1.1E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.8E+02 8.8E+02 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 8.8E+02 8.8E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.6E+00 4.6E+00 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.2E+02 5.2E+02 nc Iron 7439-89-6 9.0E+03 9.0E+03 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 8.3E-01 8.3E-01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.5E+01 6.5E+01 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.5E+01 6.5E+01 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.7E+03 7.7E+03 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.7E+00 5.7E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.4E+03 4.4E+03 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1 E+04 2.1 E+04 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1/11/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-3 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC, t, = 1 [(1/RBCmge i.)+(1/RBCde,m0+(1/RBC„ap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBCmge iw = TR Intake;., * CSF Intake;ng (age group x) = BW * AT rf j_ Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBCde,m,; = DADde.,, -CSF DADder. DAexent * SA * EV * EF * ED a (a.groupx)= AT;;fe,;me DAE—t = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevenKt• = 2 . FA. Kp , 6 • r TTevent Kp event 3B PCeventTevenb=t* = FA * C2 * �1 + B )+ 2 * T * (1+( 1 +3B' + B = ) ) Inorganics Compounds: Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBCI.naat—= - EC_ IUR [EPC]VAPOR* ETVap* EF * ED * C1 ECce. _ (ege group x) - 24 * AT,iwime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngeat;.. = THI Intake;., / RfD Intake;n, _ [EPC]—, * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW *AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBCde,ma; = DAD,,- / RfD DAE„e„1 * DFWadj DADde,m (age group x) _ ATrferma DAExe.c = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t• _ 2 . FA. Kp . 6 . r +rTevent Kp event 1+3B+3B' PCeventTevent =t* = FA' C2 * 1 + B -2— 1 + B Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent = C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nna;ad.n = THI ECn. / RfC ECn. _ [EPC]VAPOR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day)" IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)"' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day EC.an Age/chemical specific -- (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE„e„t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm`-event ECn. -- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HQ -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPCLa.r Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm2-event [EPC]„ap., ----NOT USED--- ---NOT USED--- ug/m' BW 44 44 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR 0.02 0.02 L/day FI 1 1 unitless $A 3820 3820 cm2 Tevent 2.00 2 hr/event EV 1 1 event/day C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 hr/day C2 1000 1000 cm'/L 1/11/2016 Pace 1 of 4 Attachment C -Table 43 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) Exoosure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC -risk based concentration NTV- no toxidty value available DAD- dermally absorbed dose ASS- absorption factor UR-cancer .,it mk COPC- chemical of potential concern EPD- effective permeability domain Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters CanToxicl Values COPC CASRN EPC Intake.pp..nop DA.v.p DADd.rm,i EC.,por B t* Kp FA In EPD? Mutagenic CSF. i CSFd m,i IUR RBCme,.nop RBCd.rma RBC_por RBCt t , (mg/LI (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (ug/m') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cm/hr) (unit(YIN) MOA? (mg/kg/day)-' (mg/kg/day)-' (ug/m')-' (m /L m /L m /L m /L g) Ig) (g) Ig) Chromium VI(hexavalent) 18540-29.9 1.00E-03 24E-08 4.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 8.3E+00 2.7E-01 NE 2.8E-01 1/8/2016 Pace 2 of 4 4ttachment C - Table 4-3 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based 3erivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6.16) human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites 3uke Energy COPC CASRN EPC Intake;nge,a„ DAe.em (mglL) (mg/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mglkgld: Chromium VI (h—alent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 5.6E-08 4.0E-09 4.3E-08 Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 - chemical of Dotential concern B i t- K FA In EPD. Rlk).J � RfDae,m,; RfC RBC;nge,a„ RBC;ng„a„ RgCgd, m,i RB et, P � Cn ; glm') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (Y/N) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mglm') (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 5.4E+01 1.8E+00 NE 1.7E+00 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 ttachment C - Table 4-3 isk Based Concentration Summary arivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water N-SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc -risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c -risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available, remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.7E+00 2.6E-01 2.6E-01 c 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment C - Table 4-3 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBCo 1 I �I = [(1/RBCmgescion) + (1/RBCaermal) + (1/RBCoap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion TR RBC;nges,Ion = Intake;ng *CSF [EPC]wa,er * IFWadj * FI Intake;ng(age grcupx)= BW*AT igetim Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBC,aai = m DADtlarn, *CSF DAD — DAE*ent * DFWadj tle,,,, (age gmup x) — ATliredme DAE„em _ [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t. = 2 * FA * � , 6 * x *rTevent Kp Tevent 1+3B+3W PCeventTevent>=t• = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * T * C 1 + B z ) Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBC;n a n lAion = EC— * IUR [EPC]VAPOR* ETvap * EF * ED * C1 ECean (age group xl = 24 * AT;;,e,;n,e Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;agaa,;oa = THI Intake;ng / RfD Intake;ag = [EPC]wa,er * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBC,aa; = ,m DADtlaa„ / RfD DAD,_ DAE—t * SA * EV * EF * ED (age gmup x) = BW * AT DAE„an, = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCevent 2 * FA . Kp , F6. T *T event Tevent<h = Kp event 1 + 3B + 3B- PCeventTevent>=t* = FA' * C2 * 1 + B -2— 1 + B z ( ) Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent= C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation a THI RBC;n n lagon = ECne / RfC EC�e = [EPC]VAPOR * ETvap * EF * ED * C1 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical speck -- (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific — (ug/m,)-r Intake Age/chemical specific — mg/kg-day EC-, Age/chemical specific — (ug/mi ELCR Age/chemical speck — unidess RfD — Chemical specific mg/kg-day R1C — Chemical specific (mg/m,) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mgdcg-dey DA,,., Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cmx-event EC,, — Age/chemical specific mi HO — Age/chemical specific unidess [EPCj—, Chemical speck Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical speck Chemical specific L/cmi [EPCj, r —NOT USED----- -----NOT USED— ug/me BW NA 44 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT — 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 — day IFWadj 1 — L/kg IR 0 0 L/day FI NA 0.02 unidess SA 0.613636364 0 cm2 Tevent 0.00 0 hr/event EV NA 3820 event/day DFWadj 2 2 events-cm2/kg C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 39068.18182 NA hr/day C2 1000 1000 cmNL 1 /6/2016 Page 1 of 5 to Outdoor Air EPC Calculations of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil 1AL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy = EPClsoiy x PARTICULATEtgial x 1 E-06 [kg/mg] = (1/PEF' 1E+09 ug/kg) or Measured/Modelled (m'/kg) = Q/C x [(3600 s/hr) / ((0.036 x (1- V) x (Um/U,)' x F(x) )] PARAMETER/DEFINITION UNITS DEFAULT Source PARTICULATE, / Particulate concentration in air 0.03279 Calculated or measured Measured or modeled PARTICULATE, ug/m' Measured value PEF / Particulate emission factor m3/kg Guidance value PEF / Particulate emission factor m'/kg 3.05E+10 Calculated here Q/C / inverse of the mean concentration at the center of a 0.5-acre-square source g/m2-s per kg/m' 36.80 Calculated I USEPA, 2014 V / Fraction of vegetative cover unitless 0.5 Site -specific, estimated U, / mean annual windspeed m/s 3.44 Site -specific / USEPA, 2014 U, / equivalent threshold value of wind speed at 7 m m/a 11.32 USEPA, 2014 F(x) I function dependant on U,nIU, derived using Cowherd at al. (1985) unitless 8.60E-03 Calculated I USEPA, 2014 USEPA, 2014. Regional Screening Levels. Climactic zone: Phoenix Arizona Area of Source: CASRN COPC EPC Soil (.9l EPC Particulate (ug/m') 7429-90-5 Aluminum 1 3.3E-08 7440-36-0 Antimony 1 3.3E-08 7440-38-2 Arsenic 1 3.3E-08 7440-39-3 Barium 1 3.3E-08 7440-41-7 Beryllium 1 3.3E-08 7440-42-8 Boron 1 3.3E-08 7440-43-9 Cadmium 1 3.3E-08 7440-70-2 Calcium 1 3.3E-08 7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 1 3.3E-08 16065-83-1 Chromium III 1 3.3E-08 7440-48-4 Cobalt 1 3.3E-08 7440-50-8 Copper 1 3.3E-08 7439-89-6 Iron 1 3.3E-08 7439-92-1 Lead 1 3.3E-08 7439-95-4 Magnesium 1 3.3E-08 7439-96-5 Manganese 1 3.3E-08 7439-97-6 Mercury 1 3.3E-08 7439-98-7 Molybdenum 1 3.3E-08 7440-02-0 Nickel 1 3.3E-08 7440-09-7 Potassium 1 3.3E-08 Specific to size of Exposure Area 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 5 :hment D - Table 4-4 Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil MERCIALIINDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values Intakein-1 p (mglkglday) DAD-- (mglkglday) ECp.,l- (uglm') EC,,,n« (uglm') ABSABSd (unitless) limitless) CSF_1 I (mglkglday)-' CSFd««.1 (mglkglday)-' IUR (uglm')-' COPC CASRN RBC;pge . RBCd.,mai RBCp,nw,j r RBC„p„ RBC�o�ai Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.8E-07 3.8E-08 1.3E-09 NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 3.6E+02 1.7E+03 1.7E+07 NE 3.0E+02 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC 1.3E-09 NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC 3.1E+07 NE 3.1E+07 Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC 1.3E-09 NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC 4.2E+07 NE 4.2E+07 Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC 1.3E-09 NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC 8.3E+06 NE 8.3E+06 Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NC NE 1 NC NC NC NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC 1.3E-09 NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC 3.1E+08 NE 3.1E+08 Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.1E-07 1.3E-09 NE 1 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 6.5E+02 8.9E+05 NE 6.5E+02 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 5 Attachment D - Table 44 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil COMMERCIALIINDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN I Intake;n-umn I DADd,rmal EC„m,m,k EC-P. ABSING ABSa RfD,r,i RfDd,rm,i RfC RBC;no u.n RBCd, RBC,,,,e.„„„ RBC,,,,,,, RBCto„I (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mglm3) (mg/m3) (unitless) (unitless) (mg/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/m) Aluminum 7429-90-5 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Antimony 7440-36-0 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Arsenic 7440-38-2 5.1E-07 1.1E-07 3.7E-12 Barium 7440-39-3 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Beryllium 7440-41-7 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Boron 7440-42-8 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Cadmium 7440-43-9 8.6E-07 3.6E-09 3.7E-12 Calcium 7440-70-2 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Chromium III 16065-83-1 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Cobalt 7440-48-4 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Copper 7440-50-8 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Iron 7439-89-6 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Lead 7439-92-1 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Magnesium 7439-95-4 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Manganese 7439-96-5 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Mercury 7439-97-6 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Nickel 7440-02-0 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Potassium 7440-09-7 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Selenium 7782-49-2 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Sodium 7440-23-5 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Strontium 7440-24-6 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Thallium 7440-28-0 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Titanium 7440-32-6 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Vanadium 7440-62-2 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Zinc 7440-66-6 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Nitrate 14797-55-8 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Sulfide 18496-25-8 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 Chromium VI (hemvalent) 18540-29-9 8.6E-07 3.7E-12 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.2E+06 1.3E+09 NE 1.2E+06 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 4.7E+02 NTV NE 4.7E+02 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 5.8E+02 2.8E+03 4.0E+06 NE 4.8E+02 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 2.3E+05 1.3E+08 NE 2.3E+05 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 2.3E+03 5.3E+06 NE 2.3E+03 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.3E+05 5.3E+09 NE 2.3E+05 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.2E+03 7.0E+03 5.3E+06 NE 1.0E+03 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+06 NTV NE 1.8E+06 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+06 NTV NE 1.8E+06 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 3.5E+02 1.6E+06 NE 3.5E+02 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 4.7E+04 NTV NE 4.7E+04 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 8.2E+05 NTV NE 8.2E+05 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.6E+05 1.3E+07 NE 1.6E+05 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 3.5E+02 8.0E+07 NE 3.5E+02 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 5.8E+03 NTV NE 5.8E+03 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 2.3E+04 2.4E+07 NE 2.3E+04 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 5.8E+03 5.3E+09 NE 5.8E+03 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 7.0E+05 NTV NE 7.0E+05 1 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.2E+01 NTV NE 1.2E+01 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 5.8E+03 2.7E+07 NE 5.8E+03 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.5E+05 NTV NE 3.5E+05 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 1.9E+06 NTV NE 1.9E+06 1 NTV NTV NTV NE 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 3.5E+03 2.7E+07 NE 3.5E+03 1/8/2016 Page 4 of 5 Attachment D - Table 4-4 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Soil COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Tar et Cancer Risk er Chemical 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; remedial goal not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-W-b I.ZL+Ub I.ZL+Ue nc Antimony 7440-36-0 4.7E+02 4.7E+02 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.8E+02 3.0E+02 3.0E+02 c Barium 7440-39-3 2.3E+05 2.3E+05 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.3E+03 3.1E+07 2.3E+03 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.3E+05 2.3E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E+03 4.2E+07 1.0E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+06 1.8E+06 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+06 1.8E+06 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.5E+02 8.3E+06 3.5E+02 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.7E+04 4.7E+04 nc Iron 7439-89-6 8.2E+05 8.2E+05 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.6E+05 1.6E+05 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.5E+02 3.5E+02 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.3E+04 3.1E+08 2.3E+04 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.0E+05 7.0E+05 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.5E+05 3.5E+05 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+06 1.9E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /8/2016 Page 5 of 5 Table 4.4 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Remedial Goal RBC1ora; = 1 [(1 /RBC;ngeatlon) + (1 /RBCde„na) + (1 /RBCPa,) + (1 /RBC,aP)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngesuon= TR / Intakeng* CSF [EPC]sol; * IR * ABSING * FI * EF * ED * C1 Intakeng (age group x)= BW. * ATIff uroe Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdenna; = TR / DAD * CSF DADderro(agegroupx)= DAEvenr * SA * EV * EF * ED BW. * ATIburre DAE—r = [EPC].;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngeeuon= THI Intakeng / RfD Intakeng = [EPC]sou * IR * ABS;ng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCd... I= THI DAD / RfD DADderrn = DAEvenr * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAE—r = [EPC].;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBClnhalauon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan (age [EPC]PART * ETPad * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED (s group xl- _ 24 * AT ureaa,e Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBC;nnaladon= ECno / RfC EC- = [EPC]PART * ETPad * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED * C2 24 *AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day EC.an Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-nt Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/m' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]so;I Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment D - TABLE Attachment D - TABLE ug/m' EPC [ ]VAPOR Attachment D - TABLE Attachment D - TABLE ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 80 80 kg EF 250 250 day/year ED 25 25 year AT 9125 day ATlifetime 25550 day IR 100 100 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA 3470 3470 cm2 AF 0.12 0.12 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day ETPart 4 4 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 8 8 hours/day 1 /8/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment E - Table 4-5 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this emosure route NV - not volatile EC - emosure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available Attachment E - DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS -absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN [—Inlak.,..ese. (mglkglday) DADd-.1 (mglkglday) ECp,r,; .,_ (uglm') EC, ,po, (ug/m') ABSING (unitless) ABSd (unitless) CSFor,i (mg/kg/day)"' CSFder,,,,I (mg/kg/day)-' IUR (uglm')"' RBC;,,gej.„ RBCde .1 RBCp,nl.w_ RBC,,,po, RBCmaal Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.4E-10 3.0E-10 NE NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 1.5E+05 2.3E+05 NE NE 9.1E+04 Barium 7440-39-3 INC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC NE NE Boron 7440-42-8 INC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NE NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC NE NE Calcium 7440-70-2 INC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC NE NE Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NE NE 1 NC NC NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-04 INC NC NE NE Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Zinc 7440-66-6 INC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sulfide 15496-25-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 7.3E-10 NE NE 1 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 2.7E+05 NE NE 2.7E+05 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment E - Table 4-5 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment COMMERCIALIINDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV -not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN I Intakeln-time I DADd,rmal EC„m,m,k EC-P. ABSING ABSa RfD,r,i RfDd,rm,i RfC RBC;noe n RBCde--I RBC.,e..,„ RBC,,,,,,, RBCto„I (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mglm3) (mg/m3) (unitless) (unitless) (mg/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/m3) Aluminum 7429-90-5 2.1E-09 NE Antimony 7440-36-0 2.1E-09 NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.2E-09 8.3E-10 NE Barium 7440-39-3 2.1E-09 NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.1E-09 NE Boron 7440-42-8 2.1E-09 NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.1E-09 2.8E-11 NE Calcium 7440-70-2 2.1E-09 NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 2.1E-09 NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.1E-09 NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 2.1E-09 NE Copper 7440-50-8 2.1E-09 NE Iron 7439-89-6 2.1E-09 NE Lead 7439-92-1 2.1E-09 NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 2.1E-09 NE Manganese 7439-96-5 2.1E-09 NE Mercury 7439-97-6 2.1E-09 NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.1E-09 NE Nickel 7440-02-0 2.1E-09 NE Potassium 7440-09-7 2.1E-09 NE Selenium 7782-49-2 2.1E-09 NE Sodium 7440-23-5 2.1E-09 NE Strontium 7440-24-6 2.1E-09 NE Thallium 7440-28-0 2.1E-09 NE Titanium 7440-32-6 2.1E-09 NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.1E-09 NE Zinc 7440-66-6 2.1E-09 NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1E-09 NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 2.1E-09 NE Chromium VI(hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.1E-09 NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 4.9E+08 N 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 1.9E+05 N 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 2.4E+05 3.6E+05 N 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 9.7E+07 N 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 9.7E+05 N 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 9.7E+07 N 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 4.9E+05 9.1E+05 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 7.3E+08 N 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 7.3E+08 N 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 1.5E+05 N 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 1.9E+07 N 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 3.4E+08 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 NTV NTV N 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 6.8E+07 N 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 1.5E+05 N 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.4E+06 N 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 9.7E+06 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 2.4E+06 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 2.9E+08 N 1 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 4.9E+03 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 2.4E+06 N 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 1.5E+08 N 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 7.8E+08 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 1.5E+06 N 4.9E+08 1.9E+05 1.5E+05 9.7E+07 9.7E+05 9.7E+07 3.2E+05 7.3E+08 7.3E+08 1.5E+05 1.9E+07 3.4E+08 6.8E+07 1.5E+05 2.4E+06 9.7E+06 2.4E+06 2.9E+08 4.9E+03 2.4E+06 1.5E+08 7.8E+08 1.5E+06 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment E - Table 4-5 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; risk based concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) I Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /429-90-b 4.9E+06 4.9E+08 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.9E+05 1.9E+05 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E+05 9.1 E+04 9.1 E+04 c Barium 7440-39-3 9.7E+07 9.7E+07 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 9.7E+05 9.7E+05 nc Boron 7440-42-8 9.7E+07 9.7E+07 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 3.2E+05 3.2E+05 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 7.3E+08 7.3E+08 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 7.3E+08 7.3E+08 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.5E+05 1.5E+05 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.9E+07 1.9E+07 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.4E+08 3.4E+08 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 6.8E+07 6.8E+07 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.5E+05 1.5E+05 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 9.7E+06 9.7E+06 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.9E+08 2.9E+08 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 4.9E+03 4.9E+03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.5E+08 1.5E+08 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.8E+08 7.8E+08 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.5E+06 2.7E+05 2.7E+05 c 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-5 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC,,, = 1 [(1/R13C,ngestlon) + (1/RBCdem,el) + (1/RBCpart) + (1/RBCvap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngestlon = TR / Intake;ng* CSF [EPC]saI * IR * ABSING * FI * EF * ED * C1 Intake;ng (age group x) = BW. * AT a Ilfmetl Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCde oa, = TR / DAD * CSF DAD e,n DAEverrt * SA * EV * EF * ED d (age groupx)= BW. *AT Ilfetlme DAEoenf = [EPC].I; * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion THI RBC,ngaatlnn = Intake;ng / RfD Intake;ng = [EPC]sg; * IR * ABS;ng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCda,n,a, = THI DAD / RfD DADdam, = DAE111 * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAEvenf = [EPC].;; * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nna;atloo = TR / ECoan * IUR [EPC]PART * ETPart * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETVap* EF * ED EC an (age group x) _ 24 * AT;;f ume Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBC;nnalaunn = ECno / RfC ECnu, = [EPC]PART * ETPart * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless MID Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAEven, Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/ma HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]so;; Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment E - TABLE Attachment E - TABLE ug/m' [EPC]VAPOR Attachment E - TABLE Attachment E - TABLE ug/m3 ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 80 80 kg EF 12 12 day/year ED 25 25 year AT -- 9125 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR 5 5 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA 670 670 cm2 AF 0.1 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day ETPart 4 4 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 8 8 hours/day 1 /6/2016 Pace 1 of 4 Attachment F -Table 4-6 