WQ0000020 Aville Arpt Correspondence 12-'17

Laverty, Brett
From: Toepfer, John R <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2017 3:05 PM
To: Davidson, Landon; Laverty, Brett
Cc: Nordgren, Scott R.; Hill, Tim S.; Weisker, Brian R; Renner, Dave; Culbert, Erin; Kafka,
Michael T.; Pickett, Matt; Struble, Steven I; Summerville, Allison Y.; Sullivan, Ed M; Wells,
James; Draovitch, Paul; Czop, Ryan; Karably, Ken; Maibodi, Mehdi; McNash, James-
geosyntec; [e-mail]; John Coon [e-mail]); Michael A. Reisman
([e-mail]); Williams, Teresa Lynne; Cranford, Chuck; Whisnant, Garry A; Walls,
Jason A; Peoples, Danielle; Norman Divers; Woodward, Tina; Todd, Shannon
Subject: [External]Asheville Airport NOV Response- December 29, 2017
Attachments: 12-29-2017 Asheville Airport-Response to NOV.pdf; ARA_Area_1
—NOV Comment_Response_Duke—FINAL.pdf
�CAUTBC)N EExtefnal email £Do t cli nock tmks orb
"'pgq attachments unless verified Send ail suspicious emapI as an attachment toy rya,j
Landon and Brett—attached is the Duke Energy cover letter to the NOV at the Asheville Airport,Area I structural fill
along with a Duke Energy letter response. As the attachments are too large to email, please access the link below to find
the following:
Attachment A—McKim and Creed Survey
Attachment B—SynTerra Technical Memo
Attachment C—Geosyntec Engineering Analysis Report
Attachment D—Emergency Response Plan
https:Hgeosyntec-
my.sharepoint.com/personal/4mcnash geosyntec com/ layouts/15/guestaccess.aspx?folderid=1aa906f58744c4945917
6cc4509e83cOb&authkev=Aa Ufc6YlQbVgmwOa4RueCPA&e=90358eda5b2c427e9c0e77f93765518e
A hard copy of the attached and the information at the link was sent via USPS. Please let me know of questions
regarding the NOV response. thanks
cc line—please file accordingly, no hard copies will be sent.
John R. Toepfer, P.E.
Duke Energy
Lead Engineer
410 S.Wilmington Street/NC15
Raleigh, NC 27601
919-546-7863 phone
919-632-3714 cell
919-546-3669 fax
1

DUKE:
400 South Tryon Street
• Mail Code•ST 06A
ENERGY® 2
Charlotte,NC,2820
December 29,2017 _ t
Division criResources
Mr. G. Landon Davidson,.P.G::: - -
Regional'Supervisor-.Water Quality.Regional Operations
_.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality JAN - 2 2018
Division:of Water Resources Asheville Regional::Office
op
2090 U.S.Highway 70 .
Swannanoa, North Carolina 28778 Water Quarty negionai operations.,
_.
Subject-.:Response to Notice of Violation (NOV 2017-PC-0616).
Permit No..WQ0000020
Duke Energy Progress, LLG ..: .
_ Coal Combustion Products (CCP) Structural Fill'Projects
Asheville Airport..:
Buncombe County; North Carolina
Dear Mr: Davidson:
Duke Energy is presenting'this letter report in response to the Notice of`Violation-(NOV) NOV-
2017- PC-0616 dated November 17, 2017 submitted by the North Carolina Department of
. . ..
' the-Area 1 Structural Fill(Area '
Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). NOVNOV-2017-PC=06:16 refers to
1) at-the:Asheville Regional Airport(ARA) located:within Buncombe;County, North Carolina.
1Nithin the NOV,'NCDEQ also provided.comments and
'requested further clarifications of the 30=
day deliverable titled Area 1 Structural Fill Prelim nary Assessment:Report(Preliminary-
Assessment
Report) prepared b Geosyntec and:submitted by Duke.Energy to NCDEQ on
p. ..) p. p Y
October 27, 2017::...
Duke Energy has contracted with the following:companies to complete the requested actions as
..outlined during site visits by NCDEQ and-specifically requested in the NOV;
■ McKim & Creed: Surveying.services (Attachrhent.A-Topographic Survey of Fill Area: -
on Asheville Airport, dated becember 22;2017)
Synterra:,.Groundwater and surface water sampling and analysis (Attachment B
Area'' Wetness Inspection and Sampling Report- November 2017)
Geosyntec Consultants: Geotechnical:investigation and analysis (Attacfiment:C
'Engineering Analysis Report)....
:..Reports submitted:by these companies are attached to this report as.noted and are referenced
in the responses.
.... ... . . . .. . _ ._..
.:Duke Energy will share the findings of these reports with:Asheville Regional Airport to work on a
long term.strategy to alleviate.the issues noted in.the NOV. Potential.temporary and long term
corrective action measures are presented as part_of the Engineering Analysis Report.and also
are discussed below:

Mr: G. Landon Davidson..
December 29,2017
Page 2
Response to NCDEQ:Corrective'Actions .
The following corrective actions, specified a-#, were identified in the Notice of.Violation: The
NCDEQ requested:corrective action:is:presented in italics.with the Duke Energy response
followin
g..
NCDEQ Corrective Action(a):
Accurately map ariy new and existing features within or near th .-east-and west cells such as
ground ruptures, cracks,.slides,:-wetted areas; groundwater seepage; exposed coal-ash,::and
any other feature'related to potential slope movement;and/or slope failure:: .
Response to Corrective Action (a)
::Duke Energ
y contracted McKim an• Creed, a NC professional land surveyor;;to collect a
topographic survey of the North Slope:of Area 1. An updated:survey containing survey locations =
of new and existing features is provided as Attachment A.
The original breach areas were noted during the 3rd Quarter.lnspection of the:fill on September.
7 2017, Duke provided temporary stabilization,measures in anticipation,of-tropical storms . .
forecasted.at the time. In an':email from NCDEQ on September 22, 2017, Duke was required to,
"Stabilize the breach area and remove any CCR material,present on the surface,".by September.. . . .
29 and that detailed topographic sure of the area be'com feted within 30 da: s after that.
: ..: Y p. Y .
-Duke.Energy installed a:repair over the original breaches. Duke-contracted-McKim & Creed on
October2, 2017 and they:performed the survey-on October 4. As_ uch;-the original Breach.
areas were-beneath-the stabilization repair by the-time:of:the.first survey.::
The:McKim & Creed complete survey denotes the stabilized areas,:the Geosyntec slope.-
monitoring pin grids on the east and west slopes, water sampling locations, piezometee and:
inclinometer locations, slough areas.and wet spots'as:pointed out by NCDEQ,:Geosyntec and:
Synterra.6.
. . ..
NCDEQ Corrective Action (b) .
Conduct a groundwater/surface water investigation of the east and west cells fthat.addresses.the .
following:identify and map'all groundwater seepage surrounding the east and west cells,
evaluate'the quality of groundwater seepage for impacts from coal ash; investigate-the:: ,
occurrence arid.extent of groundwater within the interior of:the east cell,determine the areal
.distribution of groundwater and pore water pressures within-the east cell,-and determine the
extent and quantities of subsurface water present in the structural fill sufficient to support the
- - stability:6nalyses. : ivis►on staff ave.observed less cover material and mixed.materials present
comprising the soil:cap for the east cell To ensure the-KSAT performance standard for the soil.
caps is-being met; youare required to evaluate.and verify the existing KSAT for both the crown
soil cap:and the slope soil cap of the east and:west cells. DWR-wiltrequire implementation:of a
surface water sampling plan once.seepage areas have been identified.' :.
Response to Corrective:Action (b) .. .. .
Duke Energy retained SynTerra to:investigate and analyze surface v►rateraeeps and
groundwater near Area 1. SynTerra prepared a technical memorandum to document the

Mr. G. Landon Davidson . ..... .
December 29, 2017
Page 3.
activities and data available to date (Attachment B)-. The groundwa ter results from the
November sampling event-were submitted to.DEQ under separate cover as required.by permit
WQ0000020. .:
Geosyntec installed six iezometers to identify:the hreatic conditions within the Area.1:east
p� fY . p
and west-fills, as described within Section 3.2 of the Engineering Analysis Report(Attachment
C):The depth to water measurements within each piezometer, described within.Section 4 of the:..
...Engineering Analysis Report, were applied to model phreatic conditions the-slope.stability
- analyses presented in Section 5 of the Engineering Analysis Report:
:NCDEQ required:Duke Energy to."evaluate and verify the existing Ksar for both:the crown soil
cap and the slope soil cap".to"ensure Ksar performance is being met"...Charah;'Inc. (Charah),
the general contractor that:constructed the fill as.selected bTthe ARA:Authority, stated to Duke
Energy that"no reference was made;to a permeability requirement;and none,was applied ,
during the construction of the structural fill" An evaluation to assess whether the'performance,
standard was not performed or-proposed, as a design KsAT was.not.established.
NCDEQ Corrective-Action(c):
Conduct geotechnical slope:stability study of the east cell: The study-should calculate factors of
safety, :determine cause(s)/triggers of the slope failure (breach),,and identify temporary and
permanent(e.g. short term and long-term) corrective action measures. A sensitivity analysis of
the material and-Pore=water pressure parameters used in:the_stability analysis will clarify the "
uncertainty in the analysis results.
= = Response to Corrective Action (c)
Details:and results of the Area 1 slope stability analysis for the east and west fills are provided
in Secti.or '5 and Appendix E:of the Engineering Analysis Report(Attachment C) as a calculation
package to document the slope stability analysis'and results. Potential temporary and
permanent corrective action measures.are addressed in Section 7 of the Engineering Analysis
. .... ...
Report.:, ;
NdDEQ Corrective_Action (d):
Perfonn'a risk assessment,-(e.g.. probable failure mode analysis) that.addresses the following:
existing and potential failure-modes, probabilities of failures and consequences of failures.
-Evaluate failure scenarios relative toprecipitation amounts and potential Weather patterns(e.g.
tropical cyclone or above normal rainfall).Identify.the critical conditions for the slope to transition
from a sliding failure mode to a.flowageAiquefaction failure mode. .
.. . .
:Response to Corrective Action (d)
A probable failure mode analysis and a description of the consequence-the-Engineering
s of slope failure for the
Area 1 North Slope is provided in Section 6.6 and 6.7, respectively, of the Engineering Analysis .
Report (Attachment;C). The probability"of failure is evaluated within the slope stability analysis
described within Section 5 of the Engineering Analysis Report. In this analysis; the factor of
safety (FS), defined as the ratio of the resisting forces to the driving.or_loading forces; is
computed for three cross sections:and for.several failure.mechanisms. A FS greater than 1.0: .:
indicates that slope failure is not probable. Current standard:of engineering practice indicates.

is
Mr. G. Landon Davidson -
December.29, 2017
Page 4 _....
a.
that.a FS greater than or'equal to 1.5 be maintained for long-term loading conditions. .Minimum
FSs for the:CCR-GCL interface and global failur6 mechanism or surface of 1.5 and•1.8 :
-respectively, were computed, which indicate a low probability of global failure Hof.the Area 1 .
- :.:North Slope. :.
Slope-pin movements that'exceed the survey tolerances over tiine'are plotted with rainfall
measurements to assess the in of rainfall on slope;displacements. The,plots are
- resented Section:6.1.of the Engineering Analysis Report;
NCDEQ Corrective Action.(e) . ..
.:Provide a plan tole implemented if slope.failure is imminent or occurringthat includes, but is : :.:
. .. ..... . ... .
:: .. not limited to, emergency management notification, adjacent landowner notification'-identify
available.resources,to address impacts,.etc.
Response to Corrective Action (e) : -
Duke Energyprepared.a Res onse Plan-to be implemented if.slo a failure is-considered p p p p P
imminent or occurring: This Response Plan is provided as Attachment D to this Getter.
....... . . .
NCDEQ,Corrective Action (f):.
... ... ... ......
.......
.:Provide any documentation related to Area 1 that was'evaluated during or after construction . -
...
........ ' related_to.slope stability-orany.of the above-referenced requirements(e.g.; the designed.factor -- -
::: .: of safety).-'
... .
Response to Corrective Action (f) . .:
Charah`and their design en -iiieer, Vaughn Engineering, designed and constructed-Area 1.
Charah stated;to;Duke Energythat all:required'designdocuments u*r�derthe:regulatioris'during
construction have..been provided to Duke.Energy and other design documentation was not
. .. ..... prepared.''
... . .

Mr. G. Landon Davidson
- : December29, 2017
e
Pag 5. ..: ......
Response.to NCDEQ:Comments
-The following comments, numbered 1-31; were requested-in the Notice of.Violation. The
NCDEQ comment is.presented in 'italics with the Duke Energy response following in plain text. .
NCDEQ Comment#1:
:Page 1, 1st paragraph-A regulatoryinspection of areasof concern was he on September 15;
2017. As a point of clarification, the initial regulatory site inspectio,n.occurred on September 8,
2017. Subsequent regulatory-site inspections•occurred on September.15, 2017, October:9,
'2017, and November 9, 2017.
Response:to Comment#1-
The references to'the regulatory inspection dates have been updated as applicable in the
Engineering y p Analysis Report Attachment.0 . = .
. .
NCDEQ.Comment#2:
-:.:Page. ....
2, 2"tl bullet-Begin surface water.quality monitoring at the property.line:in November 2017
of a see identified during the re ulato inspection. The actual directive was to begin stream
p . g_ . :r rY P ..
9
monitoring at the,property line (SW3-A 1):and at a previously identified groundwater seep(SWB--
Al). Both sites were sampled on November 1, 2017.
Resgonse:to Comment#2:
----. - . . ..... . ........ .
Acknowledged; Duke Energy beg an:stream monitoring at the property line per NCDEQ's ..
direction:_Surface water.quality.monitoring activities.are described:in Attachment-B..
-
NCDEQ Comment#3:
Page 2;.2"d paragraph-Prior to construction, the-stream channel was re-routed within:a 60-inch
diameter reinforced concrete pipe RCP bedded within drains e a re ate. The stream
p.P (RCP) 9' 9'9 ..g .. ..
channel'had been previously rerouted upgradient of Area..1 within a'54-inch_diameter RCP. On
-:November 1, 2017,:attempts were.made to sample the.up-gradient water(SW2-AI) in the 54- : ::
inch RCP that conveys stormwater from the north-end of airport:but the inlet-box was dry.:
Conversely,.there was ample-flow discharging from the end of the 60-inch RCP(SW-A1)--
during a 3-day:dry period. What was the source of water at SW1-A1 on.November 1, 2017?
Provide a map depicting the entire stormwater system-for the 54-inch RCP.:.You are also
required to perform a camera survey of the RCP to determine or verify the condition-and
entry points of water into the system.
Response to Comment#3_ - .-...
Duke Energy inspects.the 60-in:diameter RCP via camera.survey, annually in February up to
the junction box at the south boundary of Area 1: However,:the 54-in. diameter=RCP and the:
stormwater system upgradient.of the junction box is.outsidethe structural fill and is not : ... .
inspected. Construction plans prepared by WK Dickson titled North General Aviation::
Development Grading and Drainage sealed on December:3, 2007 depict the drainage system

Mr. G. Landon Davidson . ........
December 29, 2017 -
Page 6. ...
upgradient of the 60-in. diameter RCP. Duke Energy provided these plans to NCDEQ:under -
separate cover.
.: The source of the water within the 60-in: diameter RCP is groundwater, which has entered
through cracks and joints. .Conceptual culvert design indicated that tho',60-in. diameter RCP
was'bedded.in drainage aggregate to facilitate groundwater flow after:structural fill construction.
Piezometer PZ-4166nded in foundation soils immediately:east of the 60-in. diameter RCP soil
:..corridor indicates groundwater elevations above the top of-RCP culvert at that-location, as
. . . . ....... . ........ . ......
provided in Section 4.1.2 of:the Engineering Anal. sis Report Attachment C
NCDEQ Comment.#4: --
Page 3 :1st paragraph-As.such, Duke Energy performs routine:inspections of the structural fill
slopes' and provides.recommendations for.mainteriance activities to:the ARA Authori
According to.section'2.1. of.permit WQ0000020,-Duke Energy is solely responsible for effectively
maintaining.and operating:the:CCP structural fill at all time so there is=no discharge-to:surface
-waters, nor any contravention of groundwater or surface water standards.Jn:the event the
facilities fail to perform satisfactorily,:including the creation of nuisance conditions due to
improper operation and maintenance, thee-Permittee shall contact the Asheville Regional Office
supervisof.and take any immediate corrective action.
Response to Comment#4
Duke.Energy inspects the structural fills as required by Permit M000.0020. The permit:requires
Duke Energy to conduct sampling:events biannually, quarterly structural/operational inspections::
and submittal of'an annual inspection report. It was during the third quarter inspection on -------
September 7, 2017 that a breach in Area 1 was:noticed and Duke Energy immediately notified
NCDEQ:as outlined in the permit. Duke Energy met with NCDEQ met on site to inspectahe:area
the next day, September 8, 2017. Since:notifying and.meeting with NCDEQ,:Duke Energy has .
performed.weekly:inspections.,Duke:Energy took.immediate:actionto.stabilize the areas of
concern and install safeguards so that no ash left:the site. DukeEnergy has complied-With
-
directions from NCDEQ to submit a 7-day.submittal; 30-day submittal and this-report.to meet a . .-. ---
:90-day request.
.... . .......
Duke Energy completed:the Annual Inspection;Report for all structural;fills and submitted it
December"18,2017.. .
`NCDEQ Comment#5: -.
Page 4, 2" paragraph The as-built drawings depict 6-foot and 4-foot thick soil cover over the :..
aop deck and side slopes of the structural fill, respectively. The soil cover placed on Area 1 side.
slopes.was subsequently field verified to be 2-foot thick. -The Asheville Regional Office is in
possession:of conceptual design drawings forArea 1, which were sealed by Vaughn-.
Engineering on September 14, 2009.:A,cross-section on page 2 highlights:the.performance
standards for Area..1 which includes 3:1 slopes, 6-foot compacted soil cap on.the:crown with a .
KsAr no greater than 1.12X10`5 and a 4-foot compacted soil capon fhe.slope with a KsAT no
greater than 1.12X10-5 The slope of the west cell appears,to be greater than 3:1..If so;please . ..
provide an explanation as to why the:slope was constructed in this manner and an
explanation concerning why.the'soil cap "as.built"drawings deviate from observations

Mr. G. Landon Davidson .
- December 29, 2017 =
Page 7. :,
in-the field.4t is important to point out that gravels; cobbles, and chunks of asphalt were
recently observed eroding bbt'of the Area 1 slope:cap. It assumed'that:the cap depth-and the
quality of material'is integral to achieving the KsAT performance standard(t e: no greater than
112X10-5). With less.cover material:and mixed materials present, is the KsAT performance;
standard for the soil caps being met? You will be required to evaluate and verify the
existing K "
g sar for both the:crown soil cap and the slope soil cap at both the west and east. - - --
cells. Please provide a work plan to the Asheville Regional Office for comment prior to
.any field work: . .... _..
Response'to Comment#5
As described within the Preliminary Assessment-Report provided as.the.30-day submittal.to.
NCDEQ, Charah revised the-soil cap thickness design on the North Slope to be 2-ft.thick.
NCDEQ previously-requested Duke Energy to confirm.the:soil cap thickness:as a requirement of.:
the 2015 NOV letter:. The hand auger investigation performed by Charah indicated that the soil-'
cap thickness is 2=ft. In addition, the"as-built" drawing set-sealed on 8 March 2010 indicates
- that the cover was constructed with KsAT equalto:or less than 1.12=X`10-5 cm/s. This.'as=built"
-also indicates that the;slope soil cap is 4-ft thick, which was:subsequently disproved. The
. :drawing was re-submitted with a revision to show 2-ft thickness on slopes:.Charah stated to
Duke Energy that"no reference was made to a permeability requirement; and none was applied
during the construction of the;:structural fill", and thus cannot be�subsequently verified by Duke
.Energy.
NCDEQ Comment#6:
Page 6, 1stbullef-Removal of thick vegetation at the toe.of:the North Slope of Areal revealed
:a weep, described to be flowing at a trickle, and a scarp.'Please identify the above features
on a'site map and include the pin locations:and control points(i.e.-stationary:reference
points) of the survey-monitoring grid:.-
Response.to.Comment#6. __... . . ...
.The weep described corresponds to surface water sampling locati6n:SW8-A1,.which has been
described with in=SynTerra's technical memorandum (Attachment B) and identified on the
Existing Conditions'Survey (Attachment A)..
. ..... ..:.
NCDEQ'Comment#7:
Page 6; 2"d bullet-Duke Energy recommended to the ARA authority that a geotechnical
investigation be performed,to identify source of the weep and cause of the scarp. Please::
: provide a copy of the geotechnical report. If a'report:is not available,then:provide an
explanation as to why the geotechnical evaluation wasnot completed.
Response.to Comment#7: .. : ::
The ARA Authority has not provided a geotechnical report nor an explanation:as to why a
geotechnical report was not:pedoared per Duke Energy's recommendation.

>:
Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December 29, 2017
:-Page 8. .:..
NCDEQ Comment#8:
= Pages 7—8, ls'and rd bullets—Provide a status update procuring the:Basis of Design
_.
' 'Report andahe Construction Quality Assurance Report for Area 1.--Please provide a copy of
these reports to the Asheville Regional Office:as they become available.
Response to Comment#8
Charah:stated to Duke Energy--that Charah was.not,required to and,did,not prepare Basis of =
.Design or Construction Quality Assurance Reports forArea.t Charah indicated that the ARA
:.Authority's consultant,.AVCON, performed construction quality assurance for.the structural fill-
and Charah has requestedthis.supporting documentation.
NCDEQ Comment.#9:
-- -.
Page 9,5th bullet—Additional:wet areas and potential slope displacements outside:of-the .
temporary stabilization could not be identified. Small areas_ of.wet soil, ponded.water and
:erosion gullies in:cap.material indicative:of seepage were observed in the area:between pins.H3 .:: .
and 12. It is.highly recommended that this area be pinned and included in the slopee-----
monitoring survey. Please acknowledge these observations and provide an explanation
based onsite.data:... .
. .
Response to.Comment#9
... ... .
:.: Duke Energy has monitored the location-noted on a weekly basis for wetness. In addition,
Geosyntec conducted a site visit on.December 12, 2017 to assess the observations made by,.
NCD.EQ; and a description of which is'provided in,Section'3.3 of the Engineering Analysis
Report(Attachment C). Duke Energy will continue to monitor the location for expanding wet
areas and outbreaks'but considers the existing slope pin configuration to be appropriate to ....
detect movement:Adding pins to expand:coverage would not.provide significant data. The area
.... .. . .. ..... .......
:.: is noted;on the survey by McKim & Creed in Appendix A.
.NCDEQ Comment#10:
Page 9:81n bullet—Signs of'Subsidence or displacement were not observed on the top deck or
crest of the northern Area 1 structural fill slope. On November 1,'2017, a zone of macropores
:(burrows), small erosion gullies, and a possible soil crack was observed along the contour of the:: .
:.,embankment slope near pins.86, C6,-D6 and FE Note that movement in excess of 0.1 ft(1.2
inches)has been reported for:pin B6, and nearbypin 85. Please acknowledge these:..... .
observations and.provide a response-based on site data.
esponse to Comment#10: .
The slope crest referenced in Page 9,;8'. bullet of the.Preliminary Assessment Report, refers to
the portion of the slope that transitions-from the 3HAV slope to the top deck..'The top deck
refers to:the shallowly sloped area inside of the dike crest: Slope pins-B6, C6, D6, and F6 are
located approximately 3Q to.40 feet downslope of;the crest and approximately 5-ft downslope of
these observed features.

rq
Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December-29, 2017
Page 9 . .
Geosyntec performed a site visit on December 12, 2017, and is described within Section 3.3 of.
the Engineering Analysis.Rep.ort (Attachment-C), and assessed the:zone of macropores;:small -
erosiongullies; and,possible soil crack,observed by NCDEQ near slope pins B6; C6, D6, and: .:
F6. During this site visit, Geosyntec observed the shallow crack or slough.in_the-soil cap. Duke-.
.= Energy has noted this area:and observes it in weekly and quarterly inspections. In early
November, the area was cleared of heavy_ vegetation to improve observation of the conditions.
The slope adjacent.to slope pins B6;;C6., D6, and F6 is monitored weekly by Duke Energy and
- .
: :.slope pins are surveyed bi-weekly. Observations and measurements from these events are
utilized:to assess whether the:slough has moved since slope pin installation on October 4, 2017
and to'evaluate whether this.feature is recent movement or older'movement that was previously. . . .
obscured by tall grass.
........ . ........ ... ...
NCDEQ Comment#11:
:Page 10, 4rh bullet-:A. pre-existing seep to a wetland with reddish staining.was observed
downslope of the access road bench at the eastern structural fill toe, though the source of the
seep could not be identified at the time of the,site Visit.
The seep above has:been labeled SIN8-A1 and was sampled on November-1, 2017. The
specific:conductivity at the time of sampling.was,937 NS%m. The high conductance may, ..
indicate.groundwater in contact with coal ash:::
:.Response to Comment#11
Duke Energy acknowledges:NCDEQ's comment:: Surface water quality data from samples,
collected by SynTerra are provided within Attachment B to this letter. However,.the source of
:SW8-A1 may be contact water.(pore Water) migrating beneath the two foot soil:cap and_-.,
daylighting;_not necessarily:groundwater in contact with ash.
: .NCDEQ Comment.#12:
Page 11, 2nd paragraph-' The:slope monitoring consists of 18-inch long steel stake(slope pins). =
Given that the slope-soil cap is two feet thick; why are;you not using longer.steel stakes to.
:ensure adequate contact with the-coal.ash?
Response to Comment#12:
Geosyntec selected slope pins, and Duke Energy concurred, to monitor the north slope of the. . =
-east.and west Areal fill. Slope,pins were installed, as described within-Section 3.1.3 of the
Engineering Analysis Report (Attachment C),.to function as survey monuments to identify and
measure displacements of the slope, if any. The 18-inch long-stakes will displace if either the -
final cover(veneer surface) or the CCR mass displaces due-to a potential slope:failure; as such, ' .:.
longer.slope pins were not.considered necessary,to monitorthe.slope:
NCDEQ Comment#13:
sm
Page 12; 'St bullet—A local slump within the.center and mid-slopeof the temporary stabilization
measure:was observed during the October 4, 2017 visit. Immediately downgradient of the
rupture and in the general vicinity of pins C2, D2 and E2Js a feature being called the "bulge':
:This"bulge".appears to be dynamic and potentially growing.as observed during our last site

sq
Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December 29, 2017
Page 10 - q.
inspection; Does the local.slump mentioned above coincide in with the apparent : - -
bulge in the temporary stabilization measure?:Please depict the local slump on a:site
map that includes the pin locations and control points ►e stationaty reference ppoints) of •-
: . the survey monitoring grid.Also,please clarify if the term 'slump'is used:for a rotational..
sliding failure, or some other slope failure mode.
Response to Comment#13:
The described slump on-Page 1-2, Vt bullet within the Preliminary Assessment Report_,_refers to
the"bulge" referred to b the.NCDEQ. Durin installation of the slope:monitorin9 Y s stem on 4
. .. u g ...
October 2017,'this feature was identified, which prompted:Geosyntec to install Row 2 of slope
pins (A2 through H2)to measure potential displacements, as described,within Section.3.1,3.of
the Engineering Analysis Report (Attachment C).
The approximate-location of the slump.within the temporary:stabilization measure has been
-delineated on Figure 2 of the Engineering Analysis Report.'The.term"slum p":generally:applies
to a small area of accumulation downslope of.a-shallow(e.g., 1-to'2 ft deep) veneer-type sliding
failure. A'rotational failure is generally interpreted as bein deep er seated (e.g-.
. .. 9 Y 9 p . , greater than 2 ..: . ....
ft deep).
NCDEQ-Comment#14:. ..;
Page 12, 6th bullet: Geosyntec identified three areas approximately 30-ft to:40-f#downslope .
from:the structural fill crest:that may have subsided.:Please identify the locations-ofthe-three
suspected'subsidence areas., Please show the:potential subsidence areas on-a site map
that includes the pin:locations and control points (i.e. stationary reference points) of the
survey monitoring:grid.
....._. . ........
Response to Comment#14::
:.:Slope pins B6, C6,.D6, and F6 were positioned approximately 5-ft down slope of this possible
observed:crack/subsidence and,30-ft to 40-ft from the slope crest to measure potential.future
movemen o is area, The approxima.e..oca ions o ese.suspec a -areas afe. a ineate on
=.Figure 2 of the Engineering Analysis:Report (Attachment C)_.
NCDEQ:Comment#15:
..... -.-----
.:Page 12, 8th bullet.-:Installed a row of slope pins approximately five feet down slope of these.
-areas to identify potential displacement. Please identify these pins and their'locations...-.
Response to Comment 915:
Row 6, consisting of slope pins A6 through H6, was installed approximately 5=ft downslope of
the subsided areas to measure:potential future:movement of this area. These slope pins;are
depicted on Figure,2 and measurements are summarized:in Appendix D of the Engineering
Analysis Report (Attachment C).

..
Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December 29, 2017
Page 11
NCDEQ.Comment#16:
. ...
Page 13, 1 St paragraph—Based on the site-visit assessments and slope monitoring survey
.results, the slough area does not appear to have changed orexpanded. During the November.
1, 2017.site inspection, there was visual evidence for movement along a segment of the original
ground:rupture where it is covered by the temporary slope repair immediately below slope'
monitoring pins Wand E3, and above pins D2 and E2. In,this area, the rip-rap_cover of the
temporary repair had settled exposing localized areas of a few inches of near-vertical slopes in
cap soil:material. In addition; small tension cracks were observed in:the soil cap at monitoring
pm D3'which extended approximately 30 inches to the northeast along contour towards pin E3.
Note: The current survey grid may not detect movement:between the rows D2-E2 and D3-E3,
: re:John.Toepfer's Nov. 10; 2017 response regarding movement in this.areaIfthe observed . ..
movement was caused by-surface washout.of the:sand used in.the repair resulting from-heavy
rains,as suggested in Mr. Toepfer's response, then the surface wash--erosion of exposed
rupture/scarp was not evident on Nov. 1., Sand used in the repair has been.franspocted from
beneath,the geoteztile,however, it could have resulted in part from-seepage from the cap/fill in
addition to heavy rainfall infiltrating through the temporary repair. Please acknowledge these
observations and provide a response-based'on site data:
Response-to-Comment#16; -
mo
: The feature'observed.by NCDEQ on November 1, 2017.was observed by:Geosyntec and Duke:
Energy on December.12, 2017. Visual:observations indicate:the crack had not moved further
since the initial observatiori.:'Duke Energy routirldy:inonitors the temporary stabilization
measure:to assess potential;:movements.
NCDEQ'Comment#17:
. .Page 14; 3 -pars..raPh-As artof the 90-da deiverable, a slope stability study will be conducted
. . . . . m . . .
to compute factor
. ...
of safety for the Area 1 North slope and provide an assessment of this
hazard. Will this'hazard assessment address the existing precipitation patterns related to :.:
observed:movement and:the precipitation patterns or other conditions that could
potentially-trigger..aslope failure of the CCR fill that could result in.the release of-CCR
-.coward the adjacent residential development to the north?
Response:to Comment#17: -
The slope stability analysis sensitivity study provided in Section 5 of the Engineering Analysis
Report:(Attachment C) computes the elevated phreatic conditions potentially induced by heavy
rainfall.'events to achieve a'target factor of safety of 1.0 and assess the hazard associated with
heavy precipitation. Section 6.1 of the Engineering Analysis Report presents slope pin
movement and.rainfall data, which indicate no correlation,between slope pin-movement and
rainfall.
. .. ....
NCDEQ Comment#18: _....
Page 14 ..paragraph- Will the slope stability analysis evaluate the Factor of Safety for
sliding at:the GCL-CCR.interface?

`Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December 29, 2017
Page 12. ..
Response to Comment#18-.
The slope stability analysis provided.in"Section 5 and Appendix E of the Engineering Analysis
Report (Attachment C) presents the computed FS for thestructural fill at the geosynthetic clay
liner.(GCL)' CCR interface-based on the available information..The minimum FS was
computed as 1.5, which is current standard'of engineering practice for long term slope.stability.
'NCDEQ Comment:#19:
Page 14, $rd paragraph- Upwelling coal and coal.ash transported by seepage water were:.
previously observed in the areas now covered by the temporary repairs, indicative of seepage
:.:and piping processes affecting the CCR materials and the cap. Will seepage:forces be
incorporated into the slope.stability analysis?,
Response to Comment#19:
Seepage.forces are not.incorporated into slope-stability model as piezometer measurements do
not suggest large_seepage-forces_acting against the slope face. The:slope stability analysis -.
does incorporatethe_observed seepage face, as observed within the east fill, and predicts a
-'shallow slough within the soil-cap material, which indicates that the slope stability model.is---
appropriate: Details of the slope stability analysis are provided within Section 5 of the '- -
Engineering'Analysis-Report (Attachment C).
NCDEQ:Comment-#20:.
Page 14,-3rd and 5th:bullets= Selection of unit weight and shear strength parameters; and, .
foundation and cover properties. Please:provide available:boring logs and laboratory data.
from Area 1-and adjacent CCR structural-fills at the ARA. Are the origins, extent,,and:
properties of the earth materials beneath the"GCL layer available for Area 1?Note....This
►n ormation is not:depicted on the as-built plans stamped and dated on 3-840;prepared by
Vaughn Engineering:•If the above data is not available; will data and parameters specific to: :.
Area T be collected for the slope stability study?
-Response to Comment#20: -
Geosyhtec installed pie2ometers and an inclinometer casing during-the week of November 14,
2017: Boring logs including standard penetration test(SPT) blow counts and laboratory.data . .... ...
..collected during instrument installation are provided in Appendices B and C:of the Engineering
-Analysis:Report(Attachment,C).- Discussion of material properties_interpreted from this...-
investigation and from engineering literature,are provided within the slope stability analysis,
described within Section 5 and included as Appendix E of the Engineering Analysis Report: .
N -DE omment#21:.
Page 14,-4th bullet:- Use of compacted CCR engineering:properties. Are as-built compaction
test data available for the CCR and other earth materials in the CCR placement zone of
Area 1?.Are there plans to confirm in-place. densities of the materials in-the Area
1 structural fill?
... ..

W.
Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December 29, 2017
Page 13..
. .. . .. . .. .... _ ....
Response to-Comment#21: -
As=built compaction test data has been requested by Duke Energy but are not available''for'the
.. .CCR and other;earth materials in the CCR placement zone:of Area 1. Material properties of soil
=- and foundation soils including-relative densities;_were developed based'on available information
as described within Section 5;and Appendix E of the Engineering Analysis Report (Attachment
....... ...... . ......
NCDEQ Comment#22:
Page 14, 7th bullef-.:W11 further investigation into the presence and extent of subsurface
waterbe based solely on the results.of the FEA model:and slo a stabilit stud For
example,:the presence and extent(or absence) of subsurface water within the CCR fill should
be confirmed by .means other than the FEA model and slope stabifitystudy.Electrical resistivity
.:surveys are a non-invasive investigation:method that could be used to help effectively locate.
piezometers used-to constrain slope stability analyses.
Response to Comment#22`
Six piezometers were installed the week of November 14- 2017.to confirm the presence and
extent:(or absence) of subsurface water within the:CCR fill and were used to assess ..
groundwater and: hreatic condition_ s:at the site for slo a stabilit analysis.: Piezometer
9 . .p p .: Y Y .: . ...
:installation information is provided Within.Section 3.2 and:Ap.pendix B of the.Engineering
Analysis Report (Attachment C):
mp
---
NCDEQ Comment#23:
Page 15, last paragraph:-Based on-the initial slope stability study results will borings;
material sampling and testing(e.g., triaxial testing)be considered.for Area 1.
.. :Response to Comment#23:
Index testing on CCR were.found to be consistent with values reported:in engineering-:literature
... .. .....
:commissioned by:the R Electric Power' 6arch Institute (EFRI). -
NCDEQ Coiimment#24:
Page 16, 1st paragraph— The most recent condition inspection of the 60=inch:RCP identified
staining and leaks into.the RCP at several joints or cracks. These observations further suggest
that the:drainage corridor may be clogged. What is the potential relationship between,the
clogging of the drainage material along the`RCP and.the on-going problems associated
with Area I?
Response:to Comment#24 .
Clogging of the drainage material.along:the 60-in. diameter RCP could result in:groundwater.
flow following the historical stream charinel, previously'routed underneath the east fill, and.could
contributeto an increase of the-phreatic surface elevation beneath the,GCL within the;structural
fill: Preliminary water elevation data collected from the piezometers installed during the'week of: .
November 14, 2017.do not corroborate this effect. Specifically, preliminary water elevation

Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December 29, 2017
Page 14 ..
data indicates that phreatic_surface above the GCL.is several feet,above the phreatic surface
below the:GCL (e.g., these zones are not connected). Piezometer measurement interpretation
is-provided in Section",6.1 ofthe Engineering Analysis Report (Attachment:C).
NCDEQ Comment#25:.
Page 18 References for the Geosyntec report includes the 2012 Electric.Research Institute"
. :document on the geotechnical properties-of fly ash and potential for static liquefaction. The
Geos ntec to port does not appear. ' to specifically. mention lans to assess the liquefaction
Y. p . P 9
potential:(64., FS for liquefaction) of the CCR fill._Are there p/ans ao:assess the liquefaction
potential(static anddynamic)of"the.CCR fill with respect to shallow and global failures?IF:
-the li uefaction: otential is to be assessed, will material properties of the."CCR that are
4. ..... .. P . ... ... P P. .. . ...
s ecific to Area 1 be used in.the analysis?if a liquefaction analysis is not planned,.please
_
P Y � .• 9 Y..�.
provide-the rationale or"not performing the analysis,
Response to Comment#25:.. ....
_Qualitative evaluation.of static liquefaction.potential was.conducted using site-specific
-.:information. Dynamic liquefaction'susceptibility was evaluated using a procedure adopted in.
practice.: The dynamic liquefaction analysis.used conservative material parameters for_non
compacted CCR within a basin located at another North Carolina Duke Energy site.- Details of
the static and dy;namic.liquefaction analyses are provided:in Section 6.5 of the Engineering Analysis Report:(Attachment C).
. .
NCDEQ Comment#26:
.. ..
.::''.:In addition, the two slope pins which.had magnitude.of movement greater�than the reported. .
survey accuracy of+A 0.10.feet(1.2 inches).horizontally"and vertically, there were nineteen (19)"
pins wh►dh:show movement of:0.700 inches orgreater. More importantly, there may be*a'
spatial
correlation or correlations to movement among these pins"(A5, B I,' 84, B6, C2, C6, D3, D4, F2,.:
F3, F4, G1, G6, W,'H4, H5, 15, J3;.and J6). Are there.any plans to analyze slope movement .. :::
data:that occurs below the reported survey accuracy?Moving forward,please include an
electronic-spreadsheet(0.0' Excel or com►na.:delimited text)when.submitting-the:slope
monitoring measurements to the Asheville RegionalOffice to include all current and
:":;:historical data. : :.: :: - .... ..
Response to Comment#26::
Slope pin monitoring will continue as indicated within the:slope monitoring plan until the.90-day
submittal is complete. Computed movements that exceed the survey tolerances will-be reported
_-to_NCDEQ. There are.no plans to analyze slope movement-data below the reported survey
:accuracy. Duke Energy has provided,slope pin survey data collected by McKim:& Creed to
NCDEQ.in.xlsxformat. ,.
NCDEQ-C6mment.#27:
Movement-greater than 0.1 ft(1.2 inches)toward the.SE, instead of the-downsidpe direction,.was
reported forthe following pins .B5= 1.319 inches in the 18 Oct. 2017 survey; and 1.308.inches
in the 01 Nov. 201.7 survey; 86'= 1.52:inches in tlie"01 Nov..2017 survey,and; C2 1.383 inches:.:
::"" "in the 01 Nov. 2617 survey. Based on the 18, Oct. 2017.survey 57 of the 78 total pins moved. .:

Mr. G. Landon Davidson
December-29, 2017
Page 15-
"toward the SE or SW Please:explain the reason for the apparent-movement of the pins
_ ... . toward-the-SE.
Response to Comment#27:
The-apparent movement.in the:SE/SW direction.below the 1.2-inch.survey accu racy.is likely due
to the limitations.Of the survey technology.'- Use of survey data below the reported'accuracy can:;
be misleading and:not considered appropriate for the purposes of this analysis:as these
.. apparent displacements can be a result of surve,y:rod angle and placement on each pin:during
data collection.
NCDEQ Comment:#
Noted in:Table 3, the Northing. .:. ;fasting, and Elevation are reported to.three significant digits after - -
the'decimal, tiut in the Slope Monitoring:Plan the Northing, Fasting, and Elevation are rounded
to two significant digits after the decimal in Table.1 of Slope Monitoring Plan;Please
acknowledge these observations and provide a,response based:on site data.':
. ........ . ..... .
.:Response to Comment#28:
Surveydata within Appendix.D.of the Engineering Analysis Report:(Attachment C) are:reported
...to-three'significant-fgures.-Future survey data-will'be,reported to three-significant figures,
-consistent with the Northing, Easting;.and Elevation dataprovided by the surveyors. However,.':
- -- -'the survey accuracy is 0.1 ft; which is one significant figure after the decimal.
NCDEQ Comment-#29:
. ..
. .
Three points are shown.on.the preliminary survey.plat are identified:with thenumbers 25907;
25908:and 25909. Are these the control oints, which are assumed to be stationa -used
for the curve ..
y Monitoring grid?
Response to,Comment#29..........
.. ....
These survey-locations are control points utilized by McKim &Creed during routine slope pin
mq
::monitoring events,:The locations'ofthe:control points-are mapped in Attachment A.
NCDEQ.Comment#30:
'Please provide(or identify in the existing reports) the northing and easing:coordinates,
and elevations for the survey-control points;from the baseline;survey, and the
subsequent monitoring surveys.
..Response to Comment#30:
.,Northing, eastings,_and elevations of-the base point locations,when reported by McKim:and
Creed, are provided in Appendix D of the Engineering=Analysis Report (Attachment C).
:...:: . NCDEQQ-Comment#31
.:Page 3, 1 St 27 &3'd bullets-More frequent monitoring pin surveys may be needed if monitoring.:
detects increases in movement rates,-or in response to precipitation.events that could trigger

Mr. G. Landon Davidson
Decerriber 29, 2017
.Page 16 .... . ...
additional slope movement. More survey pins may be needed if there is observed evidence of
slope.movement in areas not covered by the existing monitoring grid.::P,lease provide the_
Asheville Regional Office with an ArcGISTM compatibleshape file of the monitoring pin locations
and numbers. Please include the identified survey control points for the monitoring pin'
surve Also provide di ital versions a Excel-or comma delimited text) of the :-.:
monitoring pin survey and_resurvey data:-
:-:.Response to Comment#31:
The monitoring in locations and numbers are provided in,an Arco 187"°.com atible shape file as
under a separate cover. Point information will be provided in_-.xisx, .cxv, or .shp file format for
NCDEQ's-,use. ..
. ...CLOSURE - ----
If you have.any questions or.require additional.information; please.do,not hesitate to contact Mr.
Scott Nordgren of Duke Energy at 980.373.1203 or.at [e-mail]..
:Sincerely, -
:Scott R. Nordgren,:P.E. -
Senior.Engineer
:Attachments Attachment A- Existinng;Conditions Survey prepared by McKim &:Creed
Attachment B- Surface.Water Sampling Technical Memorandum.prepared b
SynTerra
---
Attachment Engineering Analysis Report,prepared by Geosyntec
Attachment D- Emergency Response Plan prepared by Duke.Energy

Paul Draovitch
DUKE Senior Vice President
ENERGY® Environmental,.Health&Safety;
526 S,ChurchiStreel
Mail Code.EC3XP
Charlotte,NC 28202
[phone]
D .
December:20,2017 bivl8ion of 4Naicr Resources
Mr.G. Landon Davidson
North.Carolina Departnientof.Environmental Quality
JAN: - 2. :2018
Asheville Regional Office :
2090 U.S.70 Highway. Water Qi, f h+Ftniortal Operations
5wannanoa, NC:28778 Ash !;�^ ;Office
Subject; Responseto Notice of Violation
Asheville.Airport Structural Till
NOV-2017-PC70616(Incident#201701440)
Permit No.WQ0000020
Dear Mr. Davidson:
This.cover letter and enclosed.report responds to the.Notice of Violation.(NOV), dated:November 17,
2017. The report addresses the letter items (a) through (f) within the NOV along with items listed:in.
.
Appendix A to:the NOV. If or you have comments and questions, direct then!to Ed Sullivan:at
Y. �. . G , please d
(980),P7-. 719 or John Toepfer at(919)546-7863.
Sincerely,
Pau Draovitch:
Senior.V—:President
_ . .
Environmental, Health&Safety
Enclosure' Response:to Notice of Violation,90 Day Report
cc: Mr.S.Joy Zimmerman P.G. Director ..
Division of Water Resources,Central-Office
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North*Carolina 27699-1611

Prepared far
'DUKE
,w5 N
PROGRESS
Duke.Energy Progress,LLC
526 South.Church Street
Charlotte,North Carolina 28202
-ENGINEERING ANALYSIS REPORT
Revision 0
Asheville Regional Airport — Area 1 Structural Fill
Asheville,, North Carolina
Prepared by
Geosynteccl'
consultants
Geosyntec Consultants of NC,PC ;
1300 South.Mint.Street, Suite 300
Charlotte,North Carolina 28203
License No. C-3500
Project No. GC6463
December 2017
p F ;SS/p• !y�
_a o y.y 7
SE r; ;_James cNash,P.E.
ortliaCa rolinq�kegistrationn No. 0441.12 .
v '•�NGINE��.•�L��e: iZ-2R-1�-
9

ARA—Area I Structural Fill ,CrGbSylteG:V
Engineering Analysis Report ecitstfnts
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AOEM Alpha-Omega Environmental Management, LLC.
ARA Asheville Regional Airport
Area 1 Area 1 Structural Fill
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
AVCON AVCON, Inc.
bgs Below Ground Surface
CAMA Coal Ash Management Act
CCR Coal Combustion Residuals
Charah Charah, Inc.
CQA Construction Quality Assurance
Duke Energy Duke Energy Progress, LLC
DORS Distribution of Residual Solids
DWR Division of Water Resources
EPRI Electric Power Research Institute
FS Factor(s) of Safety
FSliq Factor(s) of Safety against Liquefaction
ft Foot/Feet
ft3 Cubic Feet .
gpd Gallons per Day
GC6463/ARA_Area_1_Engineering Analysis_Report i December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill Sytte
Engineering Analysis Report .
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
GCL Geosynthetic Clay Liner
Geosyntec Geosyntec Consultants of North Carolina, PC
HSA Hollow Stem Auger
HELP Hydraulic Evaluation of Landfill Performance
in. Inches
Ksat Saturated Vertical Permeability
lb Pound
MW Monitoring Well
NCAC North Carolina Administrative Code
NAD83 North American Datum of 1983
NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988
NCAC North Carolina Administrative Code
NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources
NCDEQ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
NCGS North Carolina General Statute
NOV Notice of Violation
PGA Peak Ground Acceleration
PGAgrouna Peak Ground Acceleration at Ground Surface
PGAs/C Peak Ground Acceleration at Rock Outcrop
Preliminary Report Preliminary Engineering Assessment Report
GC6463/ARA Area 1_Engineering_Analysis_Report ii December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill ,Gdo$ynre&
Engineering Analysis Report CIInBitlbilt9..
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Report Engineering Assessment Report
SynTerra SynTerra Corporation
SHGWT Seasonal High Groundwater Table
Silar Silar Services, Inc.
SPT Standard Penetration Test
USCS Unified Soil Classification System
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USGS United States Geological Survey
GC6463/ARA Area 1 Engineering_Analysis_Report iii December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill :GeOS !T1CeC
Engineering Analysis Report ccxrisullnfs;,.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................I
1.1 Project Background.....................................................................................................I
1.1.1 7-Day Requirements......................................................................................1
1.1.2 30-Day Requirements....................................................................................I
1.1.3 90-Day Requirements....................................................................................2
1.2 Site Background..........................................................................................................3
1.3 Report Organization....................................................................................................4
2. Engineering Review.............................................................................................................6
2.1 Available Documents..................................................................................................6
2.1.1 Design Documents.........................................................................................6
2.1.2 As-Built Drawings and Records....................................................................7
2.1.3 Notice of Violation(NOV-2015-PC-0303)...................................................8
2.1.4 Annual Inspection Records............................................................................8
2.1.5 Recent Drainage Modifications...................................................................10
2.2 Unavailable References ............................................................................................10
3. Breach Delineation and Monitoring...................................................................................I I
3.1 Preliminary Assessment.............................................................................................11
3.1.1 Preliminary Observations............................................................................11
3.1.2 Breach and Wet Area Delineation...............................................................12
3.1.3 Initial Slope Monitoring Plan......................................................................12
3.2 Expanded Slope Monitoring.....................................................................................13
3.3 December 2017 Observations...................................................................................14
4. Slope and Phreatic Surface Monitoring Results ................................................................16
4.1 Slope Monitoring Measurements..............................................................................16
4.1.1 Slope Pin Measurements .............................................................................16
4.1.2 Piezometer Measurements...........................................................................17
4.1.3 Slope Inclinometer Measurements ..............................................................17
GC6463/ARA Area 1_Engineering_Analysis_Report December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill Gvosy teC
Engineering Analysis Report coiisuEtl3nfs
5. Slope Stability Assessment................................................................................................18
5.1 Overview...................................................................................................................18
5.2 Input Parameters.......................................................................................................19
5.3 Analysis Results........................................................................................................19
6. Data Interpretation and Potential Failure Mode Evaluation..............................................20
6.1 Interpretation of Instrumentation Measurements......................................................20
6.1.1 Slope Pin Measurements .............................................................................20
6.1.2 Piezometer Measurements...........................................................................21
6.1.3 Inclinometer Measurements ........................................................................22
6.2 Changes of Slough and Wet Areas...........................................................................22
6.3 Source of Seepage Water..........................................................................................23
6.4 Cause of Area 1 Slough............................................................................................23
6.5 Liquefaction Analyses ..............................................................................................24
6.5.1 Static Liquefaction.......................................................................................24
6.5.2 Seismic Liquefaction...................................................................................25
6.6 Potential Failure Mode Evaluation...........................................................................27
6.6.1 Soil Cap Instability......................................................................................27
6.6.2 Global Slope Instability...............................................................................27
6.6.3 Liquefaction of CCR and Foundation Soils ................................................27
6.6.4 Seepage and Piping......................................................................................28
6.6.5 Soil Erosion.................................................................................................28
6.6.6 Hurricane or Tropical Storm........................................................................28
6.7 Consequences of Failure...........................................................................................29
7. Corrective Action Recommendations................................................................................30
8. References..........................................................................................................................31
GC6463/ARA Area 1_Engineering_Analysis_Report i December 2017

ARA—Areal Structural Fill eG.GOs). teia
Engineering Analysis Reportjj,t( p ;.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of Area 1 Engineering Resources
Table 2. Summary of Geosyntec Site Visits
Table 3. Summary of Area 1 Survey Events (October to December 2017)
Table 4. Baseline and Most Recent Slope Pin Survey Data
Table 5. Piezometer Installation Details
Table 6. Summary of Laboratory Index Testing Data
Table 7. Piezometer Phreatic Surface Level Measurements
Table 8. Inclinometer Measurements
Table 9. Summary of Computed Factors of Safety
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Asheville Regional Airport Site Location Map
Figure 2. Slope Monitoring Pin Baseline Survey Locations
Figure 3. Surface Water Sampling and Instrumentation Locations
Figure 4. Slope Pin Movements—East Fill
Figure 5. Slope Pin Movements—West Fill
Figure 6. Piezometer Measurement Data
Figure 7. Inclinometer Data—Profile Change
Figure 8. Inclinometer Data—Tilt Change
Figure 9. Cross Section Location Map
Figure 10. East Fill Slope Pin Lateral Movements
Figure 11. East Fill Slope Pin Elevation Movements
Figure 12. West Fill Slope Pin Lateral Movements
Figure 13. Seismic Liquefaction Susceptibility Evaluation Results
GC6463/ARA_Area_l_Engineering_Analysis_Report ii December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill :CiG'QSYIttG'C `
Engineering Analysis Report C.01, �wriG9,°,
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Existing Conditions Survey (by McKim&Creed)
Appendix B Instrument Installation Records
Appendix C Laboratory Analysis Results (by Excel Geotechnical Testing, Inc.)
Appendix D Area 1 Slope Pin Survey Measurements (by McKim& Creed)
Appendix E Slope Stability Analysis
Appendix F Liquefaction Analyses
GC6463/ARA Area 1 Engineering Analysis—Report iii December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill ,►(} [� �
Engineering Analysis Report
r
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Proiect Background
Duke Energy Progress, LLC (Duke Energy) identified wet areas and a small slough' in the cover
soils, with an isolated seep of coal combustion residuals (CCR), at the base of the east fill of the
North Slope of the Area 1 structural fill(Area 1) during inspection activities at Asheville Regional
Airport (ARA) on 7 September 2017. Duke Energy promptly notified Mr. Brett Laverty, P.G.
with the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), formerly known as the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources(NCDENR),Division of Water
Resources (DWR) on 7 September 2017, as required by Condition IV.12 of Coal Combustion
Products Structural Fill Permit (WQ0000020). Regulatory inspections of the North Slope were
held on 7 September and 15 September 2017. Upon completion of the regulatory inspections,
NCDEQ issued short-term requirements with submittals at 7-day, 30-day, and 90-day intervals to
Duke Energy via email correspondence on 15 September 2017. The short-term requirements were
formalized within a Notice of Violation(NOV),NOV-2017-PC-0616, dated 17 November 2017.
1.1.1 7-Day Requirements
The 7-day submittal was completed on 22 September 2017, and required the installation of a
temporary stabilization measure for the slough and wet areas. Duke Energy designed and
constructed a temporary stabilization measure consisting of, from bottom to top, a geotextile,fine
sand, and a riprap buttress system.
1.1.2 30-Day Requirements
The short-term 30-day requirements stipulated that Duke Energy provide the following:
• accurately map the rupture and wetted areas;
• establish a system to monitor for slope movement(e.g., slope pins);
• conduct a preliminary assessment of slope stability; and
• submit a report to document findings of the engineering review,changes in the breach area,
and additional corrective measures employed, etc.
The preliminary assessment of slope stability was clarified by NCDEQ as"a geotechnical engineer
will need to inspect the rupture/wetted area and identify any immediate hazards. The geotechnical
1 Referred to as a breach by NCDEQ in a 15 September 2017 email to Duke Energy.
GC6463/ARA_Area_1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 1 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill G6ospriite 6,
Engineering Analysis Report � Rjg=;
engineer should provide recommendations on temporary stabilization measures and the monitoring
of slope movement."
Geosyntec Consultants of North Carolina, PC (Geosyntec) prepared a Preliminary Engineering
Assessment Report (Preliminary Report) [Geosyntec, 2017] to address the 30-day requirements
and submittal described above. The Preliminary Report was submitted by Duke Energy to
NCDEQ on 27 October 2017.
The Preliminary Report was limited to an assessment of the geotechnical stability and hazards for
Area 1, as requested by NCDEQ. The Preliminary Report's assessment was also limited to the
east Area 1 slope since the ARA Authority had not cleared thick vegetation along the west Area 1
slope prior to September and October site visits.
1.1.3 90-Day Requirements
The short-term requirements to be addressed within the 90-day submittal were listed within the 15
September 2017 e-mail correspondence as follows:
• conduct an engineered slope stability study, calculate factor of safety (FS), identify
corrective action measures, and determine the cause of the breach;
• investigate the source and map the locations of seeps discharging from Area 1; and
• begin surface water quality monitoring at the property line in November 2017 of a seep
identified during the regulatory inspection.
In addition to the above requirements, NOV-2017-PC-0616 outlined the following as additional
requirements or clarifications to previous requirements to be completed by 29 December 2017:
a) Accurately map any new and existing features within or near the east and west cells such
as ground ruptures, cracks, slides, wetted areas, groundwater seepage, exposed coal ash,
and any other feature related to potential slope movement and/or slope failure.
b) Conduct a groundwater/surface water investigation of the east and west cells that addresses
the following: identify and map all groundwater seepage surrounding the east and west
cells; evaluate the quality of groundwater seepage for impacts from coal ash; investigate
the occurrence and extent of groundwater within the interior of the east cell; determine the
areal distribution of groundwater and pore water pressures within the east cell; and
determine the extent and quantities of subsurface water present in the structural fill
sufficient to support the stability analyses. Division staff have observed less cover material
and mixed materials present comprising the soil cap for the east cell. To ensure the Ksat
performance standard for the soil caps is being met,you are required to evaluate and verify
the existing Ksat for both the crown soil cap and the slope soil cap of the east and west cells.
GC6463/ARA_Area_l_Engineering—Analysis_Report 2 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill r8OS�tr e-
G
Engineering Analysis Report C�IAaU�t
DWR will require implementation of a surface water sampling plan once seepage areas
have been identified.
c) Conduct geotechnical slope stability study-of the east cell. The study should calculate
factors of safety, determine cause(s)/triggers of the slope failure (breach), and identify
temporary and permanent(e.g. short term and long term) corrective action measures.
d) Perform a risk assessment. (e.g. probable failure mode analysis) that addresses the
following: existing and potential failure modes,probabilities of failures; and consequences
of failures. Evaluate failure scenarios relative to precipitation amounts and potential
weather patterns (e.g. tropical cyclone or above normal rainfall). Identify the critical
conditions for the slope to transition from a sliding failure mode to a flowage/liquefaction'
failure mode. .
e) Provide a plan to be implemented if slope failure is imminent or occurring that includes,
but is not limited to, emergency management notification,adjacent landowner notification,
identify available resources to address impacts, etc.
f) Provide any documentation related to Area 1 that was evaluated during or after construction
,related to slope stability or any of the above-referenced requirements (e.g., the designed
factor of safety).
This Engineering Analysis Report(Report)was prepared by Geosyntec to address portions of the
required corrective actions identified in NOV-2017-PC-0616. Specifically, this Report provides
supporting documentation to address items (a), (c), (d), (e), (f), and portions of Appendix A of the
NOV, not addressed elsewhere.
1.2 Site Background
Area 1, situated near the northeastern ARA property boundary and depicted on Figure 1, was
constructed pursuant to the contract between Charah, Inc. (Charah) and the ARA Authority to
expand airport operations and is owned and operated by the ARA Authority. Prior to construction,
the Area 1 footprint was a topographic valley containing a historical stream channel intermittently
flowing northward from the site. A residential area is situated on the northern property boundary
of Area 1 of which the historical stream channel traverses through before discharging into the
French Broad River.
Area 1 was designed and constructed by Charah by filling the topographic valley with compacted
CCR purchased by Charah from Duke Energy's Asheville Steam Electric Plant. Pursuant to the
terms of the sales contact between Duke Energy and Charah, title to the CCR was transferred to
Charah as the CCR was loaded on to trucks owned by Charah. Prior to construction,the historical
stream channel was re-routed within a 60-inch (in.) diameter reinforced concrete pipe (RCP)
bedded within drainage aggregate. The stream channel had been rerouted previously upgradient
GC6463/ARA_Area_1_Engineering Analysis—Report 3 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural FilleC1s �i�`
Engineering Analysis Reportta nt;;
of Area 1 within a 54-in. diameter RCP. A concrete junction box was installed to transition from
the 54-in. to 60-in. diameter RCP prior to installation of the 60-in. diameter RCP. The historical
stream channel was also filled with drainage aggregate and connected to the RCP trench with 2-
foot (ft) wide gravel filled trenches spaced at 100-ft intervals. Soil backfill was placed from the
RCP spring line to 2 feet above the top of pipe.
As-built drawings prepared on behalf of Charah [Vaughn Engineering, 2010] indicate that Area 1
was constructed with a geosynthetic clay liner(GCL)base liner and a soil cap system. Soil backfill
was compacted on the GCL above and within 50 feet of the 60-in. diameter RCP. The 60-in.
diameter RCP divides the Area 1 structural fill into western and eastern components; thus, the
North Slope of Area 1 is divided into east and west fills as bisected by this approximately 100-ft
wide compacted soil corridor. CCR was used as structural fill within the remainder of Area 1.
The soil cap system was constructed with approximately 6-ft and 2-ft thick on the top deck and
side slopes, respectively. Access to the base of the structural fill slope is provided by.a gravel
access road situated outside a security fence maintained by the ARA Authority.
Although owned and constructed by the ARA Authority, the Area 1 permit, formerly referred to
as the Distribution of Residual Solids (DORS) Permit (WQ0000020), was issued by the NCDEQ
DWR via renewal to Duke Energy on 2 September 2015 and incorporates the ARA Structural Fill
Projects. As such, Duke Energy performs quarterly inspections of the structural fill slopes and
completes semi-annual groundwater monitoring. Geosyntec understands that Duke Energy
documents inspection events and provides recommendations for maintenance activities to the ARA
Authority. Geosyntec understands that the ARA, as the owner of Area 1, is required to install
and/or maintain all necessary permanent erosion and sediment control measures and is responsible
for completion of repairs to the structural fill area.
1.3 Report Organization
This Report was prepared under the responsible charge of Mr. James D. McNash, P.E. and
reviewed by Dr. Victor M. Damasceno, Ph.D., P.E., both with Geosyntec. Professional engineer
certification of this Report is provided on the cover sheet.
This Report was organized as follows to address to address items (a), (c), (d), (e), (f), and portions
of Appendix A of the N0V-2017-PC-0616 dated 17'November 2017,not addressed elsewhere:
• Section 2 —Engineering Review: This section presents an overview of the Area 1 design
and construction documents available to Geosyntec for review as a part of this Report.
• Section 3 — Breach Delineation and Monitoring Plan: This section describes the slough
and wet area delineation and slope monitoring plan.
GC6463/ARA—Area_1_Engineering Analysis Report 4 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill Gdosyhte ,
Engineering Analysis Report oil r i
• Section 4 — Slope and Phreatic Surface Monitoring Results: This section describes and
presents the Area 1 slope and phreatic surface monitoring data for Area 1.
• Section S — Slope Stability Assessment: This section describes the methodology,
assumptions, and factors of safety computed of the Area 1 slope stability analyses.
• Section 6—Data Interpretation and Potential Failure Mode Analysis:This section presents
the interpretation of data, liquefaction evaluation, source of seepage, and potential failure
mode analysis.
• Section 7— Corrective Action Recommendations: This section identifies potential short-
term and long-term corrective actions under consideration for the Area 1 slope.
• Section 8 —References: This section lists the sources cited during the preparation of this
Report.
GC6463/ARA—Area_l_Engineering_Analysis_Report 5 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill sy'n��'
Engineering Analysis Report risilkatt .;.
2. ENGINEERING REVIEW
2.1 Available Documents
Geosyntec reviewed the available design and as-built documents prepared by the ARA Authority,
their engineering consultants, and their earthwork contractor for Area 1. Routine structural fill
inspections were performed by Duke Energy and inspection reports were provided to the ARA
Authority that contain observations and maintenance recommendations for review and
consideration. The inspection reports were also reviewed and considered during the preparation
of this Report. A list of reviewed documents is provided in Table 1 and pertinent information from
these documents is summarized in the subsections that follow.
2.1.1 Design Documents
Design information available during the development of this Report includes a Hydrogeologic
Assessment Summary Report prepared by Silar Services, Inc. (Silar) [Silar; 2008] and Asheville
Airport—Leachate Evaluation prepared by Alpha-Omega Environmental Management (AOEM)
[AOEM,2009]. These documents were prepared to support Charah's Area 1 design activities and
are summarized below.
Silar was retained to evaluate and identify the seasonally high groundwater table (SHGWT) as
required by Section II,9b of WQ0000020 to locate the structural fill base during design activities.
Silar installed four groundwater monitoring wells(MW-l.through MW-4)screened within the first
observed water bearing zone and collected depth to groundwater measurements to assess the
potentiometric surface for Area 1. MW-1 through MW-3 were installed along the proposed
northern and eastern Area 1 CCR limits; MW-4 was installed immediately south of the proposed
structural fill. Depth to groundwater measurements were collected on 5 March 2008, 7 August
2008, and 19 September 2008. Continuous water levels were collected by an installed pressure
transducer within MW-1 and MW-2 for a period of three and eight months, respectively. The
potentiometric surface was developed for the east Area 1 cell from these measurements and ranged
from 2,090 ft at the south Area 1 boundary to 2,088 ft at the north boundary North American
Vertical Datum (NAVD88). Silar concluded that the SHGWT was approximately seven to eight
feet below existing ground surface, approximately 2,106.7 ft NAVD88 at MW-2. The Silar
assessment did not evaluate or predict hydrogeologic conditions post-construction of Area 1.
AOEM prepared a leachate evaluation summary for the east and west Area 1 cells using the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)Hydraulic Evaluation of Landfill Performance
(HELP)model,version 3.07. AOEM subcontracted Draper Aden Associates to perform the actual
analysis,and a Draper Aden Associates calculation package providing input parameters, (i.e.,liner
slopes, CCR thickness, and cap thickness) was not included within the leachate evaluation
summary memorandum. AOEM stated that the side slope soil cap thickness was 4-ft at the time
GC6463/ARA_Area-1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 6 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill Geosytif i';;!",'
Engineering Analysis Report cizriaCazits
of analysis. AOEM presented the HELP model results for four cases using default parameters,
and concluded that leachate would be retained against the GCL. AOEM computed that 2.23 inches
(32,094 ft3) and 6.28 inches (253,972 ft3) of leachate would be retained on east fill GCL assuming
concrete pavement/soil cover and without soil cover, respectively, over an analysis period. If
converted over a 20-year analysis period for the east fill,the average leachate daily generation rate
for the uncapped and soil/concrete cap condition was computed as 260 gallons per day (gpd) and
33 gpd, respectively. In addition, AOEM reported that 6.49 inches (162,369 ft3) and 4.94 inches
(15,961 ft3) of leachate would be retained on the GCL for the west fill assuming an uncapped fill
(1-year analysis model) and concrete/soil cap (10-year analysis model) conditions, respectively.
The analysis for the west fill leachate generation assumed that a 10-year,24-hour storm(6 inches)
occurred in Year 1 of the analysis model. If converted over each model analysis period, the
average daily leachate generation rate was computed as 3,327 gpd(1-year analysis period) and 33
gpd (10-year analysis period), respectively. AOEM recommended that the North Slope of both
the east and west fills be fitted with a pipe and riser through the cover to monitor for water
infiltration. AOEM also recommended that the pipe and riser be abandoned if water was not
observed after an unspecified period.
2.1.2 As-Built Drawings and Records
Under contract to Charah, Vaughn Engineering prepared sealed as-built drawings [Vaughn
Engineering, 2010] titled "Charah — Asheville Regional Airport Coal Combustion Product
Engineered Fill: March 2010 Update" for Area 1. The as-built drawings depict the pre-existing
topography, GCL base liner location, and cover design, and used to develop assumptions within
this Report.
The Vaughn Engineering as-built drawings indicate that: (i)the historical stream channel was filled
with drainage aggregate; (ii) the 60-in. diameter RCP culvert was bedded in drainage aggregate
without a geotextile separator; and(iii)that the GCL base liner was placed above the RCP culvert
and generally followed the pre-existing topography. The GCL and structural fill base generally
slopes toward the historical stream channel situated east of the 60-in. diameter RCP culvert. The
as-built drawings depict 6-ft and 4-ft thick soil cover over the top deck and side slopes of the
structural fill, respectively. The soil cap placed on Area 1 side slopes was subsequently field-
verified by Charah to be 2-ft thick as described further within Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 of this
Report.
A photographic log prepared by Altamont Environmental, Inc. [2015] depicts that the 60-in.
diameter RCP culvert was installed with drainage aggregate for pipe embedment fill but without a
geotextile separator as indicated on the as-built drawings. In the background of several
photographs, placement of CCR or the GCL base liner is depicted which indicates that the
structural fill construction likely proceeded concurrently with culvert installation activities.
GC6463/ARA_Area 1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 7 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill Ga@(?SyrtteG
Engineering Analysis Report consuu!#u4,
2.1.3 Notice of Violation (NOV-2015-PC-0303)
On 2 December 2015, NCDEQ issued NOV-2015-PC-0303 as an erosion induced breach of the
Area 1 soil cap was observed and reported by Duke Energy after a quarterly inspection. NOV-
2015-PC-0303 required the following for Area 1:
• verify the Area 1 side slope soil cap thickness;
• describe all temporary and long term remedial efforts to address Area 1;
• remove 6-in diameter slope drain at Area 1;
• identify long-term treatment and maintenance of observed rills and cavities on the slope
face; and
• document removal and disposal method of 12 cubic yards of CCR and soil cap material at
breach area.
The verification of soil cap thickness was requested by NCDEQ since varying side slope cap
thicknesses were identified in project concept, design,and as-built documents. Implementation of
these requirements are described within the annual inspection reports summarized within Section
2.1.4.
2.1.4 Annual Inspection Records
Duke Energy prepared annual inspection reports after 2015 to document the condition and
modifications of structural fills at ARA observed during monthly inspections as required by NOV-
2015-PC-0303. To date,two annual inspection reports were completed and submitted to NCDEQ.
The findings regarding Area 1 within the 2015 and 2016 Annual Inspection Reports are
summarized below.
The 2015 Annual Inspection Report provides observations pertaining to structural integrity,
erosion, cap integrity, and condition monitoring of other Area 1 features. Notable observations
within the 2015 Annual Inspection Report include:
• exposed CCR was observed in the northwest corner of the fill and areas of minor erosion
were identified on the slopes;
• exposed CCR was excavated and removed from the site;
• compacted soil was placed to repair the Area 1 soil cap;
• temporary erosion and sediment control measures were installed to limit erosion until a
permanent grading plan was developed by ARA Authority;
GC6463/ARA Area_1 Engineering_Analysis_Report 8 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill l"rGQSC1tG'C '
Engineering Analysis Report cfiisitlttt�c;z
• temporary measures were observed by Duke Energy to be effective within subsequent
inspections;
• removal of thick vegetation at the toe of the North Slope of Area 1 revealed a weep,
described to be flowing at a trickle, and a scarp;
• Duke Energy recommended to the ARA Authority that a geotechnical investigation be
performed to identify source of the weep and cause of the scarp; and
• several ruts on the North Slope were regraded and re-seeded to establish vegetation.
NOV-2015-PC-0303 also required Duke Energy to verify the Area 1 soil cap thickness on the
North Slope during the first annual inspection report. The Area 1 side slope soil cap thickness was
designed to be 2-ft thick as documented within a letter between NCDEQ and Progress Energy
Corporation (now Duke Energy) dated 23 December 2008, although it was depicted erroneously
as 4-ft thick on sealed, as-built drawings prepared on behalf of Charah [Vaughn Engineering,
2010], The 2-ft side slope soil cap thickness was field verified by Charah on 14 December 2015
through observations made during hand auger borings [Duke Energy, 2015].
The 2016 Annual Inspection Report dated 15 December 2016 was prepared by Duke Energy to
summarize the monthly Area 1 inspections. The noted observations are summarized as follows:
• drainage modifications (see Section 2.1.5) designed by AVCON, Inc. (AVCON) [2015],
the ARA Authority's consultant,were designed,permitted by NCDEQ, and implemented;
• drainage modifications appeared to be implemented and functioning as designed during the
December 2016 inspection;
• standing water and tire ruts were observed at the access road and Area 1 slope toe
intersection;
• the weep, again described as a trickle, and scarp remained at the toe of the Area 1 North
Slope and appeared to be outside the limits of CCR; and
• monthly inspection reports were prepared by Duke Energy and provided to the ARA
Authority,which contained recommendations to address observed ruts,erosion,and animal
burrows.
• video inspections are performed annually on the 60-in. diameter RCP culvert and the
results of each video inspection are provided to the ARA Authority. The 60-in. diameter
RCP was most recently inspected on 23 February 2017 by Bio-Nomic Services (BNS).
Duke Energy evaluated the video recording, assessed the pipe condition, and provided
recommendations within this inspection report [Duke Energy, 2017].
GC6463/ARA Area 1 Engineering—Analysis_Report 9 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill G8t?Sy[1ted-P
Engineering Analysis Report .
2.1.5 Recent Drainage Modifications
After the NOV-2015-PC-0303, the ARA Authority retained AVCON to design drainage
improvements for Area 1. The improvements included a riprap lined runoff collection channel at
the west fill crest to re-direct stormwater from the top deck along the access road into an existing
stormwater pond at the base of the slope. An additional swale was constructed on the northeast
section of Area 1. The ARA Authority completed the improvements in 2016.
2.2 Unavailable References
In preparation of the 90-day submittal required by NOV-2017-PC-0616, Duke Energy met with
representatives of Charah on 28 November 2017 to discuss the Area 1 construction history and
procure available engineering references. During this meeting, Charah indicated the design
documents were prepared in accordance with applications promulgated at the time of construction
and that periodic construction quality assurance(CQA)testing was performed by ARA Authority's
consultant. The frequency, location, and documentation of CQA testing was requested from the
ARA Authority, but was not provided at the time this Report was prepared.
GC6463/ARA_Area 1 Engineering Analysis_Report 10 December 2017