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Seep Water COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL -COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value avai Attachment F - DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potenital concern In take Calculations Ta water Dermal Parameters Cancer ToxicityValues COPC CASRN EPC Fntake;d DP,�„n DADd.,;. EC_ B t• t• Kp FA In EPD? CSF,,,; CSFd,1 IUR RBC;ngu.n RBCd.nn.i RBC_., RBCr(gc)g/kglday) (mglkglday) (mg/kglday) (uglm') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (Y/N) (mglkglday)-' (mg/kglday)-' (uglm')-' (mg1L) (mg1L) (mg/L) (mglL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 3.9E-10 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 NE 1.7E+02 NE 1.7E+02 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.4E-03 NE -- NE Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.8E-03 NE -- NE Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium,Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 9.0E-03 NE -- NE Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NE -- NE Magnesium 7439-954 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 i Y NE -- NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.4E-04 NE -- NE Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NE -- NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NE -- NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y NE -- NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 NE 8.0E-09 7.9E-10 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 NE 6.4E+00 NE 6.4E+00 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 4 .hment F -Table 4-6 Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based ration of Risk Based Concentrations - Seep Water MERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL -COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 COPC CASRN EPC (mg/L) Intake;ng„a,n (mglkglday) D A. m (mglkglday) DADae,m,; (mglkglday) EC,e„ (mglm') B (unitless) t (hr/event) [* (hr) K P (cmlhr) FA it In EPD. (YIN) RfD,,,� (mg/kglday) RfDae,m,; (mg/kg/day) RfC (mglm') RBC;nge„mn (mg/L) RBCae,mai (mg/L) RBC,,,e„ (mI. RBC,,,,; Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 NE 9.1E+05 NE 9.1E+05 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 NE 5.4E+01 NE 5.4E+01 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 0.6 V 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 NE 2.7E+02 NE 2.7E+02 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 NE 1.3E+04 NE 1.3E+04 Beryllium 7440-01-7 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 V 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 NE 1.3E+01 NE 1.3E+01 Boron 7440-02-8 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 NE 1.8E+OS NE 1.8E+05 Cadmium 7440A3-9 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 NE 2.3E+01 NE 2.3E+01 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Chromium, Total 7440A-3 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 V 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 NE 1.8E+04 NE 1.8E+04 Chromium 111 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 NE 1.8E+04 NE 1.8E+04 Cobalt 7440A8-0 1.00E-03 NE 1.6E-09 4.4E-10 NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 NE 6.8E+02 NE 6.8E+02 Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 NE 3.6E+04 NE 3.6E+04 Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 NE 6.4E+05 NE 6.4E+05 Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-10 1.1E-10 NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 NE 5.1E+03 NE 5.1E+03 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 NE 1.9E+01 NE 1.9E+01 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 NE 4.5E+03 NE 4.5E+03 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NE 8.0E-10 2.2E-10 NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 NE 3.6E+03 NE 3.6E+03 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NE 8.0E-10 2.2E-10 NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 V 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 NE 4.5E+03 NE 4.5E+03 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NE 2.4E-09 6.6E-10 NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 V 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 NE 5.4E+05 NE 5.4E+05 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 1.0E-03 1 V NE NN NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 NE 1.2E+02 NE 1.2E+02 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.4E-09 6.6E-10 NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 V 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 NE 4.5E+05 NE 4.5E+05 Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 1.1E-09 NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 NE 1.5E+06 NE 1.5E+06 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NE 1.6E-09 4.4E-10 NE 4.0E-04 1 V NE NN NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 NE 8.0E-09 2.2E-09 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 NE 3.4E+01 NE 3.4E+01 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 achment F -Table 4-6 ;k Based Concentration Summary rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Seep Water IMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL WORKER (ADULT) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 1429-9U-b 9.1E+Ub U.'IE+Ub nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.4E+01 5.4E+01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.7E+02 1.7E+02 1.7E+02 c Barium 7440-39-3 1.3E+04 1.3E+04 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.3E+01 1.3E+01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.8E+05 1.8E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+04 1.8E+04 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 6.8E+02 6.8E+02 nc Copper 7440-50-8 3.6E+04 3.6E+04 nc Iron 7439-89-6 6.4E+05 6.4E+05 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 5.1 E+03 5.1 E+03 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.9E+01 1.9E+01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 4.5E+03 4.5E+03 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 3.6E+03 3.6E+03 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 4.5E+03 4.5E+03 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 5.4E+05 5.4E+05 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.5E+05 4.5E+05 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.5E+06 1.5E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.4E+01 6.4E+00 6.4E+00 c 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-6 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC, t, = 1 [(1/RBCmge i.)+(1/RBCde,m0+(1/RBCxap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBCmge iw = TR Intake;., * CSF Intake;ng (age group x) = BW * AT rf j_ Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBCde,,; = e, DADden„ -CSF DADder. DAexent * SA * EV * EF * ED a (agegroupx)= AT;;fe,;me DAExem = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t• _ 2 . FA. Kp . 6 . r +rTevent Kp event 1+3B+3B' PCeventTevent =t* = FA * * �1 + B + 2 ( ) Inorganics Compounds: Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBCI—at— = - EC_ IUR [EPC]VAPOR* ETVap* EF * ED * C1 ECG,,, _ (ege gmuP x) - 24 * AT,iwime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngeat;n„ = THI Intake;,,, / RfD Intake;n, _ [EPC]—, * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW *AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBCde,e,a; = DAD,,- / RfD DAExen1 * DFWadj DADde,m (age group x) = ATrferma DAExeec = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevenKt• _ 2 . FA. Kp . 6 • r •rTevent Kp event 1+3B+3B' PCeventTevent =t* = FA' C2 * 1 + B -2— 1 c + _BY Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent = C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nna;adn„ = THI ECn� / RfC ECnn = [EPC]VAPOR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day)" IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)"' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day EC.an Age/chemical specific -- (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE„e„t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm`-event ECn� -- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HQ -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPCLa.r Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm2-event [EPC]„ape, ----NOT USED--- ---NOT USED--- ug/m' BW 80 80 kg EF 12 12 day/year ED 25 25 year AT -- 9125 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR L/day FI unitless $A 670 670 cm2 Tevent 4.00 4 hr/event EV 1 1 event/day C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 4 4 hr/day C2 1000 1000 cm'/L 1/8/2016 Page 1 of 5 Particulate to Outdoor Air EPC Calculations Derivation of Risk Based Concentration - Soil CONSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy = EPClsoiy x PARTICULATEtgial x 1 E-06 [kg/mg] = (1/PEF' 1E+09 ug/kg) or Measured/Modelled (m'/kg) = Q/C x [(3600 s/hr) / ((0.036 x (1- V) x (Um/U,)' x F(x) )] PARAMETER/DEFINITION UNITS DEFAULT Source PARTICULATE, / Particulate concentration in air 0.03279 Calculated or measured Measured or modeled PARTICULATE, ug/m' Measured value PEF / Particulate emission factor m3/kg Guidance value PEF / Particulate emission factor m'/kg 3.05E+10 Calculated here Q/C / inverse of the mean concentration at the center of a 0.5-acre-square source g/m2-s per kg/m' 36.80 Calculated / USEPA, 2014 V / Fraction of vegetative cover unitless 0.5 Site -specific, estimated U, / mean annual windspeed m/s 3.44 Site -specific / USEPA, 2014 U, / equivalent threshold value of wind speed at 7 m m/a 11.32 USEPA, 2014 F(x) / function dependant on U./U, derived using Cowherd at al. (1985) unitless 8.60E-03 Calculated / USEPA, 2014 USEPA, 2014. Regional Screening Levels. Climactic zone: Phoenix Arizona Area of Source: CASRN COPC EPC Soil (mg/kg) EPC Particulate (ug/m') 7429-90-5 Aluminum 1 3.3E-08 7440-36-0 Antimony 1 3.3E-08 7440-38-2 Arsenic 1 3.3E-08 7440-39-3 Barium 1 3.3E-08 7440-41-7 Beryllium 1 3.3E-08 7440-42-8 Boron 1 3.3E-08 7440-43-9 Cadmium 1 3.3E-08 7440-70-2 Calcium 1 3.3E-08 7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 1 3.3E-08 16065-83-1 Chromium III 1 3.3E-08 7440-48-4 Cobalt 1 3.3E-08 7440-50-8 Copper 1 3.3E-08 7439-89-6 Iron 1 3.3E-08 7439-92-1 Lead 1 3.3E-08 7439-95-4 Magnesium 1 3.3E-08 7439-96-5 Manganese 1 3.3E-08 7439-97-6 Mercury 1 3.3E-08 7439-98-7 Molybdenum 1 3.3E-08 7440-02-0 Nickel 1 3.3E-08 7440-09-7 Potassium 1 3.3E-08 Specific to size of Exposure Area Haley & Aldrich, Inc. \\MAN\common\42058_Duke\002\HH PRGs\PRG calculations\Soil -Template-EPA-non-M-V11-ConstructionW-D2-RBC update.xlsx 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 5 :hment G - Table 4-7 Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentration - Soil STRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values Intakein-1 p (mglkglday) DAD-- (mglkglday) ECp.,1. (uglm') EC,,,n« (uglm') ABSABSd (unitless) (unitless) CSFgrai (mglkglday)-' CSF-..i (mglkglday)-' IUR (uglm')-' COPC CASRN RBC;pgaad . RBCda,mai RBCp,nw,j „ RBC„pg, RBC�o�ai Aluminum 7429-90-5 INC NC INC NE NC NC INC NC NC NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 5.8E-09 9.2E-10 2.6E-11 NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 1.1E+04 7.3E+04 9.1E+08 NE 9.9E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC 2.6E-11 NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC 1.6E+09 NE 1.6E+09 Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC 2.6E-11 NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC 2.2E+09 NE 2.2E+09 Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC 2.6E-11 NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC 4.3E+08 NE 4.3E+08 Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NC NE 1 NC NC NC NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC 2.6E-11 NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC 1.6E+10 NE 1.6E+10 Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NC NE NC NC NC NC NC NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 INC NC INC NE NC NC INC NC NC NE Chromium VI(hexavalent) 18540-29-9 9.7E-09 2.6E-11 NE 1 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 2.1E+04 4.6E+07 NE 2.1E+04 Haley & Aldrich, Inc. \\MAN\common\42058_Duke\002\HH PRGs\PRG calculations\Soil - Template-EPA-non-M-V11-ConstructionW-D2-RBC update.xlsx 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 5 Attachment G - Table 4-7 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentration - Soil CONSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values Intake;,,„t (mg/kg/clay)" DADderp (mg/kg/day) ECp,njcuj (mglm3) EC-1 (mg/m) ABSinG (unitless) ABSds (unities RfD,i (mglkg/day) RfDd,p,i (mg/kg/day) RfC (m COPC CASRN RBC;,,tp, RBCd,.,i RBCp,n;cu, RBC„_ RBCa,i Aluminum 7429-90-5 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.5E+06 2.8E+09 NE 1.5E+06 Antimony 7440-36-0 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 5.9E+02 NTV NE 5.9E+02 Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.1E-07 6.4E-08 1.8E-12 NE 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 7.4E+02 4.7E+03 8.3E+06 NE 6.4E+02 Barium 7440-39-3 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-03 2.9E+05 2.8E+09 NE 2.9E+05 Beryllium 7440-41-7 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-05 7.4E+03 1.1E+07 NE 7.4E+03 Boron 7440-42-8 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.9E+05 1.1E+10 NE 2.9E+05 Cadmium 7440-43-9 6.8E-07 2.1E-09 1.8E-12 NE 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.5E+03 1.2E+04 1.1E+07 NE 1.3E+03 Calcium 7440-70-2 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 2.2E+06 NTV NE 2.2E+06 Chromium III 16065-83-1 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 2.2E+06 NTV NE 2.2E+06 Cobalt 7440-48-4 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 3.0E-03 3.0E-03 2.0E-05 4.4E+03 1.1E+07 NE 4.4E+03 Copper 7440-50-8 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 5.9E+04 NTV NE 5.9E+04 Iron 7439-89-6 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E+06 NTV NE 1.0E+06 Lead 7439-92-1 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Manganese 7439-96-5 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 2.1E+05 2.8E+07 NE 2.0E+05 Mercury 7439-97-6 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-04 3.0E-04 2.9E+03 1.7E+08 NE 2.9E+03 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 7.4E+03 NTV NE 7.4E+03 Nickel 7440-02-0 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 2.0E-04 2.9E+04 1.1E+08 NE 2.9E+04 Potassium 7440-09-7 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Selenium 7782-49-2 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 7.4E+03 1.1E+10 NE 7.4E+03 Sodium 7440-23-5 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Strontium 7440-24-6 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 2.0E+00 2.0E+00 2.9E+06 NTV NE 2.9E+06 Thallium 7440-28-0 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Titanium 7440-32-6 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 1.0E-02 1.0E-02 1.0E-04 1.5E+04 5.6E+07 NE 1.5E+04 Zinc 7440-66-6 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 4.4E+05 NTV NE 4.4E+06 Nitrate 14797-55-8 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 2.4E+06 NTV NE 2.4E+06 Sulfide 18496-25-8 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 NTV NTV NTV NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 6.8E-07 1.8E-12 NE 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 3.0E-04 7.4E+03 1.7E+08 NE 7.4E+03 Haley & Aldrich, Inc. \\MAN\common\42058_Duke\002\HH PRGs\PRG calculations\Soil -Template-EPA-non-M-V11-ConstructionW-D2-RBC update.xlsx 1/8/2016 Page 4 of 5 achment G - Table 4-7 k Based Concentration Summary ivation of Risk Based Concentration - Soil NSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) nan Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites ce Energy concern Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Taraet Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-W-b l.bL+Ub l.bL+Ub nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.9E+02 5.9E+02 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.4E+02 9.9E+03 6.4E+02 nc Barium 7440-39-3 2.9E+05 2.9E+05 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.4E+03 1.6E+09 7.4E+03 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.9E+05 2.9E+05 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.3E+03 2.2E+09 1.3E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 2.2E+06 2.2E+06 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.2E+06 2.2E+06 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.4E+03 4.3E+08 4.4E+03 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.9E+04 5.9E+04 nc Iron 7439-89-6 1.0E+06 1.0E+06 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 2.0E+05 2.0E+05 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 2.9E+03 2.9E+03 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 7.4E+03 7.4E+03 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.9E+04 1.6E+10 2.9E+04 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 7.4E+03 7.4E+03 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.9E+06 2.9E+06 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.5E+04 1.5E+04 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.4E+05 4.4E+05 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /8/2016 Page 5 of 5 Table 4-7 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC, r 1= 1 [(1/RBC„g.s,.,) + (1/RBCde .1) + (1/RBCp,N) + (1/RBC ,p)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC„g,sj; = TR / Intake,,,* CSF [EPCI-1 * IR * ABS,NG * FI * EF * ED * C1 I ntakein9 (age g..P x)= B W x ` ATereume Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCde, A = TR / DAD * CSF DAD e,n a e - DAE... t * SA * EV * EF * ED d (e grnoP x)— BW„ * AT rre,me DAE t = [EPC]s j, * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,nge i,n= THI Intake;,, / RfD Intaken, = [EPC]sn;i * IR * ABS,n9 * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW*AT Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RGde, a,= THI DAD / RfD DADde = DAI-nr * SA * EV * EF * ED BW*AT DAE t = [EPC]s 1, * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Based Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RG;nh,l,t,,,= TR / EC- IUR [EPC]PART * ETp.,, * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETv,p * EF * ED EC- lase erow x)= 24 * ATrreume Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RG;nha,adnn= THI EC,� / RfC EC,, = [EPC]PART * ETp.,i * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]yAPOR * ETvap * EF * ED * C2 24*AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless MID -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE—t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event EC- Age/chemical specific mg/m' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]so;, Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment G - TABLE Attachment G - TABLE ug/m' [EPC]vAPOR Attachment G - TABLE Attachment G - TABLE ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 80 80 kg EF 60 60 day/year ED 1 1 year AT -- 365 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR 330 330 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA 3470 3470 cm2 AF 0.3 0.3 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day ETPart 8 8 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 8 8 hours/day Haley & Aldrich, Inc. \\MAN\common\42058_Duke\002\HH PRGs\PRG calculations\Soil - Template-EPA-non-M-V11-ConstructionW-D2-RBC update.xlsx 1/8/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment H - Table 4-8 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Groundwater CONSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinoaenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potenital concern e Calculations Ta water Dermal Parameters Cancer ToxicityValues COPC CASRN EPC Fntakein,,d,„t 7DZ DAions EC„„ B c t* Kp FA In EPD? CSF,r,i CSFd,rm,i IUR RBC,,,, RBCd.rm,i RBC,,,_RBC,(mg/L)g/kglday)ay) (mglkg/day) (ug/m') (unitless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mg/kglday)'' (mg/kg/day)" (uglm')'' (mglL) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NC INC INC NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 1.2E-10 1.6E-09 3.1E-11 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 5.7E+02 2.1E+03 NE 4.5E+02 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 INC NC NC NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.4E-03 NC NC NE Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.8E-03 NC NC NE Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 9.0E-03 NC NC NE Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 V NC NC NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 V 2.4E-04 NC NC NE Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Strontium 7"0-24-6 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 V NC NC NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 1.2E-10 3.2E-09 6.3E-11 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 1.7E+03 7.9E+01 NE 7.6E+01 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 :hment H - Table 4-8 Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Groundwater STRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 ) ) NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potenital concern NTV - no tobcity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC rbake„n DA„„nr DADd,,,,,ai EC„n„ B c t+ Kp FA In EPD? RfD,rai RfDd---I RfC RBCins,.mn RBCd.rm,i RBC„.r RBC(mg/L) glkglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/kglday) (mg/m') (unitless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mglkglday) (mglkg/day) (mglm') (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.2E+05 4.5E+05 NE 9.6E+04 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 4.9E+01 2.7E+01 NE 1.7E+01 Arsenic 744038-2 00E-03 8.2E-09 6E-09 2.2E-0 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 0.6 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 3.7E+01 14E+02 NE 29E+01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 82E-09 1.6E09 22E09 NE 45E-03 62E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 20E01 14E-02 50E-03 24E+04 6.4E+03 NE 5.0E0 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-05 6.1E+02 2.3E+03 NE 4.8E+02 Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.4E+04 9.1E+04 NE 1.9E+0q Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.2E+02 1.1E+01 NE 1.0E+01 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 2.2E-0 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 .8E+05 9.1E+03 NE 8.6E+0 Chomium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 8.2E09 16E-0 1 1. E+03 NE 8.6E033 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 6.4E-10 8.8E-10 NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-03 3.0E-03 2.0E-05 3.7E+02 3.4E+03 NE 3.3E+02 Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 4.9E+03 1.8E+04 NE 3.8E+03 Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 8.5E+04 3.2E+05 NE 6.7E+04 Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-10 2.2E-10 NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.7E+04 2.5E+03 NE 2.2E+03 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-03 1.4E-04 3.0E-04 2.4E+02 6.4E+01 NE 5.0E+01 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.1E+02 2.3E+03 NE 4.8E+02 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 3.2E-10 4.4E-10 NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 2.0E-04 2.4E+03 1.8E+03 NE 1.0E+03 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 3.2E-10 4.4E-10 NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 6.1E+02 2.3E+03 NE 4.8E+02 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 9.6E-10 1.3E-09 NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 3.8E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E+00 2.0E+00 2.4E+05 9.1E+05 NE 1.9E+05 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-02 1.0E-02 1.0E-04 1.2E+03 4.5E+03 NE 9.6E+02 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 9.6E-10 1.3E-09 NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.7E+04 2.3E+05 NE 3.1E+04 Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 1.6E-09 2.2E-09 NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 1.9E+05 7.3E+05 NE 1.5E+05 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 6.3E-10 8.7E-10 NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 8.2E-09 3.2E-09 4.4E-09 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 3.0E-04 6.1E+02 3.0E+01 NE 2.8E+01 1/6/2016 3chment H - Table 4-8 k Based Concentration Summary ivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Groundwater NSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer (mg/L) Final I (mg/l. I Basis Aluminum t4ZV_bu_0 a.et+u4 a.et+u4 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.7E+01 1.7E+01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.9E+01 4.5E+02 2.9E+01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 5.0E+03 5.0E+03 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 4.8E+02 4.8E+02 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.9E+04 1.9E+04 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.6E+03 8.6E+03 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 8.6E+03 8.6E+03 nc Cobalt 7440-484 3.3E+02 3.3E+02 nc Copper 7440-50-8 3.8E+03 3.8E+03 nc Iron 7439-89-6 6.7E+04 6.7E+04 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 2.2E+03 2.2E+03 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 5.0E+01 5.0E+01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 4.8E+02 4.8E+02 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 4.8E+02 4.8E+02 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 1.9E+05 1.9E+05 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 9.6E+02 9.6E+02 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.1E+04 3.1E+04 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.5E+05 1.5E+05 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.8E+01 7.6E+01 2.8E+01 nc Page 3 of 4 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-8 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC-m 1 = 1 1(1/RBCmg,,tim) + (1/RBCtl.-W) + (1/RBC,„ p)] Cancer -Based Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion TR RBCmgeati- = Intake;ng *CSF [EPC]w ,*IR*FI*EF*ED*C1 Intake;,,g (e , gra„ p,) = BW * AT iiretima Cancer -Based Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption RBCtl _1 = TR DADde,,,, * CSF DAD e,,,, DA-*t * SA * EV * EF * ED tl (a .,-p x) - AT;;w;me DkE t = [EPC]w, , * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t• _ 2 * FA. Kp . 