AR4—Area I Structural Fill CeQSy11Ced,
Engineering Analysis Report cotiitlfl�
3. BREACH DELINEATION AND MONITORING
3.1 Preliminary Assessment
This Section describes the actions previously implemented by Duke 'Energy to address the
following 30-day requirements which were described in the Preliminary Report[Geosyntec,2017]
submitted to NCDEQ on 27 October 2017:
• accurately map the rupture-and wetted areas; and
• establish a system to monitor for slope movement(e.g., slope pins).
NCDEQ reviewed the Preliminary Report and formally requested additional information,
monitoring, and clarifications (Appendix A of NOV-2017-PC-0616)to be provided in the 90-day
submittal. Duke Energy prepared a Response to Comment letter dated 29 December 2017 to each
NCDEQ comment or observation on the Preliminary Report.
3.1.1 Preliminary Observations
Prior to completion of the Preliminary Report, Geosyntec visited Area 1 three times in September
and October 2017, after the slough was first observed by Duke Energy, as summarized in Table 2.
Geosyntec first visited the site on 22 September 2017 to discuss engineering services to assist
Duke Energy with the response to NCDEQ's short term requirements. Prior to the meeting,Duke
Energy installed the temporary stabilization measure over the slough area, which consists of fine
sand,a non-woven geotextile,and a riprap buttress,as delineated on Figure 2. Geosyntec observed
the following:
• surface flow from the slough and wet areas located on'the east slope was limited and visible
flow was not observed;
• wet areas around the slough area were observed approximately-20-ft to 30-ft upslope from
the east slope toe;
• moist conditions were observed at similar elevations along the access road between the
structural fill slope crest and toe;
• thick vegetation on the west fill slope prevented observations during the 22 September
2017 site visit;
• additional wet areas and potential slope displacements outside of the temporary
stabilization measure could not be identified;
• the east fill slope geometry did not appear to be at a constant slope;
GC6463/ARA Area_1 Engineering Analysis_Report 11 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill :{'reQSCiteG '
Engineering Analysis Report coilfaT►is
• determination whether the east fill slope was not uniformly graded during initial
construction,modified by subsequent maintenance activities,or changed as the result slope
movement was not possible;
• signs of subsidence or displacement were not observed on the top deck or crest of the Area
1 north slope;
• grading did not appear conducive to stormwater drainage from the structural fill top deck
(i.e., some areas appeared to occasionally retain or pond surface water);
• localized depressions or catchments, particularly adjacent to the security fence, were
observed;
• the security fence,installed with a concrete footer to limit vegetative growth near the fence,
is typically an inch or more above the prevailing grade; and
• a pre-existing seep to a wetland area with reddish staining was observed downslope of the
access road bench at the east fill toe,though the source of the seep could not be identified
at the time of the site visit.
These observations were used to develop an initial understanding of Area 1 and to develop a slope
monitoring plan for the accessible east fill slope.
3.1.2 Breach and Wet Area Delineation
Duke Energy subcontracted a professional land surveyor,McKim&Creed,to delineate the slough
and wet areas identified on the east fill. McKim & Creed mobilized to ARA on 4 October 2017
and surveyed boundaries of the temporary stabilization measure constructed to support the slough
area, as well as the supporting erosion and sediment control measures installed downslope of the
slough. A wet area, approximately 90 feet east of the slough area,was identified by Duke Energy
and was pre-emptively stabilized with riprap. McKim & Creed surveyed the limits of this
temporary riprap stabilization since slough and wet areas were not able to be observed at the
ground surface. Duke Energy also directed McKim& Creed to survey the current topography of
the east and west fills of the Area 1 North Slope in support of the slope stability study.
McKim& Creed returned to Area 1 to survey additional slope features on the Area 1 North Slope
on 29 November 2017 and 12 December 2017. The topographic survey, the limits of temporary
stabilization measure (riprap), and other observed features (i.e., wet areas) are provided within
Appendix A of this Report.
3.1.3 Initial Slope Monitoring Plan
During the 22 September 2017 site visit, Geosyntec could not clearly identify whether the failure
mechanism for the slough area constituted a shallow, veneer, or deep-seated failure surface since
GC6463/ARA_Area_l_Engineering_Analysis_Report 12 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill reOSS!T1C4G
Engineering Analysis Report
the Area 1 east fill appeared to be constructed without a consistent slope. Preliminary field
observations suggested that the observed slough was a veneer final cover system failure instead of
a deep-seated failure plane. Absent survey data and without complete understanding of the failure
mechanism, Geosyntec proposed a slope pin monitoring system to: (i) identify whether slope
movements were continuing to move and (ii) identify the potential failure mechanism prior to
recommending a more robust instrumentation program.
Geosyntec visited ARA on 4 October 2017 to inspect the Area 1 east and west fills and install the
initial slope monitoring system. The initial slope monitoring system consisted of 18-inch long
steel stakes (slope pins) driven into the slope at regular intervals to establish a grid and survey
transects for routine monitoring(Figure 2). A total of 78 slope pins were installed in ten transects
as described below.
Geosyntec installed 64 slope pins to create eight transects (A through H)through the temporarily
stabilized area. Transects A and H,are offset approximately 25-ft from each side of the temporary
riprap stabilization system at the east fill toe. Each transect consists of eight slope pins. Pins 1
through 3 were installed at the toe,midpoint, and top of the temporary riprap stabilization system,
respectively. Pins 4 through 6 were installed along the face of the slope at approximately 20 to
25-ft centers. Pins 7 and 8 were installed at the approximate edge of the slope crest and
approximately 25 to 30-ft offset from the edge of the slope crest, respectively. Slope pins in row
6 (A6 through H6)were positioned downslope of an apparent slough formation to assess potential
future movements and evaluate whether the slope distress was due to slope movement or
vegetation management.
Geosyntec installed 14 additional slope pins to create Transects I and J. Transect I traverses the
east slope at a small wet area located approximately 75-ft east of the slough area and temporary
riprap stabilization system. Transect J is located at the eastern corner of Area 1 and was selected
as the slope was visually estimated to be the steepest area of the east fill northern slope. Transects
I and J each contain seven slope pins.
The initial Slope Monitoring Plan for the east section of the Area I North Slope was attached to
the 30-day submittal [Geosyntec, 2017],previously submitted to NCDEQ. Slope pin coordinates
(i.e. northing, easting, and elevation) were surveyed six times between October and December
2017 for the east fill of the Area 1 and these survey events are summarized in Table 3. Baseline
slope pin survey data is provided in Table 4.
3.2 Expanded Slope Monitoring
After the ARA Authority cleared vegetation from the west fill, Geosyntec mobilized on 14
November 2017 to Area 1 to install four additional slope pin transects (K through N) spaced
approximately spaced on 25-ft intervals upslope. Baseline slope pin coordinates (i.e. northing,
GC6463/ARA—Area_1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 13 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill 'e W(",,
Engineering Analysis Reportiytq
casting, and elevation) for these slope pin transects were surveyed on 15 November 2017 by
McKim& Creed.
Between 15 and 17 November 2017, Geosyntec installed six piezometers(PZ-1 through PZ-6)and
one slope inclinometer casing (INC-1) as presented on Figure 3. Piezometers PZ-1 through PZ-4
were installed within 6-in. diameter hollow stem auger (HSA) boreholes advanced with standard
penetration tests (SPTs) at select intervals to collect physical samples of the soil cap, CCR, and
foundation soils. Piezometers PZ-5' and PZ-6 were installed within hand auger borings located
within the east fill. Piezometers PZ-1 and PZ-3 through PZ-6 were screened within the CCR above
the GCL base liner. Piezometer PZ-2 was screened between 40 ft and 50 ft below ground surface
(bgs), which was approximately 7 ft to 17 ft below the Area 1 base liner. Each piezometer was
constructed in accordance with well installation permit WM0100425 and the North Carolina Well
Construction Regulations and Standards- 15A North Carolina Administrative Code(NCAC)02C
.0100. Piezometer construction information is summarized in Table 5 and piezometer construction
records are provided in Appendix B. Select samples collected during SPTs were packaged, sealed,
and transported to Excel Geotechnical Testing, Inc. in Roswell, Georgia for index testing.
Laboratory index testing results are provided in Appendix C and summarized in Table 6.
Slope inclinometer casing INC-1 was installed adjacent to piezometer PZ-3 to a depth of 42.3 ft
bgs,which was where auger refusal was encountered approximately 9 ft into foundation soils. The
primary grove direction (A-A') was positioned parallel to the slope and in line with the expected
direction of movement, if any, and the casing was grouted in place using cement-bentonite grout.
The cement-bentonite grout was mixed to a 1 pound(lb) cement to 6.6 lb water to 0.4 lb bentonite
ratio by weight, as recommended by the casing manufacturer for soft soils.
Slope pin coordinates were collected generally bi-weekly between 4 October 2017 and 12
December 2017 and compared with the baseline survey to identify slope displacements over time.
Water levels were collected from each piezometer and slope inclinometer surveys were performed
during routine inspections of the east and west fills by Duke Energy. Monitoring results and
interpretation of the available data collected are presented in Sections 4 and 6 of this Report.
3.3 December 2017 Observations
Geosyntec inspected the Area 1 east and west fills on 12 December 2017 to corroborate
observations made by Duke Energy during routine inspections and to identify changes in wet and
slough areas, if any. The Asheville, NC area experienced six to ten inches of snowfall on 10
December 2017 and a significant amount of the snow had not yet melted from the North Slope
during the site visit. As such, the observations provided below are limited to those noticeable
despite the weather conditions.
GC6463/ARA Area 1_Engineerin&_Analysis_Report 14 December 2017

1
i
{
ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill Ub-"'JSyCitM
Engineering Analysis Report IIUtxtiltk�C9,
• Additional slumping of the temporary repair measure was not identified since the 4 October,
2017 inspection. Previous shifting south/upslope edge of the temporary repair measure
between slope pins D3 and E3 appeared to not have displaced further. Seepage through
the temporary repair measure could not be discerned or separated from snow melt.
• Wet areas identified, flagged, and surveyed on 15 November 2017 near slope pins H3 and
Jl were located but changes to the wet areas could not be assessed due to snow cover.
• The shallow slough identified on 15 November 2017, near slope pins A6 through D6,was
inspected. Additional movement of the soil cap was not observed during subsequent site
visits and slope pin surveys.
• The weep location observed in Section 3.1.1 was actively seeping and was flagged as SW8-
Al by SynTerra for surface water quality sampling.
• The riprap buttress constructed downslope of slope pin Al in downslope of the east fill
access road was inspected and appeared to be stable. Additional shallow slumping west of
the riprap buttress, adjacent to t e SW8-Al surface water sampling location, and outside
the limits of CCR was observed to be approximately one to two inches deep and
approximately 25-ft long.
• Seepage was observed.at SW10 1.
• Flow was not observed from theI 60-in. diameter RCP, but was observed within the 18-in.
RCP drain situated to the west of the 60-inch RCP.
l
GC6463/ARA_Area_1_Engineering_Analysis Report 15 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill �Q,Sy bet '
Engineering Analysis Report C.b. tt f02it5'e
4. SLOPE AND PHREATIC SURFACE MONITORING RESULTS
The purpose of this Section is to present slope and phreatic surface monitoring measurements and
to identify measurable changes in the slough and wet areas. ,
4.1 Slope Monitoring Measurements
4.1.1 Slope Pin Measurements
McKim & Creed conducted the baseline survey event for slope pin Transects A through J and
Transects K through N on 4 October 2017 and 15 November 2017,respectively. Slope pin survey
events were performed approximately every two weeks by McKim & Creed, starting from 4
October 2017. Northing and easting coordinates of the top of each slope pin were collected in
terms of North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) and the elevations in terms of NAVD88.
Survey activities are summarized in Table 3.
Geosyntec compared the survey coordinates between the baseline surveys and the 12 December
2017 survey events and computed the magnitude of lateral displacement,the elevation change,and
the angle of lateral displacement from north.(set as 0 degrees) was computed for each slope pin.
The reported accuracy for the survey by McKim-& Creed is f 0.1 feet (1.2 inches) for northing,
easting, and elevation. As a conservative estimate, a slope pin was considered to have displaced
if the magnitude of movement(northing/easting)or elevation was found to be at least 0.1 feet from
the baseline survey, although, in Geosyntec's engineering judgment, 0.2-ft of movement or more
is a better indicator of displacement. The baseline survey coordinates, 12 December 2017 survey
coordinates,and computed displacements and angle of displacement are presented in Table 4. The
raw survey data from McKim& Creed is attached in Appendix D.
The following observations are made based on the comparison of slope pin surveys completed to
date:
• Six slope pins (136, C7, D7, 118, Jl, J2) on the east fill were calculated to have displaced
laterally above the survey tolerance (0.1 ft/1.2 in.)relative to the baseline survey.
• Four slope pins on Row 8 (A8, B8, C8, F8) at the top of the east fill were calculated to
have displaced in elevation greater than the survey tolerance (0.1 ft).
• Slope pins K2,K3,K5,K6,K7,L1,L4,M2,M4,N2,N5, and N8 within the west fill were
found to displace between 0.1 ft and 0.2 ft since the baseline survey.
Figures 4 and 5 depict the slope pins and slope movements for the east and west fills,respectively,
that exceed the survey tolerances computed between the baseline and the most recent survey. Prior
surveys identified lateral movements above the survey tolerance in additional slope pins (D3, D6,
GC6463/ARA_Area l_Engineering_Analysis_Report 16 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fillr4QSCttG(,"
Engineering Analysis Report cai3ultatits;
J6)that were not identified in the most recent survey. These differences are likely associated with
the limits of the surveying technology employed and discussed further in Section 6.1.
Slope pins will be continued to be to be monitored and compared to the baseline data to reduce
uncertainties within measured displacements and identify groups of adjacent slope pins with
consistent direction of movement to provide additional indicators of movement.
4.1.2 Piezometer Measurements
Depth to water levels within Piezometers PZ-1 through PZ-6 were measured by Geosyntec and
Duke Energy five times between 20 November 2017 and 12 December 2017. Depth to water
measurements and the corresponding phreatic surface elevations are summarized in Table.7 and
presented on Figure 6 with rainfall data collected from a ARA rain gauge available at
www.weatherundergound.com. As-built piezometer details and locations are provided in
Appendix B and on Figure 3, respectively. A summary of as built piezometer construction
information is provided in Table 5.
Water elevations within PZ-1 through PZ-3 were found to range between 2,112.29 ft and 2,116.10
ft NAVD88. Water elevations within piezometer PZ-4, located in the northeast corner of Area 1;
were found to range between 2,123.83 ft and 2,124.1'8 ft NAVD88 during the measurement record.
Water elevations from PZ-5 and PZ-6, situated mid-slope of the east fill, were found to range
between 2,112.90 ft and 2,114.95 ft NAVD88.
4.1.3 Slope Inclinometer Measurements
On 17 November 2017, slope inclinometer casing INC-1 was installed to 42.3 ft bgs adjacent to
PZ-3 at the east fill crest above the temporary stabilization measure as depicted on Figure 3. Duke
Energy performed the baseline slope inclinometer casing survey on 29 November 2017 to allow
for curing of the cement-bentonite grout. The first slope inclinometer casing survey was conducted
on 12 December 2017. Each casing survey extends to 38-ft below top of casing or approximately
35.7 ft bgs.
Profile change and tilt change plots for INC-1 casing are provided on Figures 7 and 8,respectively.
The profile change plot depicts recent casing profile data against the baseline casing profile data.
The tilt change plot compares the recent tilt readings against the baseline tilt reading at each depth.
In both cases,changes in the profiles represent movement.The tilt change plot does not accumulate
movement throughout the profile(i.e.,movement will only be represented at depths measured with
additional tilt). The raw slope inclinometer casing survey data is provided in Table 8.
GC6463/ARA Area_1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 17 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill 166synteG
Engineering Analysis Report criiiSiittattts=
5. SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT
5.1 Overview
A detailed discussion of the slope stability analysis can be found in the calculation package
presented in Appendix E. The purpose of the analysis is to identify the failure mechanism of the
observed slough, compute the global FS, and provide a proof-of-concept for the potential long-
term correction action. Geosyntec selected three critical cross-sections for analysis as depicted on
Figure 9. Cross section A is cut through the Area 1 west fill. Cross sections B and C are cut
approximately perpendicular to the temporary stabilization measure and a wet area that contains a
potential seep, respectively. For each cross section,the following failure mechanisms or analysis
cases were considered:
• Veneer stability:In this mechanism, it is assumed that a shallow slip surface passes through
the soil cap or soil cap/CCR interface only.
• Global failure: In this mechanism, it is assumed that a deep-seated slip surface is the cause
of failure. The slip surface is assumed to pass through the top deck.
• Base sliding: In this mechanism, it assumed that the.CCR and soil cap slide as a deep-
seated block along the CCR/GCL interface. The slip surface is assumed to pass through
the top deck.
The influence of a seepage face on the computed FS was also evaluated to further demonstrate the
trigger of the observed slough. In this scenario, a cross sections through the east fill was selected
where seepage or wet areas was observed in the soil cap, and the phreatic surface was manually
adjusted such that the seepage face is removed. No specific analysis (e.g. finite element analysis)
was conducted to predict the phreatic surface since piezometer measurements near the east and
west fill slopes suggest that CCR is a relatively permeable material. As such, this scenario is
conceptual and intended to evaluate the influence of the seepage face in triggering the observed
slough.
Per NCDEQ's comment on the 30-day submittal, the influence of an elevated phreatic surface
generated from surface water infiltration potentially from rainfall was also evaluated. In this case,
cross sections B and C were selected and the phreatic surface in the structural fill was increased
until a calculated FS of 1.5 was computed. The seepage face was increased up the slope
concurrently with the phreatic surface elevation. A FS of 1.0 indicates that the driving forces are
equivalent to the resisting forces based on the model assumptions and parameters. A computed
FS below 1.0 indicates that slope displacement is expected. A FS of 1.5 or greater is the standard
of engineering practice and is required by NCAC— Title 15A Subchapter 2K— Dam Safety for
slopes under normal,long-term loading conditions.
GC6463/ARA Area_l_Engineering_Analysis_Report 18 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill C►ec�Syntec
Engineering Analysis ReportoTlultstii.
5.2 Input Parameters
Input parameters for slope stability analysis were developed from historical documents, recent
survey and investigation data, and engineering literature. Representative cross sections were
developed from recent surveys performed by McKim & Creed [20171 and as-built drawings
[Vaughn Engineering, 20101. Material parameters were developed from SPT blow counts, index
testing results, and engineering literature for foundation soils, CCR, and soil cap materials. The
phreatic surface within Area 1 was selected based recent water level measurements. Details of the
input parameter selection are provided in Appendix E.
5.3 Analysis Results
Slope stability analysis results (computed FS) are summarized in Table 9. For the deep-seated
failure mechanisms (i.e. global and base sliding),the calculated FS were found to equal or exceed
1.5 for each cross section evaluated. For the veneer stability cases, the calculated FS were found
to be below 1.0, for cross sections B and C, where seepage and wet areas were observed in the
field and modeled as a seepage face for analysis. The effective overburden stress experienced by
the soil unit is reduced when the surface manifestation of seepage in the form of a seepage face is
observed,which in turn reduces the shear strength of the soil unit. For shallow sliding planes,the
existing overburden stresses are relatively small and a reduction of effective overburden stress due
to the buoyancy of water is relatively large. As such, the computed FS for the veneer/shallow
failure at these locations were computed as less than 1.0, consistent with field observations prior
to implementation of temporary corrective measure; while the global failure surfaces with much
larger overburden and shear strengths were computed to be 1.5 or greater because the relative
contribution of additional water or seepage is small. The calculated FS for veneer stability on the
west fill exceeded 1.5, consistent with field conditions since a seepage face was not observed in
this area.
When the seepage face was removed from one of the east fill cross section models,the calculated
FS was found to exceed 1.5 for both veneer and global failure mechanisms. In the sensitivity
analysis for the cross sections passing through the east fill, the phreatic surface that results in a
calculated FS of 1.5 for a global failure mechanism was found to be approximately 2,120 ft
NAVD88, approximately 6 ft higher than the current phreatic surface based on water elevation
measurements presented in Section 4.1.2.
The slope stability analysis results suggest that the observed slough or failure is shallow in nature
and likely triggered by the development of a seepage face at the base of the east fill.
GC6463/ARA_Area_1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 19 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill {rG'QS3%I1�G'G;
Engineering Analysis Report coYrsiilltuets
6. DATA INTERPRETATION AND POTENTIAL FAILURE MODE EVALUATION
6.1 Interpretation of Instrumentation Measurements
Figures 4 through 8 present the measured slope pin movements, piezometer depth to water
elevations, slope inclinometer survey measurements collected to date. The following subsections
present the interpretation of these measurement results._
6.1.1 Slope Pin Measurements
Slope pins located within row 3 of the eastern North Slope(A3 through 1­13) were installed at the
top edge of the east fill temporary stabilization measure. Movement that exceeds the survey
tolerance was measured on 29 November 2017 but was not measured on 12 December in slope
pins D3 and F3. A slight scarp was observed upslope of slope pins D3 and E3 in earlier
inspections, but this area does not appear to have visually moved in subsequent inspections. As
such, the computed movement in slope pins D3 and F3 was considered the result of small
settlements or sand washout during subsequent rainfall events and not an indication of additional
soil cap failure.
Slope pins in Row 6 of the eastern North Slope(A6 through H6)were installed to monitor potential
movements of areas of subsidence, scarping, or depressions within former downdrain locations.
Slope pins B6, D6, and F6 were computed with movement exceeding the 0.1-ft survey tolerance
when the 29 November 2017 survey is compared to the baseline survey. Based on the survey
collected on 12 December 2017,the movements within slope pins D6 and F6 are computed below
the survey tolerance. Slope pins C7 and D7 situated 25-ft upslope of the scarp were computed
with approximately 0.11-ft of movement (0.01-ft above tolerance) based on 12 December
2017.survey.As such,these results suggest that the scarp in this location may have shifted slightly,
i.e., within 0.1-ft, but,is not quantifiable given the drift associated with the survey tolerances. In
Geosyntec's engineering judgment, 0.2-ft is a better indication of slope pin displacement. A.
potential scarp was noticed during slope inspections between slope pins A6 and D6 after grass was
cut on the slope and may have been present during slope pin installation. As such, the slope pin
data for this area indicates that the scarp has not moved significantly during the measurement
period. Slope pins.A8,B8, C8, and F8 were measured to have subsided slightly since the baseline
survey event. Displacements outside the survey tolerance were identified between 15 November
and 29 November 2017 but did not continue to subside as of the 12 December 2017 survey.
Vegetation was cut on Area 1 in mid-November 2017 and piezometers and inclinometers were
installed between 15 to 17 November 2017 in this area. As such, these small movements absent
additional movement may be traffic-induced from recent slope maintenance and subsurface
investigation activities and not an indication of slope or soil cap movements.
GC6463/ARA Area 1 Engineering—Analysis—Report 20 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill G OSt�t'C
Engineering Analysis Report colstPTaris.
.Based on the results presented above, the Area l east fill does not appear to be displacing or as
displaced at a magnitude less than the accuracy of the survey over the monitoring period since the
slope pins locations,generally were found to be within 0.1-ft of their original locations or minimally
above the survey tolerance.
Several slope pins (K2, K3, K5, K6, K7, L1, L4, M2, M4, N2,N5, and N8) installed in the west
fill were computed to have lateral movements exceeding the 0.1-ft survey tolerance between the
baseline and the most recent survey. Two survey events since the baseline survey have been
conducted on these pins;as such,a longer measurement period is necessary to assess whether these
movements are meaningful, or the result of systematic errors or errors caused by the conditions
during the most recent survey(i.e., six to ten inches of snow on the slope).
Slope pin movements for pins that have been computed with lateral movements exceeding 0.1 ft
between the baseline and a survey event were plotted with time and compared with precipitation
data for the ARA. Figures 10 and 11 depict the computed lateral movements and elevation change
over time, respectively, for the east fill. Figure 12 depicts the lateral movements over time for the
west fill. Elevation change exceeding the survey tolerance has not been measured for the west fill
and was not plotted against rainfall data. ,The data indicate precipitation has not induced additional
slope pin movements within the east fill during the monitoring period. Further monitoring is
recommended as significant precipitation between the 15 November 2017 and 29 November 2017
survey events was not measured by rain gauges at ARA. Slight lateral movements were observed
after the rainfall and snowfall events for slope pins installed in the west fill. The most recent
survey was collected two days after a heavy snowfall event which did not melt at the time of the
survey. The surveyor removed snow from each slope pin to locate each survey monument prior
to collection of survey data.
6.1.2 Piezometer Measurements
Adjacent to the east fill temporary stabilization measure,water elevations within piezometers PZ-
3 and PZ-5 situated on the top deck and mid slope, respectively, were measured as 2,115.2 ft and
2,114.0 ft NAVD88 on 12 December 2017. The temporary stabilization measure was constructed
approximately between elevations 2,105 ft and 2,115 ft NAVD88 where the slough and seepage
were observed, and the top of the riprap extends'several feet upslope of the observed slough and
wet area. As such, the piezometer data corroborates that the phreatic surface within the CCR
slopes shallowly towards the slough area where the infiltrated water daylights from the east fill
interior. In the northeast corner of Area 1, a similar trend with a steeper slope was observed
between piezometers PZ-4,and PZ-6;however, a small wet area has been identified near the slope
toe.
Piezometer PZ-2 was screened within foundation soils beneath the Area 1 GCL base liner and was
measured with a water surface elevation of 2,113.5 ft NAVD88 on 12 December 2017. Based on
GC6463/ARA_Area_1_Engineering—Analysis_Report 21 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural FillGQSt1CeC
Engineering Analysis Report ctistiitsenf9:`
the boring logs and as-built survey elevations, the GCL base liner was observed at approximately
2,112 ft NAVD88 (-33 ft bgs) indicating that groundwater rises toward the CCR. Water surface
elevations within PZ-5 and PZ-6, at the slope toe, are measured above those measured in
piezometer PZ-2, which suggests that the phreatic surface within the CCR of the east fill is not
hydraulically connected to the underlying groundwater.
The GCL base liner was encountered at approximately 37.6 ft bgs(-2,106.8 ft NAVD88)and 33.0
ft bgs (-2,112.3 ft NAVD88) when drilling piezometers PZ-3 and PZ-4, respectively. Thus,
approximately 12 to 13 ft of water is retained above the GCL within east fill CCR at these
locations. While the GCL was not encounter in piezometer PZ-1,the liner elevation from as-built
drawings [Vaughn Engineering, 2010] is approximately 2,103.0 ft NAVD88,which indicates that
the west fill also retains approximately 10 ft of water above the GCL at this location. Piezometers
PZ-5 and PZ-6 were installed within hand auger borings above the GCL liner. Since the GCL was
not encountered, the height of water above the GCL at PZ-5 and PZ-6 was not estimated.
Piezometer PZ-2 was installed in foundation soils (i.e., below GCL) and not within the CCR.
Select SPTs were performed at 5-ft depth intervals until 28 ft bgs, where CCR was described as
"wet". The GCL was encountered at approximately 33 ft bgs (2,111.9 ft NAVD88) at the PZ-2
location which is generally consistent with"as-built drawings [Vaughn Engineering, 2010]; thus,
five feet of water is possibly retained above the liner at this location, if not more.
6.1.3 Inclinometer Measurements
Figures 7 and 8 present the profile and tilt change measurements for the baseline survey on 29
November 2017 and subsequent survey on 12 December 2017, which indicate that the casing has
not deflected over the measurement period. As such, evidence of a global slip surface within the
CCR or translational movement along the GCL-CCR interface for the Area 1 slope adjacent to
INC-1 is not apparent.
6.2 Changes of Slough and Wet Areas
Based on the site visit assessments described in Section 3.1 and 3.3 and slope monitoring results,
the slough area does not appear to have changed or expanded significantly since 4 October 2017.
The temporary stabilization measure obstructs inspection of the ground surface of the slough, but
the condition of the temporary stabilization measures and the surrounding slope are routinely
inspected.
Additional limited wet areas were identified since Geosyntec's initial inspections in October 2017
near slope pins H3, J2, and Kl, and these areas are located on Figure 2. The wet areas adjacent to
H3 and J2 are routinely inspected to assess whether seepage from the east fill is expanding or
contracting. The wet area identified near Kl appears to be groundwater discharge and not
associated with seepage from the west fill.
GC6463/ARA Area_1_Engineering—Analysis_Report 22 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill {�rE'.bsp E:C
Engineering Analysis Reports,tt
6.3 Source of Seepage Water
Seepage water at the base of the east fill appears to be infiltrated stormwater from the Area 1
interior. The subgrade and GCL base liner were constructed by generally following the pre-
existing topography and slope to the north toward the French Broad River. Infiltrated water flows
along the GCL northward and collects against the GCL adjacent to the north perimeter berm
constructed to bound the Area 1 fill. Infiltrated water began daylighting through slope soil cap at
the observed seepage and wet areas as the saturation of CCR increased over time.
The soil cap was not designed to prevent stormwater infiltration into the east fill as evidenced by
the absence of final design plans or technical specifications that specify the required soil cap
permeability performance. The top deck soil cap is shallowly graded to the north but a security
fence with concrete footer was installed after Area 1 construction by the ARA Authority above the
adjacent grade which impedes stormwater and allows additional water infiltration. Previous
communication between ARA Authority and Charah indicates that a hangar facility surrounded by
concrete slabs and concrete driveways was initially planned to be constructed on the east fill soil
cap. The concrete areas were assumed to facilitate runoff and reduce infiltration according to
calculations summarized by AOEM [2009]. To date, a hangar facility with supporting concrete
slabs and drives have not been constructed on the east or west fills.
Maintenance by the ARA Authority of the .top deck and soil cap appears to be limited to
establishment and trimming of vegetation. Ruts and depressions were observed during Area 1
inspections, in which ponded water was observed after rainfall and snowfall events. These ruts
and depressions impede runoff and allow for additional saturation of the cover and infiltration into.
the Area 1 interior.
Water elevation measurements from PZ-2 through PZ-6 suggest that water within the CCR is
hydraulically separated from the underlying foundation soils. Piezometer PZ-2, screened in the
foundation soils, was found with a lower water elevation than PZ-3 and PZ-4, screened within
CCR, closer to the east fill North slope. If these zones were hydraulically connected, the water
elevation measured from PZ-2 would be anticipated to follow the slope of the GCL base liner and
be measured higher than the elevations measured in PZ-3 and PZ-4.
The source of wet areas or seeps outside the limits of CCR were not evaluated by Geosyntec.Water
quality sampling and analysis required in the 90-day submittal is provided by SynTerra[2017] and
not discussed herein.
6.4 Cause of Area 1 Slough
The slough observed on 7 September 2017 by NCDEQ was most likely caused by infiltrated water
at'east fill seeping at the slough location, saturating the soil cap material,and developing a seepage
GC6463/ARA_Area_1 Engineering_Analysis_Report 23 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill G@OS !t1tG'C.a
Engineering Analysis Report con,Wtaziis`
face. As a drainage layer or drainage mechanism between the CCR and soil cap was not designed
or installed,the east fill slope developed a seepage face,which caused the slough/veneer failure to
be triggered within the soil cap. Based on the computed FS,as described within Section 5,a veneer
failure at the observed slough is predicted (i.e., a FS less than 1.0). The computed global FS
through the east fill is greater than 1.5,which indicates that the sum of the resisting forces exceeds
the driving forces by a ratio of 1.5 and is standard acceptable risk level for slopes under normal,
long-term conditions as indicated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers(USACE) [2003].
Inclinometer casing surveys indicate the east fill slope has not displaced globally between casing
surveys,which is further supports the global stability analyses presented in Appendix E.
6.5 Liquefaction Analyses
Geosyntec understands that engineering analysis requirements were not established specifically
for Area 1 at the time of construction. Also, North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) § 130A-
309.220 and applicable sections of Title 15A of the NCAC Subchapter 13B do not specify design
requirements with regards to seismic analyses including liquefaction. In response to comments
provided in NOV-2017-PC-0616, the static liquefaction potential and seismic liquefaction
susceptibility evaluations were performed for the structural fill with respect to shallow and global
slip surfaces. Due to absence of pertinent design requirements(and therefore standard liquefaction
analysis procedures) in the referenced regulations, the static and seismic liquefaction evaluations
for the structural fill were performed in accordance with standard evaluation procedures followed
in practice and USEPA CCR rule [USEPA, 2015], although the USEPA CCR rule does not apply
to beneficial reuse applications of CCR. The USEPA CCR rule specifies the required FS against
seismic liquefaction, FSiiq, of 1.2 for surface impoundments, which may be considered too
conservative for structural fills.
6.5.1 Static Liquefaction
Static liquefaction refers to a phenomenon in which the granular skeleton of a saturated, loose
matrix collapses during undrained shear and undergoes a significant reduction in effective stress,
resulting in subsequent flow if unconstrained. Since limited information is available for the in-
place CCR within Area 1 and the absence of a standard analysis procedure for structural fills, static
liquefaction potential of the Area 1 structural fill was qualitatively evaluated based on the guideline
for static liquefaction potential evaluation published by Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
[EPRI, 2012]. The EPRI guideline was developed for ponded fly ash based on the results from
literature review and comprehensive field and laboratory testing programs to assess potential for
static liquefaction. Based on the EPRI guideline, the following conditions or observations may
indicate relatively higher static liquefaction potential, i.e., flow potential, if the structural fill
undergoes undrained loading conditions, e.g., slope failure:
GC6463/ARA Area l_Engineering Analysis_Report 24 December 2017

ti
ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill
Engineering Analysis Reportoiulfiakifs��
• The structural fill is saturated with water and placed in such a loose state that it exhibits a
significant contractive tendency under undrained loading.
• The structural fill maintains a loose state due to early life diagenetic cementation.
The information obtained.from the recent subsurface investigation and used for the qualitative
static liquefaction potential evaluation is summarized as follows.
• The slope stability analyses of the structural fill under existing conditions and sensitivity
analyses presented in Section 5.3 indicate undrained loading(i.e., slope instability)may be
anticipated for the cover soil only. Therefore, the likelihood of a saturated portion of the
structural fill that undergoes undrained loading conditions is relatively low.
• The majority of SPT results(N-values)are greater than four blows per foot. N-values from
CCR upslope of the slough area ranged from 8 to 20,which indicate a relatively dense state
of the structural fill.
• The EPRI guideline indicates pH values greater than 9.5 are a strong indicator of afly ash
that has experienced, or can experience, diagenetic cementation. The pH values for the
five CCR samples collected from the Area 1 were less than or equal to 83, as presented in
Table 6,which indicate a relatively lower potential for diagenetic cementation. Moreover,
any diagenetic cementation which might have been developed during initial deposition of
the material within CCR basins at the Asheville Steam Electric Plant is anticipated to have
been broken during compaction in the structural fill.
Based on the information described above, the static liquefaction potential of the structural fill is
deemed to be relatively low.
6.5.2 Seismic Liquefaction
6.5.2.1 Seismic Hazard Evaluation
Seismic hazard evaluation consists of selection of appropriate hazard level and associated hazard
parameters, which include the peak ground acceleration (PGA) and the earthquake magnitude.
The appropriate hazard level is often expressed in probabilistic terms as a specific hazard level
that has a certain probability of exceedance for a given time period. Since seismic design
requirements of the structural fill and regulatory requirements for CCR structural fills are absent,
the liquefaction susceptibility evaluation was conservatively performed based on seismic design
parameters (i.e.,PGA) consistent with a 98 percent probability that the PGA will not be exceeded
in 50 years,in accordance with USEPA[USEPA,2015]. This results in a PGA with a return period
of 2,475 years,which is commonly referred to as 2,500-year event acceleration.
GC6463/ARA_Area l_Engineering_Amlysis_Report 25 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill GeOSyntecl>
Engineering Analysis Report �oiisidWbi`
The PGA corresponding to different hazard levels and site conditions can be obtained by using the
United States Geological Survey (USGS) deaggregation tool [USGS, 2017]. The deaggregation
tool also provides a corresponding earthquake moment magnitude. Figure 1 of Appendix F
presents the seismic hazard deaggregation for Area 1. Based on the USGS deaggregation tool,the
PGA value at the "firm rock" (i.e., shear wave velocity of 2,500 feet per second (ft/s) or greater)
below Area 1, PGAB/c, and the moment magnitude at the site are estimated to be 0.17g and 5.64,
respectively. Local site effects(e.g., amplification) should be considered to calculate a PGA at the
ground surface, PGAground, for the liquefaction susceptibility evaluation. Following the procedure
presented in American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7 [ASCE, 2010], the site class was
estimated Class E using available N-values at the site. Subsequently, PGAground was calculated as
0.33g by multiplying PGAB/c by the coefficient, 1.94, that corresponds to Site Class E to account
for local site effects.
6.5.2.2 Seismic Liquefaction Susceptibility Evaluation Methods
Seismic liquefaction susceptibility was evaluated through comparison of earthquake-induced
cyclic stress with cyclic resistance of the subsurface materials within the structural fill as presented
by Idriss and Boulanger [2008]. The cyclic stress was calculated using a simplified procedure,
originally proposed by Seed and Idriss [1971]. The cyclic resistance of CCR was estimated using
an undrained shear strength. In general, CCR exhibit non-plastic characteristics. The cyclic
resistance estimation method developed for silt and clay was selected for the Area 1 CCR based
on the grain size distribution of the material (silt-sized or clay-sized as presented in Table 6) and
cyclic triaxial test results for CCR collected from other CCR basins. Since site-specific CCR
undrained shear strength data are not available, an undrained shear strength ratio for non-
compacted CCR within a basin located at another North Carolina Duke Energy site was
conservatively used for the liquefaction susceptibility evaluation.
6.5.2.3 Seismic Liquefaction Susceptibility Evaluation Results
The seismic liquefaction susceptibility was evaluated at four SPT boring locations associated with
potential global slip surfaces in Area 1. Profiles with depth of the calculated FSliq at these locations
are presented on Figure 13. The detailed calculations are also provided in Table 1 of Appendix F.
FS1iq for the SPT depths meet the required FS1iq (i.e.,FS> 1.2).
The static slope stability analysis results presented in Section 5.3 indicate shallow slip surfaces
adjacent to the toe of the slope do not meet the required FS for static slope stability. Based on the
static slope stability analysis, the underwater CCR in shallow slip surfaces is not anticipated to
meet the required FSliq. Lowering the phreatic surface (and subsequently, the seepage face
elevation)within the CCR and above the GCL will improve FS1iq.
GC6463/ARA Area 1 Engineering_Analysis_Report 26 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill GOed
` Vnbd ,�
Engineering Analysis Report
tit15t1FGt1fS=,
6.6 Potential Failure Mode Evaluation
The following subsections describe thei potential failure mode evaluation for Area 1. For the
purposes of this evaluation, failure was defined as an event that exposes CCR contained within
Area 1.
6.6.1 Soil Cap Instability
Soil cap instability is defined as displacement on the CCR-soil cap interface or sloughing of the
soil cap, which may result in the exposure of CCR. Soil cap instabilities on side slopes are often
the result of insufficient surface water or groundwater drainage, inadequate design analysis, or
poor construction. A veneer failure may expose CCR or develop a shorter seepage path resulting
in the piping. Generally,veneer failures or shallow failures in slopes are managed as maintenance
items. If left unrepaired, the slope may progressively degrade, which in turn may result in
conditions that allow for a global slope failure mechanism.
In consideration of the assessments presented within Sections 6.3 and 6.4, a soil cap instability is
the likely failure mode, as infiltrated water continues to collect underneath the soil cover to seep
and saturate the soil cap. Surface water generally drains to the north and towards the 2-ft thick
slope soil cap, when not impeded by depressions and the security fence footers. Surface water
then flows-down the fill side slopes and contributes to the saturation of the soil cap, particularly
the 3H:1 V slope of the east fill. Geosyntec recommends that the selected corrective action include
design elements to remove and prevent infiltrated water adjacent to the slope and to design surface
water features to promote positive drainage from the fill.
6.6.2 Global Slope Instability
Global slope instability or deep-seated failure occurs when a soil mass rotates or slides as a block,
which results in large slope displacements and potentially debris flow offsite. For the purposes of
this analysis, a deep-seated failure was considered as a rotational surface passing from the top
deck, CCR, and the slope toe or a block sliding failure along the GCL-CCR interface. Based on
observations, inclinometer casing surveys, and the analysis presented in Section 5 of this Report,
a deep-seated failure is not likely since the computed FS against global sliding exceeds 1.5 for
each section evaluated.
6.6.3 Liquefaction of CCR and Foundation Soils
Liquefaction is the phenomenon where saturated sandy soils loose shear strength due to excess
pore pressure generation particularly in response to rapid loading(i.e., seismic shaking). The loss
of shear strength can result in global and shallow slope failure, subsidence,and lateral spreading
ultimately causing damage to existing structures and/or debris flow offsite. Based on the
GC6463/ARA Area_1 Engineering_Analysis_Report 27 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill GeQStteC,
Engineering Analysis Report G66su3fants
evaluation of liquefaction of CCR presented in Section 6.5, CCR within Area 1 is not anticipated
to experience static liquefaction. CCR within the slope may be susceptible to seismic liquefaction.
6.6.4 Seepage and Piping
Seepage is flow of water through the soil, often daylighting at the ground surface, and is typically
associated with dams or impoundments. If hydraulic gradients are large, seepage may result in
piping, heaving, and static liquefaction of the slope toe. Measured water levels within Area 1 do
not show large hydraulic gradients within the east and west fill slopes. As such,heaving and static
liquefaction are not considered likely failure mechanisms the soil cap or CCR. Limited piping has
been observed to coincide with the initial slough and, if left unaddressed, could further erode the
soil cap. Duke Energy installed a sand and geotextile over the slough and piping area to serve as
a filter and mitigate future piping within the soil cap. Duke Energy routinely monitors the east
and west fill slopes for changes in wet areas or sloughing and will install temporary measures to
mitigate piping as needed until a final corrective action is implemented. As such, a failure induced
or progressively induced by piping is not considered likely.
6.6.5 Soil Erosion
Soil erosion of the soil cap, if not maintained and left unrepaired, may result in the exposure of
CCR at the ground surface as subsequent rainfall events progressively erode soil material over
time. Erosion rills or gullies are typically backfilled and re-seeded as a part of on-going
maintenance. If drainage conditions suggest that stormwater transitions from sheet flow to
channelized overland flow, engineered drainage structures may be required to prevent erosion of
soil.
Area 1 design drawings indicate large areas drain at a shallow grade to the north slope of the east
and west fill. As such, channelized overland flow may develop at the top deck to fill slope
transition to form erosion rills and gullies on the northern east and west fill slopes. Geosyntec
recommends that vegetation continue to be maintained on the top deck and fill slopes to limit
erosion and that observed rills and gullies be repaired as a part of routine maintenance. The
stormwater design of the corrective action will consider soil erosion, if applicable.
6.6.6 Hurricane or Tropical Storm
Extreme weather events expose Area 1 to heavy rainfall and high winds, which can induce
conditions that could result in shallow failures of the slope. High winds contain the potential to
overturn of trees or tall structures, which result in the uproot or overturning of root masses or
foundations. Overturning of these structures can cause voids within the slope, expose CCR to
other elements, and/or lead to progressive failure. No trees have been permitted to grow and no
tall structures, other than the security fence, have been constructed within Area 1. As such, high
winds are not considered a potential failure mechanism.
GC6463/ARA Area_1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 28 December 2017

ARA—Area I Structural Fill Gibosytitee°`
Engineering Analysis Reportistliitxi ;'.
High rainfall events may result in larger stormwater runoff velocities resulting in soil erosion or
may result in greater infiltration into Area 1. The potential failure analysis of higher infiltration
rates is also discussed in Section 6.6.1,respectively.
6.7 Consequences of Failure
The anticipated consequences of failure are dependent on the failure mechanism and range from
additional maintenance activities to potential offsite flow of CCR. Soil erosion and veneer soil
cap failures may result in additional repair and maintenance activities to prevent a progressive or
unravelling global failure. If unmitigated, exposed CCR could potentially migrate from Area 1
during a rainfall event to the stream channel and offsite. Global instability could be induced from
high extremely phreatic conditions, unmitigated progressive shallow failures, or liquefaction may
result in large displacement of CCR northward towards a residential area. Large displacements
would likely result in property loss and potential injury or loss of life, dependent on the extent and
pace of failure. These potential failure mechanisms were evaluated previously within this Report
and are not considered likely for Area 1.
GC6463/ARA Area 1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 29 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill Geosptedc`
Engineering Analysis Report codsw
7. CORRECTIVE ACTION RECOMMENDATIONS
This section presents potential temporary(short-term)and permanent(long-term)corrective action
measures for the Area 1 North Slope to meet requirements under Item (c) issued within NOV-
2017-PC-0616 dated 17 November 2017, which requests that Duke Energy "(...) identify
temporary and permanent (e.g. short term and long term) corrective action measures (...)"
As indicated in Section 6.4, the likely cause of the slough is the saturation and seepage face
development within the Area 1 fill slope. As such, short-term and long-term corrective action
measures should be planned to lower the phreatic surface adjacent to the slope toe. Slope stability
analyses that demonstrate the effectiveness of this conceptual approach are provided in Appendix
E. The slope stability analyses indicate that lowering the phreatic surface adjacent to the slope toe
yields long-term veneer FS equal to or greater than 1.5.
Potential short-term corrective action measures to lower the phreatic surface and remove or prevent
seepage face development in the Area 1 North Slope include:
• installation of a temporary riprap buttress;
• install system to promote removal of or lower elevation of existing porewater; and
• re-grade the cover system and establish vegetation to promote stormwater runoff reduce
infiltration.
Prevention of surface water infiltration and removal of infiltrated water comprise the
recommended long-term corrective action measures. Potential long-term engineering measures
include:
• construct an impermeable barrier or cap, which may consist of a concrete slab, a concrete
parking area, or an engineered cap containing a geomembrane liner;
• installation of a drainage system(active or passive)to continuously remove infiltrated and
perched water; and
• installation of a permanent stabilization buttress and seepage collection corridor.
Final corrective action measures that include the collection of perched or seepage waters may
require treatment prior to discharge. Seepage and other water quality data are provided by
SynTerra under a separate cover. Geosyntec recommends development of the design of short-and
long-term corrective action measures, upon receipt of concurrence from NCDEQ, for options
presented above.
GC6463/ARA Area 1_Engineering_Analysis_Report 30 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 structural Fill GeOStG'G
Engineering Analysis Report cr�risultits,
8. REFERENCES
Altamont Environmental,Inc.,2015."Area 1 60-inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe(RCP)Installation
Photographs."
Amec Foster Wheeler, 2016. "CCP Annual Pipe Inspection Assessment." Asheville Regional
Airport, 14 April 2016.
AOEM, 2009. "Asheville Airport—Leachate Evaluation." Prepared for Charah, Inc., Project No:
09-107, 21 September 2009.
ASCE, 2010. "Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures."ASCE/SEI Standard
7-10.
AVCOM, Inc. 2016. "Area 1 and Area 4 Improvements: Released for Construction." Asheville
Regional Airport, April 2016..
Duke Energy, 2015. "Coal Combustion Products Structural Fill Permit No. WQ0000020: 2015
Annual Inspection Report." 31 December 2015.
Duke Energy, 2016. "2016 Asheville Airport Annual Inspection Report." 15 December 2016.
Duke Energy, 2017. "2017 Annual CCTV Inspection Video Assessment — Asheville. Regional
Airport." 30 May 2017.
EPRI, 2012. "Geotechnical Properties of Fly Ash and Potential for Static Liquefaction: Volume 1
—Summary and Conclusions."Palo Alto, California,December 2012.
Geosyntec,2017."Preliminary Engineering Assessment Report Asheville Regional Airport—Area
1 Structural Fill Asheville,North Carolina." October 2017.
Idriss, I. M., and Boulanger, R. W., 2008, "Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes." Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute, EERI Publication MNO-12.
McKim&Creed,2017."Topographic Survey of Fill Area on Asheville Airport for Duke Energy."
December 2017.
South Carolina Department of Transportation, (2010). "Geotechnical Design Manual." Updated
June 2010.
Seed, H. B., and Idriss, I. M., 1971. "Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction
Potential."JSoil Mechanics and Foundations Div,ASCE 97 (SM9),pp. 1249-1273.
Silar, 2008. "Hydrogeologic Assessment Summary Report." Prepared for Charah, 24 October
2008.
SynTerra, 2017. "Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling Report—November 2017: Asheville
Airport Structural Fill — Area L" Technical Memorandum, File No: 1026.02.44, 15
December 2017.
GC6463/ARA Area 1 Engineering—Analysis_Report 31 December 2017

ARA—Area 1 Structural Fill �C'iet?SyCtt�G:.
Engineering Analysis Report
USAGE, 2003. "Engineering and Design: Slope Stability Engineer Manual.", Manual No. 1110-
2-1902, 31 October 2003.
USEPA, 2015. "40 CFR Parts 257 and 261, Hazardous and Solid CCR Management System;
Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities; Final Rule."
USGS, 2017. "Unified Hazard Tool, Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 Edition."
https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/.
Vaughn Engineering, 2010. "Charah — Asheville Regional Airport Coal Combustion Product
Engineered Fill: March 2010 Update." Prepared for Charah, 8 March 2010.
GC6463/ARA_Area 1 Engineering_Analysis_Report 32 December 2017

i
TABLES

Table 1. Summary of Area 1 Engineering Resources
No. Document Title Author Date Description
1 Permit No.WQ0000020 NCDEQ. 2-Sep-15 DWR permit authorization for the Area 1 structural fill.
Charah-Asheville Regional Airport Coal Vaughn Sealed"as-built"drawings prepared by Vaughn Engineering.
2 Combustion Product Engineered Fill: Engineering 8-Mar-10 Document shows the as-built conditions as of March 2010.
March 2010 Update
North General Aviation Development Sealed construction plans for the Area 1 fill. Liner details or
3 Grading and Drainage for the Asheville WK Dickson 3-Dec-07 mention of CCR was not included and pre-dates the structural fill
Regional Airport concept.
4 Area 1 and Area 4 Improvements- Avcon May-16 Drawing set provides drainage improvement design for the Area
Released for Construction 1.
Asheville Regional Airport-Area 1 Water Memorandum contains groundwater monitoring well locations,
5 Location Summary and Boring Logs Charah 29-Dec-09 installation,and abandonment records.Well installation and
abandonment records provided by Silar Services,Inc.
6 Area 1—60-inch Reinforced Concrete Altamont - Photograph of RCP installation between 29 July 2008 and 2 July
Pipe Installation Photographs Environmental,Inc. 2009.
7 CCP Annual Pipe Inspection Assessment Amec 14-Apr-16 2016 annual inspection report for the 60"RCP for the Area 1.
2017 8 Assessment Annual CCTV Inspection Video Duke Energy 30-May-17 2017 annual inspection report for the 60"RCP for the Area 1.
Assessment
9 Notice of Violation(NOV-2015-PC-0303) NCDEQ 2-Dec-15 NOV issued in 2015 for erosion observed in the northwest corner
of Area 1.
10 2015 Annual Inspection Report Duke Energy 31-Dec-15 2015 annual inspection report for Area 1.
11 2016 Annual Inspection Report Duke Energy 15-Dec-16 2016 annual inspection report for Area 1.
12 Leachate Evaluation Summary AEOM 21-Sep-09 Presentation of BELP model results.
13 Hydraulic Assessment Summary Report Silar 24-Oct-08 Hydrogeologic study to determine the SHGWT.
14 Asheville Airport Structural Fill-Project Charah 21-Feb-07 Initial feasibility study prepared by the Asheville Regional
Feasibility Report Airport's Contractor
IofI

Table 2. Summary of Geosyntec Site Visits
No. Date Personnel Project Role Description
James McNash,P.E. Project Engineer Initial site visit to discuss engineering services to
1 22-Sep-17 Brian Adair,Ph.D. Project Manager support the Area 1 structural fill project.
James McNash,P.E. Project Engineer Site visit to inspect Area 1 structural fill eastern
2 4-Oct-17 slope,install slope monitoring system on eastern
Josh Colley,E.I. Senior Staff Engineer cell,and assist topographic survey tasks.
3 9-Oct-17 Brian Adair,Ph.D. Project Manager Site visit to document NCDEQ comments and
concerns regarding project activities.
14-Nov-17 Josh Colley,E.I. Senior Staff Field investigation install additional slope
4 to monitoring pins,seven piezometers,and a slope
17-Nov-17 Yovanna Cortes Di Engineers inclinometer casing.
Lena,Ph.D.
Site visit by project engineer to inspect the
5 12-Dec-17 James McNash,P.E. Project Engineer condition of Area 1 slope,identify wet areas,and
locate additional slope distress before completion
of the 90-day deliverable.
loft

Table 3. Summary of Area 1 Survey Events (October to December 2017)
Survey No. Date Description
Survey to delineate the temporary riprap stabilization measure
since breach and wet areas were not able to be observed at the
ground surface. slough and wet areas on the east side of the Area
1 North Slope, temporary stabilization measures, erosion and
sediment control measures installed downslope of the breach. A
wet area approximately 90 feet east of the breach area was
identified by Duke Energy and was pre-emptively stabilized with
1 4-Oct-17 riprap. McKim&Creed surveyed the limits of the measures.
Duke Energy also directed McKim& Creed to survey the current
topography of the east and west portions of the Area 1 North Slope
in support of the slope stability study to be provided for the 90-day
short term requirements. The topographic survey and the limits of
temporary stabilization measure (riprap) is provided within
Appendix A of this Report.
Site visit to inspect Area 1 structural fill eastern slope,install
2 18-Oct-17 slope monitoring system on eastern cell,and assist topographic
survey tasks.
3 1 Nov-17 Site visit to document NCDEQ comments and concerns regarding
project activities.
Field investigation to inspect Area 1 structural fill eastern and
4 15 Nov-17 western slopes,install additional slope monitoring pins,and
oversee and document field investigation consisting of SPTs,and
installation of inclinometer casing and 7 piezometers.
5 29-Nov-17 Site visit to locate surface water sampling locations,survey east
and west cell slope pins,and to delineate observed we areas.
Routine east and west fill slope pin monument survey.McKim&
6 12-Dec-17 Creed did not survey slope pin D2. 2 to 10 inches of snow on
ground. Survey had to clear with foot to locate the top of each
slope pin.
1ofI

I
I
Table 4. Baseline and Most Recent Slope Pin Survey Data
I
Baseline Survey Date Survey Date 141
Relative Movement(ft)
4 October 2017 15 November 2017 12 December 2017 '
Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting. Elevation Direction
Pin ID (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83). (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) Ay Ox Magnitude Az (o)�s�
Al 636481.904 945163.365 2105.853 - - - 636481.890 945163.351 2105.877 -0.014 -0.014 0.020 0.024 225
A2 636470.291 945167.177 2109.646 - - - 636470.293 945167.147 2109.675 0.002 -0.030 0.030 0.029 274
A3 636458.644 945171.283 2112.458 - - - 636458.619 945171.286 2112.489 -0.025 0.003 0.625 0.031 173
A4 636434.927 945180.011 2117.490 - - - 636434.956 945179.982 2117.524 0.029 -0.029 0.041 0.034 315
A5 636413.117 945190.021 2123.249 - - - 636413.095 945189.967 2123.283 -0.022 -0.054 0.058 0.034 248
A6 636397.566 945199.936 2128.452 - - - 636397.563 945199.907 2128.490 -0.003 -0.029 0.029 0.038 264
A7 636376.284 945211.539 2135.014 - - - 636376.277 945211.543 2135.037 -0.007 0.004 0.008 0.023 150
A8 636355.931 945224.657 2138.556 - - - 636355.906 945224.634 2138.449 -0.025 -0.023 0.034 -0.107 223
Bl 636489.781 945186.317 2106.368 - - - 636489.779 945186.363 2106.389 -0.002 0.046 0.046 0.021 92
B2 636478.376 945190.288 2109.816 - - - 636478.299 945190.305 2109.833 -0.077 0.017 0.079 0.017 168
B3 636465.725 945194.863 2113.344 - - - 636465.711 9451.94.879 2113.376 -0.014 0.016 0.021 0.032 131
B4 636443.276 945203.328 2119.209 - - - 636443.218 945203.329 2119.235 -0.058 0.001 0.058 0.026 179
B5 636420.820 945211.405 2125.492 - - - 636420.764 945211.450 2125.524 -0.056 0.045 0.072 0.032 141
B6 636402.301 945216.878 2130.521 - - - 636402.200 945216.927 2130.552 -0.101 0.049 0.112 0.031 154
B7 636383.344 945222.379 2135.427 - - - 636383.311 945222.365 2135.458 -0.033 -0.014 0.036 0.031 203
B8 636361.970 945235.113 2138.483 - - - 636361.568 945235.116 2138.300 -0.002 0.003 0.004 -0.183 124
Cl 636498.766 945209.941 2106.735 - - - 636498.723 945209.910 2106.754 -0.043 -0.031 0.053 0.019 216
C2 636486.639 945212.946 2110.183 - - - 636486.554 945212.991 2110.210 -0.085 0.045 0.096 0.027 152
C3 636474.019 945216.833 2113.404 - - - 636474.008 945216.797 2113.430 -0.011 -0.036 0.038 0.026 253
C4 636451.458 945223.692 2120.012 - - - 636451.467 945223.691 2120.048 0.009 -0.001 0.009 0.036 354
C5 636428.342 945231.254 2126.396 - - - '636428.275 945231.227 2126.431 -0.067 -0.027 0.072 0.035 202
C6 636410.388 945236.607 2131.544 - - - 636410.455 945236.557 2131.577 0.067 -0.050 0.084 0.033 323
C7 636394.411 945241.291 2136.195 - - - 636394.438 945241.185 2136.233 0.027 -0.106 0.109 0.038 284
C8 636372.500 945251.907 2138.611 - - - '636372.491 945251.876 2138.497 -0.009 -0.031 0.032 -0.114 254
D1 636506.816 945233.510 2106.841 - - 636506.762 945233.497 2106.851 -0.054 -0.013 0.056 0.010 194
D2 636494.156 945237.299 2110.487 - - - 636494.114 945237.332 2110.486 -0.042 0.033 0.053 -0.001 142
D3 636479.664 945241.210 2114.438 - - - 636479.612 945241.226 2114.445 -0.052 0.016 0.054 0.007 163
D4 636460.580 945247.699 2119.883 - - - 636460.541 . 945247.713 2119.906 -0.039 0.014 0.041 0.023 160
D5 636435.967 945254.813 2126.813 - - - 636435.955 945254.805 2126.846 -0.012 -0.008 0.014 0.033 214
D6 636418.086 945259.649 2132.832 - - - 636418.027 945259.635 2132.860 -0.059 -0.014 0.061 0.028 193
D7 636405.953 945263.486 2136.127 - - - 636405.854 945263.466 2136.161 -0.009 -0.020 0.101 0.034 191
D8 636384.217 945272.170 2139.196 - - - 636384.189 945272.116 2139.217 -0.028 -0.054 0.061 0.021 243
El 636515.080 945257.040 2107.780 - - 636515.015 945257.066 2107.784 -0.065 0.026 0.070 0.004 158
E2 1 636503.440 1 945261.517 2110.616 - - - 636503.453 945261.484 2110.620 0.013 -0.033 0.035 0.004 292
E3 636487.911 1 945266.994 2114.948 - - - 636487.945 945266.953 2114.961 0.034 -0.041 0.053 0.013 310
1 of 4 j

Table 4. Baseline and Most Recent Slope Pin Survey Data (Continued)
Baseline Survey Date Survey Date 141
Relative Movement(ft)
4 October 2017 15 November 2017 12 December 2017
Pin ID Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Direction
(ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) Ay Ax Magnitude Az (o)151
E4 636469.840 945273.842 2120.075 - - - 636469.779 945273.778 2120.083 -0.061 -0.064 0.088 0.008 226
E5 636445.349 945280.128 2126.682 - - - 636445.328 945280.094 2126.689 -0.021 -0.034 0.040 0.007 238
E6 636430.138 945283.777 2132.292 - - - 636430.073 945283.731 2132.319 -0.065 -0.046 0.080 0.027 215
E7 636414.959 945287.451 2136.557 - - - 636414.949 945287.424 2136.573 -0.010 -0.027 0.029 0.016 250
E8 636391.982 945294.253 2139.244 - - - 636391.957 945294.234 2139.181 -0.025 -0.019 0.031 -0.063 217
F1 636522.509 945280.459 2107.975 - - - 636522.461 945280.427 2107.988 -0.048 -0.032 0.058 0.013 214
F2 636511.032 945284.714 2111.115 - - - 636511.006 945284.759 2111.130 -0.026 0.045 0.652 0.015 120
F3 636498.740 945288.014 2114.139 - - - 636498.709 945288.032 2114.152 -0.031 1 0.018 0.036 0.013 150
F4 636475.506 945294.063 2120.697 - - - 636475.437 945294.074 2120.723 -0.069 0.011 0.070 0.026 171
F5 636452.046 945300.524 2127.393 - - - 636452.023 945300.479 2127.399 -0.023 -0.045 0.051 0.006 243
F6 636436.629 945305.293 2132.264 - - - 636436589 945305.226 2132.286 -0.040 -0.067 0.078 0.022 239
F7 636421.117 945309.404 2136.927 - - - 636421.107 945309.363 2136.968 -0.010 -0.041 0.042 0.041 256
F8 636397.327 945315.000 2139.859 - - - 636397.282 945314.987 2139.717 -0.045 -0.013 0.047 -0.142 196
GI 636531.104 945310.143 2108.443 - - - 636531.105 945310.129 2108.467 0.001 -0.014 0.014 0.024 274
G2 636520.932 945315.056 2110.686 - - - 636520.931 945315.034 2110.701 -0.001 -0.022 0.622 0.015 267
G3 636509.086 945319.588 2114.535 - - - 636509.161 945319.561 2114.565 0.075 -0.027 0.080 0.030 340
G4 636486.579 945327.939 2121.207 - - - 636486.597 945327.907 2121.231 0.018 -0.032 0.037 0.024 299
G5 636463.454 945334.341 2128.149 - - - 636463.485 945334.356 2128.179 0.031 0.015 0.034 0.030 26
G6 636445.377 945338.768 2133.082 - - - 636445.438 945338.693 2133.105 0.061 -0.075 0.097 0.023 309
G7 636429.029 945343.133 2137.778 - - - 636429.070 945343.064 2137.792 0.041 -0.069 0.080 0.014 301
G8 636405.771 945349.322 2141.968 - - - 636405.740 945349.256 2141.992 -0.031 -0.066 - 0.073 0.024 245
H1 636538.020 945333.277 2109.509 - - - 636538.019 945333.300 2109.536 -0.001 0.023 0.023 0.027 92
H2 636525.882 945336.258 2111.896 - - - 636525.915 945336.228 2111.927 0.033 -0.030 0.045 0.031 318
H3 636513.866 945339.576 2115.371 - - - 636513.868 945339.546 2115.377 0.002 -0.030 0.030 0.006 274
H4 636491.788 945345.834 2122.368 - - - 636491.751 945345.849 2122.391 -0.037 0.015 0.040 0.023 158
H5 636468.368 945352.958 2129.400 - - - 636468.349 945352.994 2129.412 -0.019 0.036 0.041 0.012 118
H6 636450.448 945358.593 2134.189 - - - 636450.398 945358.558 2134.212 -0.050 -0.035 0.661 0.023 215
H7 636432.965 945363.355 2139.412 - - - 636432.952 945363.329 2139.436 -0.013 -0.026 0.029 0.024 243
H8 636409.569 945369.441 2144.034 - - - 636409.472 945369.404 2144.053 -0.097 -0.037 0.104 0.019 201
I1 636551.433 945397.611 2113.643 - - - 636551.406 945397.584 2113.661 -0.027 -0.027 0.638 0.018 225
I2 636527.467 945402.756 2119.318 - - - 636527.477 945402.821 2119.344 0.010 0.065 0.066 0.026 81
I3 636505.311 945409.023 2126.391 - - = 636505.328 945409.072 2126.428 0.017 0.049 0.052 0.037 71
I4 636482.975 945418.124 2133.100 - - - 636482.964 945418.132 2133.133 -0.011 0.008 0.014 0.033 144
I5 636465.992 945424.121 2137.878 - - - 636466.075 945424.155 2137.894 0.083 0.034 0.090 0.016 22
I6 636449.736 945431.123 2144.533 - - - 636449.737 945431.086 2144.553 0.001 -0.037 0.037 0.020 272
2 of 4

Table 4. Baseline and Most Recent Slope Pin Survey Data (Continued)
Baseline Survey Date Survey Date PI
Relative Movement(ft)
4 October 2017 15 November 2017 12 December 2017
Pin ID Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Magnitude Elevation Direction
(ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) Ay Ox g Az (0)151
I7 636429,365 945438.929 2144.685 - - - 636429.398 945438.974 2144.711 0.033 0.045 0.056 0.026 54
11 636589.795 945566.491 2110.121 - - - 636589.822 945566.646 2110.099 0.027 0.155 0.157 -0.022 80
J2 636568.951 945558.829 2117.952 - - - 636569.055 945558.987 2117.872 0.104 0.158 0.189 -0.080 57
J3 636546.840 945552.551 2127.177 - - - 636546.845 945552.642 2127.213 0.005 0.091 0.091 0.036 87
J4 636524.605 945545.038 2135.297 - - - 636524.622 945545.105 2135.320 0.017 0.067 0.069 0.023 76
J5 636511.106 945541.104 2139.670 - - - 636511.124 945541.163 2139.690 0.018 0.059 0.062 0.020 73
J6 636494.456 945537.566 2144.459 - - - 636494.477 945537.635 2144.490 0.021 0.069 0.072 0.031 73
J7 636458.238 945536.154 2145.418 - - - 636458.180 945536.158 2145.439 -0.058 0.004 0.058 0.021 176
KI - - - 636355.252 944990.677 2105.756 636355.327 944990.640 2105.813 0.075 -0.037 0.084 0.057 334
K2 - - - 636331.850 944991.522 2113.769 636331.964 944991.478 2113.816 0.114 -0.044 0.122 0.047 339
K3 - - - 636307.935 944991.991 2121.308 636308.035 944991.971 2121.335 0.100 -0.020 0.102 0.027 349
K4 - - - 636284.719 944991.770 2129.980 636284.789 944991.731 2130.017 0.070 -0.039 0.080 0.037 331
K5 - - - 636268.876 944992.094 2133.643 636268.981 944992.021 2133.678 0.105 -0.073 0.128 0.035 325
K6 - - - 636244.438 944988.354 2135.738 636244.544 944988.277 2135.768 0.106 -0.077 0.131 0.030 324
K7 - - - 636220.187 944984.130 2139.799 636220.267 944984.070 2139.769 0.080 -0.060 0.100 -0.030 323
L1 - - - 636354.648 944959.744 2104.296 636354.798 944959.707 2104.358 0.150 -0.037 0.154 0.062 346
L2 - - - 636331.594 944959.850 2113.090 636331.672 944959.808 2113.118 0.078 -0.042 0.089 0.028 332
L3 - - - 636308.016 944960.718 2120.726 636308.037 944960.695 2120.734 0.021 -0.023 0.031 0.008 312
L4 - - - 636284.789 944961.672 2129.735 636284.862 944961.603 2129.734 0.073 -0.069 0.100 -0.001 317
L5 - - - 636268.886 944962.238 2134.049 636268.948 944962.235 2134.047 0.062 -0.003 0.062 -0.002 357
L6 - - - 636244.305 944960.449 2136.222 636244.363 944960.381 2136.213 0.058 -0.068 0.089 -0.009 310
L7 - - - 636219.873 944957.976 2139.827 636219.904 944957.916 2139.779 0.031 -0.060 0.068 -0.048 297
MI - - - 636346.980 944933.769 2108.038 636347.065 944933.731 2108.097 0.085 -0.038 0.093 0.059 336
M2 - - - 636332.301 944934.044 2113.407 636332.405 944933.993 2113.460 0.104 -0.051 0.116 0.053 334
M3 - - - 636308.354 944933.362 2120.764 636308.424 944933.295 2120.805 0.070 -0.067 0.097 0.041 316
M4 - - - 636284.650 944932.521 2129.623 636284.806 944932.472 2129.653 0.156 -0.049 0.164 0.030 343
M5 - - - 636268.791 944931.936 2134.684 636268.858 944931.903 2134.701 0.067 -0.033 0.075 0.017 334
M6 - - - 636245.994 944928.466 2136.458 636246.033 944928.396 2136.476 0.039 -0.070 0.080 0.018 299
M7 - - - 636220.445 944923.770 2140.101 636220.499 944923.730 2140.121 0.054 -0.040 0.067 0.020 323
N1 - - - 636357.618 944918.266 2107.490 636357.677 944918.225 2107.519 0.059 -0.041 0.072 0.029 325
N2 - - - 636352.426 944896.284 2117.312 636352.515 944896.235 2117.347 0.089 -0.049 0.102 0.035 331
N3 - - - 636350.269 944885.756 2121.431 636350.350 1 944885.721 1 2121.463 0.081 -0.035 0.088 0.032 337
N4 - - - 636348.810 944878.661 2122.579 636348.847 944878.591 2122.610 0.037 -0.070 0.079 0.031 298
N5 - - - 636347.724 944873.184 2125.008 636347.815 944873.258 2125.042 1 0.091 0.074 0.117 0.034 39
3 of4

i
Table 4. Baseline and Most Recent Slope Pin Survey Data (Continued)
Baseline Survey Date Survey Date[41
4 October 2017 15 November 2017 12 December 2017 Relative Movement(ft)
Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting ElevationF636342.887
Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Direction
Pin ID (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) Ay Ox Magnitude Az (o)�s�
N6 - - - 636342.816 944850.556 2134.354 944850.596 2134.378 0.071 0.040 0.081 0.024 29
N7 - - - 636335.035 944827.658 2136.142 944827.672 2136.161 0.066 0.014 0.067 0.019 12
N8 - - - 636325.082 944805.769 2135.205 636325.109 944805.663 2135.230 0.027 -0.106 0.109 0.025 284
Notes:
[1] McKim&Creed performed baseline survey of slope pins on 4 October 2017 for slope pins Al through J7 and 15 November 2017 for slope Pins Kl through N8.
[2] Horizontal and vertical survey accuracy is to 0.10 ft(1.2 in.);relative movements in bold indicate displacement greater than survey accuracy.
[3] Magnitude of relative movement(or displacement)computed based on the horizontal displacement only.
[4] Slope Pin D2 was not surveyed on 12 December 2017 by McKim&Creed.Data presented was collected on 29 November 2017 for this pin only.
[5] A direction of 0 degrees represents true north.
4 of 4

Table 5. .Piezometer Installation Details
Survey Record
Sand
Top of Top of Top of Bot.of Bot.of Pack/ Bentonite
Piezometer Screen Screen Screen Screen Seal
Northing Eastin GSE TOC Well Prepack Unit
ID g g Elev. Pad Depth Elevation Depth Elevation Depth
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Elev. (ft bgs) (ft) (ft bgs) (ft) Depth (ft bgs)
(ft) (ft bgs)
PZ-1 636217.48 944940.05 2139.73 2142.73 2140.32 29.0 2110.73 34.0 2105,73 28.0 27.0 CCR
PZ-2 636169.71 945231.91 2144.89 2147.89 2145.17 40.0 2104.89 50.0 2094.89 38.0 31.2 Foundation
Soil
PZ-3 636383.42 945306.57 2139.78 2142.78 2140.16 31.0 2108.78 36.0 2103.78 30.0 28.0 CCR
PZ-4 636457.27 945518.29 2145.52 2148.52 2145.63 27.0 2118.52 32.0 2113.52 26.0 25.0 CCR
PZ-5 636475.18 945250.34 2116.60 2119.60 2116.56 4.0 2112.60 6.5 2110.10 3.5 2.0 CCR
PZ-6 636567.12 945555.55 2119.17 2121.47 2119.28 7.5 2111.67 10.0 2109.17 6.0 3.0 CCR
Notes:
[1] Elevations provided in terms of ft NAVD88.
[2] GSE-ground surface elevation;TOC-top of casing;ft bgs-feet below ground surface.
1ofI

Table 6. Summary of Laboratory Index Testing Data
Sample Sample Depth Gravel Sand Silt Clay Fines Specific PH PH
ID Type Ill (ft bgs) Material ("�o) (%) ("�o) (o/o) Content( ) Gravity USCS�3I 14j 141
Method 1 Method 1
SPT-1 SS 1 Soil Cap - - - - 59.2 - ML - -
SPT-1 SS 29 CCR 0.0 12.0 - - 88.0 - ML -
SPT-1 SS 31 CCR - - - - - - ML 8.3 7.8
SPT-2 SS 19 CCR - - - - 71.2 - ML - -
SPT-2 SS 31 CCR - - - - 83.1 - ML 8.2 7.6
SPT-2 SS 40 Foundation - - - - 28.4 - SM - -
SPT-2 SS 45 Foundation - - - - 32.9 - SM - -
SPT-3 SS 1 Soil Cap 0.6 42.9 32.9 23.6 56.5 - ML - -
SPT-3, SS 9 CCR - - - - 65.2 - ML - -
SPT-3 SS 29 CCR - - - - 85.2 - ML - -
SPT-3 SS 33 CCR 1.1 17.1 74.4 7.4 81.8 2.290 ML 8.3 7.8
SPT-4 SS 1 Soil Cap 1.2 51.6 25.6 21.6 47.2 2.764 SM - -
SPT-4 SS 9 CCR - - - - 73.8 - ML - -
SPT-4 SS 29 CCR - - - - 84.4 - ML - -
SPT-4 SS 31 CCR 0.4 16.9 79.4 4.3 82.7 1 - ML 7.7 7.6
HA-2 HA - CCR 0.0 12.0 76.9 11.1 76.9 1 2.279 ML 7.3 6.4
Notes:
[1] SS-Split Spoon;HA-Hand Auger Bulk.
[2] Mid-depth of sample.
[3] USCS was based on visual classification and laboratory test results.
[4] Methods 1 and 2 use distilled water and calcium chloride,respectively,as the solution for the analytical test.
[5] ft bgs=feet below ground surface;USCS=Unified Soil Classification System.
1oft

Table 7. Piezometer Phreatic Surface Level Measurements
Piezometer PZ-1 PZ-2 PZ-3 PZ-4 PZ-5 PZ-6
ID
TOC El. 2142.73 2147.89 2142.78 2148.52 2119.60 2121.47
(ft)
Date DTW Elevation DTW Elevation DTW Elevation DTW Elevation DTW Elevation DTW Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
11/20/17 29.70 2113.03 35.60 2112.29 27.28 2115.50 24.59 2123.93 6.30 2113.30 6.07 2115.40
1112d/17 29.ti3.=; 2t13 10 34,69 2113 20; 28:43 21L4.35 24 69t „2,12383 `- " 6 20' " 2113.40. 6:79;" P 2114:68"
11/22/17 29.52 2113.21 34.40 2113.49 27.44 2115.34 24.34 2124.18 6.23 2113.37 6.54 2114.93
11/29117 N `j29.64 2t13.09 34:62 2113:27. 2,668k -2116.10, 24.58�= r2123'94 6.7Q 211290;` ; ° "`7.06 2114.41=
12/12/17 29.49 2113.24 34.37 2113.52 27.60 2115.18 24.31 2124.21 1 5.59 2114.01 1 6.52 2114.95
Notes:
[1] TOC=Top of Casing;DTW=Depth to Water;GWT=Groundwater Table;EL=Elevation;ft NAVD88=feet North American Vertical Datum of
1988.
[2] All elevations are provided in ft NAVD88.
Iof1

Table 8. Inclinometer Measurements
Raw Data R] Interpreted Results PI
Depth 12 December 2017
(ft) 29 November 2017121 12 December 2017 Tilt Change Profile Change
AO A180 BO B180 AO A180 BO B180 A-A' B-B' A-A' B-B'
2 1180 -1206 229 -324 1158 -1220. 232 -311 -0.0010 -0.0012 0.0262 0.0274
4 688 -711 614 -717 688 -709 613 -731 -0.0002 0.0016 0.0271 0.0286
6 216 -233 794 -876 224 -246 788 -882 0.0025 0.0000 0.0274 0.0270
8 84 -114 653 -721 93 -119 644 -726 0.0017 -0.0005 0.0248 0.0270
10 395 -419 -168 90 406 -427 -161 85 0.0023 0.0014 0.0232 0.0275
12 258 -279 -1090 1033 266 -279 -1085 1022 0.0010 0.0019 0.0209 0.0260
14 73 -98 -1316 1251 83 -98 -1314 1238 0.0012 0.0018 0.0199 0.0241
16 122 -135 -1392 1316 130 -144 -1368 1295 0.0020 0.0054 0.0187 0.0223
18 379 -405 -1483 1405 387 -415 -1495 1396 0.0022 0.0004 0.0167 0.0169
20 704 -728 -1713 1638 707 -734 -1710 1629 0.0011 0.0014 0.0145 0.0166
22 900 -913 -1849 1773 904 -917 -1844 1747 0.0010 0.0037 0.0134 0.0151
24 928 -957 -1618 1506 936 -961 -1614 1491 0.0014 0.0023 0.0125 0.0114
26 1082 -1100 -1548 1466 1095 -1102 -1544 1456 0.0018 0.0017 0.0110 0.0091
28 1298 -1327 -1515 1433 1303 -1331 -1506 1423 0.0011 0.0023 0.0092 0.0074
30 1344 -1366 -1421 1338 1349 -1371 -1419 1328 0.0012 0.0014 0.0082 0.0052
32 1335 -1353 -1448 1356 1345 -1360 -1461 1343 0.0020 0.0000 0.0070 0.0037
34 1088 -1115 -950 882 1093 -1120 -964 870 0.0012 -0.0002 0.0049 0.0037
36 891 -914 -838 762 900 -920 -832 755 0.0018 0.0016 0.0037 0.004
38 670 -701 -486 416 .681 -706 -477 405 0.0019 0.0024 0.0019 0.0024
Notes:
[1] Data presented in terms of instrument units(Instrument Constant: 100000).
[2] Baseline slope inclinometer casing survey performed on 29 November 2017.
[3] Tilt change refers to incremental displacement;profile change refers to cumulative displacement.
1 of I

Table 9. Summary of Computed Factors of Safety
Calculated Factor of Safety-Failure Mechanisms
Cross
Section Veneer Stability Global Stability Base Sliding Removal of Seepage Face
A 1.6 2.0 1.8 N/A
B 0.9 1.9 1.5 1.8
C 0.8 1.9 1.8 N/A
Notes:
[1] The target factor of safety for normal,long-term conditions is 1.5 or greater.
[2] N/A=not applicable as a seepage face has not been observed.
1of1

FIGURES

4 V�
qq
e
y
k :Zx r
to a 'a tee;,z�
QR
AS 4 •
t✓ is S
` � phi �, �.'e� .� � ,ka&M 'y t'J �' S ��, `�` ���•.: �.- �M
+ l
e
r
!e ) u
as l
\` i� `[ °'S � & . v�. � fz< -•n *y r .`"'ter � .,yy,x ^"Pz�"
. t
J
1'
e"
l n
"
kA
IV
y a r x
{
k
f
•�� a;` � �,. i � t��C{45 e 4I y,.�r °- r'`:i�d}�� J1 �. f-tti�. ��' �'S'rye{`,��d`t �d
"+�w�--rrww
ft"V'
' tcc
#F3
r j
1,jix
!l.
e
�"i 1 �6Y .y S ,+i��r, �\.Y .,�Y`Y A E �e k'A`:�+ K-�•. � �..1 .ux>. P w"
R,.g 9 It i.. �.. tt t �•tr dp�, � t 1r9� 3� 4 ,
�tm.
'a
z i _
itA
vy
�• �, ��: � e�� ,il� ` � ``e,�:, e �`` 1�? 3q ; � E�x�a E'+t ��r �r��= i � �
it
It
,grrk x d i� 2 y � ma`&. ,r+r„ �.3 1 •.�F".. d s x --.i� .YC�,.
j C r. t
1,000 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet
Legend
Area 1 Stormwater Network SITE LOCATION MAP
0 Parcel Boundary } ° w C Asheville Regional Airport
Asheville, North Carolina
Notes: a
1.Service Layer Credits: Source:Esri,DigitalGlobe,GeoEye, 19� Geosyntee® DUKE Figure
Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS,USDA,USGS, ENERGY
AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIS User Community. COnSLlltantS
2. Parcel boundaries obtained from Buncombe County GIS website ,
on 20 December 2017. =_
.�� .��, ', CHARLOTTE,NC DECEMBER 2017