6 * r * Tevent Kip r/Tevent\ r1+3B+3B'\l PCeventTevent =t* = FA * C2 * l 1 + B /JI+ 2 • T * ` 1 Inorganics Compounds: PCevent = KP * Tevent C2 Cancer -Based Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBCmhaiagm = EC�w, *IUR EC a e _ [EPC]vnpoR * ETv,p * EF * ED * C1 l g group,) - 24 * ATr�ime Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;,,gestim = THI Intake;ng / RfD Intake,,, - [EPC]water * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBCtlermai = DADd- / RfD DAD erm - DAE-t * DFWadj tl (a .,—p a) — DAE-t = [EPC]w, , * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevenKt• = 2 * FA. Kp , 6 * r •Tevent Kip r/Tevent) (1+3B+3B' PCeventTevent =t* = FA * C2 * ILI\ 1 + B /I-2— I\ t + 1 B : /Ill ) Inorganics Compounds: PCevent = KP * Tevent C2 Noncancer-Based Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation R13C,1h111tiw - THI ECn, / RfC EC„� _ [EPC]VAPOR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day)- IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)-1 Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day EC- Age/chemical specific -- (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE„e„t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm`-event EC„� -- Age/chemical specific mg/m' HO -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]water Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm2-event [EPCJ„,, ----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED--- ug/m' BW 80 80 kg EF 60 60 day/year ED 1 1 year AT -- 365 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR 0.004 0.004 L/day FI 1 1 unitless SA 670 670 cm2 Tevent 1.60 1.6 hr/event EV 1 1 event/day C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 1.6 1.6 hr/day C2 1000 1000 cm'/L 1/6/2016 Page 1 of 4 :hment I - Table 4-9 Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment ite Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this e�posure route NV - not volatile EC - eposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - Risk Based Concentration NTV - no towcity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values Intake;ng„u„ (mglkglday) DAD-- (mglkglday) EC,,,W,re (ug/m') EC,,,p« (uglm') (ABS,.. unitless) ABSd (unitless) CSF«,i (mglkglday)-' CSF—..' (mg/kg, IUR (uglin COPC CASRN RBC1„ tWn RBCa .,i RBCmn ,i,r, RBC„�„ RBCrorai Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 7.3E-09 3.9E-08 NE NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 9.1E+03 1.7E+03 NE NE 14E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC NE NE Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NE NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC NE NE Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC NE NE Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NE NE 1 NC NC NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC NE NE Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment I - Table 4-9 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD (AGE <6) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - Risk Based Concentration COPC - Chemical of potential Concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values Intakel,s„tip, (mg/kg/day)" DADder- (mg/kg/day) ECpenlpwete (mglm3) EC,,,aor (mg/m3) ABSING (unitless) ABSd (unities s) RfDo l (mglkg/day) RfDd,.,l (mg/kg/day) RfC (mg/m3) COPC CASRN RBCI,,,,t; . RBCd,r,,,l RBCpen;puiete RBC__ RBCtpaei Aluminum 7429-90-5 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.2E+07 NE NE 1.2E+07 Antimony 7440-36-0 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 4.9E+03 NE NE 4.9E+03 Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.9E-08 1.6E-07 NE NE 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 6.1E+03 1.9E+03 NE NE 1.5E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 2.4E+06 NE NE 2.4E+06 Beryllium 7440-41-7 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 2.4E+04 NE NE 2.4E+04 Boron 7440-42-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.4E+06 NE NE 2.4E+06 Cadmium 7440-43-9 8.2E-08 5.2E-09 NE NE 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.2E+04 4.8E+03 NE NE 3.4E+03 Calcium 7440-70-2 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+07 NE NE 1.8E+07 Chromium III 16065-83-1 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+07 NE NE 1.8E+07 Cobalt 7440-48-4 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 3.7E+03 NE NE 3.7E+03 Copper 7440-50-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 4.9E+05 NE NE 4.9E+05 Iron 7439-89-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 8.5E+06 NE NE 8.5E+06 Lead 7439-92-1 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.7E+06 NE NE 1.7E+06 Mercury 7439-97-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 3.7E+03 NE NE 3.7E+03 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.1E+04 NE NE 6.1E+04 Nickel 7440-02-0 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 2.4E+05 NE NE 2.4E+05 Potassium 7440-09-7 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 6.1E+04 NE NE 6.1E+04 Sodium 7440-23-5 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 7.3E+06 NE NE 7.3E+06 Thallium 7440-28-0 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 1.2E+02 NE NE 1.2E+02 Titanium 7440-32-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 6.1E+04 NE NE 6.1E+04 Zinc 7440-66-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.7E+06 NE NE 3.7E+06 Nitrate 14797-55-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 1.9E+07 NE NE 1.9E+07 Sulfide 18496-25-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment I - Table 4-9 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Tar et Cancer Risk er Chemical 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-W-b I.LL+U/ I.LL+ut nc Antimony 7440-36-0 4.9E+03 4.9E+03 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.5E+03 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 c Barium 7440-39-3 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.4E+04 2.4E+04 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 3.4E+03 3.4E+03 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.9E+05 4.9E+05 nc Iron 7439-89-6 8.5E+06 8.5E+06 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.7E+06 1.7E+06 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.4E+05 2.4E+05 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.3E+06 7.3E+06 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.7E+06 3.7E+06 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+07 1.9E+07 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-9 Risk Based Concentration Calculations - Composite Receptor/Age-Adjusted Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBCmra; = 1 [(1/RBC,�g.s,.,)+(1/RBCde .1)+(1/RBCpan)+(1/RBCap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC„g,sj; = TR / Intake,,,* CSF [EPC1s 1 * IFSadj * ABSiNO * FI * EF * C1 I ntake,ng (age g,n,P x)= B W x ` ATerauma Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCde, A = TR / DAD * CSF DAD e,n a e - DAE.a,r * SA * EV * EF * ED d (e 9�n�P "1- BW„ * AT rrarlma DAEanr = [EPC]s j, * DFSadj * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,nge i,n= THI Intake,,, * RfD Intaken, = [EPC]sn;i * IR * ABS,ng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW*AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCda,,,a,= THI DAD * RfD DADda„ = DAEvenr * SA * EV * EF * ED BW*AT DAEanr = [EPC]s 1, * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nna,ar;,,= TR / ECG IUR [EPC]PART * ETPa,, * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETvap * EF * ED EC- (a9a e,ow x)= 24 * ATrreume Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nna,adnn= THI EC- * RfC EC,, = [EPC]PART * ETp.,i * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETvap * EF * ED * C2 24*AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE—t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event EC- Age/chemical specific mg/ma HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]so;, Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' [EPC]vAPOR -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' ABS;,g Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 6 year AT -- 2190 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IFSadj 7 -- mg-yr/kg-day IR NA 10 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA NA 6378 cm2 AF NA 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day DFSadj 741 NA mg-yr/kg-day ETPart 1 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap ug/mg 1 /6/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment I Table 4-9 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment OH -Site Recreational Swimmer -CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 INC - not carcinooenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC -risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Muta enic Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intakeing„,ign DADann+i ECp ftl.ul . EC�+p., ABSING ABSd MOA? CSFgr+i CSFd+,m+i IUR RBCing+pmn RBCd—.i RBCp+ _,.r+ RBC-_ RBCr.r.i (mglkg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (ug/m') (ug/m') (unitless) (unitless) (mg/kglday)" (mg/kg/day)-' (uglm')" Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 5.1E-08 FALSE NE NE 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 3.9E+03 NE NE 3.9E+03 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment I Table 4.9 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC -risk based concentration COPC - chemical of Dotential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dennally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intake;,,a„�;o„ DADa.rmm ECn,nmm.�, EC„enp, ABSING ABSa RfDo„ i RfDa.rmm RfC RBC;s„r;o„ RBCa,,,,,,i RBCpar;�„„ re RBCx,np, RBCrpr,i (mg/kg) (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') (mglm') (unitless) (unities (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 3.7E+04 NE NE 3.7E+04 1/6/2016 Attachment I Table 4-9 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy COPC - chemical of potential concern c -risk based concentration based on EPCs Page 3 of 4 Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Taraet Cancer Risk (oer Chemical) 1 E-04 nc -risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index NA - no toxicitv value available:Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.7E+04 3.9E+03 3.9E+03 c 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment I Table 4-9 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCrotal = [(1 /RBCingestlor) + (1 /RBCdarna) + (1 /RBCpan) + (1 /RBCvap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,ngaat;on= TR / Intakeng* CSF [EPC]aon *[IFSadj - OR - IFSM] * ABSING * FI * EF * C1 Intakeng (age group.)= BW. * AT Ircauma Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdarn,al = TR / DAD * CSF DADdarmiagagmup.)= DAEvant * SA * EV * EF * ED BW. * ATlneame DAEvent = [EPC]ao;I * [DFSadj - OR - DFSM] * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalauon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan (age [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED g group _ 24 * AT Ircauma For muta ens, IHHM is used in place of ED Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration foringestior THI RBC;ngeet;on = Intakemgn9 / RfD Intakeng = [EPC]aojI * IR * ABSIng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCden aI= THI DAD / RfD DADda,n, = DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAEvant = [EPC]ao;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalat;on= THI ECno / RfC ECno = [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPCI.POR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECoan Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-ut Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/rn' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]aaI Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' [EPC]VAPOR -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 2 year AT -- 730 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IFSadj 7 mg-yr/kg-day IFSM 29 -- mg-yr/kg-day IR NA 10 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA NA 6378 cm2 AF NA 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day DFSadj 741 -- mg-yr/kg-day DFSM 2454 -- mg-yr/kg-day ETPart 2 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 ug/mg WHIM 6480 unitless 1 /6/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment J - Table 4-10 Risk Based Concentrations -Cancer-Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OH -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentrations NN- no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potenital concern Intake Calculations Ta water Dermal Parameters Cancer Toxic, Values COPC CASRN EPC Fntl,,,7,,ya*e DAet DADd.,m,i EC„,,,, B c t* Kp FA In EPD? CSF,re, CSFder„ei IUR RBC,,,*..n RBCdermei RBC„,„r RBC,(mglL)g'kglda) (mg kg' (mglkg/day) (ug/m') (unitless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mg/kglday)'' (mglkglday)'' (uglm')'' (mglL) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NC INC INC NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 1.3E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 5.0E-01 2.3E+00 NE 4.1E-01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.4E-03 NC NC NE Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.8E-03 NC NC NE Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 9.0E-03 NC NC NE Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 V NC NC NE Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NC IN NC NE 1.0E-03 1 V NC NC NE Manganese 7439.96-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.4E-04 NC NC NE Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 V NC NC NE Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 V NC NC NE Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 V NC NC NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 V NC NC NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NC INC NC NE 4.0E-04 1 V NC NC NE 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 4 :hment J - Table 4-10 Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentrations COPC - chemical of potenital concern NTV - no tobcity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC rtakeing,anaa DAa,,,ar DADna,,,,ai EC„ana, B c t* Kp FA In EPD? RfD,rai RfDnam,ai RfC RBCina,.n.n RBCd.r 1 RBC_.r RBCtann (mg/L) glkglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/kglday) (mg/m') (unitless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mglkglday) (mg/kg/day) (mglm') (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.2E+03 9.5E+03 NE 1.1E+03 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 4.9E-01 5.7E-01 NE 2.6E-01 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 0E-03 .0E03 0.6 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 3.7E-01 2.9E+0 NE 3.2E-01 aru 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 45 2E-01 1.5E+00 1 1 Y 200 E1 14E02 00B 5E4 2.4E+02 13E+02 NE 8.6E+01 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-03 1.4E-OS 2.0E-05 2.4E+00 1.3E-01 NE 1.3E-01 Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.4E+02 1.9E+03 NE 2.2E+02 Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.2E+00 2.4E-01 NE 2.0E-01 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+03 1.9E+02 NE 1.7E+02 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+03 1.9E+02 NE 1.7E+02 Cobalt 7440-08-4 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 8.0E-10 4.2E-08 NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 3.7E-01 7.2E+00 NE 3.5E-01 Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 4.9E+01 3.8E+02 NE 4.3E+01 Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 8.5E+02 6.7E+03 NE 7.6E+02 Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-10 1.0E-08 NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.7E+02 5.3E+01 NE 4.1E+01 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 3.7E-01 2.0E-01 NE 1.3E-01 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.1E+00 4.8E+01 NE 5.4E+00 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 4.0E-10 2.1E-08 NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 2.4E+01 3.8E+01 NE 1.5E+01 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 4.0E-10 2.1E-OS NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NTVNTVNE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 6.1E+00 4.8E+01 NE 5.4E+00 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 1.2E-09 6.3E-08 NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NTV NTV NE Strontium 7440-246 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 7.3E+02 5.7E+03 NE 6.5E+02 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NN NTV NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NTV NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 6.1E+00 1.2E+00 NE 1.0E+00 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 1.2E-09 6.3E-08 NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.7E+02 4.8E+03 NE 3.4E+02 Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 1.0E-07 NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 1.9E+03 1.5E+04 NE 1.7E+03 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 7.9E-10 4.2E-08 NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NTV NN NE 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 achment J -Table 4-10 ;k Based Concentrations Summary rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentrations based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentrations based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 142U-9U-b 1.1t+u3 1.11=+U3 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 2.6E-01 2.6E-01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.2E-01 4.1E-01 3.2E-01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 8.6E+01 8.6E+01 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.2E+02 2.2E+02 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.7E+02 1.7E+02 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.7E+02 1.7E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.5E-01 3.5E-01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.3E+01 4.3E+01 nc Iron 7439-89-6 7.6E+02 7.6E+02 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 4.1E+01 4.1E+01 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.4E+00 5.4E+00 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.5E+01 1.5E+01 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.4E+00 5.4E+00 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 6.5E+02 6.5E+02 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.4E+02 3.4E+02 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.7E+03 1.7E+03 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-10 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentrations 1 RBC,�,;=[(1/RBC;ng**rnn)+(1/RBCd„m11)+(1/RBC,)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentrations for Ingestion TR RBC;nge,ti. = Intake;ng *CSF [EPC]w,a. * IFWadj * FI Intake;ng (,g, gm„ p,) = BW * ATlife,ime Cancer -Risk Based Concentrations from Dermal Absorption TR RBCde,m,l = DADd„m *CSF DAE,,,nt * DFWadj DADderm (agegruup.) _ ATiiretima DAEvant = [EPC]„„ te, * PCevent Organic Compounds: 6 * r *aTevent PCeventTeventIX* _ 2 * , FA * C2 Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3B' PCeventTevent>=t* = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * T * 1 + B r Inorganics Compounds: Kp • Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentrations for Inhalation RBC;nh,;,. = TR ti EC_ *IUR [EPC]VAPOR * ETv,p * EF * ED * C1 ECu,n —_ (a .,—p=) 24 * ATiitetime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentrations for Ingestion RBC;nge3da„ = THI Intake;ng / RfD Intake;ng = [EPC]w,t„ * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentrations for Dermal Absorption THI RBCd..d = DADde,m / RfD DADd ,m, = DAEvsnt * SA * EV * EF * ED (age 9rwp=1 BW*AT DAEvant = [EPC]„„ ter * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t* _ 2 * FA * C2 . 6 * r *R event Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3B' PCeventTevent>=t* = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * * 1 + B ) C Inorganics Compounds: PCevent = Kp * Tevent C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentrations for Inhalation THI RBC;nh,;,t;r„ = EC, / RfC ECnu = [EPCI—OR * ETv,p * EF * ED * C1 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mgdcg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)-' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific -- (ug/W) ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical speck mg/kg-day DA_., Age/chemical specific Age/chemical speck mg/cm 3-event ECnn -- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HQ -- Age/chemical speck unitless [EPCj_., Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm`-event [EPCj._ - NOT USED— —NOT USED ug/m3 BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 6 year AT -- 2190 day ATfrfetime 25550 -- day IFWadj 3 -- L/kg IR NA 0.1 L/day FI 1 1 unitless SA NA 6378 cm2 Tevent 2.00 2 m/event EV 1 1 event/day DFWadj 368901 NA events-cm2/1,g C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 hr/day C2 1000 1000 Cm'/L 1/8/2016 Pace 1 of 4 Attachment J - Table 4-10 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water OffSite Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC- not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC -exposure concentration CSF- cancer slope factor RBC- risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value avail: Attachment J DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern EPD - effective permeability domain Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Intake;,,g�;a„ DA,,,,,,r DADae,m,; B x t' Kp FA In EPD? Mutagenlc CSF,,,; CSFae,m,; IUR RBC;,,gess,,, RBCae,m,; RBC,,,p„ RBC�,; (mglL) (mg/kg/day) (mglkg/day) (mg/kglday) (U JM,r (uglm') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cm/hr) (unitless) (YIN) MOA? (mglkglday)-, (mg/kg/day)" (ug/m')" (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Chromium VI(hexavalem) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 5.2E-07 4.0E-09 2.4E-07 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 3.9E-01 2.1E-02 NE 2.0E-02 1/8/2016 Pace 2 of 4 Attachment J -Table 4-10 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water Off -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy COPC CASRN EPC Intake;,,g„a,n DA�..m DADae,m, (mglL) (mg/kglday) (mglkglday) (mglkgld: Chromium VI (h—alent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 4.0E-09 2.1E-07 Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 - chemical of Dotential concern B t t' K FA In EPD. Rf)„a, RfDae,;,, RfC RBC;ge,a,n RBC;gsaan RBCa.,,,,,, RBC„',; P � glm') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (Y/N) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mglm') (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 3.7E+00 3.6E-01 NE 3.3E-01 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 achment J - Table 4-10 ;k Based Concentration Summary rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water -Site Recreational Swimmer - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based , Attachment J NA - no toxicity value available; remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.3E-01 2.0E-02 2.0E-02 c 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-10 Risk Based Concentration Calculations -Cancer-Basetl -Single Age Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCtan;=[(1/RBC;ngm;on)+(1/RBCdenna;)+(1/RBC:;)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion TR RBCmge iw = Intake;ng *CSF [EPC1w * IFWM * FI Intake;ng(age gmp=)= BW*AT,iwi.e Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBCdermai = DAD,— *CSF DAD ems = DAE*ent * DFWM tl (agegraupx)— ATrretime DAEient = [EPCI—sr * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTeventq* 2 * FA * C2 . 