,
y y
a � .
L
t,
n • C. 9
` D `
v f
� 1 i66 #s
x
A.
Willm
rd
[PY, m #
I ,.l,. t�,+w".., #•CIF'" . .-s;. Q/��', • "�-eat• ^�xt���� � �}I' '� k .. v
,: ,: �!, I #' In.r.. ,:-.. � _ MF � ,�:� WlO .�;,��,a s:'1p UV fi � �� �� 'L'. � -`•
* W 31 .; �. yam}
• -)44Ak
..
s y
Ll WII
YIN
Qffl
'rt
ryYa fi•r.,�,
': >.' E• ' . t5.,a a{'..g ., :.�
g
r ._ i. I�.F'..; +` s...a, $y_ '1�." .ems- �,•.
D/CJ
N i
,
q
..., ..; t: ,... .. r a �. .w ry� ��7 �°�,.r�— !' ' -' ;'r=:r•- ' i, .z-..,� b.,. '•aid.
' t
r�
z
g':, i.�- OF ,'�.;�'A.' v'..-ik j ,. -' ,, •1 0 -3�1W.�Y��?!�A?' � � 00� �'�"' - C� `� � kx•�-'
Ge yy � y
Slough 4,
e Wet Area ,.�. . •, �.��.':���,}�s �- -�.i3'.i.. ,.�.5p I ..;X � : - .1;;,?�; ,s .� s �w �:.�fi .< ':�.L+ a' a �.' n
•
44
9 Control Point
. x _
Rltr
o Slope Pin-Installed 4 October 2017 ',-' , • _ .-,, `�;. a � ` y'
,. sue..' s. §
s ...
� .s.
B — �;. ,� '� :.-. •jam*,•, : ,•t*�....� +F.Fp9' T /, -.i...
Slope Pin Installed 14 November 2017 '���' ,'�, a b. r.
x
.. -. ..:. :..< 3._ .ar.- .Y.a �`„ �z - n .Ys .d C.<- r ;.,y '.a` _ -.-:.w4,• �I; 'an'
Temporary Stabilization Measure a:', �: ,,,r . , �. a t'.. �:.
^.,ptt_-�-.•�,� -". „a,,,�,..:: ,i'' 'fir e �•:..
Area 1 Stormwater Network _ ' t ;°. r—. — _ +�
,•G_ r a 150 Feet
.wf-p1r< +l.`w.�'. r�'r, .. ,. r;�._q'4 ,4 ._,. �" i .?;• 's 1?°'; r'-.°2'�. a �` = E •..
pa
a
75 37 5 0 75
._ Notes:Service f .- " •.c :., Kaa
Layer1. r g
EarthstarGeog Geographies,CNES/AlrbusDS,USDA,USGSoEY e, � t s *. ►` .: z= • '.
J.
AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIS User Communi ' ' �`' �* `_ x ' _ * SLOPE MONITORING PIN BASELINE SURVEY
2. Slope pins on the eastern slope and riprap baseline survey '.. _ ` •K , pd-` R
performed by McKim&Creed on 4 October 2017. Slope pins on - .' y. t, � Asheville Regional Airport
the western slope baseline survey performed b McKim&Creed on
P Y P Y ,�`��,. r� �«. - - . '� '�< •�a �� + � '� 3'�s &�� °"� x j Asheville,North Carolina
15November2017. tt q�
e, d Yb w $ u
3. Field investigation locations were surveyed by McKim&Creed �_ 1C �} t �.,� � ' i �r� x' u ,�� 1
on 29 November 2017. , ` r. Geosyntee DUKE FI UC@
4. SPT-2A and HA-1 are shown at approximate locations. These $:, " � r ,'"'," �ENERGY. 9
.:' t j y
borings were terminated early due to difficult or unexpected ground ' " �� consultants
conditions,were not surveyed and were not converted into k 2
piezometers. L., _ _,_ ;'�, +" 9 �° �_- r CHARLOTTE,NC DECEMBER 2017

1
ar
}
,
k 1 w
2
i
a _ A
_r
c
r
.. 1:� ,r°° .r. -. '- -_ ,�.,�ffi $` ^•A::- �y�/�'�Yy� g �;. �A -S; '-.xs,rx®.A� t�•. 4 :s..', }+ 4
,41
s �
C � i'; ,s ,, _ ,,, . •:� � � P �,� gig'° .-� �- �1<�
,
4
s
i
q44\
J
t
•
Legend
r
4l
-• g; -- ^ate,,,... .. ,..` .-.: ,> . t
Surface Water Sample Location c.',` ' ,'
Hand Auger/Plezometer ;-_, ? ,• ;:
it
y b
7
E �,� is �. `� a � :• a � a
O a -
Inclinometer
n � l
Ak
* o 0
FRINR5
SPT/Plezometer ' Y
Temporary Stabilization Measure kt
,
� p rY
t -
;, . .,. � ��.� , :�=t�` -,.3�• .t �_ :ate - ,� ,�, �`;'` � �, �„
0 Parcel Boundary ._ , . t�� _ ¢•,.: ,. �, � f.. � � -.�_ , - ,,. � � a
_ .�• " � � � �� -�,
tr
Area 1 Stormwater Network Am 50 0 100 200 FeetE
1 '
100
Notes: ', r ° p ff sYn 4 $ q.e�c �`
1.Service Layer Credits: Source:Esri,DigitalGlobe,GeoEye, * 3 3 ,,,..= , . • ,-'=µ ' _s-~ ? ' SURFACE WATER SAMPLING
Earthstar Geographies,CNES/Airbus DS,USDA,USGS, `� _ .» >s AND INSTRUMENT LOCATIONS
• ` $, 4f # } `a »,ram - - t? .$+; , S{` "," 3` *fi
AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIS User Community. `$ � �- `� $s• t � _:: � Afii � `
2. Field investigation locations were surveyed by McKim&Creed
Asheville Regional Airport
ber 2017.
on 29 Novem i. " va. r " '`
_. Asheville,North Carolina
3. SPT-2Aand HA-1 are shown at approximate locations. These
borings were terminated early due to difficult or unexpected ground 1 1 - `
conditions and were not surveyed. ' � IT t ,' P Geis teC® DUKE
2
4. Surface water sample locations were identified by NCDEQ and ' �' _ • 1 ' i r J " Figure
consultants
surveyed by McKim&Creed on 1 November 2017. _ ENERGY.
y 5.Parcel boundaries obtained from Buncombe Count GIS website "� # { ` 3
Z• j $ �'4 ` -' :- 4 arth R�r$ ��' - YW w
on 20 December 2017. -- 4' CHARLOTTE,NC DECEMBER 2017

w� T
•
Ak
Ik
01
411
_
E.°
t*`
-
Y a
• I
' 4
,
a ',
, ,
_
h
t
> .
'
€ 4- x
•, M �` Lateral Imo a entt '
IMW-2A .. rela iue to basel n]. c 1
_
Magnit die;0:2 ft
.,
-MW—.1+A
E
• Direc
* s
.,
, ' • �` E
�p>4 � � ,� "LL to erl I�ovement
relatiue,to)fbasellnet� J'2
Approximate extent -
` ,. C agnitude t� ft� -
0€HE ap.`buttress .' I� Direct(nV NE'
53
f = H1 *
b
4
s r,
V
,o �. � 3k �. � ,a �,,_ _- � ,., t •:, E1�-.ci'-°���io 2 31
mo
Al
E.
f
� -, ��A i ;, G4
k ` ' Al •' ot%uf �d Co •1,4
v
,
wJ JEJ4
G� C
r
7
W17 ,
s U
I 1 -. H6
t
60 diameter RCP,• _� ' A4,�� �T: .D5 . ,; F6
•
,.
e � CED
G7
B5 ,
ET
u
l
5 L ,
FiB: a
_
G8
F
:., r.K Lateral movements10
Legend
° relative to'baseline ;. . "
Lateral ovement .-!
m . Ds_. _• ;, -` :
M etude:
relative to baseline ` A s`- C83} -- ;
Monitoring WellDirection: SW
Ma nitude` 0.1 ft ' . .•, °
g �.� .
_
December �11,LO'kq&erali Svsriwence relative to k p P
° Y ;re� I� atwe to baseline b sa a it ne: 0.1 ft " .. 1 1 50 100 Feet
.. Magnitude 0 1(ft' ,
Direction SW
Notes: Subsidence,relatib01_ o • • MOVEMENTS
Credits: EAST FILL
1.Service Layer •urce: Esri,DigitalGlobe, • baselineiY','J�, n _ r y g
Earthstar .. .• . USDA, 3 Lateral movement « ID CoAirport
r
.. •GRID, -
(` r�elatiue t0 baseline
a
Monitoring2. obtained Sub'"s Bence relative to" ;-
•��� _L.__,.�.,,5 Magnitude• 0 1 ft �°� �� � ,
k Asheville,
Summary and Boring Logs"letter prepared by Charah,Inc.dated
rb5line: 0.2Direction. NW _, mNDUKE
3. Slope pins surveyed by McKim 4.
41
Creed on 12 December 201
• -Survey - 1 ••-•• • -• • - .sue - k; a /
survey tolerance are labeled with magnitude and direction of W, nsWtants ENERGY.
movement. r.
JCA ,

{
,
'
Qil
- i
r
,
,
,..
�s
1
a ,
- O
r.
M
Q
r � ,
r
r
a IY.I.l KlC.1J
i
<
-
io
MR 4
T 41
wlj w
0
z o
1
BMW
,
< O O'
. .o
• o
Ma'
< >
r `
g ! '
r
011
t � -
n a
c ,
,
,.f
{
r >
- '
. '
,
8
LtS3. g.G�3
_ .�. . << .• , �
s. o°
�e :.V.A=.W - •= ';�. �-.;, 3- i. -.. , '}'$:. �'A' N' ,, � by �, . �.-_'.,
-- , ...> , -... ... VVVV,.: _ � rz?t ". < a a • ,:�i--.a
.. SIV
D
`
,
j
t. 01
QAj-
_ , ...
F
., ...� h:.� 4�
J
-
vC-
w
Legend
_ _; _
Monitoring Well � ,- . ^ ,:._
z <� - - _E .
o Slope Pin-Surveyed 12 December 2017
100 Feet l
°o }
® Temporary Stabilization Measure
25 0 50 50
Area 1 Stormwater Network " , /_20w .' 0 0
LZ
: � z` ' SLOPE PIN MOVEMENTS -
1.Notes:
Service Layer Credits: Source:Esri,DigitalGlobe,GeoEye, � r `4 $" �' WEST FILL
Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS,USDA,USGS, LA Asheville Regional Airport
AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIS User Community. tio, Asheville,North Carolina
2. Monitoring well locations obtained from"Area 1 Water Location t
Summary and Boring Logs"letter prepared by Charah,Inc.dated 29 December 2009. �. F � �eoSyrite DUKE Figure
3. Slope pins surveyed by McKim&Creed on 12 December 2017. ENERGY.
4.Survey tolerance is 0.1 ft. Slope pins that moved more than the _
r . _, consultants GY®
survey tolerance are labeled with magnitude and direction of t -
movement. CHARLOTTE,NC DECEMBER 2017

2140 4
3.5
^2130 3 o PZ-1
q FA o o ® PZ-2
z 2120 I 2.5
o PZ-3
o
w g 2 w O PZ-4
2110 - - 1.5 ' O PZ-5
p, o PZ-6
3 2100 - - 1 -•-Precipitation
0.5
2090 - - 0
09/22/17 10/12/17 11/01/17 11/21/17 12/11/17 12/31/17
Measurement Date
Figure 6. Piezometer Measurement Data
Notes:
[1] Precipitation data from the KAVL weather station located at ARA and was downloaded from
www.weatherunderground.com.
[2] Piezometers PZ-1 through PZ-6 were installed by Geosyntec between 15 and 17 November
2017 and were developed on 20 November 2017.

A-A' Axis B-B' Axis
0 - ----r -_ _-I 0 ------- -- -
5 _ -- ------ --------- 5 ---- ----- ---- -----
I
10 ----- ----- ---- ---- 10 >---- ---
i
15 -- -- ------ ------'-- -- 15 ----- - --- ---- -- --
20 -------- -- --- ---- 20 ----- ---- ---- ----
-13
Q25 ---- ---- ---- --- I Q 25 ---- --------- ---
30 ---- ----• ----- ---- 30 ---- ---- ---- ---
35 ----- -- ------I---- 35 ---- ----------
----
40 ---- ----I --- -- -- 40 ----- ---- ----T-----
-o-11/29/2017 -o-11/29/2017
-0-12/12/2017 -O-12/12/2017
45 45
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Profile Change(in.) Profile Change(in.)
Figure 7. Inclinometer Data—Profile Change
Notes:
[1] Inclinometer INC-1 was installed on 17 November 2017.
[2] Baseline casing survey was performed on 29 November 2017.

A-A' Axis B-B' Axis
0 ( 0
5 —____ ___ ____-- -- 5
10 ---- ----- ---- --- 10 ---- ------ ---- ---
15 ---- ------._— --- 15 -- _ _-------- ---
20 ———— ———- -——— ——— 20 ---------- ---- ----
Y Y
�r ¢1
Q25 ———— ————---- --- Q 25 ———— —---— ———— ---.
30 ---- ---- ——— ——— 30 ———— ————- -——— ————
35 ---- ---- ———
---- 35 ---- ---- ---- ————
40 —._-- --— ---- --- 40 —_.----.----- ——— ---_
—o—11/29/2017 —0-11/29/2017
--0-12/12/2017 —0—12/12/2017
45 45
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Tilt Change(in.) Tilt Change(in.)
Figure 8. Inclinometer Data—Tilt Change
Notes:
[1] Inclinometer INC-1 was installed on 17 November 2017.
[2] Baseline casing survey was performed on 29 November 2017.

t
•
z <
4
K � I1
NZ
11
;, cq
, r
�� � t� �y��• ` �' � A M1 _ice .�
t ,
Q
r '
0
,
{pv
n �
y r
z¢ Ge i � r S I •-1� : Y Y �i
x
y { 4
t'.i ,kgq .i t K !'} •. „z5. Y3 3i' .va e.!'a 4ht
i
r.
„ �,:;¢.. a .,,, fl^7..'�'.-� � �,. 1� 100 0 � — + � • °.- .dee �
11
n
i
7� i
,
L
r y ,;••e,. 4 , , .,': ,."'.a�R.i aft `. .. e -3. :. -. , ;, � � �'�, E
,
, I i
,
s <, .: � g , : � #fie# ,.. .,,:•� � . > t `� tt' 4,: ) t`_4
x
#, .. +'„: _" . ..�..,., ;',. * , ik=. .�} �� '�-$: r>;='4 •'§c_ �'g.;v ,'�,:s� 's+,�� � Via ,
t ,
Legend =,
A
#r }b
pp ,<
Hand Auger/Plezometer
t�
Inclinometer .a '. ,ti #$ .tee r ..s. ,r,.m £-� t�m.. „7r. .; � ,� � a 5r ;.�:^•iL`nYJt�. .*s:- a.��;..:
SPT/Plezometer FZ51,
Approximate Cross Section Locations
a e+
App
•: °�' �. ,. �..A-:;h`t
� V
v
Y
e F
4
Temporary Stabilization Measure t , �� _� ,,Y....,��. ..,'� • �$� .. �t.'' ��g. ;, �; =°�� . �
0 Parcel Boundary ::. `; :; - ;'i, 100 50 0 100 200 Feet
ITT 5MMMENEENE0111i
'.;.fit �r �•- � $ _ �'{' a '-, �
r
Area 1 Stormwater Network11
' CROSS SECTION LOCATION MAP
a
Notes: �� � � �' •.` � .r.' t� �
1.Service Layer Credits: Source:Esri,DigitalGlobe,GeoEye, .' "
a
Earthstar Geographies,CNES/Airbus DS,USDA,USGS, �!
Asheville Regional Airport
AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIs User Community. r _ .'ffi Asheville,North Carolina
2. Field investigation locations were surveyed by McKim&Creed
on 29 November 2017.
Y ,_ # ,� Geos tee �' ®ldiCE
3. SPT-2Aand HA-1 are shown at approximate locations. These t , ;' = ` `' �" ffi#._ r' Figure
borings were terminated early due to difficult or unexpected ground ENERGY.
consultants
conditions and were not surveyed.
} •- ���' M �.r x a�� a ,.fir `� 4' � 'r•" ., �
4.Parcel boundaries obtained from Buncombe County GIS website "Y ` (! I » =
t, ._ " # .. sj, CHARLOTTE,NC DECEMBER 2017
on 20 December 2017. `a a >_, t1 � . - �-<.,,..�,�:,� �.:�.. �" •� '... r.��� -��.� ;�:_�.__.

0.5 ' 4
0.45 --- _ 0 B5
— 3.5 e B6
0.4 -- --- — 3 e C2
0.35 — C C7
0.3 -- 2.5 .o o D3
0.25 ---- — —- — 2
o D6
�y x D7
0.2 -- — —x - x — 1.5 o F3
0.15 — -- — X- ° p" o F6
04 o 1
0.1 --- =-----Q-- ----o--- ------ ----t�----------- ------ + H8
- p
0 I 0
2-0ct-17 22-Oct-17 11-Nov-17 1-Dec-17 21-Dec-17 ° J6
Measurement Date Rainfall
Figure 10.East Fill Slope Pin Lateral Movements
Notes:
[1] Slope pin surveys are accurate to 0.1-ft.
[2] Precipitation data from KAVL weather station and was downloaded from
www.weatherunderground.com.

0.500 — -- — 4
0.400 --- — —� ---
3.5
0.300 ----- ( --- ----- ----
w
0.200 — ---- —
an ---- - �- - -- ---------------• 2.5
a 0.100 -------------- -;----- c C A8
� o
a
U 0.000 — 8—i —- -1_c— -- ------ 2 ° 138
-0.100 ---- ----------- - ---------------o-----------©----------T------- C8
1.5
-0.200 — --- — ---n ——° F. c F8
-0.300 — - --- --
1 —Rainfall
-0.400 -- — -- — -- - — 0.5
-0.500 0
2-Oct-17 22-Oct-17 II-Nov-17 I-Dec-17 21-Dec-17
Measurement Date
Figure 11. East Fill Slope Pin Elevation Movements
Notes:
[1] Slope pin surveys are accurate to 0.1-ft.
[2] Precipitation data from KAVL weather station and was downloaded from
www.weatherunderizround.com.

0.500 --- --- 4
0.450 _ ---- —� _ a K2
0.400_ --I — --� 3.5 a K3
-- —
� 3 n KS
0.350 ------- - -- ..
O K6
0.300 - — — 2' o 0
LI
0.250 — -- l 2 w
0.200 = c L4
c.
1.5 M2
a0.150 — 1 M4
0.100 ---- ---------- --- -------i------------------a---------- -------• 0.5 x N2
0.050 -- -— —�i— o N5
0.000 0 A Ng
2-Oct-17 22-Oct-17 11-Nov-17 1-Dec-17 21-Dec-17
Measurement Date —'—Rainfall
Figure 12. West Fill Slope Pin Lateral Movements
Notes:
[1] Slope.pin surveys are accurate to 0.1-ft.
[2] Precipitation data from KAVL weather station and were downloaded from
www.weatherunderground.com.

2150
2145
---------- .. .... . - ------- -------
FS set as 2.0 above
..... - { water table or for hi erFSs - ...... :. ..... .... . . .....
2140
2135 —
--------- -----•-- -------------
00 2130
> ---- • ............. ------ -------- ----.. ..------
Z - - - - - -- ------- ------- -. ----- -------
2125
2120 -.... -•--
t - _ -------
2115
2110
SPT-1 —SPT-2
2105
- --.—SPT-3 —9—SPT-4
2100
1 1.5 2 2.5
Factor of Safety(FS)against Seismic Liquefaction
Figure 13. Seismic Liquefaction Susceptibility Evaluation Results
Note:
[1] SPT-1 through SPT-4 represent the locations associated with potential global slip surfaces in Areal.

Appendix A
Existing Conditions Survey
(by McKim & Creed)

NOTES:
ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND
DISTANCES(US SURVEY FOOT)UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ANY VALID&ENFORCEABLE
EASEMENTS,RESTRICTIONS&RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD.
W SURVEY PROPERTY UNES ARE BASED ON PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AND
EXISPNO MONUMENTS FOUND DURING THE SURVEY.
ALL COORDINATES LISTED HEREON ARE PROJECT COORDINATES UNLESS 4 �'
OTHERWISE NOTED. �P P
4a CONTOUR INTERVAL SHOWN AT 1'AND 9'
mr
THE COORDINATE SYSTEM DEVELOPED FOR THIS PROJECT IS BASED s
ON NORTH CAROLING STATE PLANE COORDINATES ESTABLISHED BY
GPS METHODS USING VAS SOFTWARE.
PROJECT COMBINED SCALE FACTOR(GROUND TO GRID): 0.99978084
GEOID MODEL: 12(B) VICINITY MAP
UNITS: US SURVEY FOOT (NOT TO SCALE)
PROJECT DATUM:HORIZONTAL-NAD83/2011 MON WELL MW-2A
VERTICAL-NAVD88 aa99.43 T0P OF CONC.ELEV:2099.73' REPAIR AREA#2
0 DATE OF FIELD SURVEY:10/04/17 AND 11/01/17 l REPAIR BY:DUKE ENERGY
MONITORED WET AREA 2W9.,6� �aa99.Jz WEEK OF BEPTEMBERPZ86 2017
IDENTIFIED BY NCDEO, ( ]
GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA 1.5"PVC PIPE s
TOP ELEV:2119.28' MONITORED WET AREA
SURVEY POINT#30030 D99J3 TOP OF CO C.ELEV:2119.28' IDENTIFIED BY NCDEO, B
REPAIR AREA 11 �_ __ GEOS"TEC AND SURVEY POINT#30015 SYNTERRA
REPAIR BY:DUKE ENERGY -- Oil
WEEK OF SEPTEMEER 25,2017 "-' '_-
LEGEND REPAIR AREA#3 !-- —�` -- \
x097oJ REPAIR BY: DUKE ENERGY
—. FENCELINE MON WELL MW-tA -\ 6.92
TOP OF CONC.ELEV.2097.49' WEEK OF NOVEMBER 13,2G17 SILT FENCE
EDGE OF CHANNEL ��ao9 IDENTIFIED BY NC E0, (PZ-5]
tit GILT FENCE J7,1 BOTTOM OF CONC. GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA 1.5'PVC PIPE `^ /.��'.•""'��.+^'j ��\��� _.,\
____BB_
TOE OF BANK 2� ELEV.2090.76' SURVEY POINT#3369 TOP ELEV:211 PIPE-
----TB-TOP OF BANK (CAN NOT CET INVERT) I TOP OF CONC.ELEV.-2116.Sfi'
5.5"wDE MEADwA1 6
25907 1 } " ;- "¢ r%/�.•'G'f7rY' ji'i•%i %�%--_Via-=_\�� \�..\� \\
2098.10 �.. 62 i� �/J%..i''j•�,•,'� /% / �-\'.`,� \\\\\�
IRT I/ %.•" 1. r/�!/ ��'�-��•''i%i/�� �\\
/ 1l �'%G6R r �SSEy
MONITORED WET AREA
IDENTIFIED BY NCOEO. \ ) ( / /r ai" Fri i OFr-
15.25
GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA
43 /r�-r 3r!-��..i�r "�r�•'r'.... / ate' ma.m1\.\7I' OJ7 \� \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \
oy* 2„> r/\\ \\ \\ �\\\\\\\\\\\\ F_..••-
(PZ-j
J1 .5"PVC PIPE TOP ELEV:21-52' \T \ \\\ \\\\ \ \ \
i / I// // // // ///////j///�dCS r ./.. r%�-''r•C C/s7'i J/// 017 TOP OF CONC.E.EM!2145.62'
♦(... 25909 \\ \ \\ \
IIIIII MONITORED WE AREA I/ ///% /// ,C�// Ry'/// / /OE7�iT6��.%'J/r/r/) 2RT 4.61 //' \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\�I �)
\ / III I I III IDENTIFIED BY NCDEO. // �'' ( op
I WEST SLOPE MONITORING GRID GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA / Y/ // / / //// ///'/ �9z I' / ` \ \\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\ r\
DFe
INS
N LLED:REOSYN 14. 01] SURVEY POINT 830132 '/'(/1 /// //// // //// ' 9�/'R EB ^si'a.69 r / /' \\\\\
Mn 'I / / /// / / //X,� OQ8 / / r PV PIPE TOP ELEV.214-1 NOTCH) \ \ \\
w0.yfLU` / ////�'p///�• /, / /a139.Je� / / PVC I FE TOP ELEW 2142.84'(E.NOTCH) \\ \\ \\\
OC II$ L is0.]], r PVC PIPE TOP ELEV:2183'(S NOTCH)
MON WELL MW-5 / ////j/// r /i//// Ir�/ // //// /////,/,/ // / / �yiA9i/ l PVC IPE TOP ELEW 2142.82'(W.NDTCH)
/ TOP OF CaNO _ J�I/// ,-,I.- //I///I/,/I /// /.///4//�� OB8 / lt. / / P / _\\\\ \\\\ \ \
ELEV.2151.76' /,//////�,/.$ ram\ \\ \ \\ _ '• / // 1:J1 / /// /'k / / /
TRANSFORMER PAD //'/ /% '•' \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ LY1,\l��\=Q�11L7 �QKJ-lr i-i//l/� ^^^iTT /,///''//////////,/ //i0/ O / ' 1�PVC PIPE/TOP ELEW 214 7B' /
L
QN7�\ �\\\\\ \\ \\��\\`_. -- _ /J OF CONC.ELEV:2t,0.Ae / ' -- \\\\\\\\\\\�\ 111I I
�6K' / ///// / /// EAST LOPE MON TORING G�10 / \ \\\ \\\ \\\\ \\ m} \
INSTSLLED:GEOlYN1TEC / vn / /' \\\\\\ \\
Mw-s _O NB -f/ / / / /' OC OBER 4.2017C / /'
/l /' \\0'
215tJ0 MONITORED SLOUGH, / / / / 1 / _ -r \\ \\ \ \\\
IDENTIFIED t8�,NCDEO. \\\\\\\�\\\\
1I IL/ \ --_ _ /// , / / G RSYN TE/
I { I (F� _ .� - ��l-(j/// •s vEYE�T1-Is-n
I\}1'}t}\. au=� �` \�\�=
_TB_�-_�TI3 L5 Q=-='L��'---A---'�` Y / fit\\ ! r
I � }t} \}}\\\\1\\\l / //r \..® OMS r...'O L5 OKS,.,_��/�..-._-'. -_ ' J\ //
'2590a
01.7
0.7
\a I '
PVC PIPE TOP ELEV:2142.72'
} \\\\\ TOP'OF-CONE ELfE.2t40.-32'-'
\ \\\\\mm - /' EP2`21.4.. 1.5" ✓C PIPE TOP ELEW 2,4T.B9'"'
1 �\ ---_'. ---- / T9POPCONC.fU!V.' f1 17' r
�P\\ ---/'.• yI ��— 1 `�I \\ \t /'/ / // / RAN Vµ1t5
- =/' '/• WET AREA
\
0, \ m GRAPHIC SCALE
(IN FEET)
I In.h=40 TL
DATE REVISION INITIAL TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PROJECT#: 0015 9-06 60
A,�7�/J��� ,�n•/17-��'�7'��'q OF PROJ. SVYR JCD
/II,fC 1 1\/1 Ti C M M 1 S DRAWN BY: JOD
NA
PRELIMINARY PLAT 1�A 1�LL♦166JJ 1�• •JJL/ FILL AREA ON ASHEVILLE AIRPORT FIELD BK. : NA
NOT FOR RECORDATION,
COMP, FILE 2017-10-04 AIRPORT
CONVEYANCES, OR SALES
8020 Tower Point Drive FOR
Charlotte, North Carolina 28227 SHEET#: 1 OF 1
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] DUKE ENERGY
F-1222
DATE:OCTOBER 4,2017 SCALE:1"=40'
Internet Site: http://www.mckimcreed.com DATE: ARDEN BUNCOMBE NORTH CAROLING DWG. #:

Appendix B
Instrument Installation Records

LEGEND for SYMBOLS RELATIVE MOISTURE CONTENT
Pattern Description Absence of moisture,dusty,
'I• ® GW—Well graded GRAVEL or Well graded Dry dry to the touch
` GRAVEL with sand
Moist Damp but no visible water
GP—Poorly graded GRAVEL or Poorly graded
.b- GRAVEL with sand Wet Visible free water,from
i SW—Well graded SAND or Well graded below water table
' 4v SAND with gravel
SP—Poorly graded SAND or Poorly graded RELATIVE DENSITY
SAND with gravel Sand*/Gravel Blows/Foot
SP-SM—Poorly graded SAND with silt or Very Loose 0-4
Poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel Loose 5 - 10
SP-SC—Poorly graded SAND with clay or Medium
11 -30
Poorly graded SAND with clay and gravel Dense
SM—Silty SAND or Silty SAND with gravel Dense 31 -50
Very Dense >50
SC—Clayey SAND or Clayey SAND with *Relative density is applied to non-plastic CCR.
gravel CONSISTENCY
ML—(Sandy or Gravelly) SILT, SILT with Silt/Clay Blows/Foot
I' sand(or withgravel) Very Soft 0-2
MH—(Sandy or Gravelly)Elastic SILT,Elastic Soft 3 -4
SILT with sand(or with gravel) Medium Stiff 5 -8
CL—(Sandy or Gravelly)Lean CLAY,Lean
CLAY with sand(or with gravel) Stiff 9- 15
CH—(Sandy or Gravelly)Fat CLAY,Fat Very Stiff 16-30
CLAY with sand(or with gravel) Hard 31 -50
OL—Organic SILT or CLAY with low Very Hard >50
plasticity
^_ OH—Organic SILT or CLAY with medium to Note(s):
high plasticity 1. ft=feet;SPT=Standard Penetration Test;bgs
=below ground surface;
CCR Material Elev.=Elevation;FC=Fines Content;SG=
Specific Gravity;GCL=Geosynthetic Clay
Well Screen Liner;CCR=Coal Combustion Residuals
.�
2 Two pH values were measured using distilled� Bentonite-Cement Grout water and calcium chloride and reported
respectively.
Bentonite Seal
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
• Granular Backfill AND LOG KEY
PVC Riser Ge®syntec
p Water Level Measured on 29 November 2017 consultants
PROJECT NO.: GC6463
DATE: December 2017

Geosynte& 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
suite 300
consultants Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-1/PZ-1
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111512017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636217.5
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 944940
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2140 ft
Well o tologcescrpon N-Value Comments
Construction m o 10 20 30 40 50
z
Sandy SILT(ML)(SOIL);trace
clay;brown to reddish brown; PVC %up:2.7'
moist;medium stiff a 2-3-3-4 1.5 FC=59.2/a
k
Started observing
2135 -5 CCR cuttings about
5'bgs
r
0. tu•
D,,
0. to.
. 1-2-3-4 1.7
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
2130 -10 gray;moist;loose
o• to.
SQL
:p. io.
A• i0•
?' Grout
o
212515 r�'.
"•o. I.Q.
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark L?`
gray;moist;loose 1Q 3-4-6-5 1.8
2120 -20
�77
(Continued Next Page)
Page 1 of 2
Total Depth:34 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®syntec' 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
consultants Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-1/PZ-1
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111512017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Comes Di Lena NORTHING: 636217.5
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 944940
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION: 2140 ft
� !> a$ Lithologic Description ' Well 0- o N-Value Comments
w vZ 0 Construction m 0 10 20 30 40 50
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark oo
gray;moist;loose(continued) r
2115 -25
Bentonite
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark Seal
gray;wet;very loose Filter Gravel=0.0%;
Pack 1-1-2-1 1.7 Sand=12.0%;
(Sand) FC=88.0%
2110 -30 Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark pH=8.3/7.8
gray;wet;very loose
1-1-1-1 2.0
Screen
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;wet;loose
2-2-4-7 2.0
Boring Terminated at 34.0 ft bgs.
Page 2 of 2
Total Depth:34 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®syntec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
ConSt ltantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-21PZ-2
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111612017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Comes Di Lena NORTHING: 636169.7
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945231.9
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2144.9 ft
Co
L ~ 0
Lithologic Description � Comments
Well a o N-Value o
w, z r) 0 Construction o7 m 0 10 20 30 40 50
Sandy SILT(ML)(SOIL);trace
clay;brown;moist;medium stiff PVC Stick-up:3.0'
.o a
2-4-4-5 2.0
I
I�
•. la.
Started observing
2140 -5 CCR cuttings about
61 5'bgs
o.
IQ.
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark ° 6-9-9-10 1.8
2135 _10 gray;moist;medium dense
o• to.
D.
o'
a.
2130 -15 °
Grout
D.
. IQ.
.o. Io•
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;moist;loose E 4-3-4-5 1.8 FC=71.2%
.o a
2125 -20 ,• ?•
'o: 4 a:
(Continued Next Page)
Page 1 of 3
Total Depth:49.3 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®stec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
C0I1SUltantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-21PZ-2
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111612017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Comes Di Lena NORTHING: 636169.7
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945231.9
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION: 2144.9 ft
00 Lithologic Description ' Well a o N-Value Comments
W vz p Construction o7 m 0 10 20 30 40 50
CL
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;moist;loose(continued)
. la.
2120 -25 IQ.
Q.
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);gray, a:
wet;very loose 1-2-1-1 1.5
. IQ.
2115 -30 0 `•
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);gray; i
wet;very loose W OH- FC=83.1%;
o W OH-1 1.0 pH=8.2/7.6
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);gray;
wet;medium dense
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);brown to 1-9-13-20 1.7 GCL at 33.0'bgs
reddish brown;moist;medium
dense;some gravel and clay
2110 _35 Bentonite
Seal
Filter
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);brown to Pack
2105 reddish brown;moist;dense; (Sand) 6-9-24-
-40 some gravel;some clay 50/4" 1.5 FC=28.4%
(Continued Next Page)
Page 2 of 3
Total Depth:49.3 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®sptec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
COIISUltantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-21PZ-2
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111612017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636169.7
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945231.9
DRILLER NAME: C.Penton GROUND ELEVATION: 2144.9 ft
cc
r- Lithologic Description ' Well CL o N-Value Comments
w VZ o Construction U)m 0 10 20 30 40 50
of
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace Screen
2100 clay;trace gravel;brown to 5-10-24=
-45 reddish brown;moist;dense 29 2.0 FC=32.9%
41
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);brown to 50/4" 0.3
reddish brown;wet;very dense;
broken rock pieces
Boring I erminateTaFW3 ft bgs.
Page 3 of 3
Total Depth:49.3 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Geos /'1'1 tec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
` Suite 300
ConSUltantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-2A
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111612017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636159
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945186
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2145 ft
Lithologic Description ' o N-Value Comments
w vz U)m 0 10 20 30 40 50 0
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace clay;trace gravel; Northing,Easting,
brown;moist;loose 3-4-5-7 1.7 and elevation are
appro)amate
2140 -5
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace clay;trace gravel;
brown;moist;loose
34-4-5 n2O
2135 -10
2130 -15
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace clay;trace gravel;
brown;moist;loose
74-4-5 2.0
2125 -20
(Continued Next Page)
Page 1 of 2
Total Depth:30 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®stec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
COIISU1tantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-2A
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111612017 SAMPLING METHOD:SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636159
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945186
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2145 ft
Lithologic Description � a o N-Value Comments
w vz a) 0 m 0 10 20 30 40 50 00
0
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace clay;trace gravel;
brown;moist;loose(continued)
2120 -25
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace clay;trace gravel;
brown;moist;very loose 1101121
Boring Terminated at 30.0 ft bgs.
Page 2 of 2
Total Depth:30 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®syntec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
consultants Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-31PZ-3
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111512017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636383.4
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945306.6
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2139.8 ft
00
_> Lithologic Description ' Well a~ o N-Value o Comments
w vz p Construction U'm 0 10 20 30 40 50
Sandy SILT(ML)(SOIL);trace
clay;brown;moist;soft PVC Stick-up:3.0'
-. Q. 1-2-2-2 1.0 Gravel=0.6/°,
o ;o Sand=42.9%;
Silt=32.9%;
I; Clay=23.6%
• n
j.
2135 `
-5
' 4
0• (0•
•p Ip.
The contact
Top 3":Sandy SILT(ML)(SOIL); I• between soil and
trace clay;brown;moist;medium ° CCR is appro)amate
stiff °' i°' 2-4-4-6 1.5 FC=65.2%
2130 Bottom 15":Sandy SILT(ML)
-10 (CCR);dark gray;moist;loose '
o to
14
a: Grout
2125 -15
0. Co.
r
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;moist;medium dense �a:
3-6-10-12 2.0
2120 -20
a,
(Continued Next Page)
Page 1 of 2
Total Depth:40 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Geosyntec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
ConSUItantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-31PZ-3
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111512017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636383.4
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945306.6
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2139.8 ft
0 L
w a o Lithologic Description si ~m ae Comments
Construction o 10 20 30
40 50
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark °•
gray;moist;medium dense
(continued)
o: to.
2115 -25
0 :0
f.
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;moist;medium dense Bentonite 6-9-11-12 2.0 FC=85.2%
2110 Seal
-30 Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark Fllter
gray;moist to wet;medium
dense Pack 3-6-7-12 1.5
(Sand) Gravel=1.1%,
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark Sand=17.1%,
gray;wet;medium dense Silt=74.4%,
4-6-10-12 1.7 Clay=7.4%;
Screen SG=2.29;
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark pH=8.3/7.8
2105 -35 gray;wet;medium dense 3-6-10-9 1.5
-- a
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;wet;medium dense
5-5-5-6 1.5
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace GCL at 37.6'bgs
clay;brown;moist;loose Bentonite was
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);brown; placed beneath the
moist;loose;some clay 1-1-3-4 1.0 well from 36 to 40 ft
bgs
Boring Terminated at 40.0 ft bgs.
Page 2 of 2
Total Depth:40 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®syntec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
ConSL11tantS Charlotte,NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: SPT-41PZ-4
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111512017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636457.3
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945518.3
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION: 2145.3 ft
co
` Lithologic Description ' Well a o N-Value Comments
w z ❑ Construction m 0 10 20 30 40 50 8
2145 Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace
PVC Stick-op:3.2'
clay;brown;moist;very loose
o. 2-2-1-2 1.3 Gravel=1.2/0,
Sand=51.6%,
Silt=25.6%,
o Clay=21.6%;
SG=2.764
o;
Q.
2140 -5 �.
r The contact
Top 4":Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL); I, between soil and
trace clay;brown;moist;medium o: ja: 4-5-6-6 210 CCR is appro:amate
dense FC=73.8%
Bottom 20":Sandy SILT(ML)
2135 -10 (CCR);dark gray;moist;medium :• �o.
dense o• o.
I�.
. I.
o. Grout
o. a.
lo.
2130
-15
o.
.o a
a.
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;moist;loose 2-4-4-6 2.0
n.
o• to.
-20 �
2125 '• I•
I'0.
(Continued Next Page)
Page 1 of 2
Total Depth:34 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