6 * r *Tevent Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3B' PCeventTevent>=t* = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * T * ( 1 + B , ) Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent= C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBC;nhaladm = ECcnn *IUR [EPCIVAPOR * INMH * C1 EC.,—_ (age g1°"p') * 24 ATliretime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;nge3do„ = THI Intake;ng / RfD Intake;ng = [EPCI—er * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdern,e; = THI DADden„ / RfD DADa ern, DAE*ent * SA * EV * EF * ED loge grwv=)= BW*AT ME— = [EPC1w r * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTeventIX* _ 2 , FA , Cz 6 * T , *rtTevent Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3Ba PCeventTevent>=t* = FA' C2 ' 1 + g + 2 * T * 1 + g Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent = C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBC;nhalan = m ECn� / RfC ECnn = [EPC]VAPOR * ETVap * EF * ED * C1 24*AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)-' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day ECG*„ Age/chemical specific -- (u9/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific -- undless RfD -- Chemical speck mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical speck (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAsw Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event EC, -- Age/chemical specific mg/m' HO -- Age/chemical specific undless [EPC]wme, Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical speck L/cW-event [EPC]._ -----NOT USED— —NOT USED ug/m' BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 2 year AT -- 730 day ATIBetime 25550 -- day IFWM 3.4 -- L/kg IR 0 0.1 L/day FI NA 1 undless SA 13 6378 cm2 Tevent 0.00 2 hr/event EV NA 1 event/day DFWM 1 — events-cm2/kg C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug INHM 1537099 NA hr/day C2 1000 1000 cm'/L 1/8/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment K - Table 4-11 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this emosure route NV - not volatile EC - emosure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN Intake;nppsdpn (mg/kg/day) DADdmp prl (mg/kg/day) ECppm�wp�p (u w EC, ". I (ug/m') ABSING (unitless) ABSd (unitless) CSFprpl (mg/kg/day)-' CSFdI p,n„ (mg/kg/day)-' IUR (ug/m')-' RBCln—timn RBCdprn„ I RBCppNI�pl_ RBC„ppp, RBC_.j Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 7.3E-09 1.1E-08 NE NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 9.1E+03 6.1E+03 NE NE 3.6E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC NE NE Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NE NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC NE NE Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC NE NE Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NE NE 1 NC NC NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC NE NE Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment K -Table 4-11 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential Concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values Intake;1e,t (mg/kg/day), DADderm (mg/kg/day) ECp,nmwe (mg/m3) EC-1 (mg/m3) ABSinc (unitless) ABSds (unities RfDpi (mg/kg/day) RfDd,u,i (mg/kg/day) RfC (m COPC CASRN RBC;,„tp, RBCd,,,i RBCp,n;cuo RBC__ RBCa,i Aluminum 7429-90-5 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.2E+07 NE NE 1.2E+07 Antimony 7440-36-0 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 4.9E+03 NE NE 4.9E+03 Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.9E-08 4.4E-08 NE NE 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 6.1E+03 6.9E+03 NE NE 3.2E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 2.4E+06 NE NE 2.4E+06 Beryllium 7440-41-7 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 2.4E+04 NE NE 2.4E+04 Boron 7440-42-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.4E+06 NE NE 2.4E+06 Cadmium 7440-43-9 8.2E-08 1.5E-09 NE NE 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.2E+04 1.7E+04 NE NE 7.1E+03 Calcium 7440-70-2 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+07 NE NE 1.8E+07 Chromium III 16065-83-1 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+07 NE NE 1.8E+07 Cobalt 7440-48-4 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 3.7E+03 NE NE 3.7E+03 Copper 7440-50-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 4.9E+05 NE NE 4.9E+05 Iron 7439-89-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 7AE-01 7.0E-01 8.5E+06 NE NE 8.5E+06 Lead 7439-92-1 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.7E+06 NE NE 1.7E+06 Mercury 7439-97-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 3.7E+03 NE NE 3.7E+03 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.1E+04 NE NE 6.1E+04 Nickel 7440-02-0 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 2.4E+05 NE NE 2.4E+05 Potassium 7440-09-7 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 6.1E+04 NE NE 6.1E+04 Sodium 7440-23-5 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 7.3E+06 NE NE 7.3E+06 Thallium 7440-28-0 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 1.2E+02 NE NE 1.2E+02 Titanium 7440-32-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 6.1E+04 NE NE 6.1E+04 Zinc 7440-66-6 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.7E+06 NE NE 3.7E+06 Nitrate 14797-55-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 1.9E+07 NE NE 1.9E+07 Sulfide 18496-25-8 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment K - Table 4-11 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern no - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum 142U-JU-b 1.2L+Ut 1.2L+Ut no Antimony 7440-36-0 4.9E+03 4.9E+03 no Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.2E+03 3.6E+03 3.2E+03 no Barium 7440-39-3 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 no Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.4E+04 2.4E+04 no Boron 7440-42-8 2.4E+06 2.4E+06 no Cadmium 7440-43-9 7.1E+03 7.1E+03 no Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 no Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 no Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 no Copper 7440-50-8 4.9E+05 4.9E+05 no Iron 7439-89-6 8.5E+06 8.5E+06 no Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.7E+06 1.7E+06 no Mercury 7439-97-6 3.7E+03 3.7E+03 no Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 no Nickel 7440-02-0 2.4E+05 2.4E+05 no Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 no Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.3E+06 7.3E+06 no Thallium 7440-28-0 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 no Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.1E+04 6.1E+04 no Zinc 7440-66-6 3.7E+06 3.7E+06 no Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+07 1.9E+07 no Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment K - Table 4.11 Risk Based Concentration Calculations - Composite Receptor/Age-Adjusted Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCtotai = [(1 /RGingeauon) + (1 /RGderroa) + (1 /RGpa,t) + (1 /RGvap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,nsasuon= TR / Intakeng* CSF [EPC]aoii * IFSadj * ABSING * FI * EF * C1 Intakeng (age group,)= BW. * AT irceuroe Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCden ai = TR / DAD * CSF DADdar.(agegroup x)= DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW. * ATIburoe DAEvent = [EPC]aoii * DFSadj * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngeet;on= THI Intakens * RfD Intakeng = [EPC]so;i * IR * ABS;ng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdero,ai= THI DAD * RfD DADdar,n = DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAE—t = [EPC]aoii * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC1nha1anon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan a a _ [EPC]PART * ETPad * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED (s group •)— 24 * AT rrearoe Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBClnhaiatmn= ECno * RfC ECnu, = [EPC]PART * ETPa,t * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]vAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED * C2 24 *AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECoan Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-nt Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/ma HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]_il Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' [EPC]vAPGR -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 6 year AT -- 2190 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IFSadj 7 -- mg-yr/kg-day IR NA 10 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA NA 1770 cm2 AF NA 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day DFSadj 208 NA mg-yr/kg-day ETPart 1 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap ug/mg 1 /6/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment K - Table 4-11 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment OH -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Muta enic Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intakeing„,ign DADd+,,,,+i ECwftl.ul EC�+p., ABSING ABSd MOA? CSFgr+i CSFd+,m+i IUR RBCing+pmn RBCd—.i RBCp+ _,.r+ RBC-_ RBCr.r.i (mglkg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (ug/m') (ug/m') (unitless) (unitless) (mg/kglday)" (mg/kg/day)-' (uglm')" Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 5.1E-08 FALSE NE NE 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 3.9E+03 NE NE 3.9E+03 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment K - Table 4-11 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - Risk Based Concentration COPC - chemical of Dotential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - carnally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Soil Intake;,,a„�;o„ DADa„m,i ECt„h;�„„„ EC„enp, ABSING ABSa RfDo„ i RfDa„m,i RfC RBC;s„r;o„ RBCa,,,,,,i RBCpar;�„„ re RBCx,np, RBCrpr,i (mg/kg) (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') (mglm') (unitless) (unities (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglm') Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.0E+00 8.2E-08 NE NE 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 3.7E+04 NE NE 3.7E+04 1/6/2016 Attachment K - Table 4-11 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy COPC - chemical of potential concern c - risk based concentration based on EPCs Page 3 of 4 Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Taraet Cancer Risk (oer Chemical) 1 E-04 nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index NA - no toxicitv value available: Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.7E+04 3.9E+03 3.9E+03 c 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment K - Table 4.11 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCrotal = [(1 /RBCingestlor) + (1 /RBCdarna) + (1 /RBCpan) + (1 /RBCvap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,,,gaat;o = TR / Intakeng* CSF [EPC]aon *[IFSadj - OR - IFSM] * ABSING * FI * EF * C1 Intakeng (age group.)= BW. * AT Ircauma Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCdannal = TR / DAD * CSF DADdarmiagagmup.)= DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW. * ATlneame DAEvent = [EPC]an;I * [DFSadj - OR - DFSM] * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalauon = TR / ECoan * IUR ECoan (age [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETvap* EF * ED g group _ 24 * AT Ircauma For muta ens, IHHM is used in place of ED Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration foringestior THI RBC;ngeet;on = Intakemgng / RfD Intakeng = [EPC]ao;I * IR * ABSIng * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCda-.1= THI DAD / RfD DADda,n, = DAEvent * SA * EV * EF * ED BW * AT DAEvant = [EPC]an;I * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nhalat;on= THI ECno / RfC ECno = [EPC]PART * ETPan * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPCI.POR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECoan Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE-ut Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event ECno Age/chemical specific mg/rn' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]aoll Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' [EPC]VAPOR -----NOT USED----- -----NOT USED----- ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 2 year AT -- 730 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IFSadj 7 mg-yr/kg-day IFSM 29 -- mg-yr/kg-day IR NA 10 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA NA 1770 cm2 AF NA 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day DFSadj 208 -- mg-yr/kg-day DFSM 689 -- mg-yr/kg-day ETPart 2 2 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 ug/mg WHIM 6480 unitless 1 /6/2016 Pace 1 of 4 Attachment L - Table 4-12 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potenital concern In take Calculations Ta water Dermal Parameters Cancer ToxicityValues COPC CASRN EPC Intake;ng„r;an DP,�„n DADae,n,,; ECwmr B i t• Kp FA In EPD? CSF_1 CSFd,1 IUR RBC;ng„ran RBCd.1 RBC.. RBC_ (mgc) (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (mglkglday) (ug/m') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (Y/N) (mglkglday)-' (mg/kglday)-' (uglm')-' (mglL) (mglL) (mg/ (mg IL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 8.3E-08 2.0E-09 8.1E-09 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 8.0E-01 8.2E+00 NE 7.3E-01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Beryllium 744041-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.4E-03 NC NC NE Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cadmium 744043-9 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.8E-03 NC NC NE Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium, Total 744047-3 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Chromium 111 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Cobalt 744048-4 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 9.0E-03 NC NC NE Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.4E-04 NC NC NE Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Titanium 7440.32-6 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Zinc 7440.66-6 1.00E-03 NC NC INC NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NC NC NC NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NC NC NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NC NC INC NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NC NC NE 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment L - Table 4-12 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD (AGE <6) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 - chemical of Dotenital concern COPC CASRN EPC (mg/L) Intake;,,�,r;,,, (mglkglday) D Ae m (mglkglday) DADae,m,; (mglkglday) ECnoor (mglm') B (unitless) ,: (hr/event) t• (hr) K P (cmlhr) FA (unitless) � In EPD. (YIN) RfD„a, (mg/kglday) RfDae,me; (mg/kg/day) RfC (mglm') RBC;nge,a,n (mg/L) RBCd,, ., (mg/L) RBC,,,e„ (mg") RBCr,r,; Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.2E+03 3.4E+04 NE 1.2E+03 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 4.9E-01 2.1E+00 NE 3.9E-01 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 0.6 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 3.7E-01 1.0E+01 NE 3.5E-01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-04 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 2.4E+02 4.8E+02 NE 1.6E+02 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 2.4E+00 4.8E-01 NE 4.0E-01 Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.4E+02 6.9E+03 NE 2.4E+02 Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.2E+00 8.6E-01 NE 5.0E-01 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NN NN NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-OS NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+03 6.7E+02 NE 4.9E+02 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.8E+03 6.7E+02 NE 4.9E+02 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 8.0E-10 1.2E-08 NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 3.7E-01 2.6E+01 NE 3.6E-01 Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 4.9E+01 1.4E+03 NE 4.7E+01 Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 8.5E+02 2.4E+04 NE 8.2E+02 Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-10 2.9E-09 NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NN NN NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NN NN NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.7E+02 1.9E+02 NE 9.0E+01 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 3.7E-01 7.2E-01 NE 2.4E-01 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.1E+00 1.7E+02 NE 5.9E+00 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 4.0E-10 5.8E-09 NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 2.4E+00 1.4E+02 NE 2.1E+01 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 4.0E-10 5.8E-09 NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NTV NN NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 i Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 6.1E+00 1.7E+02 NE 5.9E+00 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 1.2E-09 1.7E-08 NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NN NN NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 7.3E+02 2.1E+04 NE 7.1E+02 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NN NN NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-O8 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NTV NN NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 6.1E+00 4.5E+00 NE 2.6E+00 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 1.2E-09 1.7E-GS NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.7E+02 1.7E+04 NE 3.6E+02 Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 2.0E-09 2.9E-08 NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 1.9E+03 5.5E+04 NE 1.9E+03 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 7.9E-10 1.2E-08 NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NTV NN NE 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 achment L - Table 4-12 ;k Based Concentration Summary rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water `-Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: risk based concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Aluminum 142U-9U-b 1.2E+U3 1.2E+U3 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 3.9E-01 3.9E-01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.5E-01 7.3E-01 3.5E-01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 1.6E+02 1.6E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 4.0E-01 4.0E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 5.0E-01 5.0E-01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 4.9E+02 4.9E+02 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 4.9E+02 4.9E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.6E-01 3.6E-01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 4.7E+01 4.7E+01 nc Iron 7439-89-6 8.2E+02 8.2E+02 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 9.0E+01 9.0E+01 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 2.4E-01 2.4E-01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.9E+00 5.9E+00 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.1E+01 2.1 E+01 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 5.9E+00 5.9E+00 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.1 E+02 7.1 E+02 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.6E+00 2.6E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.6E+02 3.6E+02 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.9E+03 1.9E+03 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-12 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCtut,;= [(1/RBCmg„rnn)+(1/RBC,sm„1)+(1/RBC,.,P)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion TR RBC;ng,,t;n„ = Intake;ng * CSF [EPC]w,t,r * IFWadj * FI Intake;ng(,g,gm,Px)= BW*ATliwime Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBCdern,,; = DADd,,,,, *CSF DAE,,,nt * DFWadj DADderm (agegruup.) _ ATiiretima DAE*ant = [EPC]„„ ter * PCevent Organic Compounds: 6 * r *aTevent PCeventTeventIX* _ 2 * , FA * C2 Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3B' PCeventTevent>=t* = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * T * 1 + B r Inorganics Compounds: Kp • Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBCmh,i,tim = TR EC_ *IUR [EPC]VAPOR * ETvw * EF * ED * C1 ECu,n —_ (, .,—p=) 24 * ATiiwime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;nge3t;a„ = THI Intake;ng / RfD Intake;ng = [EPC]w,t,r * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBCd..d = DADdern, / RfD DADd ,m, = DAE—t * SA * EV * EF * ED (,g, 9rwp=1 BW*AT DAE*ant = [EPC]„„ ter * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t* _ 2 * FA * C2 . 6 * r *R event Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3B' PCeventTevent>=t* = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * * 1 + B ) C Inorganics Compounds: PCevent = Kp * Tevent C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBC;nh,;,t;m = EC, / RfC ECnu = [EPCI—OR * ETv,p * EF * ED * C1 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mglkg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific -- (ug/W) ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unkless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical speck mg/kg-day DAs Age/chemical specific Age/chemical speck mg/cm 3-event ECnn -- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HID -- Age/chemical speck unitless [EPCj_., Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm`-event [EPCj._ - NOT USED— —NOT USED ug/m3 BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 6 year AT -- 2190 day ATfrfetime 25550 -- day IFWadj 2 -- L/kg IR NA 0.1 L/day FI 1 1 unitless SA NA 1770 cm2 Tevent 2.00 2 m/event EV 1 1 event/day DFWadj 103497 NA events-cm2/1,g C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 hr/day C2 1000 1000 Cm'/L 1/8/2016 Pace 1 of 4 Attachment L - Table 4-12 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT Exoosure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV- no toxidty value available DAD- dermally absorbed dose ABS- absorption factor UR-cancer .,it nsk COPC- chemical of potential concern EPD- effective permeability domain Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Cancer ToxicityValues COPC CASRN EPC Intake�pp..nop DA.v.p DADd.rm,i EC_.; B t* Kp FA In EPD? Mutagenic CSF. i CSFd,rm,i IUR RBCme..nop RBCd.rma RBC_por RBCt t , (mg/L) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (ug/m') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cm/hr) (unitless) (YIN) MOA? (m Ckg/day)-' (mg/kg/day)-' (ug/m')-' (m /L m /L m /L m /L el Ig) (gl Ig) Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29.9 1.00E-03 4.0E-07 4.0E-09 5.0E-08 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y Y 5.0E-01 2.0E*01 8.4E-02 4.9E-01 1.0E-01 NE 8.3E-02 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment L - Table 4-12 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water Off -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD (AGE 0- 2) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration EPD - effective permeability domain Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC Intakeins„s„ DA„„nr DADd,,,,,,i EC�,n„ B c t* KIP FA In EPD? RfDo„i RfDd,m„ i RfC RBCj_g a RBC,_a u RBCda.mai RBCmvi (mglL) (mg/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/kg (mglm') (unitless) (hr/event) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mg/kglday) (mg/kglday) (mglm') (Mg/ (mg/L) (mglL) Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 8.2E-07 4.0E-09 5.8E-08 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 3.7E+00 1.3E+00 NE 9.5E-01 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 achment L - Table 4-12 ;k Based Concentration Summary rivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface water -Site Recreational Wader - CHILD, ADOLESCENT, and ADULT n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 9.5E-01 8.3E-02 8.3E-02 c 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment L - Table 4-12 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration 1 RBCt,*;=[(1/RBC;ng**rnn)+(1/RBCdem1l)+(1/RBC,)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBCingertim = TR Intake;ng * CSF [EPCI.mar * IFWM * FI Intake;ng(,egroup ,)= BW*AT lifetime Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBCderma; = DADde,,,, *CSF DAEoant * DFWM DADderm (agegroup.) _ ATIif�lime DAE—t = [EPC]„,eter * PCevent Organic Compounds: F6.7. PCeventTeventIX* _ 2 * ,aTevent FA * C2 Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3B' PCeventTevent>=t* = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * T * 1 + B r Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBC;nhalatim = ECnm, *IUR [EPC]VAPOR * INMH * C1 EC�n —_ (,.,—p ") * 24 ATIiwime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBCingemon = THI Intake;ng / RfD Intake;ng = [EPC]w,ter * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW * AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBCd..d = DADderm / RfD DAD em, = DAEvsnt * SA * EV * EF * ED d (age group=1 BW*AT DAE—t = [EPC]„,eter * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t* _ 2 * FA * C2 . 6 * r *R event Kp Tevent 1 + 3B + 3B' PCeventTevent>=t* = FA * C2 * 1 + B + 2 * * 1 + B ) C Inorganics Compounds: PCevent = Kp * Tevent C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBCinha;ew„ = EC, / RfC ECne = [EPCI—OR * ETvap * EF * ED * C1 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mglkg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/mp)-' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific -- (ug/W) ELCR Age/chemical specific -- undless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DA_., Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm 2-event ECnn -- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HQ -- Age/chemical specific undless [EPCI_., Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm`-event [EPCI._ - NOT USED— —NOT USED ug/m3 BW NA 15 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 26 2 year AT -- 730 day ATflfetime 25550 -- day IFWM 2.1 -- L/kg IR 0 0.1 L/day FI NA 1 undless SA 10 1770 cm2 Tevent 0.00 2 m/event EV NA 1 event/day DFWM 1 — events-cm2/kg C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug INHM 319693 NA hr/day C2 1000 1000 cm'/L 1/8/2016 Page 1 of 4 :hment M - Table 4-13 Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values Intake;ngaaggn (mglkglday) DAD-- (mglkglday) EC,,.,.. (ug/m') EC,,,n« (uglm') ABSABSd (unitless) limitless) CSFgrai (mglkglday)-' CSF,1. «' (mglkglday)-' IUR (uglm')-' COPC CASRN RBC;ngaadnn RBCda,mai RBCmnkm.r. RBC„pg, RBCrorai Aluminum 7429-90-5 INC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.6E-10 3.8E-09 NE NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 1.0E+05 1.7E+04 NE NE 1.5E+04 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC NE NE Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NE NE INC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC NE NE Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC NE NE Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NE NE 1 NC NC NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC NE NE Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.1E-09 NE NE 1 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 1.8E+05 NE NE 1.8E+05 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment M - Table 4-13 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment OFFSITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV -not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN I Intakeln-time I DADd,rmal EC„m,m,k EC-P. ABSING ABSa RfD,r,i RfDd,rm,i RfC RBC;noe n RBCde--I RBC.,e..,„ RBC,,,,,,, RBCto„I (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (mglm3) (mg/m3) (unitless) (unitless) (mg/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/m3) Aluminum 7429-90-5 7.7E-09 NE Antimony 7440-36-0 7.7E-09 NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.6E-09 2.7E-08 NE Barium 7440-39-3 7.7E-09 NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.7E-09 NE Boron 7440-42-8 7.7E-09 NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 7.7E-09 8.9E-10 NE Calcium 7440-70-2 7.7E-09 NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 7.7E-09 NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 7.7E-09 NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 7.7E-09 NE Copper 7440-50-8 7.7E-09 NE Iron 7439-89-6 7.7E-09 NE Lead 7439-92-1 7.7E-09 NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 7.7E-09 NE Manganese 7439-96-5 7.7E-09 NE Mercury 7439-97-6 7.7E-09 NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 7.7E-09 NE Nickel 7440-02-0 7.7E-09 NE Potassium 7440-09-7 7.7E-09 NE Selenium 7782-49-2 7.7E-09 NE Sodium 7440-23-5 7.7E-09 NE Strontium 7440-24-6 7.7E-09 NE Thallium 7440-28-0 7.7E-09 NE Titanium 7440-32-6 7.7E-09 NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.7E-09 NE Zinc 7440-66-6 7.7E-09 NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.7E-09 NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 7.7E-09 NE Chromium VI(hexavalent) 18540-29-9 7.7E-09 NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.3E+08 N 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 5.2E+04 N 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 6.5E+04 1.1E+04 N 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 2.6E+07 N 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 2.6E+05 N 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.6E+07 N 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.3E+05 2.8E+04 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.9E+08 N 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.9E+08 N 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 3.9E+04 N 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 5.2E+06 N 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 9.1 E+07 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 NTV NTV N 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.8E+07 N 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 3.9E+04 N 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.5E+05 N 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 2.6E+06 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 6.5E+05 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 7.8E+07 N 1 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 1.3E+03 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 6.5E+05 N 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.9E+07 N 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 2.1E+08 N 1 NTV NTV N 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 3.9E+05 N 1.3E+08 5.2E+04 9.6E+03 2.6E+07 2.6E+05 2.6E+07 2.3E+04 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 3.9E+04 5.2E+06 9.1 E+07 1.8E+07 3.9E+04 6.5E+05 2.6E+06 6.5E+05 7.8E+07 1.3E+03 6.5E+05 3.9E+07 2.1 E+08 3.9E+05 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; risk based concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-W-b I..SL+Ub l.3L+uo nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.2E+04 5.2E+04 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 9.6E+03 1.5E+04 9.6E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.6E+05 2.6E+05 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.3E+04 2.3E+04 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.2E+06 5.2E+06 nc Iron 7439-89-6 9.1E+07 9.1E+07 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.6E+06 2.6E+06 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.8E+07 7.8E+07 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.3E+03 1.3E+03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.9E+07 3.9E+07 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1 E+08 2.1 E+08 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment M - Table 4-13 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC, r ; = 1 [(1/RBC„g.s,.,) + (1/RBCde .1) + (1/RBCp,N) + (1/RBC ,p)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,ng,si; = TR / Intake,,,* CSF [EPCI-1 * IR * ABSiNc * FI * EF * ED * C1 I ntakein9 (.p g..P X)= B W x ` ATereume Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCde, A = TR / DAD * CSF DAD e,n a e - DAE... t * SA * EV * EF * ED d (e grnoP x)— BW„ * AT rre,me DAEenr = [EPC]s j, * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,nge i,n= THI Intake,,, / RfD Intaka,n, = [EPC]sn;i * IR * ABS,n9 * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW*AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCd,,,,,l= THI DAD / RfD DADde = DAI-nr * SA * EV * EF * ED BW*AT DAE t = [EPC]s 1, * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nh,l,t,,,= TR / ECG IUR [EPC]PART * ETp.,, * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETv,p * EF * ED EC- lase e,ow x)= 24 * ATrreume Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nha;adnn= THI EC,� / RfC EC,, = [EPC]PART * ETp.,i * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]yAPOR * ETvap * EF * ED * C2 24*AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless MID -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE—t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event EC- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC].,, Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment M - TABLE Attachment M - TABLE ug/m' [EPC]vAPOR Attachment M - TABLE Attachment M - TABLE ug/m3 ABS;,, Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 80 80 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR 5 5 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA 5790 5790 cm2 AF 0.1 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day ETPart 4 4 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 8 8 hours/day 1 /6/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment N - Table 4-14 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) ^" NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC -risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potenital concern Intake Calculations Ta water Dermal Parameters Cancer Toxici Values COPC CASRN EPC Fntakein DA,,,,,,t DADd.