GeosyC1tec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
ConstdtantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID:SPT-41PZ-4
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 6"
BORING DATE: 1111512017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636457.3
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945518.3
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2145.3 ft
Lithologic Description ' Well a~ o N-Value Comments
> CDw vZ p a Construction o7 m 0 10 20 30 40 50 d
a)
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR).dark
gray;moist;loose(continued) °'
o:
•o; Ga;
-25
2120 Bentonite
Seal
Filter
`. Pack
(Sand)
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark
gray;wet;loose 2-2-4-5 1.5 FC=84.4%
Screen
2115 -30 Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark Gravel=0.4%,
gray;wet;loose Sand=16.9%,
2-3-4-6 1.3 Silt=78.4%,
Clay=4.3%;
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark pH=7.717.E
gray;wet;loose 2-2-3-6 1.5 GCL at 33.0'bgs
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace Bentonite was
gravel;brown;moist;loose;some placed beneath the
clay well from 32 to 34 ft
Boring ermmate at s. b s
Page 2 of 2
Total Depth:34 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®syntec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
considtantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID:HA-21PZ-5
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hand Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE:Not Applicable
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA:4"
BORING DATE: 11/1712017 SAMPLING METHOD: Grab
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cones Di Lena NORTHING: 636475.2
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945250.3
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION: 2116.3 ft
Lithologic Description : Well Comments
w` z o Construction
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);brown;moist;some clay
Gravel=0.0%,
2115 Silty SAND(SM)(CCR);dark gray;moist �o Grout Sand=12.0%,
1 Silt=76.9/o,
Clay=11.1%;
Bentonite SG=2.279;
Seal pH=7.3/6.4
Filter Borehole
collapsed during
Pack the placement of
_5 (Sand) bentonite seal
Screen
Boring Terminated at 6.5 ft bgs.
Page 1 of 1
Total Depth:6.5 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators,

Ge®syntec c' 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
ConSLlltantS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID:HA-31PZ-6
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hand Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE:Not Applicable
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA:4"
BORING DATE: 1111712017 SAMPLING METHOD: Grab
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636567.1
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING:945555.6
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2119.1 ft
co Q$ Lithologic Description V Well Comments
w va p v Construction
z
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);brown;moist;some clay
Grout
�Q
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);brown;moist;some clay
2115--
xz Bentonite
-5 Seal Borehole
collapsed during
the placement of
Clayey SAND(SC)(SOIL);brown;moist;some silt bentonite seal
Filter
Clayey SAND(SC)(SOIL);brown;moist to wet;some silt Pack
(Sand)
Screen
2110
Boring Terminated at 10.0 ft bgs.
Page 1 of 1
Total Depth:10 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Ge®syntec® 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
Suite 300
COT1SUfltmts Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: INC-1
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 8"
BORING DATE: 1111712017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Comes Di Lena NORTHING: 636385.9
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945318.8
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2140.6 ft
00 :E; f-
wLithologic Description o N-Value o Comments
z p m 0 10 20 30 40 50 a)
Sandy SILT(ML)(SOIL) Drilling was
2140 advanced without
sampling.
Lithologic
descriptions are
based on
observations of
cuttings.
-5
2135
Started observing
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR) CCR cuttings about
7'bgs
-10
2130
-15
2125
-20
2120
(Continued Next Page)
Page 1 of 2
Total Depth:41.8 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

Gees r1'1 tec c> 1300 South Mint St BORING LOG
y ` Suite 300
COIISUI=tS Charlotte, NC 28203 BOREHOLE ID: INC-1
GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME:ARA Area 1 DRILLING METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT NO: GC6463 RIG TYPE: Geoprobe 7822DT
SITE LOCATION:Asheville, North Carolina BOREHOLE DIA: 8"
BORING DATE: 1111712017 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
GEOSYNTEC REPRESENTATIVE: Y. Cortes Di Lena NORTHING: 636385.9
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Terracon EASTING: 945318.8
DRILLER NAME: C. Penton GROUND ELEVATION:2140.6 ft
cc
v Lithologic Description o- o N-Value o Comments
W vZ p CUm 0 10 20 30 40 50
Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR)(continued)
-25
2115
-30 Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark gray;moist;medium
2110 dense 5-6-6-8 1.5
Top 15":Sandy SILT(ML)(CCR);dark gray;moist;
medium dense
3-9-15-18 1.7 GCL at 33.2'bgs
Bottom 9":Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace gravel;
brown;moist;medium dense;some clay
-35
2105
J.
Silty SAND(SM)(SOIL);trace clay;trace gravel;tan
-40 and white;moist to wet;dense .: 6-15-19- 1.5
20
2100
SAND(SP)(SOIL);brown;wet;very dense;some silt; :? 23-50/3" 00.8
broken rock pieces at bottom 3"
Boring Terminated at 41.8 ft bgs.
Page 2 of 2
Total Depth:41.8 ft bgs engineers I scientists I innovators

LOCKING CAP
EXPANSION PLUG
PROTECTIVE CASING
2FTX2FT 3.2'
CONCRETE PAD 2.7'
GROUND SLOPE TO
SURFACE DRAIN
A
ex "".1
ol
f ,� is ,.•� a� ` \ ,��i `�\ `�
CEMENT-BENTONITE GROUT
29'
o BENTONITE SEAL 1'
0
0
0
ri
c) 1 INCH DIAMETER 1
/ RISER SCH 80 PVC
3
ui
„off GRANULAR
`g BACKFILL
U
C9
SLOTTED 1 INCH DIAMETER
m SCREEN(0.010 INCH SLOT)
5'
a
Ld
w
0
N
w
F-
K
O
BOTTOM CAP/SUMP
a
J 1� NOMINAL
�
5 BOREHOLE
Lo= DIAMETER:6 INCH
NOT TO SCALE
r
ui
w
w NOTES: PIEZOMETER PZ-1 AS-BUILT
ui
0 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS ADVANCED CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
o USING THE HOLLOW STEM AUGER METHOD.
2. THE GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER AT THE BASE CreOS�/riteC�
3 OF STRUCTURAL FILL WAS NOT PUNCTURED FIGURE
DURING ADVANCEMENT OF THE BORING. COI1SUlfidrits B 1
/ PROJ NO: GC6463.03 DECEMBER 2017
Y

LOCKING CAP
EXPANSION PLUG
PROTECTIVE CASING
2 FT X 2 FT 14'
CONCRETE PAD 3.0'
GROUND SLOPE TO
SURFACE DRAIN
d
a
CEMENT BENTONITE GROUTit
40'
O BENTONITE SEAL 6.8'
N
O
O
Q
to
O
M
1 INCH DIAMETER 2'
RISER SCH 80 PVC
3
i
�i
M GRANULAR
BACKFILL
U
O
SLOTTED 1 INCH DIAMETER
m SCREEN(0.010 INCH SLOT)
10'
a
ui
w
O
N
W
CL
—
Of
O
BOTTOM CAP/SUMP
a
J NOMINAL
S BOREHOLE
_ DIAMETER:6 INCH
c NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
Lu
w
w 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS ADVANCED PIEZOMETER PZ-2 AS-BUILT
Y USING THE HOLLOW STEM AUGER METHOD. CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
D
0 2. THE GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER AT THE BASE
/n OF STRUCTURAL FILL WAS PUNCTURED
DURING ADVANCEMENT OF THE BORING AND GeosyntecO' FIGURE
`' REPAIRED WITH THE BENTONITE SEAL AS
aSHOWN HEREON. c:onsaltants
I _ B.2
/ PROJ NO: GC6463.03 DECEMBER 2017
Y

LOCKING CAP
EXPANSION PLUG
PROTECTIVE CASING
2FTX2FT 3.4'
CONCRETE PAD 3.0'
GROUND SLOPE TO
SURFACE DRAIN
N.N.
CEMENT-BENTONITE GROUT
31'
O BENTONITE SEAL 2'
M '
O
O
Q
N
O
M
<h ,
O
1 INCH DIAMETER 1'
/ RISER SCH 80 PVC
3
q GRANULAR
BACKFILL
SLOTTED 1 INCH DIAMETER
m SCREEN(0.010 INCH SLOT)
5'
a '
w
Ld
w
0
N
w
H '
O
BOTTOM CAP/SUMP
La a
I� NOMINAL
5 BOREHOLE
w DIAMETER:6 INCH
NOT TO SCALE
c'
0 NOTES:
ui
w
w 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS ADVANCED PIEZOMETER PZ-3 AS-BUILT
Y USING THE HOLLOW STEM AUGER METHOD. CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
0 2. THE GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER AT THE BASE
N OF STRUCTURAL FILL WAS PUNCTURED
DURING ADVANCEMENT OF THE BORING AND Geosyntecl> FIGURE
REPAIRED WITH THE BENTONITE SEAL AS
a SHOWN HEREON. consultants
B.3
PROJ NO: GC6463.03 DECEMBER 2017
Y

LOCKING CAP
EXPANSION PLUG
PROTECTIVE CASING
2FTX2FT 3.5'
CONCRETE PAD 3.2'
GROUND SLOPE TO
SURFACE DRAIN
4 4„
I
S
o"i,
CEMENT-BENTONITE GROUT
27'
O BENTONITE SEAL 1'
0
0
LO
0
ri
1 INCH DIAMETER 1'
RISER SCH 80 PVC
3
i
�i
o GRANULAR
0
BACKFILL
U
C9
SLOTTED 1 INCH DIAMETER
m SCREEN(0.010 INCH SLOT)
5'
a
Ld
L
w
0
N
W
H
O
BOTTOM CAP/SUMP
a
J f_ NOMINAL
� BOREHOLE
Ld DIAMETER:6 INCH
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
w
w 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS ADVANCED PIEZOMETER PZ-4 AS-BUILT
Y USING THE HOLLOW STEM AUGER METHOD. CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
0 2. THE GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER AT THE BASE
OF STRUCTURAL FILL WAS PUNCTURED
DURING ADVANCEMENT OF THE BORING AND GeosynteC'�' FIGURE
REPAIRED WITH THE BENTONITE SEAL AS
SHOWN HEREON. consultants
aI BA
PROJ NO: GC6463.03 DECEMBER 2017
Y

f '
LOCKING CAP
EXPANSION PLUG
PROTECTIVE CASING
2FTX2FT 3.5'
CONCRETE PAD 3.3'
GROUND SLOPE TO
SURFACE DRAIN
14
XX
Y e�
e
CEMENT-BENTONITE GROUT
4
0 BENTONITE SEAL 1.5'
0
0
0
0
0
Ki
1 INCH DIAMETER 6"
/ RISER SCH 40 PVC
3
ui
GRANULAR
� BACKFILL
0
0
C9
J
SLOTTED 1 INCH DIAMETER
m SCREEN(0.010 INCH SLOT)
2.5'
Lo
Lo
w
IL
' W
F-
O
BOTTOM CAP/SUMP
a
J f. ►1 NOMINAL
BOREHOLE
ul
a: DIAMETER:6 INCH
x
i NOT TO SCALE
r
c�
La
w
W NOTES: PIEZOMETER PZ-5 AS-BUILT
Ld
0 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS ADVANCED CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
o/ USING A HAND AUGER.
2. THE GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER AT THE BASE GeosynteCD
`' OF STRUCTURAL FILL WAS NOT PUNCTURED FIGURE
Ir corlswtants
DURING ADVANCEMENT OF THE BORING.
al B.5J
/ PROJ NO: GC6463.03 DECEMBER 2017
Y

l
LOCKING CAP
EXPANSION PLUG
PROTECTIVE CASING
2FTX2FT 29
CONCRETE PAD 2.4'
GROUND
SURFACE SLOPE TO
DRAIN
4 - 4
/i
CEMENT-BENTONITE GROUT ,
n.
7.5'
o BENTONITE SEAL 3'
0
a
Lo
ri
0 1 INCH DIAMETER 1.5'
/ RISER SCH 40 PVC
i
GRANULAR
BACKFILL
SLOTTED 1 INCH DIAMETER
m SCREEN(0.010 INCH SLOT)
2.5'
a
c
w
0
N
w
H
BOTTOM CAP/SUMP
a
J f- ►� NOMINAL
� BOREHOLE
w DIAMETER:6 INCH
x
a NOT TO SCALE
r
of
of
w
w PIEZOMETER PZ-6 AS-BUILT
Y NOTES: CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
0 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS ADVANCED
USING A HAND AUGER.
w 2. STRUCTURAL FILL WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED Geosyntec® FIGURE
DURING THE BORING. COnSUltatits
B.6
/ PROJ NO: GC6463.03 DECEMBER 2017
Y

LOCKING
7^ CAP
CAP
PROTECTIVE CASING
2 FT X 2 FT 2,4'
CONCRETE PAD
GROUND SLOPE TO
SURFACE DRAIN
-- - 4
SIN
�2.1'
CEMENT-BENTONITE GROUT
0
0
0
uo
0
Ki
m
41.8 FT
2.75-IN.DIAMETER
STANDARD CASING
3
0
i
ui
0
ri
�r
0
U
C�
N
H
J
m
m
Q
W N.
ui BOTTOM CAP
0
N
W
a
F-
0
0
_w NOMINAL
a BOREHOLE
DIAMETER:
w 8 INCH
}
NOT TO SCALE
w NOTES:
w INCLINOMETER CASING INC-1
W 1. THE GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER AT THE BASE OF AS-BUILT CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
Y
o STRUCTURAL FILL WAS PUNCTURED DURING ADVANCEMENT
0
OF THE BORING AND REPAIRED WITH THE GROUT AS SHOWN
HEREON.
ui 2. THE CEMENT-BENTONITE GROUT WAS MIXED IN GENERAL Ge®S3/riteC® FIGURE
� ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S COnSUItalits
al RECOMMENDATION. B.7
� rPROJ NO: GC6463.05 DECEMBER 2017
Y

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECOKD(GW;-I) For Internal Use Only;
],weil Gontroctor:Taformationi.
Craig Penton
_i4:.XK'ATERZOti7FS.'
FROM TO DFSCRn'T1
Well Contractor Narne oN_
f4 ft.
NCWC 4388-A ft. fir
NC Well Contractifr Cettitii 3tinn Numlies' ""ig:OLtTER CASING r.*multi-cased:i*jt 0r%L NER`if a'ticatilc •` ..m
Terra co n FROM ,TO DIAMETER TnICIOVESS S17ATERLAL
Coitipany Name
0 ft -3 ft.. Metal
M O OO 16.INNERCASING OR TUBING 6thermal closed-too
2.,Well Construction'Permit#: N Y� 425. FROM I TO _.. DIAMETER 1.'THICKNESS ,MAT ER1A7:
i tstull applicable well gorlsltz{etion permits(i.e:u1C,Cotmty:'State.Yarfance;elc;). 29: lt. _2:5 dt: 1• in: . SCH$Q PVC
3.Well Use(check well'use):
fk ft io.,
Water Supply Well: 37:-SCREEN
FROM I TO DIAMETER. I.SLOT.SI7.E I THICKNESS MATERIAL
Agricultural Ef MltnicipAl/Public 34 tt. 29 "it- 1 in, 0.010 SCH80 PVC
Geothermal(Heating/Cboling SuPPly) [3Residential Water.Supply(single} ft: ft: in.
lnijustriaVGommerpial oResidential Water'Supply'(sharM) f;l$:GROG �t�a
irrigation ,- .FROM TO MATERIAL EMPLACEMENT METHOD&AMOUNT'
Non-Water,Supply Weil: 28 f4 21 tL Bentonite chips Gravity
x Monitoring Recovery 2j ft. 1 iL Cement-f eritonite Hose
Injection:Well: fa.
Aquifer Recharge Groundwater.Remediation
l9.SAlYpIGRA1°EL`RACK� fa "licabn r,
Aguifec Storage and,t'4ecpyery OSaltnity_Barrier ERoai To MATERIAL eMPLACsntENr.METi1oD.
inage
AgtiiferTest StotmwaterDra 34 ft- '2.8 - ft• #2Sand Gravity-
Experimental Technology S.ulisidenee Control fL ft.
C,epthermai(ClosedLoop) DTracer 20.DRILLING LOG, attach'ad'ditionals`heets'ifnecessary)
Geothermal Ifeatin Eoolih Return) Oiher(ez lain under#2I Rernarki)j FROM TO. DESCRIPTroN tootori hardness,soiltrock s' eW
p, ft. —6 ft: Brow,h,.§Hfy,sand
4'.Date Wells)CompleCed..1 1='1 5-17 Well`im, I— — ft. 34 ft. i
Dark, -ay, ash
'5a.Well Location: fC ft.
Asheville Regional Airport ft; ft:
}
FacilitylOwnerName 'Facility iD#(ifapplicable)' ft.. ft:
Asheville Regional Airport, Fletcher, :NC ft t
Physical Address,City,and Zip
ft.. 'ft
B 1JI1130en be 9643523284L0001 :21.REMARKS.
County. Parcelldentificati6h No.(PIN)
,
Sb,Latitude and longitude in:degreesfmin4!eAtseconds.or deeimsit.degrees: l
(ifwelhfield,onelatFlang is'stiffscient) 23.Cerflfcation: €#
35.4463782. _ N 82.5432491 « (Uzj_-� 2c,. ;
lZ=G-i
6.Is are the wells X Permanent or Te ora SigriafurebfCe" Well Contractor• Date
( > ()fib� � � �: � I
By sikning•lhu form..!hereby Geri titat the fvellfs)was(were)constructed in accordance
7 Is this a Repair to;an exiiting;Well Dyes or E% No .ivilh 15,4 NCAC 02G.0100 o 15A NCACO2C-.0200 WelGCo+fsrrnEtion Stiu`"idards aitdThat a' l
/fr/tu is a reptjr„fill oil knurl welt cdmutrnctiat i+jormaho'irai7il erplain'tlre'iatireol the FqPk o11!?ts'/-ecard&as:6een proyided to:A;g we11_oyvtter. ,
reprrwunder 1i21 remarl5 ecrio+t o�on he,bnck gftltu form_
23 Site diagram or additional well details
You ma use the back of this page•to pro ,additional,well site details or well
8 For'Geoprobe/DPT.or.Closed-Loop Geothermal Wells ha'vingthe samey . ,
construction;onlyIGW-I is needed, Indicate TOTAL NUMBER of wells constmctiondetails. You may also attach Additional pages if necessary., i
drilled:i SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIQNS ;
For nnil(i le wells list all de rhs r• di erettt exan le
9.Total well depth below.ISO surface•,34 (ft) .gqa, For!All Wells.- Submit this fairn:within 30 days of'completion'of well f'
p P' f Q ( tp 3 aG2'00'and 1@I00 construction to the following:
10 Static water level,below top of casing: ,30. (ft.) Division of Water Resources„Information Processing;Uoit,- I
lfriwter level is above cuing,trse"+" 1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,NC 2Z699-1617 j r
11.Borehole drameter 6 'n') above also submit.,elco in addatton[o scnding the fohn to the address m 24a £
Hollow stem au �r py,of this farm wuhin.30,days,of complefion of Well
l2.We1l.construcGon method 9 construction to the.following:
(ix. auger rotary,cable dimctpush etc:)
Division of Water Resources,Underground Injection'Controi Program, i f'
FOR WATER.SUPPLY WELLS ONLY;- 1636 Mail Service Center;Raleigh,NC 27699,1636
13%,Yield sl
tyP P ( ) ecbon Wells -In addition'to'send m the form to
136:,Disinfect on e. MetAmouhod tntt coin ]linen of well constru ubmit on'e copy of'this.form within 30 days of
the address is alwve also s '
on to the eounty health department"of the county
where constructed.
r ;
Fbnn 6W-1 Nonh Caiolina Mi5artmentofErwironineniafou, lity--Diyuionof Water Res gurces Revised 2722,20,16
L

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD.(GAl- For Internal Use Only
1:Well Coutractor,Information,,
crai Penton'. ia.wATERzorlEs
wall CoritractorName- FROM TO DESCRWTION
Ncwc-4388.A ft
NC Welt"Contractor Certification'Numlier 25.:MUTER CASING far Tnfll-cased;ga tr`ells OR I[NER if a"`livable'
Terracon PROM ro DIAr THICKNESS MATERIAL
Company Name
0 ff -3:5 ft, in Metal
W n A 0�00/j 25 -16,INNER CASING OR TUBING' edtbeiihilvlosed loo
2.Well Construction Permit#: `V, _r FROM 1,To I DtAAWM I 711ICKNESK IMATFRIAL
Liss all oppikatiTe wail eaustrticti0n'perrnits.ta."e;UIC.`c6likty,State,ra iani441c.) ft- -3 ft, '1 'n _SCH$O PVC
I Well Use(check well use):
Water 3u t Well;
'17.SCREEN
PP Y FROM TO DIAMETER »v sLOT.SiZE TmcKNESs MATERIAL µ
. Agricultural [3municippgpubiic 50 it. 0 rt 1 i°' 0.010 SCH80 PVC
Geotherinal_(Heatingitooiing Supply) Residential Water Supply(single) ft: it. In.
Ini ustriaUCommerc ai A6sidettial Wale ':Supply(s}Carei!)
28GROUT
71irrigation FROM To 1141TERIA7 EAIPI ACEM67HT METHOD&AMOUNT"
Non-Water Supply Well: 3$ ft 31.2 ft- 'Bentonife chips Gravity
x Monitoring Recovery 31,2 ft- 1 R• . Cement-b.entonite. Hose
[tijectiodWell:
ft. ft.
Aquifer Reclarge 130roundwaterRenediation 1gA SAND/GRAVEL)?ACK'rfa ltc3fite
Aquiht r$t019ge RDSI..RCGOVery SalYtllty•Barrier 'PROM TO MATERIAL .. I MPLACENIENT DIETHOD
3
Agiiierfies"t �Stormwaterlhanage 50 ft. 38 fr. #2 Sand Gravity
Experimental Technology E3 Subsidence Control it. ft.
Geothermal(Closed Loop) OTmcer 20.DRILLING LOG tittach addtiional streets ifnecesi;an .
z
Geothermal(fleatffigh o2in lt`etum) Qther(ex lain under#21 Remarks FROM TO DESCR►MON color-hard° so[Urockly iu s"etc:
_ p It .6 ft- Brown,.silty sand
4.Date Well s)Completed: Well IM PZ-2- - �6 ft! 33 fr
( P Dark gray,ash i
Sa.Well Location: a3 ft' 33 re GCL
Asheville,Regional Airport a3 ft- 50 ft- Brown,silty sand
Asheville Regional-Airport, �litylDti(ifappliaabte)
Facrtity/ClwnerName Factl
etC�er NO
Physical Address,City,and2ip r ft. ft.
1.
Buncombe 9643523284L0001 1L REMARKS'
County Parcel Identification No,(PIN)
Sb,l� tltude.and,longitude;in degreeVniinufeVieconds or decimal degrees:
(ifttietl:field,one-lat+longissuffcient) 22.te tlfcation;
35.4462756 N 82 54226-41 W I
E
6. ignature of fled Well Contractor Date,
Is(awr!e)the.vvell(s)�,ix Permanent or -S - - a.
;B,signing lhiv form.thereby cerfi�y tbat the well(s)-Has(were)constricted in accordant
7 I5 tt is:a repaie to ari dlsdng well oyes or' xx No xftk 134NCAC 62C.d1"Ofi or lS f NCAC O�G.tlt00"Well Cautnrct o rStnndardsand'tb`at a
Iftbis"Is:'a repair,fill orrt lvrawit fell constrticnbn"iOrmatioa aad esplairi the nature of the APT of this record lids been provided 1o:Ihe Q11 owh6-.
repairandertt2l remarks section or ori.tlie back ofiffisform.
23 Site diagram or additional well details:. P
You may use?the back of this page.,to provide additional weli site details or well 8.For'Geoprobe/D1'T or Closed-Loop Geothermal Wells hating the.same y-
constniction,_only'l GW61 is-needed. Indicate TOTAL NUMBER,ofweps construction details. You may also;attach additional pages,ifnecessaty:
dulled: P SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS ;.
1
9 Tatal well depth below'[and surface 50 (ft_ 24a. For All 'Wens: Submit this form wiiliin 30 dais of completion of-well ,
Forniulirplewellsfrsl.a/ldephs.tfdrjjererrl(eranrple-,3Q?00`pnd"2Q10(J'j 6onsttuctiontdthefoll6wmg:
it
111 Static water level below top oE.casing::-35 (ft.) Division.of Water=R_esources,,Information Processing Unit;
1f water level is above casing,'use'+,, 1617 Mail Service Center,;Raleigh,NC-276994617
11.ilotehoI6 dlaffieteri 6
( 24b For-Intectian-Wells: In addition to seniling;the.fbrm to the;address in,24x
'12'.Welconstruc HolloW stem aU above,also submit one-copy of this form-within 30 days of completion of well
l, tion method, g er
(i.e.auger,rotary,cable,directpusli,etc:) constructionto the•following:
Division of Water Resources,`Undergroundlnjection;Control Program,
FOR WATER,SUPPLY WELLS ONLY:- 1636,MaikService Center,Raleigh,NC 27699-1636,
13a.-Yield'(gpm) MefSodof"testy 24c.For Water.Suoolr&Iniectiori Wells: In,addition.to sending the fonn,to
the addrdss(es) above, also submit one copy of'this,form within`3 1 days,of
13b.Disinfection type: Amount: completion of well construction to the:county health department.of the county ;
- where constructed..
Form GW-I North Carolina I)epartmentofEnvironmental'Quality-Divisionof Water-Resources Revised 2-22-20I6

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD(6W-1) For'Intemal Use,Only:
1 Well Contractor lnfortnafion
Cralg_ PerltO'n _: ,Ia.wATEIVwNEs .. ` :
-Well COntIaetOr Name
TO. _ .DFSCRH'TION :
ft. ft.
NCWC 4388-A
NC Well ContractorCertificitionNutiiber 15:OUTEIiCASING for•mutd.cascd,stegs"OAIllVER°tfa `1lruhle
ft, tt
Terracon FROM To DLtNtETER THICKNESS MATERIAL
. ;,,
p ft. -3 rt. in.; Metal
Company Name
WWQ 1 J Q042 16:INNER CASING,OR TUBING NeotbPrirfal closed-loop!
2.Well Construction Permit#: FROM To DIAMETER I THICKNESS MATERIAL -
List all appGenble'well consMictioir perritits(i:e.UIC'Oifm(S,:Stale,Variance,•efi ft it., ;in,
31_ -3 1 SCH80 1.0vo
3.Well Use(check well,use): ft (t. in.
Watersupply Well: "'17.SCREEN- `' .• = _
FROM TO I)LILMECER SLOT SIZE TfHCFMESS MATERIAL.
Agricultural [3MunicipaVPublic 31 ft. 36 ft. 1 in. 0.090 SCH80 PVC
ft
Geothermal(HOting/Cooling Supply) Residential Water:Supply(sih&) it. In.
Indastriat/Commerciat Residential Water''$4piy`(shared) ""GROUT
- 4
Iiri anon FROM. TO .MATERIAL- 1,EMPLACF WN7 nrETHOD&AMOUNT
Non-Water Supply Well: 30 ft- 28 fr Bentoriite chips Gravity
x Monitoring Recovery 28 It- 1 to Cement-beritonite Hose
Injection Well- ft. fG
Aquifer Recharge Groundwater Retnediation
a19.,SANDJGRAE1 PACK^if a licable'sm k,
Aquifer Storage and Recover Salinity-Barrier FROM 11 TO 'NATERIAL I EMPLACEMENT METHOD
AquifeeTest E)Stonnwaier Drainage 36 ft' 30 & #2 Sand Gravity
Experimental Technoiogy [3 Subsidence Control fL A.
Geothermal(Closed�Loop) j3naeCr 20 DRILLING.WG<attach additloaai sbi tmif necemi ry
SCREPTION(color,(Y: .:
1'I-15-.17 PMFROMl T
ft! 8;2 ft $town,.$if y:tand uturask ram s etc rd s
(lieatin Caolin Return) Othet�(ex lam'an 'er"#21.Rotnar)�)-
4.j)a
Geo thefmai
te,Well(s)Completed.. Well ID# $.25 u• 37.5 ft. Dark gray,ash
5a.Well Location: 37.5 ft. 37.6 ft GCL
Asheville Regional Airport 37:5 ft• 40; ft. Brown,_silty sand t
Facility/Owner Name Facility lDN(ifapplicable) fG ft. F
Asheville Regional Airport, Fletcher, NC' ft. f
Physical Address,City;and Zip 7t tt.
Buncombe K43523284LQ,001 L21:'REMARKS
County Parcel Identification No.(PIN) ;
$b Latitude and longitude in degrees!minutes/seconds or,decimAdegrees:
(dwell,field,,one lay.long is.suffieient),
22.Ce `tication:
$5.4468697 N 82.5420392 w i
6.Is are the:well s x P.errnanent or Tem ora $igrwNre of Geri ed well Contractor Date.
By
constructed
1 Is.this a re ui'r to'aii ezi§tin well: Yes o'r X N.o' w'r"t7rt ANG4C 02G:OIOU`o'r ISAWCAC 02C d2100%Weil Ccnsiruc'6 rSiand in anfro t is a:
p g �` � rill and�thtii a
Ift iY-a repair fr1l bra'krtdria well com Mtc&on information and expla'rir-the nature of the r°PS o jtltts record hat been pravlded lo.the well owner.
re it tutderVI retoarla section or on dte.back o this orni: '
2.3 Site diagram-or additional well details:
&For Geoprobe/DPT orClosed-Loop Geothermal Wells having the same Y,ou tray use the back of. -is-page to provide.additional,well site detaiis or well
construction,only 1 GW-I;is„needed. Indicate TOTALNUMBERof wells construction details, You may also.attach.additional pages ifnecessary:
dnited:`I. S TTALINSTRUCTION,�
9 Total wel(depth below land surface (ft.) 24a. For
M
All Wells:' Submit this form'within 30 days of completion of well
For m4 ple wells list all dept/ts lfdt�erent(example-3�Zt10;'and l(a�/t702 i
construction to the following:
10.Static water level below top.ofcastng: (ft.) Dinston of Water Resources,Information Processing Unit,
If water level is above casing;usc,"+" 161TMail Seridce Center,Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
I1.13orehole diameter-, Q 24b.For Infection Wells. In additibn,to sending;the form to,the address m J4a +S
Hollow"stem au er atiove,also submit one copy,of this form- thin wi 30 days:of completion of welt j
]2.Well construction method: g construed
on to the following:
(t e,cage;,rotary,cable,duectpush,etc.)
DIVIAon of Water Resources,Underground Injection Control Program,
FOR WATEWSUPPLY WELLS ONLY 1636;h1aii'Service Center,Ralelgb,.NC 27699-]636
kt
13a.Yield(M) Method of`test; 24e.For Watery SuppW&.Inlection Wells: In addition to,sending,the form to
'the address(es) above, also'submit one copy of this fo_rm;,within 30 days;,or
136.Disinfection type: Amount: cocripletion of weIi construction to ti a county ftealih department of the county
where conducted.
l
FormGW-1 -North Carolina Department oft.nyironmentafQuality,-Division;of Water Resources Revised,2-22-2016 i

-_W;
WELL CONSTRUCTION.RECORD(GW-1) For Internal Use'Only
L Well.Contractor friformation:.
Craig Penton ,1$:3WATERZONE3
Well Contractor Name FROM TO DESCRIPTION
NCVC 4388-A ft- ft.
ft. ft.
C7C Well Contractor Certification Number 15:bIITER'CASINC`for multi=cased-4vclls OR LINER ifa` Gcabte
Terracon FRObr TO DIAMETER THICKNESS MATERIAL
Company Name
-p rt: -35 ft- in- 'I IMetal
_
WM0100425 .16.INNER CASING'OR TUBING eother`mid closed-lao
-2:Well Gonstructiori Permit-#: � ' FROM I To DIAMETER I TIDcxNEss. I MATERIAL '
List at1 applicable well consintetion p'eratits(le.,UIC.County;State,l{d"rlaGce'ctc.) 27 ft; _3 ft. 1 'tn' SCHBQ PVC
3.Welt-Use(check well use): fq fin,
`t7.,SCREEN
'Water Supply Well: FR
OMTO - DIAMETER �SLDTSIZE TICKNESS: MATERIAL '
Agoculttual 0MunicipaUPublic ft in.
32 1' 0.090 SCH80 PVC I
Geothermal(Heating/Cooling Supply) EtResidential Water Supply(single)
Industrial/Commercial OResideptial Water Supply,(sbared)` "
Te,..
Irri ation TO MATERIAL EMPLACEMENT METHOD&AMOUNT,
Non=Water Supply Well: 26 fL 25_ ft- Bentonite chips Gravity
X Monitoring .Recovery 25 fi-, 1 f° Cement-bentonite ]'`Hose
Injection Well:
ft. ft.
Aquifer Recharge Daroundwater Remediation
19°SANDJGRAVEL,PACKAf2bialliFabl6f,, _
Aquifer Stonrgeand.Recovcry Salinity Barrier' FROM TO 1, MATERIAL I EMPLACEMENT MEMOD i
k
Aquilef Test
bStormwater Drainage 32 f; 26 ft- #2 Sand Pour
Ex
_perimentalTechnolo Technology [3 Subsidence Control ft. ft.
Geothermal(Closed Loop) 13Traeer 20:DRILLING:LOG`-attach additional sheets if necessary)
FROM TO, DESCRIPTION color,hardam soit/roekty .lna etc. }
Geothermal(Hearin Coaling Return) Outer explain under#2l Remarks) 6 fr• 8:25 fte BrOWrI SI[tj/-SBnd
4.Date Well(s)'Completed:11-15-17 Well ID#PZ-4 8.25 ft- 33 ft•
Dark. ra , ash a,
Sa.Well Location: ;33 ft- 34 ft' Brown ilty sand
Asheville Regional Airport:
fc:
Faciiit;]Owner Noma 'Facility IDtt(ifapp'licable) ft. �
Asheville Regional Airport, Fletcher, NC ft. 'ft.
Physical Address,City,and Zip ff. 'ft. }
Buncombe 9643523284L0001 2I:REAURKS` _.r _ ;
County, Parcel ldentificifiooNo.(PIN) a
SW Latitude and longitude in;degrees/minu(cVsccouds or decimal degrees:,(if well Seld,one latopngis sufficient) 22,Cert f tion:
35.4470933 N 82.5413376 Y
.- t f,
12-_6
6.is(are)the wefl(s)Ox Permanent or [3Temporary Signature of Cert' Well Contractor Dale,
By.rignlhg.&Is)ornz,Thereby cert(Ai that ilie well(s)was(were)consinrcted in accordance
1.H this a repair to au existing Well:. DY;es :ar jNo= 0111i ISANCACO2C.0100 or 15ANCk 02C,0200 Well Coriii itciiori Standards and theta
Ifthis is a repair,fill out known well consirttction infarmation and explain the nahtre of the copy:of this record has been provided to,the well owner. }
repair anden121 rernarks section or on the b ck ofthis form.
'23.Site-diagram or additional well details:. G,
8:For t.eoprobelDPT or-Closed-Loop Geothermal Wells having the same 1 ou may use the back of this page to pro.Yide-additional-well site details or well 4
cons"clion,only 1 GW-I' needed, Indicate TOTAL NIJIV1BER of wells
construction use.
You may also attach additional pages faecI I . i!
Boiled: SUB1tMIT717AL INSTRUCTIONS'
9 Total well,depth belowland.surface 32` (ft.)
244 For All Wells Submit this forrn within 30 days of completioit'of well
Par ntnrlaple wells list nll depllq tfd erenl(exanrple>3QZ00'and 2@11N7} Construction to ffie following:
10.Static water level below top of casing:—25 ;
Division of Water Resources,Information Processing Unit,
ljwater legetls above casing,use"+" 1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,NC 276994617 i
11.Borehole dlartteter:6 (in:) 24b.For Injection Wells: In addition'to,sendin the form,to the. in 14a t
g i'
Ho[low rem aw er, above,also submit one copy of this form within 30 days `-completion of well
I2:.Weh construction method: 9
construction to the following: l
(i.e,auger,rotary;cable,direct-push,etc.)
Division of Wa"ter'Resources,Underground injection Control Program,,
FOR WAtER SUPPLY'WELLS ONLY:
1636 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,NC 27699-1636
13a.field(gpm) Method oftest' 24c.For Water Suovly&rnjection Wells: In addition to sending:the'forin to
the addresses) above also•submit one copy of,this form within 3o days of
13b.Disinfection type: Amount: completiori of well construction to the county health department.of'the county
Where constructed.
y
Forni GW-1 North Carolina Deparfinent.of Environmental Quality-Diyisiou of\Voter Resources Revised 2-22-241b

WELL CONSTRUCTION RECO)r a.t GW-1) , ForInternal.Use Only--.
1.-Wed contractor-.Information
,Craig Penton x4'svR=ZONL
:FROM ;TO 'DESCRIPTION
WeI1.ContractaeName
NCWC 4388-A
NC Well C6ni6c'toeCenifiGiti6n'Nuintier"
O 7TER'CASING'f6r riiWfi4ased WAls OR•LINER'if•a"ltcable
Terracon FROM TO DIAMETER: THICKNESS MATERLII
o ft .-3 it. _ Metal
Cotngany Name
' 16.1NNER>CASING.OR TUBING I eothieriiialdosed-too _ •-__.,
WM0100425 State Wide'Varlarlce TROM To DIAMETER THICKNESS IU MATEAL
2.Well.Construction-Pertnit.#r; '
.LlstatlnppGcable•ivellcons"cdoaperniuS .e;(JIC Cowrty;Sta(e,:Variatrce;el). 4' n' '73 'ft. 1 1n' SfiH40 PVC
3.Well Use(check well use): it. ft. 1n. i
Water Su ' 1 Web: MSCREEN„
QP y FROM TO I DIAMETER SLOTSIZE' I THICKNESS' I-6IATERIAL
:jAgrfcultaral QMunrcipal/Public 6.5 ft 4, fL 1 In• 1 0.010 8CH40 PVC
Geothermal(Heating/Cooling-Supply) ERgsidential WateciSupply°(single) it it in.
mdustrial/Commercial DResidenthd Water Supply(shared) yg CROUT .
TO MATERIAL EMPI:ACErlENTMLrH0D&ANIOU,E
lion EROM:_' NT
Non Water Supply;Well: 3..5. ,g• 2 fL, Bentonite chips,,.Gravity
? Monitoring. -Recovery '2 1L 1' ft- Cement-benionite Hose _
.Injection Well; it., ft
Aquifer Recharge [jGroutdwatec Remediation
19,SAND%GRAVEL•PACK"if a llcable
AytriferStorage,andRecovery DSalinityBarrier FROM, To MATERIAL EDlPLACEMENT:RtETHOD
Aq iif&Test [3StormwaterDr3inage 6.5, tt• 3.5 ft- Prepaeklsand Gravity f
ExperimentatTechnology DSubsidenceContr4l fL ft.
GeQthermal';(Closed Loop) ®[Tracer 20.DRILLING LOG attach additibtialsbeets Ef oee'essa "
'. _. , . . soiNrock e.grains etc.)ize,: '.
Geothermal'(Heafi Coolm Retum) Other(explarnunder#21 Remarks) EROM
0 i TO _DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION color.hardnes 1 ft• Brown, silty sand
4.Date,Wgll(s)Completed,_ 11 17-17 well ID#PZr5 1, ft. 6.5 `ft Dark gray,ash
5a.Weil Locations tta ar,.
Asheville Regional Airport ft f
FacilitAwner Name facility lDtt(ifapphcalite} ft. (L
Asheville Regional Airport, Fletcher, NC iL ft.
Physical Address,City,and'Zip f(. (t. I
Buncombe 96435232840001
1?1:R.>1;HaRxs 1� i
County' ParcelldeniiticatiotiNo:(PIN}
Sb.L:a4tude+and longitude in dcgrees/mnufeslseconds ordecimal degrees:
(if well field oiieaatilong is satficieo(). 21 Certification:
35..4471162 N 82.5422,389 w f
/2 6. / 7
6:.ls(are)the well(s)Ox Permanent or OT,emporary Signatute'ofCeriif ell Contractor Date'
By sighing this fornt,.!hereby cartrfy that the well was(were)cppstnicted in accardanee. i
7,•Xs this a.repair,to,an existiltg well: �Xes ar X�No; •with ISAWCAC 02C.0100 or 15A NC.4C 02G 0200 Well-Constniction Signdards and that.a
If tills is a repair,fill oid,k town`well eonstniction info ijnbtfbmande pld&The na6t-e of the SPY of tt is record,luu been provided to.the well awrter. ti
repairuniler H21.remarlcs secriort or,ogdlae'back of(his form; 23 Site diagram or additional well details:
8.For GeoprobdDPT or Closed-Loop Geothermal Wells having thesame You may use-the back of this page to provide additional well site details or well
constraction=;only 1 GW-lJi mceded. Indicate TOTAL NUMBER-ofwells construction details.;You mayaiso attach additional pages if necessary.
dnlled:l SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS (
9 Total well depth below'land surface. 6.5 (it;) 24a: For All Wells: Submit this forim within 30 days of completion-of well
For anVai le wells fist alldeprlu fd ereirt(exattrple-3Q'20Q°and 2@a 1001
construction t6 the following; 1
16.Static water level below fop of casing; 5 (ft.) Ditasion of Water Resources,.Intormation Processing Unit,.
k
Iftioa%r level is above casing,use '+" 1617 Mail Service;Ceater,Raleigh,N0,27699-1617 �r
11,.111orehole"diameter:,4 (in.) 24b..For Injection Wells;,,;In addition to,sending the form to the;address in 24a
Hand au ryter above,also submit-one copy of this form•wiihin 30-days•'of completion of well
12.Well construction method y
constiuction to the following:
(Le.an6'e,rotiry;cable,d¢ectpush,etc,), r'
Division of Water Resources,Underground Injection Control Program, '
FOR'WATE.R SUPPLY WELLS`ONLY 1636=1GIaq Service Center,Raleigh,NC 27600-1636 }
13a..Yield(gpm) Method of•'test: 24c.For WaterSubnly&Iniection`Wells: In addition to sending-the forin to "E
'the-address(es);above; also submit one copy of this forth,within:30'days of
13b.Disinfection type: Amount: completion of well construction to the county health department of,the county
where constructed.
i�
Form GW-1 Nofth Carolina Deparbnent of Environmental,Quality-Division'of Water Resources Revised 2-22-2016;

WELL CONSTRUCTION:REC(rnji(GW-1) For Internal'Use Only:
I,.Well Contractorinformatiou:
Craig Penton;
t4:;R'ATER°ZONES •
Well Contractor Name FROM TO DESCRIPTION -
N CWC 43,88-A ft_ rt ,
ft.: [G
NC Well•Contractor CdnificationNumber l5 fl13TERCASING'rormal6=cased' e11s)OR;LINEIt ifa licable "."
Terracon FROM To DIAMME7ER THICKNESS ALATERIAI
CompanyName 0: fu -2.5 ft, in.
Metah
WM0100425, State Wide Variance I&INNERCA8ING.OR:TUBING cotherma dosedaoo
2-Well Construction Permit#:
FROM. TO DIAMETER THICKNESS" MATERIAL
List all pppttcable µell.corrstnlGion pernnts(i.e,VIC_,Cormty,'Shve,F*4nce etc). 7.5 I'L -2 IL- I. In- SCH40 PVC
3.Well Use{check welhuse): ft. 1h.
17 SCREEfi`
� Supply Well:
Water .PAY _ -
FROM TO DIAMETER SLOTSIZE THICKNESS MATERIAL
:)Agricultural [3Municipal/Public 10 ft- 7.5 ft., i in. 0.010 SCH40. PVC
Geothcrinal(HeatingtCoolin&Supply) ORLsidential Water Supply(single)
it. ft. En
IndustriallCommercial Residential'Water supply(shared) 1R.'GR0UT.;. ' a"
Irrlaation - FROM TO MATERIAL ENIPLACEMENTMETHOW&AMOUNT
Non-Water;Supply Weq: 6 ft. 3 ft, Bentonite;chips. Gravity
x Monitoring 1311ccovery 3 ft' 1 ft, Cement-bentonite Hose.
Injection Well: ft, rL
Aquifer Recharge Groundwater Remediation ;
19. ANDIGRAVEL PACK(if a licabl eAquifer Stora gaand Recov } SalinrtyBarrier FROM MATERIAL EMACEENThME'rEOD
Aquifer Test 0Stormwatef Drainage 10 ft. 6 ft- Prepack/sand' Gravity
Ekp"erirriental Technology [3,suhsidence Control ft. ft.
Geothermal(Closed Loop) OTracer 20.DRILLING LOG Otta,ch additional shectsif wiissa
Geothermal(Heatin Cooliit'Rettnit) 00thler-.(ex lain under 921 Remarks) I
FROM TO _ DESCRIPTION color,hordness.softack type,�rain s -etcj
0 ft- 10 fL. Brown,silty-sand With clay
4.,Date,We"(s)Completed:11-17-17'1 Weil 10#PZ-6 ft. ft.
5a.Well Location: ft. it..
Asheville Regional Airport ft. ft.
Pacilityldwner Name Facility[Dd(if applicable) r
Asheville Regional Airport, Fletcher, KC fl f .
r
Physical Address,City,±an&Zip ft. IL
Buricorribe 9643523284L0001 '21•REnfARKs.
County Parcel Identification No:(PIN) The beFehele eellapsed =
.
5b.Latitude and,longitude in degrees/minutes/seconds or decimal degrees:
(if well Geld,one lattlong issufficient) 22.Ce ifica'done
35.4473985 N 82;5412257
eu
jz- 6_-/.7
:6,Is(are)the;well(s)o!X Permanent or [Temporary
Sigi ure of epC ed''Well contractor Date
By S197d,g this fonn,I hereby certify-thol the vefl(sj was(were)consinicted in accordance
7 !s this a,repalr to an existing well: 13Yes or` x)No with. NCAC 02C,0100 or'15ANCAC0IC.0200•[fell Cmtstr(tetion Stdndards and Jlidt a t
11 this:is'atrepair,fill out blown wellvonstnrction nfornrdtlowand explain the tianireofihc copy ofthis record has been provided to thewetf ox�rer:
&f
repair under del reararkr section or;ar the back of tl{ts forne. �
23 S►te diagram or additional well details
&.For Geoprobell)n or Closed-Loop Geothermal Wells having the same You may trse the back of this page to provide additional well site.details or well It
construction,only I GW-1 isneeded. Indicate TOTALNUMBER,of wells construction details. You may also attach additional pages if necessary.
drilled:' r,=
SUBMITTAL.INSTRUCTIONS
9.Total well'depth below land surface,1.0
( 24a. For All Wells; Submit this form within 30 days of completion of well
For ntidtiple xe71s7ist aU depUrs ifd ererit esrtmple-3Q200`and ZQa 1002
- construction to the following:
10.Static water level below top of,casin9--7 (ft.) Division of Water Resources,,Information Processing Unit,
Ifaaierlevel isabove acing,rise"+ 1617,Mail Service Center,-Raleigh,NC,27649-161? l'
I.I.Borehole diameter-4 (in.) 24b.For Iniection Wellsi in addition to sending the,fonn to the address in;24a,
Hand au .er above,also submit'one copy of This form Within 30 days of completion of well
l2.Well rnnstruchon method: construction to the followin
(i.e.augcr.'rotary,;cable,direct:pu'sh,etc.) g`
P.
Division of Water Resources,Underground Injection Control Program,
FOR WATER SUPPLY WELLS ONLYe 1636 Mail Seri3ce'Centee,Raleigh,iVC 216494636,
13a:Yield(gpm) Method oftest: 24c.For Water Supply&Iniection Wells: In addition to sending the formic
the address(es) above, also 'submit one copy of'this'fonn within 36 days of
13b.Disinfection type: Amount: codipletiori of well construction'to the county health department of the county
Where constructed.
Form GWd' North Carolina Department of F nJWnmental:Quality-Division of Water Resources Revised 2-22-2016
Lt

Appendix C
Laboratory Analysis Results
(by Excel Geotechnical Testing, Inc.)

Excel GeotechR ical.'t' t ng, Inc.
Test-Results Summary
"Exceflen'ce in.-Testing"
i 953 Fcarcest:Stleet,Roswell,Georgia 30D75; PrgjeC�Name:' .AkCa''g
Tel:;[phone] Fax;[phone] .Pxaject.No. ,868
Site ID: Testlntnrmatiou
Moisture Ciaiu Size Analysis AtterbeM lamits Engine Specific ' Pill.- Carbonate Other-
Sample Sampk tY _ Tests,
Na Content'' 11Stht.t)42Z AST{4tI)d3t8- Clnsslfii Grrvi AST Method
Content. ;ldemurics _ /
ID .Aepth :ASTM Gravel. Sand Fines Silt Clay, LL. PL, Pi AMS AS NI Distilled. -Calcium.' ' A5m.
02216 Content, 'Content .'Content Content " Content 'D 2487 D SM Water Chloride{ D 4373:
H.
SPT-I 0-2 :17KI03 59:2
'SPT-'1 ,-10 17K104
SPT-I 18'-20 17K105 -
SPT--1 28;-30_ JW106= 0.0' 12.0, 88.0 �-
SPT'1 30--32 17K1Q7 $.3 28
SPT:.h 32-34 17KI.08'
SPT 2- 0--2 17K109
SPT-2 8:-10 ,I7K110 .
'SPT2 A8.-20" 17K1-1I 71:2
SPT2 '28-30' 17K112
'SPT-2 30'-32' 17K113 '83-1 8.2 7.61
.SPT=2 32-34 .17K114
i
SlTr2. 39=,41 IWO :' 28:4
S J�Kld6 32 9 PT-2 44-46- '
SPT2 49-51 '17KI17
SPY-3 0-2, 17K118 0.0 42.9� .56:5. 32.9-' 23,6>
SPT 3 8-10 .17K119 '65.2
SPT-3 18 2Il 17K120
SPT-3' 28--•30' VK121,
SPT-3 301-32 17KI22
Notes.
p.

Test,R sulO Summarv-
"Excel°�eo�echnic�l '1'�st[n ,:Inc;.
-FJCGI?1ie17CE'`tfl TtSf}J1tJ '
Georga 30075 TO et Roswell;; Pe Name AI2A Area.1
Tel,(7.70)940-7637,Fax:[phone]$;
i •,&Ite-IDr • Ttstiuformutiefa . 4 •.:
Moisture; GRip SieAnalysii AttcrbergLimits: 'Engine-, Specifsc,' PH: Carbonate tOthcc: ,
Q:nb Content Clas'sire Gravity ASTM DiM `Content'. "'Tests
Ssamptc Sample No.. ASTM.D 422; ASIM D,d318 MdhodA Iiemarl s:
ID Depfb. ASTM _ Gravel: : -Sand Fmes: Silt C4ay_ LL PL PI, AST14 ASTeii bistilled' "Calcium: AST111;
D 2214 Content' Conteaet., Content• ;Content 'Content- D 2487' ,D 854� W.
�diiiii e" D i373
�':) •.l.ft.� �--) � f'y)' (ufo.)7 ['�?` 1.°�). (�f•'�. .f.Of� .{-.}.
SPTS "32-34- 17K123 1:1: 17.0 :8118 74.4 7.'9: ( 2.290 8:3 28
SIYU3.. 14'=36. :17IU24:
SPT-3 ,W-38` 17P125
SPT=3 38 40 17K121s �—
_. .SPT-4': p,-r:2'_ 1?K'127 1.2• 5.1:6' 472, 256 21.6: i �2.764
SET=4. 8—10 " ,.171C128
SU 4 18y 20
9PT-4'. . :28. 30 171C130. 844.
9PF-4 30 32 ,' 17K13I: 04
-16.9L $2:7 :78:4 4:3 7:7' `2;6:
SPT4 32 3: 17K132.
NA-2:: -' 17KIj3 'O:U 12.0 ;88_0 t76:9' :� �J-1_. . � 74 � 3' 6Ai
INC-4 30.'_.32' .-j7K134 ,
INC-4= 32;,34 17if13S'
: 17KI36
WCA y 4.1 43'" 17K137
OWi
` ,

t
I
E
Project Name:: ARA Area l
Excel C�eotechnacal Tes �•ng ihc.
"Excetlenceln Testing". Project No 868
_ 953°Forrest Street;Roswell,Georgia`30075 Client Sample D; SPT-1,(28-34')
Tel:[phone] Fax:'(770)910 708 L36:Sa1nple No: 17K106
'SA Id d.AD422.DM;D 1149, .. - • • Graia Sb Gravity Wbicofitwt,
D 7716p31ar D4318,D6?12,D7918 QIC.INDEX..PROPERT11S; 1A& M-A"�
3`t` .. _ _ _
b Coarse, Fidie Calrse Medium Fine Silt Clay
a Cobbles
Gravel Sand Fines'
U.S.Standaid Sieve Sizes and Numbers
2 1SP.014'14.318^ 1,4! #111 1211 440 4&kloo: #zoo
80
v„ ,{ 4 I
7,0
to
is •
'50
: 3a _.
i.a - 1 I
Ii I
i6bb 1001 10 1 0.1 0:41 01.001 0:0001
Gra n,.Size{MM)'
. Hydrometer
No °
Sieve Size(mm) -Finer 80 - -
ParticleDiameter %-Tiner
75 _ IOU, mm .
70
" 00.0 iLin I j
l:5•• 3 :5 f40.Q
° 25 100.0" 0. f
v SO .CHaroI
3i4 t,9• "a"Lae
3/8"f 9:3, 100.0 40 '
4 475 t00.0° _ y 30 . .
,'d10' 2,00 -99.6. Grlvel(%):. 20 CLcrO
A,_) 0.850 , 99:0, ' Ss6d($4)r 12.0 MHorOH
n40' fl,4?5' 0_4 Fines °/6): "88.0 10
(.
0.,250 97A Silt(%),- Mtsor;OL.
k100 Or150 0 1.0 20 30. 40 50- 60 70 86, go-100 110 no—
-_
#{200 0:075 88:0 ,
Liquid.Limit(L]W,
Goeff.Uulf.0*.'
Specific Grnyity ICoeo Carv-,(S);
r Atetb,FinesContentCIiept Iof Moistu I irivts_ Engineering Classification
;Sample Sample Content <No.200' LL PL PT
SPT-1(28-105 17K106 88.4

- Pro}'ecMe
t I•Iame'': ARA Area l
"r:rcell ttt: tr►Tesfl,g" Project tva,ry 8G&°
4 953 I:Qrrest S1PL' t,Row !!,fat't) is 34t�75 Cltent S mply,
Tst,(1 7a)110 7 T Fax (77 Mq PA
Lab;Sample7ito 1711:8;,
. , . aizazr,osaza;d�abatsss, ��I�•Il'►)�L�.��I2.��ER'�"�.Ttl'� ,-_ w�ci�rsrr��Ani��i,°�itr`.
Coarsc Fine dairsc 1Mdizim Pzu�• $rtt:-" C1ay
ti
}
,
Gravel;, Sand t sacs
IIS.Ssa�dard�i�veSzasSezatS�nmhr�'`�
40 949--ffO#i06-.%MP
IF
eeSlr .._: _ _
80
14
5 r1-1
tH
v
m 1
as '
r
c
i
ti
0.41 oeoo a.aoar
` - GrattiSix�e{riim:j
Szev�lYa S> e(mm) "✓o R ner q Hyd�tt►efer � ,
S'
0.0" 1° 47 2'
-
-
-
i' 4.096k
50
100 Q, 6 0U31 1. 7 , : A'11"
1000.,
s4 : : Q75.. Sa o =
q
es
64 0 250 799. Slit
xiL
'mo 0150'., 6&1 Clap.{elq},: 23:6-, 0` {IO 20 , 4b' 'S0 6d J- �6 :100 lip-I20:
-�
30Q. G 07g- 565, Liytid Limit fit
pfC13l�-Gl'avity�); � 2 x5-" C°ei�CnzC(CU}i F CaefY
'Ur;y fCC}.
Zltrlt, tzl? Ioisttue: Euies Content Atterlaer Ltrtiitse 'Engit�eeiit Classi:cahori,
:. I _
Sazriple SSmple- Content.' 'No 20Q' LL:
Auassmstefl
sPe° °'SY.oCTSvts?ied vheainatynzzgtir°'iiyrirroinetertestresuits: �"l

Ex C� �t chn.ical Totting; inc rru(ect lame: t112A r zea
„Excellence Iri:'7'esizg" Praect No.. 8,68
053 Forrest Strew#,Rasvueil,Geor is 3Q1175- Giiea�t Sample TLe 5 i 3(32'.34
761::(T76
)bl Q 7t 37 Fix;(7ZQ)'S Q 7538°
Lab Sam, Ce i7Ki23
. �1,$i61�..�33G,Dd23,D83I;D`.2t30, = �yT T -GnsSa56's;S`ae..GrarisyrY�Marsr.Cantrns; .
' D22'36;D23$7.D331%D.d923.Di9 .,�SLJ,eL �.P� i�;.l-r ni.13 ;.Ctau�tkndrm,kttc�tergi.mt{<
(;=si IV��itIUl Fine Si11. +
' � Cobbles• _: .,
cg- Grsvel -y '$2riti.. - FiTles
3k t 5 1914"3183t8 P #I0 020- '940 .Ao ii100' �200
.� $U14 I d , .
Q
IOU
1
9U AEI'
"Saf1Ao
.
- _
` 2a�' x
.20 3
t
4 i
1(?Qfl' 100 10 0,01 0.4Q1 0001
Grain.
G'
Te�eato,,STze m} °.6Fmer Flydxorneter
` 1-'rtkleDtanietei• °%a 1?iber I
70'
60` ,
[T•Line �
1" .-` 100.E Q:007S, 9, °
CIi
Sk, ar OH
.310 19 100.0 `9.003$ 3,2' A Ltna i
3l8 9 100 0 0 001.E y 3 = 44,
JONO
W
4,
#20 0 8�0' 96.2', Saad(°fo)s, 17;T': " 20 €CL r, Loc ON
40 0,425 .95.0 Fines(Yo):• 81:$ t0
_ , -
#60 0 y5a"' g31 Sit;(°loj: 74.4 0 &!t of OL
#100 0Is0' 84.8' clay("%}: .7A., 0 0 `20,' 3a` 46 50 60, 7Q,$0 i t00110'120•
g20p 0 07 %1:$ •L#gpid Li2nit'11--y
Coeff.u4if(cu}z,
Speclf#cGri vrti2,240:' Coef£rruty (Ce} ;
C3iettt Lab Maistuxe= Firi�s Content Atterbeig t units, Engineering Clad"sifcation
Sa uple' 'S€Pie: orrtent <hta,201 I I PT. PE
. t

i
Prolec#1\ram ARA
E cei ' eotechniCA "Testing9
Area i
"ExCe/!e»ce tit'�'esting"' Pro36cfN6•-. 868:
f' 8,53,�otrest S#ceet;Roswell,Gear la 3QQ75 Client Sample d SPT"4(0 2}
''Pel (770 9Jo�ss;' Fax:'(770) a 76e':'
1Jab Sample N 17J27
A5TMC-23d.D422,D85,t,D1140;.. wit •(•�•' '�'�m .- �.y 'p+,�y' g•�,., +,CrnfnSiie,S er.Craril7,hfufct,C6nle t ,
D2216.D2WD4319,D69I3D1M1 '.i7�1.1.r�11VJJE-kPO b ll��n' '-En&GlissrPfzall°n Atle GeR L4nt! ,
bourse Fine Gaaase Adediinn Eras S11t' Cla} . -
Cobbles
Gravel Sand' Fines
_.
-U S Standard Steve Size"s ad iTumbers,
12°' 3 2%.r t5/4']h_319, :91 #16 020 •r 440. -460 109 #2Q0
-. ttt
,100'
Ir 11k.,
760
'
I
so
1 !
R
• - •
d -40
20
o '
000 ;;%o To i .0. . 'Q.001 0'.0001
Grain Size(mm•,).
S1ei a No. 517e//mm QM Finer hydrometer 80
PariicleDlameter o/.Fbi& ( ;.
3, 75 100 0 mm• ( _ .F .
2r 'U 50 ' 1000 0.0306' 34.0 €
1. Lne
375 1 0.0 0-0118. �94 69
1" 23• O.0061 23.0; a; 'S0 c 'Cfi or off , --
x
3f4° 19 100 0; 0.0030 18.3y �A'Lnt
318 95 100.0 •4.0613 -
�.
910 2 60 _ 95.9
20 CL o r L y
920' 0 850.
046 0 425- 82,9,' Fines("/a}: 47.2 IO
066 "s 0.256`-: 73.fi SH M1, 25. 0 &II crt7>i:
it100' 0.1'S9 60.6 Cliy("/o)'s 1 21:b 1 0 '10;, 20 30 40 SO 60 7o '80 90 7A0 I10-120
'0200 0 67s 47;2:
_ _ - -faquid Limit(I:.L:J
ctieff C7n1G:(cu}:-
Specitic Gravity(-� �p764 CoetT.Cnry(Cc�:__'
Client La Mpisture Ftnes Content Atterberg I units- i✓ngineenng Glas$fication'
Sample sample; Colitent 'No.20U 1:L, PL.. Pr
SET-4(0-2'j. 17K127 47.2
Not s• _, -
ti v: ,ya

:
i
Trojeci Name: ARA Area I ¢
EXcel-GeotechhIcal Testing' Ind.
"&Cc Hence"in`Testirtyr` 'Project No;�. •868 .
i Clienf Sam Ie D:> §PT-:4 30-32`
953 Forrest Street,Roswell,Georggia 30076 P_ (. ),
Tel:(770)9'0 7537 -Fax:(770f,990'7638
Lab Sample No:. 17K131 i
'D'Y216:D" F.D-031&Laos; SOIL,INDEX,'?1k6 `ERTIFS `MIn M.MI.ditertieyLimiuF `
i
Cam:-, Fine Cvarsc. *dium Firia Silt May
Cobbles a
Gravel Sand _ Fines '-i
U.S.Standard'Sieve:Sizes andNumbers
i§• a 2•--5'il'trz3ts• 94 rlto lJ20 'No 960--9100 =0
100 _
11
.:90 i ri
i
80
70
. 6D
I �
s.o '
. .
u 40
20 €.
I .
lit
10 — —
► . I
Ali
10,60 1Q0 10 1' 0.1 0 0i 0.001 O.000T
GrainSize(mm.)
Steve ND ;Size(min) %Finer $ydrometer 80,
Particle Diameter %Finer
3 75 100.0, tam 74 4
2" so, 160'0 6.0348 66,9 '
i.4° 37.5 100;0. um19'9. 60 f
'II•line
1" 25' 10010 0.0677 7 7 50 I CH or OH, I
w� 19 100:0: ' 0.0038 3i1' ti. IIl
'A
3B" 9.5. 100.0'- 0.0016 40
94 4.75! 99.6 " 30 _
910 2.00: 081 Gravel(°/a): 0'4 a:
20
no, 0.850 963' Sand,(%j •16.9'
"40 0.425 . 94$. Flues(°f°): 82.7 10:
860 0.256 ' 921' Silt(%): o . htLerOL';
41,00 0.156 89:3 Clay(°i5): -4.3 0: 10'• 20, 30 .40 -50 60. 76 00 90,100,110120
.4260 0.075 823 LlquidZimit{Ll}
SpeeiftcGtavtty(?)i 2:30 C"M Curv.(6)i,
;Client Lab. Moisturee 1 i �Conient� Atterberg Lim is Engineering Classification
Sariiple ._Sample; Content <No.200, LL FL FT
SPTA(30-327. I7K131: 82.7'
Votes):' Au assumed`specific:gravity of.2.30 was used when anAMnj)hchydrometer test results.
yD�1 e
`e{p' fir.
`�
i

i
Project Name. ARAA i a"'I
Excel-G66W%chntcal Tds nga `
"Excelfe»ee:In,if', N6v 869
F 953 Forrest Street,Roswell Geofgla 30075•. U Glient am icTD Hid 2'
Tel:(T70}910 7537 Fax:(�77..0j,910 7538'
_ Lab Santp;e_1 f 17K133.,
211(4t C7V,k4 113D 69113 �s®Ty -l"kk PROI RTig Ly :C�alri$ize�Slitc Gm9tlMoutCwiteat{-_
D 16,D2387,DJ31B;D6913,!)7928. t�� l'l..�il\L Y IJrL' 8.on,t7 BnyClamfirnn°n,A:futrcraLm;ca-V
Coarse F1na Cvaise Medmm Fine Siit Chit',
t ,
` Cobbles
* Gravel' - 'Sand Fides,
U S;Standard$ieiva Sizes a'dNuinbecs
]2` 3" 3't.5'igt4`,1/231
8" :#S 610 '0l0 ,M40 96C 4100_P200 _
l oo. -
90
`•80,
3 -
i flm"
E .
� '• E (< I � � i I
a. 30 .
d 20
10
3006 1 00> 9:001 wo.0001,
Grain Size(min-),
Sieve h'o..',Size(mm} °r Finer Hydrometer 80 ,
- Particle Diameter `Y Fner.'
3 75 100;0
a 1 70 �.
2" '50 100.0 0,340. 67.0 r
141 37.5v 100,0 U.0139 384.
1" 35 1 .P 0.0075, - 17' Sb' cHo:oH r
314"- I-9 Io0.0 �OA038 - 8:5 ' ( -Lill"
3/8;` 95 1QO;b 0:bbt6 i.3'
40 __-- t
#4- .4.�s 106.0 3u
2.66 99.3 Gravet(%):
i -
i I -
#20 0 850 98.4 Sand(%} 12.0- D111 or OH {
Fines Qa 89.0 IO
iJ60` 4,250 E 95.3 Silt(%), 76.9' 0: b!L 'op,
100 0.150 93 7 C1ey('/°). 11.1 0.;I Q 20. 30 40,5(1 69 70 84 90 100 11P'120'
rt200 b.075: '88-0 Liquid,Limit(I-L)
Cooff.Unit'(Cu):
Specific Gravity(-)s 2:279 Goeff,Gury (Cc):,-
Client, Lab Moisture Fines Content- Atterbera Limits_ Engineeiing CIass Ficandn
Sample Sa1i]pte`, COnterit :�N0.-200 -
70,
PL PT '
_•
EIA-Z l.7I n13
ar°�

Appendix D
Area 1 Slope Pin Survey Measurements
(by McKim & Creed)

Engineering Analysis Report Appendix D:Area 1 Slope Pin Survey Measurements
Asheville Regional Airport
4-Oct-17 18-Oct-17 1-Nov-17 15-Nov-17 29-Nov-17 12-Dec-17
Pin ID Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation
(ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88)
Al 636481.904 945163.365 2105.853 636481.933 945163.360 2105.869 636481.902 945163.383 2105.840 636481.919 945163.359 2105.861 636481.928 945163.352 2105.856 636481.890 945163.351 2105.877
A2 636470.291 945167.177 2109.646 636470.342 945167.178 2109.674 636470.282 945167,188 2109.643 636470.289 945167.182 2109.657 636470.273 945167.162 2109.658 636470.293 945167.147 2109.675
A3 636458.644 945171.283 2112.458 636458.641 945171.277 2112.484 636458.632 945171.316 2112.454 636458.635 945171.308 2112.466 636458.594 945171.293 1 2112.463 636458.619 945171.286 2112.489
A4 636434.927 945180.011 2117.490 636434.984 945180.019 2117.520 636434.974 945180.043 2117.491 636434.983 945180.023 2117.505 636434.974 945180.019 2117.497 636434.956 945179.982 2117.524
A5 636413.117 945190.021 2123.249 636413.152 945189.968 2123.270 636413.113 945190.013 2123.240 636413.099 945190.005 2123.254 636413.092 945189.968 2123.251 636413.095 945189.967 2123.283
A6 636397.566 945199.936 2128.452 636397.605 945199.910 2128.484 636397.564 945199.955 2128.457 636397.568 945199.943 2128.468 636397.534 945199.927 2128.467 636397.563 945199.907 2128.490
A7 636376.284 945211.539 2135.014 636376.278 945211.555 2135.041 636376.282 945211.593 2135.005 636376.276 945211.563 2135.022 636376.244 945211.546 2135.016 636376.277 945211.543 2135.037
A8 636355.931 945224.657 2138.556 636355.906 945224.648 2138.577 636355.904 945224.667 2138.537 636355.894 945224.662 2138.424 636355.886 945224.677 2138.420 636355.906 945224.634 2138.449
Bl 636489.781 945186.317 2106.368 636489.797 945186.382 2106.361 636489.778 945186.372 2106.355 636489.793 945186.341 2106.363 636489.753 945186.382 2106.365 636489.779 945186.363 2106.389
B2 636478.376 945190.288 2109.816 636478.346 945190.291 2109.835 636478.314 945190.332 2109.798 636478.330 945190.307 2109.820 636478.300 945190.312 2109.792 636478.299 945190.305 2109.833
B3 636465.725 945194.863 2113.344 636465.721 945194.901 2113.375 636465.728 945194.901 2113.353 636465.729 945194.904 2113.365 636465.729 945194.903 2113.337 636465.711 945194.879 2113.376
B4 636443.276 945203.328 2119.209 636443.209 945203.342 2119.233 636443.236 945203.355 2119.213 636443.249 945203.340 2119.228 636443.205 945203.352 2119.209 636443.218 945203.329 2119.235
B5 636420.820 945211.405 2125.492 636420.763 945211.499 2125.506 636420.740 945211.479 2125.490 636420.740 945211.467 2125.509 636420.738 945211.448 2125.491 636420.764 945211.450 2125.524
B6 636402.301 945216.878 2130.521 636402.243 945216.929 2130.539 636402.214 945216.970 2130.525 636402.215 945216.962 2130.528 636402.189 945216.951 2130.517 636402.200 945216.927 2130.552
B7 636383.344 945222.379 2135.427 636383.331 945222.388 2135.442 636383.316 945222.386 2135.428 636383.310 945222.402 2135.439 636383.276 945222.360 2135.428 636383.311 945222.365 2135.458
B8 636361.970 945235.113 2138.483 636361.993 945235.099 2138.506 636361.977 945235.099 2138.471 636361.970 945235.119 2138.312 636361.956 945235.145 2138.268 636361.968 945235.116 2138.300
Cl 636498.766 945209.941 2106.735 636498.785 945209.929 2106.766 636498.711 945209.935 2106.733 636498.736 945209.926 2106.747 636498.750 945209.911 2106.740 636498.723 945209.910 2106.754
C2 636486.639 945212.946 2110.183 636486.583 945213.010 2110.210 636486.549 945213.017 2110.171 636486.545 945213.013 2110.184 636486.566 945212.981 2110.192 636486.554 945212.991 2110.210
C3 636474.019 945216.833 2113.404 636474.036 945216.818 2113.430 636474.032 945216.820 2113.402 636474.017 945216.845 2113.405 636473.998 945216.826 2113.406 636474.008 945216.797 2113.430
C4 636451.458 945223.692 2120.012 636451.449 945223.684 2120.045 636451.445 945223.712 2120.012 636451.445 945223.706 2120.031 636451.468 945223.676 2120.029 636451.467 945223.691 2120.048
C5 636428.342 945231.254 2126.396 636428.337 945231.223 2126.426 636428.300 945231.277 2126.404 636428.301 945231.261 2126.415 636428.268 945231.231 2126.415 636428.275 945231.227 2126.431
C6 636410.388 945236.607 2131.544 636410.438 945236.554 2131.561 636410.420 945236.609 2131.540 636410.435 945236.580 2131.559 636410.414 945236.550 2131,553 636410.455 945236.557 2131.577
C7 636394.411 945241.291 2136.195 636394.405 945241.239 2136.225 636394.419 945241.251 2136.198 636394.395 945241,241 2136,212 636394.400 945241.202 2136.212 636394.438 945241.185 2136.233
C8 636372.500 945251.907 2138.611 636372.459 945251.883 2138.633 636372.481 945251.933 2138.603 636372.498 945251.908 2138.551 636372.469 945251.899 2138.484 636372.491 945251.876 2138.497
Dl 636506.816 945233.510 2106.841 636506.783 945233.529 2106.852 636506.786 945233.540 2106.833 636506.808 945233.530 2106.836 636506.753 945233.511 2106.832 636506.762 945233.497 2106.851
D2 636494.156 945237.299 2110.487 636494.204 945237.323 2110.505 636494.163 945237.321 2110.490 636494.186 945237.314 2110.501 636494.114 945237.332 2110.486 NM NM NM
D3 636479.664 945241.210 2114.438 636479.621 945241.255 2114.442 636479.631 945241.234 2114.435 636479.631 945241.220 2114.434 636479.564 945241.239 2114.420 636479.612 945241.226 2114.445
D4 636460.580 945247.699 2119.883 636460.512 945247.748 2119.889 636460.524 945247.750 2119.888 636460.527 945247.727 2119.884 636460.490 945247.715 2119.877 636460.541 945247.713 2119.906
D5 636435.967 945254.813 2126.813 636435.963 945254.861 2126.836 636435.954 945254.843 2126.816 636435.968 945254.856 2126.828 636435.927 945254.862 2126.811 636435.955 945254.805 2126.846
D6 636418.086 945259.649 2132.832 636418.030 945259.637 2132.854 636418.025 945259.659 2132.830 636418.042 945259.660 2132.844 636417.986 945259.639 2132.828 636418.027 945259.635 2132.860
D7 636405.953 945263.486 2136.127 636405.908 945263.463 2136.154 636405.897 945263.497 2136.131 636405.889 945263.483 2136.141 636405.871 945263.499 2136.129 636405.854 945263.466 2136.161
D8 636384.217 945272.170 2139.196 636384.164 945272.167 2139.201 636384.186 945272.187 2139.192 636384.168 945272.163 2139.204 636384.148 945272.154 2139.195 636384.189 945272.116 2139.217
El 636515.080 945257.040 2107.780 636515.045 945257.062 2107.782 636515.024 945257.069 2107.772 636515.036 945257.052 2107.773 636515.042 945257.059 2107.777 636515.015 945257.066 2107.784
E2 636503.440 945261.517 2110.616 636503.443 945261.536 2110.633 636503.420 945261.543 2110.585 636503.434 945261.531 2110.617 636503.440 945261.489 2110.607 636503.453 945261.484 2110.620
E3 636487.911 945266.994 2114.948 636487.904 945266.960 2114.969 636487.895 945266.970 2114.934 636487.903 945266.974 2114.956 636487.925 945266.954 2114.953 636487.945 945266.953 2114.961
E4 636469.840 945273.842 2120.075 636469.831 945273.827 2120.071 63646.9.813 945273.839 2120.056 636469.818 945273.833 2120.078 636469.800 945273.817 2120.071 636469.779 945273.778 2120.083
E5 636445.349 945280.128 2126.682 636445.338 945280.117 2126.678 636445.350 945280.145 2126.667 636445.352 945280.131 2126.686 636445.325 945280.084 2126.676 636445.328 945280.094 2126.689
E6 636430.138 945283.777 2132.292 636430.104 945283.771 2132.320 636430.087 945283.795 2132.289 636430.104 945283.782 2132.317 636430.091 945283.740 2132.312 636430.073 945283.731 2132.319
E7 636414.959 945287.451 2136.557 636414.958 945287.438 2136.570 636414.966 945287.443 2136.540 636414.972 945287.448 2136.559 636414.935 945287.401 2136.553 636414.949 945287.424 2136.573
E8 636391.982 945294.253 2139.244 636391.955 945294.285 2139.251 636391.952 945294.281 2139.232 636391.962 945294.288 2139.246 636391.901 945294.272 2139.159 636391.957 945294.234 2139.181
F1 636522.509 945280.459 2107.975 636522.495 945280.503 2107.986 636522.463 945280.469 2107.958 636522.477 945280.471 2107.966 636522.440 945280.471 2107.956 636522.461 945280.427 2107.988
F2 636511.032 945284.714 2111.115 636511.005 945284.771 2111.126 636511.003 945284.768 2111.102 636511.028 945284.774 2111.117 636510.968 945284.770 2111.099 636511.006 945284.759 2111.130
F3 636498.740 945288.014 2114.139 636498.693 945288.055 2114.152 636498.694 945288.053 2114.136 636498.686 945288.050 2114.134 636498.635 945288.039 2114.129 636498.709 945288.032 2114.152
F4 636475.506 945294.063 2120.697 636475.456 945294.093 2120.731 636475.458 945294.081 2120.702 636475.453 945294.082 2120.707 636475.430 945294.096 2120.695 636475.437 945294.074 2120.723
F5 636452.046 945300.524 2127.393 636452.020 945300.522 2127.412 636452.014 945300.539 2127.391 636452.013 945300.526 2127.385 636452.002 945300.521 2127.382 636452.023 945300.479 2127.399
F6 636436.629 945305.293 2132.264 636436.573 945305.293 2132.292 636436.569 945305.309 2132.268 636436.565 945305.290 2132.284 636436.523 945305.271 2132.269 636436.589 945305.226 2132.286
F7 636421.117 945309.404 2136.927 636421.081 945309.417 2136.951 636421.078 945309.435 2136.935 636421.110 945309.422 2136.945 636421.093 945309.413 2136.931 636421.107 945309.363 2136.968
F8 636397.327 945315.000 2139.859 636397.285 945315.017 2139.868 636397.286 945315.041 2139.846 636397.279 945315.041 2139.862 636397.241 945315.009 2139.685 636397.282 945314.987 2139.717
GI 636531.104 945310.143 2108.443 636531.160 945310.181 2108.452 636531.110 945310.185 2108.427 636531.125 945310.179 2108.447 636531.155 945310.158 2108.442 636531.105 945310.129 2108.467
G2 636520.932 945315.056 2110.686 1 636520.897 1 945315.098 2110.667 636520.920 945315.102 2110.667 1 636520.913 945315.086 1 2110.692 636520.939 945315.038 2110,692 636520.931 945315.034 2110.701
Page 1 of 3