�m,i EC„n„ B c t* Kp FA In EPD1 CSF,r,i CSFd,rm,i IUR RBCina,.n.n RBCd.rm,I RBC,,.o,r RBC,,,,, (mg/L)g/kglday) (mglkglday) (mglkg/day) (ug/m') (unitless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mg/kglday)'' (mglkglday)'' (uglms)'' (mglL) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NE INC NC NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NE INC INC NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 2.5E-09 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 NE 2.6E+01 NE 2.6E+01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.4E-03 NE -- NE Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.8E-03 NE -- NE Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Cobalt 7440-4 4 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 9.0E-03 NE -- NE Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.4E-04 NE - NE Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 5.1E-09 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 NE 9.8E-01 NE 9.8E-01 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment N - Table 4-14 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC -risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potenital concern NN- no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC ake„g„ygn r(m DA„„nr DADd,,,,,,i EC„n„ B c t* Kp FA In EPD? RfD,r,i RfDd,m„ I RfC RBCing,-n RBCd.nn,i RBC„ .r RBCt,vi (mg/L) glkglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/kglday) (mg/m') (unitless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mglkglday) (mglkg/day) (mglm') (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 NE 5.6E+04 NE 5.6E+04 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 NE 3.4E+00 NE 3.4E+00 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 0.6 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 NE 1.7E+01 NE 1.7E+01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 NE 7.8E+02 NE 7.8E+02 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-03 1.4E-OS 2.0E-05 NE 7.8E-01 NE 7.8E-01 Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-OS NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 NE 1.1E+04 NE 1.1E+Oq Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 NE 1.4E+00 NE 1.4E+00 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-OS NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 NE 1.1E+03 NE 1.1E+03 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 IN 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 NE 1.1E+03 NE 1.1E+03 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.00E-03 NE 8.0E-10 7.1E-09 NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 NE 4.2E+01 NE 4.2E+01 Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 NE 2.2E+03 NE 2.2E+03 Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 NE 3.9E+04 NE 3.9E+04 Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-10 1.8E-09 NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-0 NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-OS NE 3.1E+02 NE 3.1E+02 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-04 2.1E-OS 3.0E-04 NE 1.2E+00 NE 1.2E+00 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 NE 2.8E+02 NE 2.8E+02 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-10 3.6E-09 NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 NE 2.2E+02 NE 2.2E+02 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-10 3.6E-09 NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 NE 2.8E+02 NE 2.8E+02 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NE 1.2E-09 1.1E-OS NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 NE 3.4E+04 NE 3.4E+04 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-OS NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 NE 7.3E+00 NE 7.3E+00 Zinc 7440-666 1.00E-03 NE 1.2E-09 E-08 NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 NE 28E+04 NE 2.8E+04 14797-5-5-8 1.00E-03 NE 00 2E9 0 1.8E8 NE 00 3E3 23E01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 NE 9.+Nitrate E04 NE 904 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NE 7.9E-10 7.1E-09 NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NE NTV NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 3.6E-08 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 NE 2.1E+00 NE 2.1E+00 1/8/2016 Page 3 of 4 ttachment N - Table 4-14 isk Based Concentration Summary erivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water FF-SITE RECREATIONAL BOATER - RECREATIONAL BOATER (ADULT) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc -risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c -risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer Cancer I Final Basis Aluminum M29-91J-b b.lit+U4 b.tit+U4 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 3.4E+00 3.4E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E+01 2.6E+01 1.7E+01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.8E+02 7.8E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.8E-01 7.8E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.1 E+04 1.1 E+04 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.1E+03 1.1 E+03 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.2E+01 4.2E+01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 2.2E+03 2.2E+03 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 3.1 E+02 3.1 E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.2E+00 1.2E+00 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.2E+02 2.2E+02 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 3.4E+04 3.4E+04 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.3E+00 7.3E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 2.8E+04 2.8E+04 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 9.0E+04 9.0E+04 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.1E+00 9.8E-01 9.8E-01 c 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-14 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC, t, = 1 [(1/RBCmge i.)+(1/RBCde,m0+(1/RBC„ap)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBCmge iw = TR Intake;., * CSF Intake;ng (age group x) = BW * AT rf j_ Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBCde,m,; = DADde.,, -CSF DADder. DAexent * SA * EV * EF * ED a (a.groupx)= AT;;fe,;me DAE—t = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevenKt• = 2 . FA. Kp , 6 • r TTevent Kp event 3B PCeventTevenb=t* = FA * C2 * �1 + B )+ 2 * T * (1+( 1 +3B' + B = ) ) Inorganics Compounds: Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBCI.naat—= - EC_ IUR [EPC]VAPOR* ETVap* EF * ED * C1 ECce. _ (ege group x) - 24 * AT,iwime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngeat;.. = THI Intake;., / RfD Intake;n, _ [EPC]—, * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW *AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBCde,ma; = DAD,,- / RfD DAE„e„1 * DFWadj DADde,m (age group x) _ ATrferma DAExe.c = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t• _ 2 . FA. Kp . 6 . r +rTevent Kp event 1+3B+3B' PCeventTevent =t* = FA' C2 * 1 + B -2— 1 + B Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent = C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nna;ad.n = THI ECn. / RfC ECn. _ [EPC]VAPOR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day)" IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)"' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day EC.an Age/chemical specific -- (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE„e„t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm`-event ECn. -- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HQ -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPCLa.r Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm2-event [EPC]„ap., ----NOT USED--- ---NOT USED--- ug/m' BW 80 80 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR L/day FI unitless $A 5790 5790 cm2 Tevent 2.00 2 hr/event EV 1 1 event/day C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 hr/day C2 1000 1000 cm'/L 1/8/2016 Page 1 of 4 :hment O - Table 4-15 Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based ,ation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment 2EATIONAL FISHER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) an Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potential concern Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values Intake;,,gaaua„ (mglkglday) DAD-- (mglkglday) EC,,.nk" (ug/m') ECv_ (uglm') ABSABS (unitless) d (unitless) CSFa,a, (mglkglday)-' CSFdarmai (mglkglday)-' IUR (uglm')-' COPC CASRN RBCd,gaad . RBCda,mai RBCmnkm.r. RBC„p„ RBC�o�ai Aluminum 7429-90-5 INC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.6E-10 3.8E-09 NE NE 0.6 0.03 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 1.0E+05 1.7E+04 NE NE 1.5E+04 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC INC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-03 NC NC NE NE Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC INC NE NE NC NC 1.8E-03 NC NC NE NE Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 INC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NE NE NC NC 9.0E-03 NC NC NE NE Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Iron 7439-89-6 INC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Lead 7439-92-1 NC NC NE NE 1 NC NC NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 INC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Mercury 7439-97-6 INC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC 2.4E-04 NC NC NE NE Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 INC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC INC NC NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NE NE NC NC NC NC NE NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.1E-09 NE NE 1 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 1.8E+05 NE NE 1.8E+05 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment O - Table 4-15 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment RECREATIONAL FISHER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potential Concern NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values Intake;,,„t (mg/kg/day) DADder- (mg/kg/day) ECp,njcuj (mg/m3) EC-1 (mg/rn) ABSinc (unitless) ABSds (unities RfD,i (mg/kg/day) RfDd,u,i (mg/kg/day) RfC (m COPC CASRN RBC;,,tp, RBCd,.,i RBCp,n;cu, RBC„_ RBCa,i Aluminum 7429-90-5 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 1.3E+08 NE NE 1.3E+08 Antimony 7440-36-0 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 5.2E+04 NE NE 5.2E+04 Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.6E-09 2.7E-08 NE NE 0.6 0.03 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 6.5E+04 1.1E+04 NE NE 9.6E+03 Barium 7440-39-3 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 2.6E+07 NE NE 2.6E+07 Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 2.0E-03 1.4E-05 2.0E-05 2.6E+05 NE NE 2.6E+05 Boron 7440-42-8 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 2.6E+07 NE NE 2.6E+07 Cadmium 7440-43-9 7.7E-09 8.9E-10 NE NE 1 0.001 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.3E+05 2.8E+04 NE NE 2.3E+04 Calcium 7440-70-2 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.9E+08 NE NE 1.9E+08 Chromium III 16065-83-1 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 1.9E+08 NE NE 1.9E+08 Cobalt 7440-48-4 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 3.9E+04 NE NE 3.9E+04 Copper 7440-50-8 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 5.2E+06 NE NE 5.2E+06 Iron 7439-89-6 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 9.1E+07 NE NE 9.1E+07 Lead 7439-92-1 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Manganese 7439-96-5 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 1.8E+07 NE NE 1.8E+07 Mercury 7439-97-6 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 3.0E-04 2.1E-05 3.0E-04 3.9E+04 NE NE 3.9E+04 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.5E+05 NE NE 6.5E+05 Nickel 7440-02-0 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 2.6E+06 NE NE 2.6E+06 Potassium 7440-09-7 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Selenium 7782-49-2 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 6.5E+05 NE NE 6.5E+05 Sodium 7440-23-5 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Strontium 7440-24-6 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 7.8E+07 NE NE 7.8E+07 Thallium 7440-28-0 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 1.0E-05 1.0E-05 1.3E+03 NE NE 1.3E+03 Titanium 7440-32-6 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 6.5E+05 NE NE 6.5E+05 Zinc 7440-66-6 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.9E+07 NE NE 3.9E+07 Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 2.1E+08 NE NE 2.1E+08 Sulfide 18496-25-8 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 NTV NTV NE NE Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 7.7E-09 NE NE 1 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 3.9E+05 NE NE 3.9E+05 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment O - Table 4-15 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Sediment RECREATIONAL FISHER - OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Incidental Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Tar et Cancer Risk er Chemical 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; Risk Based Concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/kg) I Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /42U-W-b I..SL+Ub l.3L+uo nc Antimony 7440-36-0 5.2E+04 5.2E+04 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 9.6E+03 1.5E+04 9.6E+03 nc Barium 7440-39-3 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.6E+05 2.6E+05 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.6E+07 2.6E+07 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 2.3E+04 2.3E+04 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.9E+08 1.9E+08 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Copper 7440-50-8 5.2E+06 5.2E+06 nc Iron 7439-89-6 9.1E+07 9.1E+07 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 1.8E+07 1.8E+07 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.6E+06 2.6E+06 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 7.8E+07 7.8E+07 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.3E+03 1.3E+03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.5E+05 6.5E+05 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.9E+07 3.9E+07 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1 E+08 2.1 E+08 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-15 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC, r ; = 1 [(1/RBC„g.s,.,) + (1/RBCde .1) + (1/RBCp,N) + (1/RBC ,p)] Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC„g,sj; = TR / Intake,,,* CSF [EPCI-1 * IR * ABSiNO * FI * EF * ED * C1 I ntakein9 (age g..P x)= B W x ` ATereume Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCder A = TR / DAD * CSF DAD ern a e - DAE... t * SA * EV * EF * ED d (e grnoP x)— BW„ * AT rre,me DAE t = [EPC]s j, * ABSd * AF * C1 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,nge i,n= THI Intake;,, / RfD Intaken, = [EPC]sn;i * IR * ABS,n9 * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW*AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption RBCd,r a,= THI DAD / RfD DADde = DAI-nr * SA * EV * EF * ED BW*AT DAE t = [EPC]s 1, * ABSd * AF * C1 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nh,l,t,,,= TR / EC- IUR [EPC]PART * ETp.,, * EF * ED --- OR--- [EPC]VAPOR * ETv,p * EF * ED EC- lase erow x)= 24 * ATrreume Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation THI RBC;nha;adnn= EC,� / RfC EC,, = [EPC]PART * ETp.,i * EF * ED * C2 --- OR--- [EPC]yAPOR * ETvap * EF * ED * C2 24*AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' IUR Chemical specific (ug/m')-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ECG Age/chemical specific (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC Chemical specific (mg/m') DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE—t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm2-event EC, Age/chemical specific mg/m' HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]so;i Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg [EPC]PART Attachment O - TABLE Attachment O - TABLE ug/m' [EPC]vAPOR Attachment O - TABLE Attachment O - TABLE ug/m' ABS;ng Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless ABSd Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 80 80 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR 5 5 mg/day FI 1 1 unitless C1 0.000001 0.000001 kg/mg SA 5790 5790 cm2 AF 0.1 0.1 mg/cm2 EV 1 1 event/day ETPart 4 4 hours/day C2 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 8 8 hours/day 1 /6/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment P - Table 4-16 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER - RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-0� NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration CSF - cancer slope factor RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ASS - absorption factor UR - cancer unit risk COPC - chemical of potenital concern Intake Calculations Ta water Dermal Parameters Cancer Toxici Values COPC CASRN EPC Fntakein DA,,,,,,t DADd„m,i EC„„ B c t* Kp FA In EPD? CSF,r,i CSFn„m,i IUR RBCina,,n,n RBCn„m,i RBC,,,,„ RBC,,,,i (mglL)g/kglday) (mglkg/day) (mg/kg/day) (ug/m') (unitless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cm/hr) (unitless) (Y/N) (mg/kglday)'' (mglkg/day)'' (uglm'r (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NE INC NC NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NE INC INC NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 2.5E-09 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 4.3E-03 NE 2.6E+01 NE 2.6E+01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 HE NC INC HE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.4E-03 NE -- NE Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 NE NC INC HE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.8E-03 NE -- NE Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 NE NC INC HE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Cobalt 7440-4 4 1.00E-03 NE NC INC HE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 9.0E-03 NE -- NE Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC HE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NE NC INC HE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 HE NC INC HE 5.4E-03 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y HE - NE Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.8E-03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE - NE Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 HE NC INC NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.4E-04 HE - NE Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NE NC INC HE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y HE - NE Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NE - NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 HE NC INC HE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y HE - NE Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC HE 1.0E-03 1 Y HE -- NE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y NE -- NE Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NE NC NC NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y NE -- NE Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NE NC INC NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NE -- NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 5.1E-09 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-01 2.0E+01 8.4E-02 NE 9.8E-01 NE 9.8E-01 1/8/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment P - Table 4-16 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water OFF -SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER - RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Dermal Contact Yes Duke Energy Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 NV - not volatile EC - exposure concentration RfD - reference dose RBC - risk based concentration COPC - chemical of potenital concern NN- no toxicity value available DAD - dermally absorbed dose ABS - absorption factor RfC - reference concentration Intake Calculations Tapwater Dermal Parameters Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN EPC rtak,,,/,,�YFD&_.r DADd,;i EC„n„ B c t* Kp FA In EPD? RfD,rai RfDd,m,aI RfC RBCing,-n RBCd.nn,i RBC„.r RBCt,vi (mg/L) glkgglkg/day) (mg/kglday) (mg/m') (witless) (hrlevent) (hr) (cmlhr) (unitless) (YIN) (mglkglday) (mglkg/day) (mglm') (mg/L) (mglL) (mglL) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.0E-03 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E-03 NE 5.6E+04 NE 5.6E+04 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 4.2E-03 5.1E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-04 6.0E-05 NE 3.4E+00 NE 3.4E+00 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.3E-03 2.8E-01 6.6E-01 1.0E-03 0.6 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 1.5E-05 NE 1.7E+01 NE 1.7E+01 Barium 7440-39-3 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 4.5E-03 6.2E-01 1.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 1.4E-02 5.0E-04 NE 7.8E+02 NE 7.8E+02 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 1.2E-03 1.2E-01 2.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-03 1.4E-OS 2.0E-05 NE 7.8E-01 NE 7.8E-01 Boron 7440-42-8 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-OS NE 1.4E-03 1.3E-01 3.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E-02 NE 1.1E+04 NE 1.1E+Oq Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 4.1E-03 4.5E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.0E-03 2.5E-05 2.0E-05 NE 1.4E+00 NE 1.4E+00 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-OS NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 NE 1.1E+03 NE 1.1E+03 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.00E-03 IN 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.8E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.5E+00 2.0E-02 NE 1.1E+03 NE 1.1E+03 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.00E-03 NE 8.0E-10 7.1E-09 NE 1.2E-03 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 4.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 6.0E-06 NE 4.2E+01 NE 4.2E+01 Copper 7440-50-8 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-O8 NE 3.1E-03 2.4E-01 5.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 4.0E-02 4.0E-02 NE 2.2E+03 NE 2.2E+03 Iron 7439-89-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.9E-03 2.2E-01 5.2E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 NE 3.9E+04 NE 3.9E+04 Lead 7439-92-1 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-10 1.8E-09 NE 5.5E-04 1.5E+00 3.7E+00 1.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Manganese 7439-96-5 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.9E-03 2.1E-01 5.1E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.4E-01 5.6E-03 5.0E-05 NE 3.1E+02 NE 3.1E+02 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 5.4EmW 1.4E+00 3.4E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-04 2.1E-OS 3.0E-04 NE 1.2E+00 NE 1.2E+00 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E 08 NE 3.8E03 3.6E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 NE 2.8E+02 NE 2.8E+02 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-10 3.6E-09 NE 5.9E-04 2.2E-01 5.4E-01 2.0E-04 1 Y 2.0E-02 8.0E-04 9.0E-05 NE 2.2E+02 NE 2.2E+02 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-10 3.6E-09 NE 2.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Selenium 7782-49-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.4E-03 2.9E-01 7.0E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 2.0E-02 NE 2.8E+02 NE 2.8E+02 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.00E-03 NE 1.2E-09 1.1E-08 NE 6.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Strontium 7440-24-6 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.6E-03 3.3E-01 7.8E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 NE 3.4E+04 NE 3.4E+04 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-OS NE 5.5E-03 1.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.0E-03 1 Y NE NN NE Titanium 7440-32-6 1.00E-03 HE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 1.0E-03 1 Y HE NN HE Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 2.7E-03 2.0E-01 4.9E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 5.0E-03 1.3E-04 1.0E-04 NE 7.3E+00 NE 7.3E+00 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.00E-03 NE 1.2E-09 1.1E-08 NE 1.9E-03 2.4E-01 5.9E-01 6.0E-04 1 Y 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 NE 2.8E+04 NE 2.8E+04 Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.00E-03 NE 2.0E-09 1.8E-08 NE 3.0E-03 2.3E-01 5.6E-01 1.0E-03 1 Y 1.6E+00 1.6E+00 NE 9.0E+04 NE 9.0E+04 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.00E-03 NE 7.9E-10 7.1E-09 NE 4.0E-04 1 Y NE NN NE Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.00E-03 NE 4.0E-09 3.6E-08 NE 5.5E-03 2.1E-01 4.9E-01 2.0E-03 1 Y 3.0E-03 7.5E-05 1.0E-04 NE 2.1E+00 NE 2.1E+00 1/812016 Page 3 of 4 ttachment P - Table 4-16 isk Based Concentration Summary erivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Surface Water FF-SITE RECREATIONAL FISHER - RECREATIONAL FISHER (ADULT) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potenital concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicitv value available: remedial not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration I Non -Cancer (mg/L) Cancer I (mg/L) Final I (mg/L) Basis Aluminum /42U-9U-b b.bE+U4 b.bE+U4 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 3.4E+00 3.4E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E+01 2.6E+01 1.7E+01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 7.8E+02 7.8E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 7.8E-01 7.8E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.1E+04 1.1 E+04 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.1E+03 1.1E+03 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.2E+01 4.2E+01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 2.2E+03 2.2E+03 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.9E+04 3.9E+04 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 3.1 E+02 3.1 E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.2E+00 1.2E+00 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 2.2E+02 2.2E+02 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 3.4E+04 3.4E+04 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.3E+00 7.3E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 2.8E+04 2.8E+04 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 9.0E+04 9.0E+04 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.1E+00 9.8E-01 9.8E-01 c 1 /8/2016 Page 4 of 4 Table 4-16 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Total Risk Based Concentration RBC, t, = 1 [(1/RGmge i.)+(1/RGde,m0+(1/RG„,p Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion R13Cinge iw = TR Intake;., * CSF Intake;ng (age group x) = BW * AT rf j_ Cancer -Risk Based Concentration from Dermal Absorption TR RBCae,my = DADde.,, -CSF DADder. DAexent * SA * EV * EF * ED a (a.groupx)= AT;;fe,;me DAE—t = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevenKt• = 2 . FA. Kp , 6 • r TTevent Kp event 3B PCeventTevenb=t* = FA * C2 * �1 + B )+ 2 * T * (1+( 1 +3B' + B = ) ) Inorganics Compounds: Tevent PCevent = C2 Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation TR RBCI.naat—= - EC_ IUR [EPC]VAPOR* ETVap* EF * ED * C1 ECce. _ (ege group x) - 24 * AT,iwime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC;ngeat;.. = THI Intake;., / RfD Intake;n, _ [EPC]—, * IR * FI * EF * ED * C1 BW *AT Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Dermal Absorption THI RBCde,ma; = DAD,,- / RfD DAE„e„1 * DFWadj DADde,m (age group x) _ ATrferma DAExe.c = [EPC]_, * PCevent Organic Compounds: PCeventTevent<t• _ 2 . FA. Kp . 6 . r +rTevent Kp event 1+3B+3B' PCeventTevent =t* = FA' C2 * 1 + B -2— 1 + B Inorganics Compounds: Kp * Tevent PCevent = C2 Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Inhalation RBC;nna;ad.n = THI ECn. / RfC ECn. _ [EPC]VAPOR * ETVap * EF * ED * C2 24 * AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day)" IUR Chemical specific -- (ug/m3)"' Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day EC.an Age/chemical specific -- (ug/m') ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day RfC -- Chemical specific (mg/m3) DAD Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day DAE„e„t Age/chemical specific Age/chemical specific mg/cm`-event ECn. -- Age/chemical specific mg/m3 HQ -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPCLa.r Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/L PCevent Chemical specific Chemical specific L/cm2-event [EPC]„ap., ----NOT USED--- ---NOT USED--- ug/m' BW 80 80 kg EF 45 45 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day IR L/day FI unitless $A 5790 5790 cm2 Tevent 2.00 2 hr/event EV 1 1 event/day C1 0.001 0.001 mg/ug ETVap 2 2 hr/day C2 1000 1000 cm'/L 1/8/2016 Page 1 of 4 Attachment Q - Table 4-17 Risk Based Concentration - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentration - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - RECREATIONAL(ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Exposure Routes Evaluated Duke Energy Ingestion Ves Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1 COPC - chemical of potential concern ABS - absorption factor ABS - absorption factor RBC - risk based concentration NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route CSF - cancer slope factor NTV - no toxicity value available Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicit Values ABSiNc (unitless) CSF,,,i (mg/kg/day)' COPC CASRN IntakeN,ge,a,,, (mg/kg/day) RBCi„��ia„ Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NC Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NC Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.1 E-05 1 1.5E+00 2.1 E+00 2.1 E+00 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NC Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NC Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NC Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NC Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NC Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NC Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NC Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NC Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NC Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NC Lead 7439-92-1 NC 1 NC Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NC Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NC Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NC Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NC Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NC Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NC Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NC Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NC Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NC Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NC Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NC Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NC Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NC Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NC Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NC Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.1E-05 1 5.0E-01 6.4E+00 6.4E+00 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 4 Attachment O -Table 4-17 Risk Based Concentration - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentration - Biota OffSite Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - RECREATIONAL(ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 COPC -chemical of potential concern RfD -reference dose NTV - no toxicity value available ASS -absorption factor RBC - risk based concentration Intake Calculations f Aluminum 7429-90-5 2.2E-04 1 1.0E+00 4.6E+03 4.6E+03 Antimony 7440-36-0 2.2E-04 1 4.0E-04 1.8E+00 1.8E+00 Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.2E-04 1 3.0E-04 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 Barium 7440-39-3 2.2E-04 1 2.0E-01 9.1E+02 9.1E+02 Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.2E-04 1 2.0E-03 9.1E+00 9.1E+00 Boron 744042-8 2.2E-04 1 2.0E-01 9.1E+02 9.1E+02 Cad.Wm 744043-9 2.2E-04 1 1.0E-03 4.6E+00 4.6E+00 Calcium 7440-70-2 2.2E-04 1 NTV Chromium, Total 744047-3 2.2E-04 1 1.5E+00 6.9E+03 6.9E+03 Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.2E-04 1 1.5E+00 6.9E+03 6.9E+03 Cobalt 7440-48-4 2.2E-04 1 3.0E-04 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 Copper 7440-50-8 2.2E-04 1 4.0E-02 1.8E+02 1.8E+02 Iron 7439-89-6 2.2E-04 1 7AE-01 3.2E+03 3.2E+03 Lead 7439-92-1 2.2E-04 1 NTV Magnesium 7439-95-4 2.2E-04 1 NTV Manganese 7439-96-5 2.2E-04 1 1.4E-01 6.4E+02 6.4E+02 Mercury 7439-97-6 2.2E.04 1 3.0E-04 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.2E.04 1 5.0E-03 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 Nickel 7440-02-0 2.2E-04 1 2.0E-02 9.1E+01 9.1E+01 Potassium 7440-09-7 2.2E-04 1 NTV Selenium 771 2.2E-04 1 5.0E-03 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 Sodium 7440-23-5 2.2E-04 1 NTV St. Um 7440-24-6 2.2E-04 1 6.0E-01 2.7E+03 2.7E+03 Thallium 7440-28-0 2.2E-04 1 1.0E-05 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 Titanium 7440-32-6 2.2E-04 1 NTV Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.2E-04 1 5.0E-03 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 Zinc 7440-66-6 2.2E 04 1 3.0E-01 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.2E-04 1 1.6E+00 7.3E+03 7.3E+03 Sulfide 18496-25-8 2.2E.04 1 NTV Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.2E-04 1 3.0E-03 1.4E+01 1.4E+01 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment Q - Table 4-17 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentration - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - RECREATIONAL(ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk(per Chemical 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; risk based concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final I (mg/kg) Basis ,viummum [4CJ-au-o 4.0t+UO 4.bt*U5 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.8E+00 1.8E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.4E+00 2.1 E+00 1.4E+00 nc Barium 7440-39-3 9.1E+02 9.1E+02 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 9.1E+00 9.1E+00 nc Boron 7440-42-8 9.1 E+02 9.1 E+02 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 4.6E+00 4.6E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 6.9E+03 6.9E+03 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 6.9E+03 6.9E+03 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.8E+02 1.8E+02 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.2E+03 3.2E+03 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 6.4E+02 6.4E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 9.1E+01 9.1E+01 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.7E+03 2.7E+03 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.3E+03 7.3E+03 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.4E+01 6.4E+00 6.4E+00 c 1 /6/2016 Page 4 of 4 Attachment Q - Table 4-17 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Cancer -Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC,ngesi;on = TR / Intake;n9 * CSF [EPC]b;ote * IR * ABSiNc * EF * ED * C1 Intake,n9 (age group xi = BWx * ATrfeeme Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion THI RBCm9esnnn = Intake;n9 / RfD Intake,n9 = [EPC]b,°,e' IR * ABS;n9 * EF * ED * C1 BW*AT Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific (mg/kg-day)-' Intake Age/chemical specific mg/kg-day ELCR Age/chemical specific unitless RfD Chemical specific mg/kg-day HQ Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]b;ot. Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg ABS;n9 Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 80 80 kg EF 365 365 day/year ED 10 10 year AT 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 day IR 17.5 17.5 g/day C1 0.001 0.001 kg/g 1 /6/2016 Attachment Q - Table 4-17 Risk Based Concentration - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentration - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - RECREATIONAL ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 - <16) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy COPC - chemical of potential concern ABS - absorption factor ABS - absorption factor NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route CSF - cancer slope factor Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available Intake Calculations COPC CASRN Intake,ng-ti- (mg/kg/day) Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values RBC,ngefi.nEl ABSING (unitless) CSF... I (mg/kg/day)"t Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NC Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NC Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.5E-05 1 1.5E+00 2.7E+00 2.7E+00 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NC Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NC Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NC Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NC Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NC Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NC Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NC Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NC Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NC Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NC Lead 7439-92-1 NC 1 NC Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NC Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NC Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NC Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NC Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NC Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NC Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NC Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NC Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NC Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NC Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NC Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NC Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NC Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NC Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NC Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 7.4E-05 1 5.0E-01 2.7E+00 2.7E+00 Page 1 of 4 1 /6/2016 Attachment Q - Table 4-17 Risk Based Concentration - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentration - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - RECREATIONAL ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 - <16) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) r.npr.. _ rh.-ir 1 of nnfunfial --rn Rfn _ ruforunru rineu NT/ _ nn Inririly vale is a ilohlu ASS -absorption factor RBC - risk based concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN Intakeing--ion ABSINc RfDo,al RBCI„9,nI,,, RBCLoaI m /k lday) (unitless) (mg/kg/day) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.7E-04 1 1.0E+00 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.7E-04 1 4.0E-04 2.3E+00 2.3E+00 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E-04 1 3.0E-04 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 Barium 7440-39-3 1.7E-04 1 2.0E-01 1.2E+03 1.2E+03 Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.7E-04 1 2.0E-03 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 Boron 7440-42-8 1.7E-04 1 2.0E-01 1.2E+03 1.2E+03 Cadmium 744043-9 1.7E-04 1 1.0E-03 5.8E+00 5.8E+00 Calcium 7440-70-2 1.7E-04 1 NTV Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 1.7E-04 1 1.5E+00 8.7E+03 8.7E+03 Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.7E-04 1 1.5E+00 8.7E+03 8.7E+03 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.7E-04 1 3.0E-04 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 Copper 7440-50-8 1.7E-04 1 4.0E-02 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 Iron 7439-89-6 1.7E-04 1 7.0E-01 4.1E+03 4.1E+03 Lead 7439-92-1 1.7E-04 1 NTV Magnesium 7439-95-4 1.7E-04 1 NTV Manganese 7439-96-5 1.7E-04 1 1.4E-01 8.1E+02 8.1E+02 Mercury 7439-97-6 1.7E-04 1 3.0E-04 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.7E-04 1 5.0E-03 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 Nickel 7440-02-0 1.7E-04 1 2.0E-02 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 Potassium 7440-09-7 1.7E-04 1 NTV Selenium 778249-2 1.7E-04 1 5.0E-03 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 Sodium 7440-23-5 1.7E-04 1 NTV Strontium 7440-24-6 1.7E-04 1 6.0E-01 3.5E+03 3.5E+03 Thallium 7440-28-0 1.7E-04 1 1.0E-05 5.8E-02 5.8E-02 Titanium 7440-32-6 1.7E-04 1 NTV Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.7E-04 1 5.0E-03 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 Zinc 7440-66-6 1.7E-04 1 3.0E-01 1.7E+03 1.7E+03 Nitrate 14797-55-8 1.7E-04 1 1.6E+00 9.3E+03 9.3E+03 Sulfide 18496-25-8 1.7E-04 1 NTV Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.7E-04 1 3.0E-03 1.7E+01 1.7E+01 Page 2 of 4 1/6/2016 hment Q - Table 4-17 Based Concentration Summary ation of Risk Based Concentration - Biota ite Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - RECREATIONAL ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 - <16) n Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; risk based concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Hiummum ia/a-au-o o.at+us o.at+us nc Antimony 7440-36-0 2.3E+00 2.3E+00 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.7E+00 2.7E+00 1.7E+00 nc Barium 7440-39-3 1.2E+03 1.2E+03 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.2E+03 1.2E+03 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 5.8E+00 5.8E+00 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.7E+03 8.7E+03 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 8.7E+03 8.7E+03 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 nc Copper 7440-50-8 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 nc Iron 7439-89-6 4.1E+03 4.1E+03 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 8.1E+02 8.1E+02 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 3.5E+03 3.5E+03 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 5.8E-02 5.8E-02 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.7E+03 1.7E+03 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 9.3E+03 9.3E+03 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium VI(hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.7E+01 2.7E+00 2.7E+00 c Page 3 of 4 1 /6/2016 Attachment Q - Table 4-17 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy cer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBCingestion - TR / Intakeing * CSF Intakeing (age group x) - [EPC]biota * IR * ABSING * EF * ED * C1 BWx * ATlifetime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC - THI ngestion - Intakeing / RfD Intakeing- [EPC]biota * IR * ABSing * EF * ED * C1 _ BW*AT Page 4 of 4 Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day) Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day HQ -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]biota Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg ABSing Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless B W 44 44 kg EF 365 365 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day I R 7.6 7.6 g/day C1 0.001 0.001 kg/g 1 /6/2016 Attachment R - Table 4.18 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - SUBSISTENCE(CHILD <6) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy COPC - chemical of potential concern ABS - absorption factor ABS - absorption factor NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route CSF - cancer slope factor Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available Intake Calculations COPC CASRN Intake,ng-ti— (mg/kg/day) Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values RBC,ngefi.nEl ABSING (unitless) CSF... I (mg/kg/day)"t Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NC Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NC Arsenic 7440-38-2 5.6E-04 1 1.5E+00 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NC Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NC Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NC Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NC Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NC Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NC Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NC Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NC Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NC Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NC Lead 7439-92-1 NC 1 NC Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NC Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NC Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NC Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NC Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NC Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NC Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NC Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NC Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NC Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NC Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NC Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NC Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NC Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NC Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NC Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 5.6E-03 1 5.0E-01 3.6E-02 3.6E-02 Page 1 of 4 1 /6/2016 Attachment R - Table 4-18 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - SUBSISTENCE(CHILD <6) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) r.npr. .. _ rh.-ir 1 of nnfanfial rnnrorn Rfn _ raforanra rinea NT/ _ nn Inririly vale is availahla ABS -absorption factor RBC - risk based concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN Intake„,,j,, ABSINo RfD,,,I RBCI,9asrl„ RBCr,I,i (mg/kglday) (unitless) (mg/kg/day) Aluminum 7429-90-5 6.5E-03 1 1.0E+00 1.5E+02 1.5E+02 Antimony 7440-36-0 6.5E-03 1 4.0E-04 6.1E-02 6.1E-02 Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.5E-03 1 3.0E-04 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 Barium 7440-39-3 6.5E-03 1 2.0E-01 3.1E+01 3.1E+01 Beryllium 744041-7 6.5E-03 1 2.0E-03 3.1E-01 3.1E-01 Boron 744042-8 6.5E-03 1 2.0E-01 3.1E+01 3.1E+01 Cadmium 744043-9 6.5E-03 1 1.0E-03 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 Calcium 7440-70-2 6.5E-03 1 NTV Chromium, Total 744047-3 6.5E-03 1 1.5E+00 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 Chromium III 16065-83-1 6.5E-03 1 1.5E+00 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 Cobalt 744048-4 6.5E-03 1 3.0E-04 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 Copper 7440-50-8 6.5E-03 1 4.0E-02 6.1E+00 6.1E+00 Iron 7439-89-6 6.5E-03 1 7.0E-01 1.1E+02 1.1E+02 Lead 7439-92-1 6.5E-03 1 NTV Magnesium 7439-95-4 6.5E-03 1 NTV Manganese 7439-96-5 6.5E-03 1 1.4E-01 2.1E+01 2.1E+01 Mercury 7439-97-6 6.5E-03 1 3.0E-04 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 6.5E-03 1 5.0E-03 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 Nickel 7440-02-0 6.5E-03 1 2.0E-02 3.1E+00 3.1E+00 Potassium 7440-09-7 6.5E-03 1 NTV Selenium 778249-2 6.5E-03 1 5.0E-03 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 Sodium 7440-23-5 6.5E-03 1 NTV Strontium 7440-24-6 6.5E-03 1 6.0E-01 9.2E+01 9.2E+01 Thallium 7440-28-0 6.5E-03 1 1.0E-05 1.5E-03 1.5E-03 Titanium 7440-32-6 6.5E-03 1 NTV Vanadium 7440-62-2 6.5E-03 1 5.0E-03 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 Zinc 7440-66-6 6.5E-03 1 3.0E-01 4.6E+01 4.6E+01 Nitrate 14797-55-8 6.5E-03 1 1.6E+00 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 Sulfide 18496-25-8 6.5E-03 1 NTV Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 6.5E-03 1 3.0E-03 4.6E-01 4.6E-01 Page 2 of 4 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment R - Table 4-18 Risk Based Concentrations Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - SUBSISTENCE(CHILD <6) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Target Cancer Risk(per Chemical 1 E-04 COPC - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; remedial goal not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum t429-9U-b 1.5E+U2 1.5E+U2 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 6.1 E-02 6.1 E-02 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 4.6E-02 1.2E-01 4.6E-02 nc Barium 7440-39-3 3.1E+01 3.1E+01 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 3.1E-01 3.1E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 3.1 E+01 3.1 E+01 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.3E+02 2.3E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 nc Copper 7440-50-8 6.1 E+00 6.1 E+00 nc Iron 7439-89-6 1.1 E+02 1.1E+02 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 2.1 E+01 2.1 E+01 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 3.1 E+00 3.1 E+00 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 9.2E+01 9.2E+01 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 1.5E-03 1.5E-03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 7.7E-01 7.7E-01 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.6E+01 4.6E+01 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 4.6E-01 3.6E-02 3.6E-02 c 1 /6/2016 Attachment R - Table 4-18 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy cer-Risk Based Concentration RBCingestion - TR / Intakeing * CSF Intakeing (age group x) - Ingestion [EPC]biota * IR * ABSING * EF * ED * C1 BWx * ATlifetime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration Goal for Ingestion RBC - THI ngestion - Intakeing / RfD Intake - [EPC]biote * IR * ABSing * EF * ED * C1 ng_ BW*AT Page 4 of 4 Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day) Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day HQ -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]biota Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg ABSing Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 15 15 kg EF 365 365 day/year ED 6 6 year AT -- 2190 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day I R 98 98 g/day C1 0.001 0.001 kg/g 1 /6/2016 Attachment R - Table 4.18 Risk Based Concentrations - Cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - SUBSISTENCE(ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy COPC - chemical of potential concern ABS - absorption factor ABS - absorption factor NC - not carcinogenic by this exposure route CSF - cancer slope factor Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 RBC - risk based concentration NTV - no toxicity value available Intake Calculations COPC CASRN Intake,ng-ti— (mg/kg/day) Absorption Factors Cancer Toxicity Values RBC,ngefi.nEl ABSING (unitless) CSF... I (mg/kg/day)"t Aluminum 7429-90-5 NC NC NC Antimony 7440-36-0 NC NC NC Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.0E-04 1 1.5E+00 2.2E-01 2.2E-01 Barium 7440-39-3 NC NC NC Beryllium 7440-41-7 NC NC NC Boron 7440-42-8 NC NC NC Cadmium 7440-43-9 NC NC NC Calcium 7440-70-2 NC NC NC Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 NC NC NC Chromium III 16065-83-1 NC NC NC Cobalt 7440-48-4 NC NC NC Copper 7440-50-8 NC NC NC Iron 7439-89-6 NC NC NC Lead 7439-92-1 NC 1 NC Magnesium 7439-95-4 NC NC NC Manganese 7439-96-5 NC NC NC Mercury 7439-97-6 NC NC NC Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NC NC NC Nickel 7440-02-0 NC NC NC Potassium 7440-09-7 NC NC NC Selenium 7782-49-2 NC NC NC Sodium 7440-23-5 NC NC NC Strontium 7440-24-6 NC NC NC Thallium 7440-28-0 NC NC NC Titanium 7440-32-6 NC NC NC Vanadium 7440-62-2 NC NC NC Zinc 7440-66-6 NC NC NC Nitrate 14797-55-8 NC NC NC Sulfide 18496-25-8 NC NC NC Chromium A (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 3.0E-04 1 5.0E-01 6.6E-01 6.6E-01 Page 1 of 4 1 /6/2016 Attachment R - Table 4-18 Risk Based Concentrations - Non -cancer -Based Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - SUBSISTENCE(ADULT) Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy Exposure Routes Evaluated Ingestion Yes Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) r.npr. .. _ rh.-ir 1 of nnfanfial rnnrorn Rfn _ raforanra rinea NT/ _ nn Inririly vale is availahla ABS -absorption factor RBC - risk based concentration Intake Calculations Absorption Factors Non -Cancer Toxicity Values COPC CASRN Intakei„a,ml,, ABSINo RfDo,al RBCmyasmo RBCrol,i (mg/k /day) (unitless) (mg/kg/day) Aluminum 7429-90-5 2.1E-03 1 1.0E+00 4.7E+02 4.7E+02 Antimony 7440-36-0 2.1E-03 1 4.0E-04 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.1E-03 1 3.0E-04 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 Barium 7440-39-3 2.1E-03 1 2.0E-01 9.4E+01 9.4E+01 Beryllium 744041-7 2.1E-03 1 2.0E-03 9.4E-01 9.4E-01 Boron 744042-8 2.1E-03 1 2.0E-01 9.4E+01 9.4E+01 Cadmium 744043-9 2.1E-03 1 1.0E-03 4.7E-01 4.7E-01 Calcium 7440-70-2 2.1E-03 1 NTV Chromium, Total 744047-3 2.1E-03 1 1.5E+00 7.1E+02 7.1E+02 Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.1E-03 1 1.5E+00 7.1E+02 7.1E+02 Cobalt 744048-4 2.1E-03 1 3.0E-04 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 Copper 7440-50-8 2.1E-03 1 4.0E-02 1.9E+01 1.9E+01 Iron 7439-89-6 2.1E-03 1 7.0E-01 3.3E+02 3.3E+02 Lead 7439-92-1 2.1 E-03 1 NTV Magnesium 7439-95-4 2.1E-03 1 NTV Manganese 7439-96-5 2.1E-03 1 1.4E-01 6.6E+01 6.6E+01 Mercury 7439-97-6 2.1E-03 1 3.0E-04 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.1E-03 1 5.0E-03 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 Nickel 7440-02-0 2.1E-03 1 2.0E-02 9.4E+00 9.4E+00 Potassium 7440-09-7 2.1E-03 1 NTV Selenium 778249-2 2.1E-03 1 5.0E-03 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 Sodium 7440-23-5 2.1E-03 1 NTV Strontium 7440-24-6 2.1E-03 1 6.0E-01 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 Thallium 7440-28-0 2.1E-03 1 1.0E-05 4.7E-03 4.7E-03 Titanium 7440-32-6 2.1E-03 1 NTV Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.1E-03 1 5.0E-03 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 Zinc 7440-66-6 2.1E-03 1 3.0E-01 1.4E+02 1.4E+02 Nitrate 14797-55-8 2.1E-03 1 1.6E+00 7.5E+02 7.5E+02 Sulfide 18496-25-8 2.1E-03 1 NTV Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 2.1E-03 1 3.0E-03 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 Page 2 of 4 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 4 Attachment R - Table 4-18 Risk Based Concentration Summary Derivation of Risk Based Concentrations - Biota Off -Site Fisher - OFF -SITE FISHER - SUBSISTENCE(ADULT) Exposure Routes Evaluated Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Ingestion Yes Duke Energy Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1 E+00 Taraet Cancer Risk (Der Chemical) 1 E-04 - chemical of potential concern nc - risk based concentration based on non -cancer hazard index c - risk based concentration based on cancer risk NA - no toxicity value available; risk based concentration not calculated COPC CASRN Risk Based Concentration Non -Cancer (mg/kg) Cancer (mg/kg) Final (mg/kg) Basis Aluminum /4Z`J-`JU-0 4./t*Uz 4./t*Uz nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.4E-01 2.2E-01 1.4E-01 nc Barium 7440-39-3 9.4E+01 9.4E+01 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 9.4E-01 9.4E-01 nc Boron 7440-42-8 9.4E+01 9.4E+01 nc Cadmium 7440-43-9 4.7E-01 4.7E-01 nc Calcium 7440-70-2 NA Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 7.1E+02 7.1E+02 nc Chromium III 16065-83-1 7.1E+02 7.1E+02 nc Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 nc Copper 7440-50-8 1.9E+01 1.9E+01 nc Iron 7439-89-6 3.3E+02 3.3E+02 nc Lead 7439-92-1 NA Magnesium 7439-95-4 NA Manganese 7439-96-5 6.6E+01 6.6E+01 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 9.4E+00 9.4E+00 nc Potassium 7440-09-7 NA Selenium 7782-49-2 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 nc Sodium 7440-23-5 NA Strontium 7440-24-6 2.8E+02 2.8E+02 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 4.7E-03 4.7E-03 nc Titanium 7440-32-6 NA Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.4E+00 2.4E+00 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 1.4E+02 1.4E+02 nc Nitrate 14797-55-8 7.5E+02 7.5E+02 nc Sulfide 18496-25-8 NA Chromium VI (hexavalent) 18540-29-9 1.4E+00 6.6E-01 6.6E-01 c 1 /6/2016 Table 4-18 Risk Based Concentration Calculations Human Health Risk Assessment for CAMA Sites Duke Energy cer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBCingestion - TR / Intakeing * CSF Intakeing (age group x) - [EPC]biota * IR * ABSING * EF * ED * C1 BWx * ATlifetime Noncancer-Risk Based Concentration for Ingestion RBC - THI ngestion - Intakeing / RfD Intakeing- [EPC]biote * IR * ABSing * EF * ED * C1 _ BW*AT Page 4 of 4 Parameter Value - Cancer Value - Non -Cancer Units CSF Chemical specific -- (mg/kg-day) Intake Age/chemical specific -- mg/kg-day ELCR Age/chemical specific -- unitless RfD -- Chemical specific mg/kg-day HQ -- Age/chemical specific unitless [EPC]biota Chemical specific Chemical specific mg/kg ABSing Chemical specific Chemical specific unitless BW 80 80 kg EF 365 365 day/year ED 10 10 year AT -- 3650 day ATlifetime 25550 -- day I R 170 170 g/day C1 0.001 0.001 kg/g 1 /6/2016 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT 5 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATION TABLES SynTerra ATTACHMENT 5 TABLE 5-1 SUMMARY OF EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS HUMAN HEALTH - GROUNDWATER HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Constituent Reporting Units Number of Samples Frequency of Detection Minimum Detected Concentration Maximum Detected Concentration Mean of Detected Concentration Type of UCL Selected UCL ca) EPC tb) EPC (mg/L) Aluminum pg/L 803 763 2.253 3,790 100.2 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 130.5 130.5 0.1305 Antimony pg/L 1,484 40 0.336 5.63 1.042 KM H-UCL NA 5.63 0.00563 Arsenic Ng/L 1,537 320 0.0842 26.4 2.273 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 1.106 1.106 0.001106 Barium pg/L 1,480 1,453 5 1,610 120.5 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 137.7 137.7 0.1377 Beryllium pg/L 1,413 13 1.02 17.3 5.717 95% KM Approximate Gamma UCL 0.281 0.281 0.000281 Boron pg/L 1,537 821 3.9 53,800 4,949 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 3,455 3,455 3.455 Chromium (Total) pg/L 1,537 445 0.034 69.7 2.276 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 1.358 1.358 0.001358 Chromium (VI) pg/L 654 313 0.025 7.1 0.377 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 0.282 0.282 0.000282 Cobalt pg/L 1,484 537 0.335 755 14.01 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 8.609 8.609 0.008609 Lithium pg/L 1,015 523 1.697 739 25.55 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 23.74 23.74 0.02374 Manganese pg/L 856 699 0.231 30,000 1,029 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 1,231 1,231 1.231 Mercury pg/L 1,480 111 0.017 1.11 0.115 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 0.0392 0.0392 0.0000392 Molybdenum pg/L 1,484 1,196 0.096 3,140 39.05 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 57.45 57.45 0.05745 Nickel pg/L 799 401 0.345 808 15.38 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 16.2 16.2 0.0162 Radium (Total) pCi/L 1,056 878 0 58.8 1.572 99% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 2.216 2.216 NA Selenium pg/L 1,537 361 0.103 416 29.68 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 10.51 10.51 0.01051 Strontium pg/L 790 789 67 9,370 619 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 716 716 0.7156 Thallium pg/L 1,480 85 0.082 0.762 0.17 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 0.136 0.136 0.000136 Vanadium pg/L 797 737 0.121 41.5 5.709 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 6.512 6.512 0.006512 Zinc /L 799 250 1.64 1,060 31.95 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 21.44 21.44 0.02144 * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: EPC - exposure point concentration pg/L - micrograms per liter mg/L - milligrams per liter UCL - 95% Upper Confidence Limit Prepared by: HES Checked by: ARE (a) - The 95% UCL values are calculated using the ProUCL software (V. 5.0; USEPA, 2013a). The ProUCL software performs a goodness -of -fit test that accounts for data sets without any non -detect observations, as well as data sets with non -detect observations. The software then determines the distribution of the data set for which the EPC is being derived (e.g., normal, lognormal, gamma, or non -discernable), and then calculates a conservative and stable 95% UCL value in accordance with the framework described in "Calculating Upper Confidence Limits for Exposure Point Concentrations at Hazardous Waste Sites" (USEPA, 2002b). The software includes numerous algorithms for calculating 95% UCL values, and provides a recommended UCL value based on the algorithm that is most applicable to the statistical distribution of the data set. Sample size was greater than or equal to 10 and the number of detected values was greater than or equal to 6, therefore, a 95% UCL was calculated by ProUCL. The UCL shown is the one recommended by ProUCL. If more than one UCL was recommended, the higher UCL was selected. (b) - The EPC is the lesser of the maximum detected concentration and the calculated 95% UCL. Where too few samples or detects are available, the maximum detected concentration is used as the EPC. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 5 TABLE 5-2 SUMMARY OF EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS HUMAN HEALTH - SEDIMENT HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Reporting Number Frequency Minimum Maximum Mean Detected Constituent of of Detected Detected Type of UCL Selected UCL ca> EPC (b) Units Samples Detection Concentration Concentration Concentration Aluminum mg/kg 5 5 15,000 22,000 18,800 --- --- 22,000 Arsenic mg/kg 5 4 0.52 1.8 1.19 --- --- 1.8 Cobalt mg/kg 5 5 12 16 13 --- --- 16 Manganese mg/kg 5 5 360 1,000 552 --- --- 1,000 Vanadium mg/kg 5 5 59 87 75 --- --- 87 * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: ---: 95% UCL was not calculated due to insufficient sample size or frequency of detection EPC - exposure point concentration mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram NA - Not applicable UCL - 95% Upper Confidence Limit Prepared by: HES Checked by: ARD (a) - The 95% UCL values are calculated using the ProUCL software (V. 5.0; USEPA, 2013a). The ProUCL software performs a goodness -of -fit test that accounts for data sets without any non -detect observations, as well as data sets with non -detect observations. The software then determines the distribution of the data set for which the EPC is being derived (e.g., normal, lognormal, gamma, or non -discernable), and then calculates a conservative and stable 95% UCL value in accordance with the framework described in "Calculating Upper Confidence Limits for Exposure Point Concentrations at Hazardous Waste Sites" (USEPA, 2002b). The software includes numerous algorithms for calculating 95% UCL values, and provides a recommended UCL value based on the algorithm that is most applicable to the statistical distribution of the data set. Sample size was greater than or equal to 10 and the number of detected values was greater than or equal to 6, therefore, a 95% UCL was calculated by ProUCL. The UCL shown is the one recommended by ProUCL. If more than one UCL was recommended, the higher UCL was selected. (b) - The EPC is the lesser of the maximum detected concentration and the calculated 95% UCL. Where too few samples or detects are available, the maximum detected concentration is used as the EPC. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 5 TABLE 5-3 SUMMARY OF EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS HUMAN HEALTH - ONSITE SURFACE WATER HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Constituent Reportin g Units Number of Samples Frequency of Detection Minimum Detected Concentration Maximum Detected Concentration Mean Detected Concentration Type of UCL Selected UCL (a) EPC tb) EPC (mg/L) Aluminum Ng/L 19 19 145 5,460 511.4 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1,712 1,712 1.712 Barium Ng/L 19 19 28 4,990 291.6 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1,429 1,429 1.429 Boron Ng/L 19 19 594 5,510 902 95% Modified-t UCL 1,389 1,389 1.389 Chromium (VI) ug/L 19 19 0.038 0.065 0.0561 95% Student's-t UCL 0.0587 0.0587 0.0000587 Manganese Ng/L 19 19 48 5,110 349.2 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1,503 1,503 1.503 Strontium Ng/L 19 19 112 4,990 376.4 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1,494 1,494 1.494 Zinc Ng/L 19 12 1.742 4,950 416.4 99% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 2,897 2,897 2.897 * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: EPC - exposure point concentration pg/L - micrograms per liter mg/L - milligrams per liter UCL - 95% Upper Confidence Limit Prepared by: HES Checked by: ARD (a) - The 95% UCL values are calculated using the ProUCL software (V. 5.0; USEPA, 2013a). The ProUCL software performs a goodness -of -fit test that accounts for data sets without any non -detect observations, as well as data sets with non - detect observations. The software then determines the distribution of the data set for which the EPC is being derived (e.g., normal, lognormal, gamma, or non -discernable), and then calculates a conservative and stable 95% UCL value in accordance with the framework described in "Calculating Upper Confidence Limits for Exposure Point Concentrations at Hazardous Waste Sites" (USEPA, 2002b). The software includes numerous algorithms for calculating 95% UCL values, and provides a recommended UCL value based on the algorithm that is most applicable to the statistical distribution of the data set. Sample size was greater than or equal to 10 and the number of detected values was greater than or equal to 6, therefore, a 95% UCL was calculated by ProUCL. The UCL shown is the one recommended by ProUCL. If more than one UCL was recommended, the higher UCL was selected. (b) - The EPC is the lesser of the maximum detected concentration and the calculated 95% UCL. Where too few samples or detects are available, the maximum detected concentration is used as the EPC. Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT G HUMAN HEALTH RISK ESTIMATES SynTerra ATTACHMENT 6 TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF ON -SITE SEDIMENT EPC/RBC COMPARISON ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 to <16) HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC SEMORA, NC COPC CAS Risk -Based Concentration On -site Sediment Risk Ratio Non -Cancer Cancer Final Basis Exposure Point Concentration Non -Cancer Cancer (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Aluminum 7429-90-5 3.6E+07 nc 3.6E+07 nc 22,000 0.001 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.1E+03 9.5E+03 6.1E+03 nc 2 0.0003 3.1E-08 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.1E+04 nc 1.1E+04 nc 16 0.001 nc Manganese 7439-96-5 5.0E+05 nc 5.0E+05 nc 1,000 0.002 nc Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.8E+05 nc 1.8E+05 nc 87 0.0005 nc Cumulative Ratio 0.005 1 3.1E-08 Cumulative ELCR 3.1E-12 Prepared by: HHS Checked by: TCP Notes: c - Remedial goal based on cancer risk COPC - Chemical of potential concern mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram nc - Remedial goal based on non -cancer hazard index The cumulative risk for potential carcinogenic effects is referred to as the excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR). The ELCR is the likelihood of contracting cancer over and above the background cancer rate. The risk value is also expressed as a probability (1E-04) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Particulate Inhalation No Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 6 TABLE 6-2 SUMMARY OF ON -SITE SURFACE WATER EPC/RBC COMPARISON ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6 to <16) HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC SEMORA, NC COPC CAS Risk -Based Concentration On -site Surface Water Risk Ratio Non -Cancer Cancer Final Basis Exposure Point Concentration Non -Cancer Cancer (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.3E+04 nc 1.3E+04 nc 2 0.0001 nc Barium 7440-39-3 5.5E+02 nc 5.5E+02 nc 1 0.003 nc Boron 7440-42-8 2.6E+03 nc 2.6E+03 nc 1 0.0005 nc Chromium (VI) 18540-29-9 1.7E+00 2.6E-01 2.6E-01 c 0.00006 0.0002 2.2E-04 Manganese 7439-96-5 2.4E+02 nc 2.4E+02 nc 2 0.006 nc Strontium 7440-24-6 7.7E+03 nc 7.7E+03 nc 1 0.0002 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 4.4E+03 nc 4.4E+03 nc 3 0.0007 nc Cumulative Ratio 0.01 2.2E-04 Cumulative ELCR 2.2E-08 Prepared by: HHS Checked by: TCP Notes: a Final RBC value for lead is 15 ug/L or surface/seep water exposures. Refer to Attachment D, Section 2.5 of the Mayo Steam Electric Plant CAP (SynTerra 2015). cn> Lead was not included in the cumulative risk calculation. c - Remedial goal based on cancer risk COPC - Chemical of potential concern mg/L - milligrams per liter nc - Remedial goal based on non -cancer hazard index The cumulative risk for potential carcinogenic effects is referred to as the excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR). The ELCR is the likelihood of contracting cancer over and above the background cancer rate. The risk value is also expressed as a probability (1E-04) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion No Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 6 TABLE 6-3 SUMMARY OF ON -SITE GROUNDWATER EPC/RBC COMPARISON CONSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER (ADULT) HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC SEMORA, NC COPC CAS Risk -Based Concentration On -Site Groundwater Risk Ratio Non -Cancer Cancer Final Basis Exposure Point Concentration Non -Cancer Cancer (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 9.6E+04 nc 9.6E+04 nc 0.1 0.000001 nc Antimony 7440-36-0 1.7E+01 nc 1.7E+01 nc 0.006 0.00032 nc Arsenic 7440-38-2 2.9E+01 4.5E+02 2.9E+01 nc 0.001 0.00004 8.58E-08 Barium 7440-39-3 5.0E+03 nc 5.0E+03 nc 0.1 0.00003 nc Beryllium 7440-41-7 4.8E+02 nc 4.8E+02 nc 0.0003 0.000001 nc Boron 7440-42-8 1.9E+04 nc 1.9E+04 nc 3 0.0002 nc Chromium, Total 7440-47-3 8.6E+03 nc 8.6E+03 nc 0.001 0.0000002 nc Chromium (VI) 18540-29-9 2.8E+01 7.6E+01 2.8E+01 nc 0.0003 0.00001 1.32E-07 Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.3E+02 nc 3.3E+02 nc 0.01 0.00003 nc Lithium 7439-93-2 NA 0.02 NC nc Manganese 7439-96-5 2.2E+03 nc 2.2E+03 nc 1 0.0006 nc Mercury 7439-97-6 5.0E+01 nc 5.0E+01 nc 0.00004 0.000001 nc Molybdenum 7439-98-7 4.8E+02 nc 4.8E+02 nc 0.06 0.0001 nc Nickel 7440-02-0 1.0E+03 nc 1.0E+03 nc 0.02 0.00002 nc Radium (Total) NA 0.002 NC nc Selenium 7782-49-2 4.8E+02 nc 4.8E+02 nc 0.01 0.00002 nc Strontium 7440-24-6 1.9E+05 nc 1.9E+05 nc 0.7 0.000004 nc Thallium 7440-28-0 NA 0.0001 NC nc Vanadium 7440 62-2 9.6E+02 nc 9.6E+02 nc 0.007 0.000007 nc Zinc 7440-66-6 3.1E+04 nc 3.1E+04 nc 0.02 1 0.000001 1 nc Cumulative Ratio 1 0.001 1 2.2E-07 IlCumulative ELCR 2.2E-11 jI Prepared by: HHS Checked by: TCP Notes: c - Remedial goal based on cancer risk COPC - Chemical of potential concern mg/L - milligrams per liter NA - No toxicity value available; remedial goal not calculated NC - Not Calculated nc - Remedial goal based on non -cancer hazard index The cumulative risk for potential carcinogenic effects is referred to as the excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR). The ELCR is the likelihood of contracting cancer over and above the background cancer rate. The risk value is also expressed as a probability (1E-04) Exposure Routes Evaluated Incidental Ingestion Yes Dermal Contact Yes Ambient Vapor Inhalation No Target Hazard Index (per Chemical) 1E+00 Target Cancer Risk (per Chemical) 1E-04 Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 6 TABLE 6-4 SUMMARY OF EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATION COMPARISON TO RISK -BASED CONCENTRATION HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC SEMORA, NC Cumulative Source Table Media Exposure Pathway Cumulative HI Cumulative HI Cumulative ELCR by (PRG Tables) by Media by Receptor ELCR by Media Receptor TABLE 6-1 Sediment - On -Site ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) 0.005 0.02 3.1E-12 2.2E-08 TABLE 6-2 iSurface Water - On -Site ON -SITE TRESPASSER - ADOLESCENT (AGE 6-<16) 0.011 2.2E-08 TABLE 6-3 Groundwater- On -Site 1CONSTRUCTION - CONSTRUCTION WORKER ADULT 0.001 0.001 2.2E-11 2.2E-11 Prepared by: HHS Checked by: TCP The cumulative risk for potential carcinogenic effects is referred to as the excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR). The ELCR is the likelihood of contracting cancer over and above the background cancer rate. The risk value is also expressed as a probability (1E-04). The total non -carcinogenic risk ratios for all COPCs that may produce non -carcinogenic health effects will be summed for each medium, for each exposure scenario. Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT 7 SynTerra ECOLOGICAL EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATION TABLES ATTACHMENT 7 TABLE 7-1 SUMMARY OF EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS ECOLOGICAL - SEDIMENT - WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Constituent Reporting units Number of Samples Frequency of Detection Minimum Detected Concentration Maximum Detected Concentration Mean Detected Concentration Type of UCL Selected UCL (a) EPC cb) Aluminum mg/kg 5 5 15,000 22,000 18,800 --- --- 22,000 Barium mg/kg 5 5 16 100 51.4 --- --- 100 Copper mg/kg 5 5 33 51 39.6 --- --- 51 Manganese mg/kg 5 5 360 1,000 552 --- --- 1,000 Selenium mg/kg 5 2 0.84 0.85 0.845 --- --- 0.85 Zinc mg/kg 5 5 26 56 40.4 --- --- 56 * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Prepared by: HES Checked by: ARD Notes: not a COPC for this media ---: 95% UCL was not calculated due to insufficient sample size or frequency of detection EPC - exposure point concentration mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram NA - Not applicable UCL - 95% Upper Confidence Limit (a) - The 95% UCL values are calculated using the ProUCL software (V. 5.0; USEPA, 2013a). The ProUCL software performs a goodness -of -fit test that accounts for data sets without any non -detect observations, as well as data sets with non -detect observations. The software then determines the distribution of the data set for which the EPC is being derived (e.g., normal, lognormal, gamma, or non -discernable), and then calculates a conservative and stable 95% UCL value in accordance with the framework described in "Calculating Upper Confidence Limits for Exposure Point Concentrations at Hazardous Waste Sites" (USEPA, 2002b). The software includes numerous algorithms for calculating 95% UCL values, and provides a recommended UCL value based on the algorithm that is most applicable to the statistical distribution of the data set. Sample size was greater than or equal to 10 and the number of detected values was greater than or equal to 6, therefore, a 95% UCL was calculated by ProUCL. The UCL shown is the one recommended by ProUCL. If more than one UCL was recommended, the higher UCL was selected. (b) - The EPC is the lesser of the maximum detected concentration and the calculated 95% UCL. Where too few samples or detects are available, the maximum detected concentration is used as the EPC. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 7 TABLE 7-2 SUMMARY OF EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS ECOLOGICAL - SURFACE WATER - WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Constituent Reporting Units Number of Samples Frequency of Detection Minimum Detected Concentration Maximum Detected Concentration Mean Detected Concentration Type of UCL Selected UCL (a) EPC tb) EPC (mg/L) Aluminum pg/L 19 19 145 5,460 511.4 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1,712 1,712 1.712 Barium pg/L 19 19 28 4,990 291.6 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1,429 1,429 1.429 Copper pg/L 19 19 1.47 2.02 1.638 95% Student's-t UCL 1.694 1.694 0.001694 Manganese pg/L 19 19 48 5,110 349.2 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1,503 1,503 1.503 Selenium pg/L 19 19 0.616 0.809 0.702 95% Student's-t UCL 0.719 0.719 0.000719 Zinc pg/L 19 12 1.742 4,950 416.4 99% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 2,897 2,897 2.897 * Data evaluated includes data from 2015 to 2nd quarter 2019, unless otherwise noted Notes: not a COPC for this media EPC - exposure point concentration Ng/L - micrograms per liter mg/L - milligrams per liter UCL - 95% Upper Confidence Limit Prepared by: HES Checked by: ARD (a) - The 95% UCL values are calculated using the ProUCL software (V. 5.0; USEPA, 2013a). The ProUCL software performs a goodness -of -fit test that accounts for data sets without any non -detect observations, as well as data sets with non -detect observations. The software then determines the distribution of the data set for which the EPC is being derived (e.g., normal, lognormal, gamma, or non -discernable), and then calculates a conservative and stable 95% UCL value in accordance with the framework described in "Calculating Upper Confidence Limits for Exposure Point Concentrations at Hazardous Waste Sites" (USEPA, 2002b). The software includes numerous algorithms for calculating 95% UCL values, and provides a recommended UCL value based on the algorithm that is most applicable to the statistical distribution of the data set. Sample size was greater than or equal to 10 and the number of detected values was greater than or equal to 6, therefore, a 95% UCL was calculated by ProUCL. The UCL shown is the one recommended by ProUCL. If more than one UCL was recommended, the higher UCL was selected. (b) - The EPC is the lesser of the maximum detected concentration and the calculated 95% UCL. Where too few samples or detects are available, the maximum detected concentration is used as the EPC. Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT 8 ECOLOGICAL RISK ESTIMATES SynTerra ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-1 EXPOSURE PARAMETERS FOR ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Dietary Composition Body Food Water Seasonal Plants Mammal/ Terr. Fish Invertebrates Birds Soil Parameter Weight Ingestion Rate Ingestion Rate Home Range Use Factor e Vertebrates Algorithm ID BW IRF IRW PF AM AF AI AB SF HR SUF Units kg kg/kg BW/day L/kg BW/day % % % % % % hectares unitless HERBIVORE Muskrat' 1.17 0.3 0.975 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2.0% 0.13 1 ` OMNIVORE 0 CL Mallard Duck 1.161 0.151 0.057 59% 0% 0% 38% 0% 3.3% 435 1 Q) y CARNIVORE Bald Ea le` 3.75 0.077 0.036 0% 28% 58% 0% 13.5% 0.5% 2,687 1 PISCIVORE p River Otter° 6.76 0.11 0.081 0% 0% 90% 10% 0% 0% 348 1 U W Great Blue Heron' 2.229 0.18 0.045 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 2.8% 750 1 INSECTIVORE Killdeerf 0.0711 0.464 0.141 0.0% 0% 0% 81% 0% 19% 6 1 Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Notes: Ag - Bird Ingestion Percentage AF - Fish Ingestion Percentage A, - Invertebrate Ingestion Percentage AM - Mammal Ingestion Percentage BW - Body Weight HR - Home Range IR - Ingestion Rate kg - Kilograms kg/kg BW/day - Kilograms Food per Kilograms Body Weight per Day L/kg BW/day - Liters Water per Kilogram Body Weight per Day Pr - Plant Matter Ingestion Percentage SF - Soil Ingestion Percentage SUF - Seasonal Use Factor e BW, IRF, IRW, PF, and HR from USEPA 1993 (sections 2-340 and 2-341); SF from Beyer 1994 (—d,h,,k—rog-d-) BW, IRW, PF, A�, and HR from USEPA 1993 (sections 2-43 and 2-45); SF from Beyer et al. 1994; IRF from Nagy 2001 (ea„an—ro—w .-b,-) ` BW, IRF, IRW, PF, AF, AM, Ae (Heywood a ohmen izs6), and HR from USEPA 1993 (sections 2-91 and 2-97) d BW (seene h,— 197e), IRw, AF, Al (A---.1f 1987) and HR from USEPA 1993 (sections 2-264 and 2-266); SF from Sample and Suter 1994; IRF from Nagy 2001 e BW (Q,—y 1"2), IRW, IRF, PF, AF, Al, and HR (Pe—b a S-1192s) from USEPA 1993 (sections 2-8 and 2-9); SF from Beyer et al. 2003 (W,bec ,—g-d-) 'BW from Dunning 1993; IRF from Nagy 2001 iegee,;o,, ror;setto;�oro„s b;rds�; IRW from USEPA 1993 (section 3.2.1, equation 3-15/3-16); SF from Beyer et al. 1994 (,ee� o„e„ge, Al e,.„ ed m be rememder); HR from Plissner et al. 2000 e Seasonal Use Factor is set to a default of 1 to be conservative and protective of ecological receptors. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-2 TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES FOR ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC TRVs (NOAEL) quatic Aquatic Mallard Duck (mg/kg/day) Great Blue Heron (mg/kg/day) Killdeer (mg/kg/day) Bald Eagle (mg/kg/day) Muskrat (mg/kg/day) River Otter (mg/kg/day) Aluminum' 110 110 110 110 1.93 1.93 Barium` 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 51.8 51.8 Copper' 4.05 4.05 4.05 4.05 5.6 1 5.6 Manganese' 179 179 179 179 51.5 51.5 Selenium' 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.143 0.143 Zinc' 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 75.4 75.4 Analyte TRVs (LOAEL) Aquatic Mallard Duck (mg/kg/day) Great Blue Heron (mg/kg/day) Killdeer (mg/kg/day) Bald Eagle (mg/kg/day) Muskrat (mg/kg/day) River Otter (mg/kg/day) Aluminum' 1100 1100 1100 1100 19.3 19.3 Barium` 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 75 75 Coppera 12.1 12.1 1 12.1 12.1 9.34 9.34 Manganese 348 348 348 348 71 71 Selenium' 0.579 0.579 0.579 0.579 0.215 0.215 Zinc' 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 75.9 75.9 Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Notes: LOAEL - Lowest Observed Effects Level mg/kg/day - milligrams per Kilogram per Day NOAEL - No Observed Adverse Effects Level TRV - Toxicity Reference Value a CH211 Hill. 2014. Tier 2 Risk -Based Soil Concentrations Protective of Ecological Receptors at the Hanford Site. CHPRC-01311. Revision 2. July. Http://pdw.hanford.gov/arpir/pdf.cfm?accession=0088115 ` Only a single paper (Johnson et al., 1960) with data on the toxicity of barium hydroxide to one avian species (chicken) was identified by USEPA (2005); therefore, an avian TRV could not be derived and an Eco-SSL could not be calculated for avian wildlife (calculation requires a minimum of three results for two test species). Johnson et al. (1960) reports a subchronic NOAEL of 208.26 mg/kg/d. The NOAEL was multiplied by an uncertainty factor of 0.1 to derive a very conservative TRV of 20.8 mg/kg/d. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-3 EXPOSURE AREA AND AREA USE FACTORS FOR ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Exposure Area Use Factor (AUF) Exposure Point Area' (hectares) Mallard Duck Great Blue Heron Killdeer Muskrat River Otter Bald Eagle WATER INTAKE BASIN 14.8 3.40% 1.979/o 100% 100% 4.25% 0.55%oj Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Notes: a The Water Intake Basin Exposure Area is north of the Gypsum Storage and Ash Basins and includes aquatic habitat. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-4 EPCs FOR USE IN THE RISK ASSESSMENT WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC COPC CASRN Aquatic EPCsa, b Sediment EPC Used in Risk Assessment` (mg/kg) Surface Water EPC Used in Risk Assessment (mg/L) Aluminum 7429-90-5 22,000 1.71 Barium 7440-39-3 100 1.43 Copper 7440-50-8 51 0.002 Man an se 7439-96-5 1,000 1.50 Selenium 1 7782-49-21 0.85 1 0.001 Zinc 1 7440-66-6 1 56 1 2.90 Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Notes• CASRN - Chemical Abstracts Service Registration Number COPC - Constituent of Potential Concern EPC - Exposure Point Concentration mg/L - milligrams per liter mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram a EPCs for surface water are based on 95% UCLs. EPCs for sediment are based on maximum concentrations. b Aquatic receptors in this area are evaluated using surface water and sediment data. Analysis of solids (i.e., soil and sediment) was reported as dry weight. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-S CALCULATION OF AVERAGE DAILY DOSES FOR MALLARD DUCK WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SENORA, NC man ®® � ... � �amm�am�a��®® ��a®a�� aa�� ®m�� ®��®�®ate ��a� ��a�� a� ATTACHMENTS TABLE 8-7 CALCULATION OF AVERAGE DAILY DOSES FOR KILLDEER WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SENORA, NC AVERAGE DAILY DOSE VIA, EPC„, EPC, EPC, OF ADD, SUF AUF ADD WATER INVERTEBRATES SOIL NIR„ I ADDw NIP, A, NIR. ADD. S, NIR, ADD, Slope gr Estimatetl Unadjusted Food Ingestion Invertebrates Unadjuataa Soil Ingestion Unadjusted Area Use Adjusted Total Analyte Invertebrate Uptake Imercep[ C in COPEC in (gpF) Concentration in Water Ingestion Average Daily Rate, Wet Fraction Diet Ingestion Rate, Average Daily Fraction Diet Rate, Dry Average Daily Bioivailability Insectivore Seasonal Factor Insectivore Water Water Solid Invertebrates' Rate (L/kg Dose Water (kg/kg Invertebrates Dry' (kg/kg Dose Soil (kg/kg Dose Boil, Dry (percent) Intake Use Factor (Exposure Average Daily (mg/L) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) BW/tlay) (mg/kg/Gay) BW/day) (percent) BW/day) Invertebrates, (percent) BW/day) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) (unitleaa) Area/Home Dose Dry(mg/kg/day) Range) (mg/kg/day) Aluminum 1.71 22,000 1 22.000 0,141 0.24 0.464 81% 0.083 1.820 19% 0.061 1.337 300% 3.157 1 Loo 3.152 Barium 1.43 300 1 300 0,141 0.20 0.464 81% 0.083 8 19% 0.061 6 300% 14.5 1 Loo 15 C""' 0.002 51 1.6 29 0,141 0,00024 0.464 81% 0.083 l 19% 0.061 3.1 300% 10 1 1.00 10 Manganese Selenium 1.50 1 0.001 1,000 1 0.65 O.7 0.2 -0.809 50 0.595 0,141 0-1 0.21 0.00010 0.464 0.464 81% 81% 0,083 0.083 4.1 0.05 19% 19% 0.061 0.061 61 0.1 300% 300% 65 0.1 1 1 1.00 1.00 65 -c 2.90 56 1.9 108 0. 141 —1 81 % 9 19 % 0.061 3.9 100% 13 1 1.1 3 ea v Dairy Dose mq/B- rea use a r kq/kq BW/a y msnogremsr Foaa par nib enF Bwaccumuueon Facmr Vkq BW/say - titers Water per nibgrem wavai abnrty Fa r easona sea r re polo oncentreeon `[Blank cell canstrtuent not eaeeee mykgB%m�IM1grams per wlagrem r inv , um 993 (Table qys) ctl cr, cu, g, n ro, and zn, p t al. vggab (eanM1wo�ms) ro xn, deroutt value of v w usetl mr cemstrtuents rorwM1wM1 a Bn>= ceuU rat be routs. e or ze menVzo�l azsumearobe 689%fprmtal.e�gnt gazed on average percent zolMz of samples uses In tniz exposure area. aioavailati ury is secmatlefault of voo^nmbe canservaeve antl proemve ofec g I p ATTACHMENTS TABLE 8-8 CALCULATION OF AVERAGE DAILY DOSES FOR BALD EAGLE WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SENORA, NC MENEM ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-9 CALCULATION OF AVERAGE DAILY DOSES FOR MUSKRAT WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC AVERAGE DAILY DOSE VIA: EPC„ EPC, EPC, BF ADD, SUF AUF ADD - WATER PLANTS/ VEGETATION SOIL Slope, or NIRW ADD„. P, NIRf NIR, ADD, S, NIR, ADD, Analyte Plant Intercept Estimated Water Unadjusted Fraction Food Plant Unadjusted Soil Unadjusted Area Use Adjusted Total Uptake COPt COP( in (BAF) Ingestion Ingestion Average Daily Fraction Ingestion Herbivore Seasonal Factor Herbivore r Waken Solid Concentration Rate Average Daily Diet Plant Rake, We! Ingestion Dose Plant, Die! Soil Rate,a Average Daily Bioavailabiliky° Intake Use (Exposure Av (m9/k9) In Vegetation' (L/kg Dose Water Matter (kg/kg Rate, Drys Dry (percent)(mg/kg/day) Dose Soil, Dry (percent) (mg/kg/day) (u niFactor Area/Home DailyDage ose(mg/L) (mg/kg) BW/day) (m9/k9/daY) (Percent) BW/day) kg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) BW/day) Range) I (mg/kg/day) Aluminum 1.71 22,000 0.0008 17.6000 0.975 1.67 100% 0.3 0.045 1 2% 0.004134 91 100% 93.41 1 1 93.41 Barium 1.43 100 0.03 3.0000 0.975 1.39 100% 0.3 0.045 0.13500 2% 0.004134 0.41340 100% 1.942 1 1 1.942 Copper 0.002 51 0.39 0.669 9.2 0.975 0.002 S00 % 0.3 0.045 0.41356 2 % 0.004134 0.21083 100% 0.63 1 1 0.63 Manganese 1.50 1,000 0.050 50.0 0.975 1.47 I00I 0.3 0.045 2.25000 2% 0.004134 4. 13400 100 % 7.85 1 1 7.85 Selenium 0.001 0.85 1.104 -0.678 0.4243 0.975 0.001 100% 0.3 0.045 0.01909 2% 0.004134 0.00351 100% 0.02 1 1 0.02 Zinc 2.90 56 0.555 1.575 45.1085 0.975 2.82 100% 0.3 0.045 2 2% 0.004134 0 100% 5.09 1 1 5.09 HAs3 IDI D111 Dose n rstwn Emlllg ftirt Iltece t mula[bn FaRor mg/kg - m091ams per kll0grsm n n r n or kg/kg BW/day - Kllogrsma Food per ologrsms Body WegM1t per Day r Vkg l3w-y - Lte Water par Kiwgram BMy WegM1t per Day C_-Co .1-t o, Fotentlal Concern NIR Normaiaed 1g- Fate Umpany 19-; Baes et al. 1-(M.); Environmental 0.ertoraaon Division - Manual EM-AG-003 1999; d-ft value of 1 is d Pon mnsatuencs Pon wM1kM1 a BAF..Id not be Pound. weigM1[ Por pWn[s assumetl III 15%of -1-re hl, basetl on II 111993 (Table 0-2). weight Por sedimenysoil assumetl to be 60.9% of total .re hl based on avea9e percent soild. of sampws usetl in -exposure area. BwavaiWbility is set to a default of 100% ro be conservative and protective of erowgiwl receptors. ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-10 CALCULATION OF AVERAGE DAILY DOSES FOR RIVER OTTER WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC AVERAGE DAILY DOSE VIA: EPCW EPCS EPCfish BF ADD, SUF AUF ADD,., DRINKING WATER FISH N I R,,,, ADD,,,, Pf N I Rf N I R., ADDa Fish Analyte Uptake (BCF) Estimated Unadjusted Fraction Diet Food Fish Unadjusted Area Use Adjusted Total COPC in COPC in Concentration Water Average Daily Animal Ingestion Ingestion Z Average Daily 3 Bioavailability Piscivore Seasonal Factor Piscivore Water Solid 1 Ingestion Rate Dose Water Matter Rate, Wet Rate, Dry Dose, Dry Intake Use Factor (Exposure Average Daily (mg/L) (mg/kg) in Fish (L/kg BW/day) (kg/kg (kg/kg (percent) (mg/kg/day) (unitless) Area/Home Dose (mg/kg) (mg/kg/day) (percent) (mg/kg/day) BW/day) BW/day) Range) (mg/kg/day) Aluminum 1.71 22,000 0.1 0.17 0.081 0.1 90% 0.107256248 0.024 0.004 100% 0.143 1 0.043 0.006 Barium 1.43 100 4 5.72 0.081 0.1 90% 0.107256248 0.024 0.1 100% 0.25 1 0.043 0.011 Copper 0.002 51 50 0.08 0.081 0.0001 90% 0.107256248 0.024 0.002 100% 0.0022 1 0.043 0.0001 Manganese 1.50 1,000 400 601 0.081 0.1 90% 0.107256248 0.024 14.5 100% 15 1 0.043 0.6 Selenium 0.001 0.85 8 0.01 0.081 0.0001 90% 0.107256248 0.024 0.0001 100% 0.0002 1 0.043 0.00001 Zinc 2.90 56 1 1000 1 2897 0.081 0.2 90% 0.107256248 0.024 69.9 100% 70 1 0.043 3.0 Notes: ADD - Average Daily Dose EPC - Exposure Point Concentration AUF - Area Use Factor mg/L - milligrams per liter BAF - Bioaccumulation Factor mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram BCF - Bioconcentration Factor kg/kg BW/day - Kilograms Food per Kilograms Body Weight per Day BF - Bioavailability Factor L/kg BW/day - Liters Water per Kilogram Body Weight per Day COPC - Constituent of Potential Concern NIR - Normalized Ingestion Rate ' Al (Voigt et al. 2015), mean of fish tissue BAFs; Cu (USEPA 1980); Environmental Restoration Division - Manual ERD-AG-003 1999. 2 Dry weight for vertebrates fish assumed to be 25% of wet weight, based on USEPA, 1993 (Table 4-1) ' Bioavailability is set to a default of 100% to be conservative and protective of ecological receptors. Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 8 TABLE 8-11 HAZARD QUOTIENTS FOR COPCs - AQUATIC RECEPTORS WATER INTAKE BASIN HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC Wildlife Receptor Hazard Quotient Estimated using the 'No Observed Adverse Effects Level' Analyte Aquatic Mallard Duck Great Blue Heron Killdeer Bald Eagle Muskrat River Otter Aluminum 1.09E-01 1.37E-02 2.87E+01 1.16E-02 4.84E+01 3.15E-03 Barium 2.82E-03 6.34E-04 7.00E-01 5.41E-05 3.75E-02 2.08E-04 Copper 1.09E-02 8.82E-04 2.39E+00 2.09E-04 1.12E-01 1.66E-05 Manganese 9.12E-04 3.37E-03 3.64E-01 2.18E-04 1.52E-01 1.21E-02 Selenium 1.89E-03 2.21E-04 3.48E-01 1.27E-04 1.63E-01 5.86E-05 Zinc 1.20E-03 3.90E-02 1.93E-01 2.81E-03 6.75E-02 3.96E-02 Wildlife Receptor Hazard Quotient Estimated using the 'Lowest Observed Adverse Effects Level' Analyte Aquatic Mallard Duck Great Blue Heron Killdeer Bald Eagle Muskrat River Otter Aluminum 1.09E-02 1.37E-03 2.87E+00 1.16E-03 4.84E+00 3.15E-04 Barium 1.41E-03 3.16E-04 3.49E-01 2.70E-05 2.59E-02 1.44E-04 Copper 3.64E-03 2.95E-04 7.99E-01 6.99E-05 6.70E-02 9.93E-06 Manganese 4.69E-04 1.73E-03 1.87E-01 1.12E-04 1.11E-01 8.76E-03 Selenium 9.46E-04 1.11E-04 1.74E-01 6.34E-05 1.08E-01 3.90E-05 Zinc 1.19E-03 3.88E-02 1.92E-01 2.79E-03 6.70E-02 3.93E-02 Notes: COPC - constituent of potential concern NM - not measured Hazard Quotients greater than or equal to 1 are highlighted in gray and in boldface. Prepared by: TCP Checked by: HES Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant ATTACHMENT 9 SynTerra FEDERAL AND STATE LISTED PROTECTED SPECIES ATTACHMENT 9 TABLE 9-1 FEDERAL AND STATE LISTED PROTECTED SPECIES HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NC Taxonomic Group Scientific Name Common Name NC Status Federal Status Amphibian Ambystoma talpoideum Mole Salamander SC none Amphibian Hemidactylium scutatum Four -toed Salamander SC none Amphibian Hyla versicolor Gray Treefrog SC none Amphibian Necturus lewisi Neuse River Waterdog SC PT Freshwater Bivalve Fusconaia masoni Atlantic Pigtoe E PT Freshwater Bivalve Lampsilis cariosa Yellow Lampmussel E none Freshwater Bivalve Lasmigona subviridis Green Floater E ARS Freshwater Bivalve Alasmidonta undulata Triangle Floater T none Freshwater Bivalve Alasmidonta heterodon Dwarf Wedgemussel none E Freshwater Bivalve Lampsilis radiata Eastern Lampmussel T none Freshwater Bivalve Noturus furiosus Carolina Madton none ARS Freshwater Bivalve Strophitus undulatus Creeper T none Freshwater Bivalve Villosa constricta Notched Rainbow T none Freshwater Fish Notropis volucellus Mimic Shiner T none Freshwater Fish Etheostoma Collis Carolina Darter SC none Vascular Plant Baptisia aberrans (syn. Baptisia australis var. aberrans) Prairie Blue Wild Indigo E none Vascular Plant Delphinium exaltatum Tall Larkspur E none Vascular Plant Scutellaria nervosa Veined Skullcap E none Vascular Plant Gillenia stipulate Indian Physic T none Definitions of Federal and NC Status Codes: E=Endangered T=Threatened PT=Proposed Threatened SC=Species of Special Concern ARS=At Risk Species References: Prepared by: ARD Checked by: USFWS, 2019. Endangered and Threatened Species and Species of Concern by County for North Carolina. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_counties.html Natural Heritage Program (NHP). Natural and Cultural Resources, 2019. Available at https://www.ncnhp.org/data/species-community-search Page 1 of 1 Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment December 2019 Duke Energy Progress, LLC -Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra ATTACHMENT 10 DUKE ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT Duke Energy Environmental Assessment of the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant Regulatory Requirements The Roxboro Steam Station Plant (Roxboro Plant) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (NC00003425) requires Duke Energy to conduct an environmental monitoring program on Hyco Reservoir under a study plan approved by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). The program includes reservoir surface water sampling, fish and sediment sampling for select trace elements, and fish community assessment. The program data is reported to NCDEQ in environmental monitoring reports to support the NPDES permit requirement. Hyco Reservoir Sampling Program Currently, Duke Energy maintains a robust sampling program to assess potential effects of the Roxboro Plant operations on Hyco Reservoir. This program includes quarterly surface water quality measurements and chemistry samples collected on an annual basis at five locations throughout the reservoir. Fish community surveys are conducted quarterly at the same locations. Additionally, up to 60 fish of three different species are collected annually for tissue analysis at the discharge area and an upstream location for comparison. Routine monitoring reports (e.g., Duke Energy 2017), provide detailed information on the results from this sampling program. From a limnological, or whole -lake ecological system, perspective the studies show that Hyco Reservoir has good water quality, a healthy fishery and no evidence of impacts from anthropogenic influences. For the purposes of this assessment, relevant data from 2000 through 2018 are presented below. Water Quality Assessment Duke Energy has monitored water quality and chemistry in the Hyco Reservoir since the 1970s. In all, roughly 5,120 sampling events resulting in approximately 36,000 individual measurements. For the period from 2000-2018, water quality assessments have shown that Hyco Reservoir is safe from coal ash impacts as summarized below. Surface water concentrations of select parameters commonly associated with coal combustion residuals are well below the state surface water quality standards (known as the 2B standards for aquatic life and human health protection) in Hyco Reservoir for all designated uses of the waterbody, including drinking water supply (results are in pg/L). Chemical Range Average Standard Arsenic 0.1 - 4.8 1.09 10 Barium 6 - 52 35.3 1000 Chloride 0.531 - 118 25.9 250 Nickle 0.5 - 1.93 1.08 25 Selenium 0.5 - 4.78 1.09 5 Sulfate 3.14 - 78.8 18.5 250 Fish Community Assessment The fish community of a waterbody can be a strong indicator of the underlying aquatic system health. In Hyco Reservoir the fish community is typical of southeastern piedmont man-made reservoirs with the sunfish family Centrarchidae being the dominant of eight different families present in the system. From 2000 through 2018, the number of species collected by electrofishing annually ranged from 19 to 26 from eight families. Bluegill was the most abundant species in Hyco Reservoir serving as both an intermediate predator and prey within the aquatic community. The apex predator in the community is Largemouth Bass. Green Sunfish, Redear Sunfish, and Black Crappie were other plentiful centrarchids. Clupieds (herrings), including the Gizzard Shad and Threadfin Shad, were also present in reasonably large numbers. Predator species like Largemouth Bass need the open water schooling clupieds for growth beyond a size range that are more reliant on smaller prey species (e.g., benthic macroinvertebrates and small sunfish). Satinfin Shiner, Notchlip Redhorse, White Catfish, and Channel Catfish were also important components of the fish community. Focusing on the dominant centrarchids, Bluegill and Largemouth Bass young -of -year and juvenile/adult fish in Hyco Reservoir exhibited cyclical increases and decreases in total numbers in annual surveys from 2000 through 2018. It is important to note that biomass of these species usually follows similar cyclical trends overtime. These fluctuations are indicative of expected population dynamics in systems through time that are normal responses to drivers such as predator —prey interactions, environmental variations (e.g., high rainfall and flow years, drought years, intensity of storms, reservoir drawdown, etc.) and to a lesser extent, single -species non- linear dynamics (Shelton and Mangel 2011). In the variable environment, anthropogenic interactions (i.e., fishing mortality) tend to accentuate the population fluctuations. Despite the cyclical density and biomass fluctuations, these species sustained healthy reproducing populations evident by the presence of both young and juvenile/adult groups within fish community through time (Progress Energy 2008; Duke Energy 2017). 1400 1200 'on 1000 v m 800 0 v 600 E :5 400 z 200 2000 2002 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 Year Young -of -year Bluegill Juvenile/Adult Bluegill Young -of -year Largemouth Bass Juvenile/Adult Largemouth Bass 350 300 a CO 250 0 200 v on L 150 20 0 100 v E 50 z Concerning the long-term interaction of the Roxboro Plant heated water discharge with the aquatic community, the Hyco Reservoir fish population has stood the test of time. To demonstrate balance, an aquatic population/community must continuously produce both predator and prey species in numbers reflecting the trophic status of the system by reproducing and recruiting adequately. Several regionally common predator species including adult Largemouth Bass, Black Crappie, Channel Catfish, and Yellow Perch have and continue to thrive in Hyco Reservoir. Also, many forage species exist and thrive in the reservoir as well, including Bluegill, Redear Sunfish, Gizzard Shad, Threadfin Shad, and Satinfin Shiner. Fish Tissue Analyses As required in the NPDES permit, Duke Energy monitors trace elements in fish muscle tissues from different feeding guilds (piscivore, insectivore, and omnivore) annually, including selenium. These constituents are commonly associated with coal ash and can have fish and human health impacts. Results are submitted to the NCDEQ through the permit required environmental monitoring reports. Largemouth Bass, Bluegill, and White Catfish, were trended over time from 2000 through 2018 by analyzing muscle tissues annually from at least 10 individuals of each species from two different locations combined. Selenium in the three species of fish exhibited mean concentrations ranging between approximately 2 to 14 pg/g dry weight with increasing and decreasing trendlines over the observation period. The fluctuations observed were related primarily to changing operational dispatch rates (i.e., generation capacity factor) and the addition of wet flue gas desulfurization air pollution control technology to the four units beginning in 2008. The period from about 2013 to present show that selenium concentrations have trended down in recent years, between 70% to 80% depending on species, along with decreasing dispatch. This trend is expected to continue with more reliance on natural gas -fired generation for the foreseeable future. 16 E 14 a 12 10 8 U 0 6 U v 4 Ln L 2 r) 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year — • • Mean Bluegill Se Concentration — — — Mean White Catfish Se Concentration • • • • • • Mean Largemouth Bass Se Concentration All selenium measurements in fish from Hyco Reservoir during the assessment observation period were well below the human consumption advisory level. For this comparison, Duke Energy used an approximation of the North Carolina consumption advisory for fish tissue of 10 fag/g wet weight (NCDEQ 2013) to compare against. This conversion (50 tag/g dry weight converted value) was calculated from average wet weight moisture yield from fish. Overall Health of Hyco Reservoir As stated above, Hyco Reservoir has been monitored by Duke Energy since the late 1970s. As such, it is well known that there were impacts to the aquatic during the 1970s and 1980s from selenium in the plant discharges. However, after the discovery of the cause and reduction of selenium in the discharges in 1989, the impacts were gradually eliminated and Hyco Reservoir recovered and has maintained overall good health since the early 2000s. The assessments carried out by Duke Energy have demonstrated that Hyco Reservoir has been an environmentally healthy and functioning ecosystem for almost 20 years. Data from these assessments indicate that the systems installed at the Roxboro Plant for the protection of the water quality, the aquatic community, and human health have been effective. References Duke Energy. 2017. Roxboro Steam Electric Plant 2016 environmental monitoring report. Duke Energy Progress, Raleigh, NC. NCDEQ. 2013. Standard operating procedures; fish tissue assessments. Division of Water Resources, Environmental Sciences Section, Intensive Survey Branch, Raleigh, NC. Progress Energy. 2008. Roxboro Steam Electric Plant 2007 environmental monitoring report. Progress Energy Carolinas, Raleigh, NC. Shelton, A. O. and M. Mangel. 2011. Fluctuations in fish populations and the magnifying effects of fishing. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 108 (17): 7075-7080.