Engineering Analysis Report Appendix D:Area 1 Slope Pin Survey Measurements
Asheville Regional Airport
4-Oct-17 18-Oct-17. 1-Nov-17 15-Nov-17 29-Nov-17 12-Dec-17
Pin ID Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation
(ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88)
G3 636509.086 945319.588 2114.535 636509.133 945319.592 2114.559 636509.117 945319.596 2114.544 636509.118 945319.605 2114.557 636509.146 945319,575 2114.553 636509.161 945319.561 2114.565
G4 636486.579 945327.939 2121.207 636486.581 945327.963 2121.238 636486.584 945327.980 2121.200 636486.607 945327.997 2121.212 636486.586 945327.950 2121.215 636486.597 945327.907 2121.231
G5 636463.454 945334.341 2128.149 636463.450 945334.366 2128.201 636463.469 945334.394 2128.161 636463.473 945334.395 1 2128.165 636463.454 945334.337 2128.178 636463.485 945334.356 2128.179
G6 636445.377 945338.768 2133.082 636445.427 945338.734 2133.113 636445.421 945338.728 2133.075 636445.444 945338.748 2133.098 636445.397 945338.672 2133.095 636445.438 945338.693 2133.105
G7 636429.029 945343.133 2137.778 636429.050 945343.136 2137.785 636429.045 945343.127 2137.763 636429.076 945343.101 2137.786 636429.060 945343.078 2137.773 636429.070 945343.064 2137.792
G8 636405.771 945349.322 2141.968 636405.737 945349.312 2141.962 636405.751 945349.320 2141.954 636405.747 945349.329 2141.963 636405.730 945349.301 2141.967 636405.740 945349.256 2141.992
HI 636538.020 945333.277 2109.509 636537.998 945333.317 2109.544 636538.004 945333.344 2109.511 636537.981 945333.345 2109.520 636537.956 945333.338 2109.498 636538.019 945333.300 2109.536
H2 636525.882 945336.258 2111.896 636525.859 945336.265 2111.931 636525.873 945336.244 2111.900 636525.873 945336.258 2111.917 636525.876 945336.230 2111.901 636525.915 945336.228 2111.927
H3 636513.866 945339.576 2115.371 636513.799 945339.572 2115.403 636513.861 945339.576 2115.360 636513.847 945339.582 2115.367 636513.801 945339.549 2115.360 636513.868 945339.546 2115.377
H4 636491.788 945345.834 2122.368 636491.735 945345.894 2122.398 636491.737 945345.885 2122.371 636491.737 945345.883 2122.367 636491.720 945345.857 2122.365 636491.751 945345.849 2122.391
H5 636468.368 945352.958 2129.400 636468.323 945353.030 2129.411 636468.325 945353.021 2129.389 636468.348 945352.998 2129.390 636468.285 945352.994 2129.361 636468.349 945352.994 2129.412
H6 636450.448 945358.593 2134.189 636450.414 945358.580 2134.216 636450.388 945358.584 2134.196 636450.416 945358.571 2134.194 636450.420 945358.546 2134.189 636450.398 945358.558 2134.212
H7 636432.965 945363.355 2139.412 636432.916 945363.383 2139.429 636432.892 945363.387 2139.413 636432.900 945363.380 2139.421 636432.941 945363.333 2139.415 636432.952 945363.329 2139.436
H8 636409.569 945369.441 2144.034 636409.525 945369.476 2144.035 636409.528 945369.461 2144.017 636409.537 945369.454 2144.029 636409.522 945369.422 2144.031 636409.472 945369.404 2144.053
I1 636551.433 945397.611 2113.643 636551.399 945397.609 2113.625 636551.400 945397.613 2113.632 636551.398 945397.630 2113.634 636551.412 945397.609 2113.642 636551.406 945397.584 2113.661
12 636527.467 945402.756 2119.318 636527.423 945402.790 2119.344 636527.443 945402.783 2119.309 636527.429 945402.788 2119.324 636527.449 945402.785 2119.326 636527.477 945402.821 2119.344
13 636505.311 945409.023 2126.391 636505.289 945409.042 2126.436 636505.295 945409.021 2126.385 636505.299 945409.049 2126.412 636505.291 945409.064 2126.421 636505.328 945409.072 2126.428
14 636482.975 945418.124 2133.100 636482.923 945418.130 2133.121 636482.917 945418.144 2133.122 636482.941 945418.118 2133.126 636482.960 945418.148 2133.121 636482.964 945418.132 2133.133
15 636465.992 945424.121 2137.878 636466.036 945424.135 2137.898 636466.036 945424.134 2137.881 636466.029 945424.129 2137.894 636466.042 945424.176 2137.891 636466.075 945424.155 2137.894
I6 636449.736 945431.123 2144.533 636449.718 945431.066 2144.530 636449.714 945431.068 2144.524 636449.712 945431.055 2144.531 636449.709 945431.066 2144.523 636449.737 945431.086 2144.553
I7 636429.365 945438.929 2144.685 636429.359 945438.942 2144.685 636429.370 945438.938 2144.685 636429.363 945438.943 2144.697 636429.370 945438.977 2144.698 636429.398 945438.974 2144.711
Jl 636589.795 945566.491 2110.121 636589.969 945566.492 2110.048 636589.897 945566.574 2110.134 636589.820 945566.653 2110.147 636589.866 945566.642 2110.116 636589.822 945566.646 2110.099
J2 636568.951 945558.829 2117.952 636568.945 945558.810 2117.887 636569.138 945558.908 2117.962 636569.032 945558.970 2117.963 636569.080 945558.911 2117.900 636569.055 945558.987 2117.872
J3 636546.840 945552.551 2127.177 636546.838 945552.617 2127.192 636546.864 945552.578 2127.181 636546.836 945552.564 2127.191 636546.881 945552.609 2127.188 636546.845 945552.642 2127.213
J4 636524.605 945545.038 2135.297 636524.590 945545.094 2135.304 636524.626 945545.065 2135.290 636524.625 945545.071 2135.305 636524.641 945545.116 2135.299 636524.622 945545.105 2135.320
J5 636511.106 945541.120 2139.670 636511.115 945541.120 2139.684 636511.136 945541.068 2139.657 636511.124 945541.082 2139.672 636511.130 945541.125 2139.663 636511.124 945541.163 2139.690
J6 636494.456 945537.566 2144.459 636494.527 945537.630 2144.482 636494.533 945537.591 2144.464 636494.550 945537.579 2144.467 636494.543 945537.633 2144.462 636494.477 945537.635 2144.490
J7 636458.238 945536.154 2145.418 636458.202 945536.136 2145.440 636458.220 945536.145 2145.412 636458.233 945536.098 2145.422 636458.252 945536.161 2145.419 636458.180 945536.158 2145.439
K1 - - - - - - - - - 636355.252 944990.677 2105.756 636355.290 944990.730 2105.766 636355.327 944990.640 2105.813
K2 - - - - - - - - - 636331.850 944991.522 2113.769 636331.886 944991.550 2113.777 636331.964 944991.478 2113.816
K3 - - - - - - - - - 636307.935 944991.991 2121.308 636307.959 944992.035 2121.316 636308.035 944991.971 2121.335
K4 - - - - - - - - - 636284.719 944991.770 2129.980 636284.741 944991.793 2129.992 636284.789 944991.731 2130.017
K5 - - - - - - - - - 636268.876 944992.094 2133.643 636268.901 944992.149 2133.652 636268.981 944992.021 2133.678
K6 - - - - - - - - - 636244.438 944988.354 2135.738 636244.461 944988.367 2135.740 636244.544 944988.277 2135.768
K7 - - - - - - - - - 636220.187 944984.130 2139.799 636220.177 944984.173 2139.747 636220.267 944984.070 2139.769
LI - - - - - - - - - 636354.648 944959.744 2104.296 636354.728 944959.784 2104.307 636354.798 944959.707 2104.358
L2 - - - - - - - - - 636331.594 944959.850 2113.090 636331.655 944959.840 2113.126 636331.672 944959.808 2113.118
L3 - - - - - - - - - 636308.016 944960.718 2120.726 636308.018 944960.762 2120.753 636308.037 944960.695 2120.734
L4 - - - - - - - - - 636284.789 944961.672 2129.735 636284.830 944961.685 2129.733 636284.862 944961.603 2129.734
L5 - - - - - - - - - 636268.886 944962.238 2134.049 636268.918 944962.255 2134.056 636268.948 944962.235 2134.047
L6 - - - - - - - - - 636244.305 944960.449 2136.222 636244.316 944960.461 2136.217 636244.363 944960.381 2136.213
L7 - - - - - - - - - 636219.873 944957.976 2139.827 636219.879 944958.006 2139.746 636219.904 944957.916 2139.779
MI - - - - - - - - - 636346.980 944933.769 2108.038 636347.023 944933.775 2168.067 636347.065 944933.731 2108.097
M2 - - - - - - - - - 636332.301 944934.044 2113.407 636332.349 944934.067 2113.451 636332.405 944933.993 2113.460
M3 - - - - - - - - - 636308.354 944933.362 2120.764 636308.399 944933.366 2120.777 636308.424 944933.295 2120.805
M4 - - - - - - - - - 636284.650 944932.521 2129.623 636284.720 944932.534 2129.632 636284.806 944932.472 2129.653
M5 - - - - - - - - - 636268.791 944931.936 2134.684 636268.827 944931.977 2134.688 636268.858 944931.903 2134.701
M6 - - - - - - - - - 636245.994 944928:466 2136.458 636245.983 944928.511 2136.453 636246.033 944928.396 2136.476
M7 - - - - - - - - - 636220.445 944923.770 2140.101 636220.473 944923.792 2140.118 636220.499 944923.730 2140.121
N1 - - - - - - - - - 636357.618 944918.266 2107.490 636357.652 944918.279 2107.507 636357.677 944918.225 2107.519
Page 2 of 3

Engineering Analysis Report Appendix D:Area 1 Slope Pin Survey Measurements
Asheville Regional Airport
4-Oct-17 18-Oct-17 1-Nov-17 15-Nov-17 29-Nov-17 12-Dec-17
Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation Northing Easting Elevation
Pin ID (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83 It NAVD88)
) (ft NAD83) (ft NAD 83) (ft NAVD88)
N2 - - - - - - - - - 636352.426 944896.284 2117.312 636352.448 944896.238 2117.313 636352.515 944896.235 2117.347
N3 - - - - - - - - - 636350.269 944885.756 2121.431 636350.317 944885.741 2121.430 636350.350 944885.721 2121.463
N4 - - - - - - - - - 636348.810 944878.661 2122.579 636348.829 1 944878.637 2122.570 636348.847 944878.591 2122.610
N5 - - - - - - - - - 636347.724 944873.184 2125.008 636347.754 944873.140 2125.004 636347.815 944873.258 2125.042
N6 - - - - - - - - - 636342.816 944850.556 2134.354 636342.843 944850.525 2134.350 636342.887 944850.596 2134.378
N7 - - - - - - - - - 636335.035 944827.658 2136.142 636335.052 944827.631 2136.137 636335.101 944827.672 2136.161
N8 - - - - - - - - - 636325.082 944805.769 2135.205 636325.085 944805.725 2135.214 636325.109 944805.663 2135.230
Control Point 1-25907 636513.000 945037.394 2098.102 - - - - - - - - - 636512.972 945037.407 2098.139 636512.995 945037.396 2098.071
Control Point 2-25908 636269.948 944918.049 2134.802 - - - - - - - - - 636269.942 944918,025 2134.807 636269.869 944917.999 2134.791
Control Point 3-25909 636423.096 945385.344 2144.613 - - - - - - - - - 636423.047 945385.380 2144.582 636423.090 945385.320 2144.624
Note(s):
[1]Slope pins are surveyed by McKim and Creed as described within the Slope Monitoring Plan.
[2]Survey northings and eastings are in terms of North American Datum of 1983(NAD 83)and North American Vertical Datum of 1988.Surveys are accurate to+/-0.1-ft.
[3]Control points were surveyed on 4-Oct-17 and 28-Nov-17 and are to be surveyed on subsequent monitoring events.
[4]Slope Pins Al through J7 were installed on 4-Oct-17. Slope pins Kl through N8 were installed on 15-Nov-17.
[5]NM-Not Measured.
Page 3 of

Appendix E
Slope Stability Analysis

coos y le`c t
consultant
Page 1 of 8
Written by: J.Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: J.McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
AREA 1 STRUCTURAL FILL—SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
ASHEVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT,
ASHEVILLE,BUNCOMBE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
1 INTRODUCTION
Geosyntec Consultants of North Carolina, PC (Geosyntec) prepared this calculation package
(package) as an appendix to the Engineering Analysis Report written as a component of Duke
Energy's 90-day submittal pursuant to the Notice of Violation (NOV), NOV-2017-PC-0616,
dated 17 November 2017, associated with the Coal Combustion Products Structural Fill Permit
(WQ0000020), issued to Duke Energy via renewal on 2 September 2015, for a structural fill
(Area 1) located at ARA as shown in Figure 1. Specifically, this calculation package addresses
item(c) from NOV-2017-PC-0616, which states:
"calculate factors of safety, determine causes)/triggers of the slope failure (breach), and
identify temporary and permanent (e.g. short term and long term) corrective action
measures."
The purpose of this package is to present typical cross sections and present the static, long-term
slope stability evaluation results for the potential failure mechanisms identified. The cross
sections and specific failure mechanisms of the slough, termed "breach" by NCDEQ, evaluated
as part of the analyses are discussed in subsequent sections of this package.
2 METHODOLOGY
Slope stability analyses were performed using Spencer's method [Spencer, 1973], as
implemented in the computer program SLIDE®, version 6.039 [Rocscience, 2016]. Spencer's
method satisfies vertical and horizontal force and moment equilibrium, and is considered more
rigorous than other methods such as the simplified Janbu method [Janbu, 1973] and Bishop's
method [Bishop, 1955]. SLIDE® generates potential circular slip surfaces, calculates the factor
of safety (FS) for each of these surfaces, and identifies the most critical slip surface with the
lowest calculated FS. Where applicable, a target FS equal to 1.5 was selected pursuant to the
North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) — Title 15A Subchapter 2K — Dam Safety for
slopes under normal, long-term loading conditions. This is consistent with the recommendations
set forth by the United States Army Corp. of Engineers (USAGE) [2003].
GC6463V,RA_S lopeStability

Goosyrack-,,
consultants
Page 2 of 8
Written by: J.Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: J.McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
3 INPUT PARAMETERS
3.1 Subsurface Stratigraphy
The Area 1 subsurface stratigraphy was developed based on available as-built drawings [Vaughn
Engineering, 2010], and the recent Geosyntec field investigation conducted from 14 to 17
November 2017. Geosyntec's field investigation consisted of six soil borings, including
Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs), and three hand auger (HA) borings. Four of the soil borings
and two of the HA's were converted to standpipe piezometers. More so, a slope inclinometer
casing was installed within one of the remaining boreholes; and the sixth borehole was
abandoned with grout. The field investigation and instrument locations are shown on Figure 2.
Soil boring and well construction logs are included as an appendix to the Engineering Analysis
Report. The investigation results indicate that the subsurface soils primarily comprise the
following, from top to bottom:
• Compacted Soil Cap: this unit consists primarily of fine to medium, brown/red, silty
sand (Unified Soil Classification System, USCS, class SM). The compacted soil cap is
approximately 6-ft and 2-ft thick on the top deck and side slopes, respectively. The
compacted soil cap was generally reported to be loose with N-values ranging between 3
and 8 blows per foot(bpf).
• CCR: the CCR consists predominantly of gray/black silt sized particles with varying
amounts of sand-sized particles (USCS: ML). The CCR was generally reported with N-
values ranging between 0 and 20 bpf depending on the observed relative moisture
content;
• Geosynthetic clay liner (GCL): the GCL is a low permeability geosynthetic component
of the structural fill base liner; and
• Residuum: this unit consists primarily of fine to medium grained, brown, silty sand
(USCS: SM). The residuum was generally reported to be medium dense to dense with N-
values ranging from 22 to 50 bpf.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) publication "Geotechnical Properties of Fly Ash
and Potential for Static Liquefaction" [2012] indicates that a thin-wall tube sampler with sharp
cutting shoe be used to collect samples to assess the in-situ density of CCR. As such, SPTs in
CCR do not provide a meaningful assessment of in-situ density and were not utilized to assess
the in-situ effective shear strength, but are identified for general comparison.
GC64631ARA_SlopeStability

Geosgnn.tecc
consultants
Page 3 of 8
Written by: I Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: I McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
3.2 Phreatic Surface
Six piezometers were installed as part of the November 2017 field investigation (Figure 2).
Depth to water level measurements were collected by Geosyntec and Duke Energy periodically
at each piezometer and are summarized in Table 1. The water level measurements were used to
develop the phreatic surface applied within the cross sections evaluated as part of the analyses
presented herein. During the field investigation and other inspections, wet areas were identified,
flagged, and surveyed. These wet areas were used to estimate the presence of a seepage face the
east and west fill toe, where applicable.
Boring log and water level data from piezometer PZ-2, screened within the foundation soil,
indicate that the phreatic surface within the foundation soil at this location rises above the GCL
base liner for Area 1, but not to the elevations indicated by piezometers screened within CCR.
This observation indicates that the underlying groundwater surface is separated from the phreatic
surface within the CCR. Two phreatic surfaces units were not modeled within the slope stability
cross sections evaluated within this calculation due to the limited available information on the
underlying groundwater elevations. As such, one phreatic surface was delineated based on the
previous assumptions and utilized to compute the FS.
3.3 Strength Parameters
Area 1 construction was completed in-2010 consisting of compacted CCR overlain by a soil cap.
Material index properties indicate that excess pore pressures potentially developed during
construction are expected to have dissipated and subsurface materials are expected to exhibit
drained behavior. Thus, long-term, drained strength parameters (i.e., effective stress parameters)
were selected for subsurface materials based on available in-situ testing, where applicable. SPTs
were conducted at select intervals and the SPT N-values were corrected for hammer efficiency,
borehole diameter, sampler liner, rod length, and overburden stress (i.e. (N1)60). The drained
friction angle of coarse grained materials can be estimated from (Nl)6o by the equation developed
by Hatanaka and Uchida [1996] as follows:
0' = 15.4 x (N1)60 + 20 Equation 1
where:
drained friction angle, degrees; and
(Nl)60: corrected SPT N-value.
GC6463\ARA_S1opeStability

OO"'tec
consultants
Page 4 of 8
Written by: J.Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: J.McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
Figure 3 presents a plot of estimated drained friction angle versus elevation. The selected
strength parameters are discussed below and summarized in Table 2.
3.3.1 Compacted Soil Cap
The drained friction angle for the compacted soil cap was estimated based on the SPT results.
However, the Hatanaka and Uchida [1996] method to estimate friction angle based on SPT
results tends to overpredict friction angle at shallow depths since the overburden correction
factor (CN) is sensitive to low overburden stresses. As such, a lower drained friction angle of 30
degrees without cohesion was conservatively selected. This value is consistent with published
literature values for silty sands (USCS: SM) [Day, 2012; Holtz and Kovacs, 1981].
3.3.2 CCR
Estimation of drained friction angle by Hatanaka and Uchida [1996] is only applicable for coarse
grained soils particularly clean sands. CCR typically classifies as a low plasticity silt (ML) and
the applicability of SPT-based empirical relationships is limited. In addition, EPRI indicates that
in-situ density should be assessed by a thin walled sampler and does not recommend the use of a
split-spoon sampler during SPTs. Since shear strength is a function of density, empirical
correlation of SPT blow counts with shear strength of CCR was not considered applicable.
Therefore, the CCR drained strength parameters were estimated based on Geosyntec's
experience with ponded and compacted CCR and interpretation of consolidated-undrained (CU)
triaxial test results on CCR samples collected at other Duke Energy sites. An effective friction
angle of 34 degrees without cohesion was selected. Figure 3 includes the estimated drained
friction angle for CCR by Hatanaka and Uchida [1996] for comparison purposes, but these
values were not utilized within this assessment.
3.3.3 Residuum
The drained friction angle for the compacted soil cap was estimated based on the SPT results.
Based on this interpretation, an effective friction angle of up to 40 degrees is applicable.
However, the residuum is classified as silty sand (USCS: SM) and the two samples tested
contained 28.4 percent and 32.9 percent fines. Therefore,the effective friction angle was reduced
by five degrees as recommended by Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 5 [FHWA, 2002].
The effective friction angle of the residuum was selected as 35 degrees without cohesion.
GC6463\. R jlopeStability

eosyn.tecc
consultants
Page 5 of 8
Written by: J.Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: J.McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
3.3.4 CCR/GCL Interface
Interface shear strength testing data is not available for the specific CCR/GCL interface and
interface shear strength is typically highly dependent upon site specific conditions e.g. soil type,
normal stress range [Sharma and Reddy, 2004]. However, the interface friction angle and
adhesion will typically be lower than the internal friction angle and cohesion of the soil layer
either above or below the geosynthetic. An interface friction angle of 20 degrees was selected
for the CCR/GCL interface. This value is consistent with interface shear strength tests
performed by Geosyntec on GCL/compacted clay interfaces. In addition, adhesion of the
interface was conservatively not accounted for.
3.4 Cross Sections
Geosyntec selected three critical cross-sections for analysis. Cross section A is cut through the
Area 1 west fill. At the time of preparing this package, the west fill toe was outside the recent
topographical survey limit collected on 4 October 2017. Therefore, the portions of the slope and
toe geometry were estimated based on the subsequent slope pin survey elevations, field
observations, and available as-built and design drawings. Cross section B is cut approximately
perpendicular to the temporary stabilization measure at the east fill toe, but does not include the
temporary stabilization measure. Cross section C is also cut through the east fill where a
potential seep was identified, and the slopes were found to be steepest. Geometries of cross
section A.B, and C are shown on Figure 4,Figure 5, and Figure 6, respectively.
4 CASES ANALYZED .
4.1 Slope Failure Trigger
The purpose of the analysis presented herein is to evaluate potential failure mechanisms to
inform the design of an effective long-term correction action. For each cross section, the
following failure mechanisms were considered:
• Veneer stability: In this mechanism it is assumed that a shallow slip surface passes
.through the soil cap or soil cap/CCR interface only.
• Global failure: In this mechanism it is assumed that a deep-seated slip surface is the
cause of failure. The slip surface is assumed to pass through the top deck.
• Base sliding: In this mechanism it assumed that the CCR and soil cap slide as a deep-
seated block along the CCR/GCL interface. The slip surface is assumed to pass through
the top deck.
GC6463kARA_slopeStability

eosyr�..tec�
consuftazts
Page 6 of 8
Written by: J.Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: J.McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
No specific analysis (e.g. finite element analysis etc.) was conducted to estimate the phreatic
surface since water level data was collected, but the influence of the phreatic surface was
evaluated (Section 4.2).
4.2 Sensitivity Analysis
Per NCDEQ's comment on the 30-day submittal, the influence of an elevated phreatic surface
generated from infiltration was evaluated. In this case, cross section B and C were selected and
the phreatic surface in the structural fill was raised until a calculated FS of 1.5 was achieved. It
was assumed that the seepage face also rose concurrently with the phreatic surface elevation.
The sensitivity or influence of a seepage face was also evaluated as the slough within the east fill
(cross section B) was observed to be seeping and a wet area was noted near cross section C. To
evaluate the sensitivity of the veneer FS to the presence of a seepage face, cross section B was
selected and the phreatic surface was manually adjusted to the soil cap/CCR interface such that
the seepage face is removed.
5 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The selected cross sections were evaluated for static, long term slope stability under the failure
mechanisms and cases described above. The results of the analysis are shown on Figure 7
through Figure 15 and are summarized in Table 3. For the deep-seated failure mechanisms (i.e.
global and base sliding), the calculated FSs were found to meet the target FS (i.e., FS > 1.5)
under existing conditions.
For the veneer stability cases the calculated FS were found to be below 1.0 for cross section B
and C, where seepage faces or wet areas in the field. While a FS < 1.0 is computed for cross
section B, the slough or veneer failure has been supported by a temporary stabilization measure,
which has not been included in this evaluation. A slough has not been observed at cross section
C, as predicted by the slope stability model. The soil cap was modeled as a purely frictional
material without cohesion and with a fully developed seepage face. Both assumptions are
conservative and likely not completely representative of field conditions and likely is the cause
of the computed FS below 1.0. A seepage face was not observed on west fill adjacent to cross
section A. The calculated FS for veneer stability at cross section A met the target FS (i.e., FS >
1.5).
For cross section B and if the phreatic surface was lowered to remove the seepage face, the
calculated FS was found to exceed 1.5 as shown on Figure 16. In the sensitivity analysis
performed for cross sections B and C, the phreatic surface elevation within the fill corresponding
GC6463\ARA_S lopeStability

,Geosyrteew
consultants
Page 7 of 8
Written by: J.Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: J.McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
to a calculated ITS of 1.5 for global stability was found to be approximately 2120 ft North
American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) and 2121 ft NAVD88, respectively. The results
are as shown on Figure 17 and Figure 18. This elevation is approximately 6.5 ft and 5.5 ft higher
than the current phreatic surface elevation, for cross section B and C respectively, based on water
level measurements available at the time of preparing this package
The results suggest that the observed slough is shallow, limited predominantly within the soil
cap, and triggered by the presence of a seepage face at the toe of the slope. Based on the field
observations and assumptions presented herein, the slough does not appear to be a deep-seated
failure.
6 REFERENCES
Bishop, A. (1955), "The Use of the Slip Circle in the Stability Analysis of Slopes,"
G6otechnique,Volume 5,No. 1, Jan 1955,pp. 7-17.
Day, R.W. (2012), Geotechnical Engineer's Portable Handbook, New York: McGraw Hill,
2012.
EPRI (2012), "Geotechnical Properties of Fly Ash and Potential for Static Liquefaction",
December 2012.
FHWA (2002), "Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 5, Evaluation of Soil and Rock
Properties",April 2002.
Hatanaka, M. and A. Uchida (1996), "Empirical Correlation between Penetration Resistance and
Internal Friction Angle of Sandy Soils," Soils and Foundations, Vol. 36,No. 4,pp. 1-9.
Holtz, R.D., and Kovacs, W.D. (1981), An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1981.
Janbu, N. (1973), "Slope Stability Computations," Embankment Dam Engineering, Casagrande
Memorial Volume, R. C. Hirschfield and S. J. Poulos, Eds., John Wiley, New York, 1973,
pp. 47-86.
Rocscience (2016). SLIDE v6.0. Rocscience Inc., Toronto, Ontario.
GC6463\ARA_S lopeStability

easyr tec ':
consultants
Page 8 of 8
Written by: J.Colley Date: 12/15/17 Reviewed by: J.McNash Date: 12/15/17
Client: Duke Energy Progress,LLC Project: Asheville Regional Airport Project No.: GC6463 Phase No.: 03
Spencer, E., 1967. "A Method of Analysis of the Stability of Embankments Assuming Parallel
Inter-Slice Forces.", Geotechnique, Vol. 17,No. 1,pp. 11-26.
Sharma, H.D., and Reddy, K.R. (2004), Geoenvironmental Engineering, New Jersey: John
Wiley& Sons.
United States Army Corp. of Engineers (2003), "Engineering and Design: Slope Stability
Engineer Manual", Manual No. 1110-2-1902, 31 October 2003.
Vaughn Engineering (2010), "Charah — Asheville Regional Airport Coal Combustion Product
Engineered Fill, March 2010 Update, "As Built" Surface Development as of December 29,
2009'; 8 March 2010.
GC6463URA_S lopeStability

TABLES

Table 1. Summary of Water Level Measurements
Piezometer ID PZ-1 PZ-2 PZ-3 PZ-4 PZ-5 PZ-6
Top of Casing 2142.73 2147.89 2142.78 2148.52 2119.60 2121.47
Elevation(ft)
ElevationElevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation
Date DTW(ft) (ft) DTW(ft) (ft) DI(ft) (ft) DTW(ft) (ft) DTW(ft) vat DTW(ft) (ft)
11/20/17 29.70 2113.03 35.60 2112.29 27.28 2115.50 24.59 2123.93 6.30 2113.30 6.07 2115.40
11/20/17 29.63 2113.10 34.69 2113.20 28.43 2114.35 24.69 2123.83 6.20 2113.40 6.79 2114.68
11/22/17 29.52 2113.21 34.40 2113.49 27.44 2115.34 24.34 2124.18 6.23 2113.37 6.54 2114.93
11/29/17 29.64 2113.09 34.62 2113.27 26.68 2116.10 24.58 2123.94 6.70 2112.90 7.06 2114.41
12/12/17 29.49 2113.24 34.37 2113.52 27.60 2115.18 24.31 2124.21 5.59 2114.01 6.52 2114.95
Note(s):
[1] Elevations are referred to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988(NAVD88).
[2] DTW:depth to water.
[3] Initial round of measurements collected on 20 November 2017 are pre-well development. Subsequent water level measurements are post well-
development.
i r
IofI

Table 2. Summary of Strength Parameters
Unit WeightM Cohesion Friction Angle
Material
(lb/W) (psf) (degrees)
Compacted Soil Cap 110 0 30
CCR 95 0 34
Residuum 120 0 35
CCR/GCL InterfaceE�1 95 0 20
Note(s):
[1] Unit weights were estimated based on experience with similar materials. Except for CCR which is based
on testing of CCR samples collected from other sites.
[2] CCR/GCL interface material applied only to base sliding cases.
1oft

Table 3. Summary of Calculated Factors of Safety
Calculated Factor of Safety-Failure Mechanisms
Cross Veneer Stability Global Stabilityl'] Base Sliding Seepage Face
Section Removed
A 1.6 2.0 1.8 N/A
B 0.9 1.9 1.5 1.8
C 0.8 1.9 1.8 N/A
Note(s):
[1] Calculated FS for global stability presented herein corresponds to a deep-seated slip surface passing
through the top deck. Surficial sloughing, if present, was evaluated. However, surficial sloughing is
considered to be superficial and is typically remedied with routine maintenance. Significant surficial slip
surfaces are evaluated as part of the veneer stability analysis.
[2] The purpose of the sensitivity analysis was to determine the phreatic surface elevation, based on the
parameters and assumptions presented herein,that corresponds to a calculated FS for global stability of 1.5.
The corresponding elevation was estimated to be approximately 2120 ft NAVD88 and 2121 ft NAVD88 for
cross sections B and C,respectively.
1of1

FIGURES

t
t.
3
: y c
a
,
R+ Y r 1 '�ivy .v� If � - _. a3 - rMM•:
=fro 0 0 0 ' ���' � •.a:� s.� � a y«, .,,
r � —•zs:
- ` l
i, ;� :,� \� f� �'r's:. �c " §�l S� r #� ��5-f '.� �_ � �� .it .7 •..�`I .F+i.
t
ai°a° 1 �l a 1 1 - b `'� jai•, ' ,1 .s
I I ,
.."
ME
Mag
a_. �"r' �Rs 1 � •�, - Yet r{f �, ' L-• I�Y�,��`d�_ �`" '��,..;,.,
�.
1;
1 !
:.�,:�
�:�� � '^+b. "— T� �i`b ,p t l 1 ",• f� a�\ tli�� ((_ _ �1^�1 �0��+� �Yt .. , � I� 7'
a
5
\x Vz
v soh r,tF 1 it .:ppr i e t 's� 14,
a��1LL y
0 d
;'b1 �e+',"�-d',� w,•.e."' >3 ` „G r�.+: a� ram-'°'`may.,.X� 't/'
b
1, w
z 1
j' 1.
s
1,000 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet
Legend ' ,
Area 1 Stormwater Network SITE LOCATION MAP
0 Parcel Boundary -- Asheville Regional Airport
G Asheville, North Carolina
Notes:
Y 1.Service Layer Credits: Source:Esri,Di italGlobe,GeoE e, i, r--` � DUKE
Earthstar Ge graphics,CNES/Airbus DS,USDA,USGS, y _%+�- Geosyntec ENERGY® Figure
AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIS User Community. Consultants
2. Parcel boundaries obtained from Buncombe County GIS website
on 20 December 2017. CHARLOTTE,NC DECEMBER 2017

* y
.+ ° ♦ r `'` �r¢ 1= r 4 n• .•a! .'.S, ai ,�. r`+`r,+. , :•;' x ` ,3 a ,ar .y - `F ' yr' � I I
•
a
i
4-4
�.�,:#• •i a� ,/is� *y� � Y °, i� n +1•b �• * « �, r y' �r', �L°� �! •t+� �# - ;•r + f`♦• ,.a« s
t+aBs,A iy} .F#< `ii#`r.. ,.'i j i ., ,•a - It R x N a +. �a n r ,. r 'T� • `s; r fi..� , y si� ::
�`' .ttt l! R`t'\y. F +�R rr g,' x ! � a ! +a� a _ ' L h '• yr ♦' � is 1« •
tad +.i; £� k' 'A.�' , �`.z .S,- t a • ��` s `� t.
r
S '
t • ♦` Y � :as:..���Y ' � , r .g � • ,• R �•T t i.^��; d_:y 3' ` . L r , _ )s ,�; ' a r
46
'S''�'r ks., `,; • ,m " ,:' '.t♦• - *„: •;_g1 i "�h'' " sHA\--31/PZ=6., 1, "•#.`,
r , �� t �, � s. t , +R. 4i s.s. '} •+ 1 t`' t .y 11 �,. t R � R«c •> R y, 5\. , - $ tNo
t t :.�.•s'tr ,� .. , ! aY - '��� a..4' Yya .R'r 1 � � �x /.�4 _ ^b> • x a4rf't ��•I
. }
a ,>
a
I .. . A -mod ;, .' ✓�✓■- - , z c � , 4
If -
•
'X '# a t'+a. s '1y Rt i• '. '; 'a ` .A WT 4/I?Z,.47� .a fy 1 �' -q ' 4� R' t\i`S F iV,
, „' \ R' i *�r� `�'1 � W� �• '� ar'��x '� / As*t{'S '�";���.+¢ c k+k +� �r,Y ,s ry� _ +`* R__
lk
h ."� •• ♦. • rL. s R a1IN x-\ • .a V'ty Y1, FF is < 4 �. r } 7.M\ <d tR, .
}
t l
+
• � � �.. ��' .:f`6, LS N c 5 •l �I �+ L' a4 '�tl�- n�i.- " a • t\�•�'y "I_
` } A •.i h;' 1 . :.,Y f 1 .,, i.,�, ' a r I) 3/f?�Z,-3 _ - e *.� tl , ;•,•n '�, :i..° '' ;:,d. It' , ;
'yR..k. . -.. 1 r r, � -' r � st#+,.s�, ■ t y -a- a,H..x ZS' f4 r f �� af " , s � !-
1 YR+#<
1
t
2
• HA-1 (Approximate) `�. \ n,. *«� ',..
�N � � ,�, y � ,> �• ,f ,a _V ♦ - � ,� �:�>," a-�*` ��> ,r ,. RFC ., F` •{'\ °,
�t
t
' .a !„! " !•� ' > FP *»r _ R* ` •., lv a +^:'rsf,"4 RP_
''. -
! r
• +3r• +�• ..ea' >. .a,.�:..,a.: r,- r 4 •'� x ',"�F','# a#.€ '� '� °k � w �'� r '`m`it
c•
-
.::• .t:. r}! .. :_., ` > • 5 -, a..+.: `-. �•� ,. ,r� fir,. i-.r e,.r�� ,��; 1' F .1-� '♦pi,' -;� i;,, s;" � � 1,:' -�<>+; _ � �::
; #__ ir:'� o. .-,r >.,r•t y� tr!. .R. ?4+, ~'L'a+. `' .R�,' �=
,R
s
y•..? +. �.. �.1:,� 'A.s . ' I; 3 .> ■ ra' r���` �. • * `+� i ,g i :; li' �'''�
• • 1 i y a S JPjT_�l/�7`ZJ�� 5 .1�,V > `l* 1 I Il U 1� , 1 y y ? k `t
� +` k♦ *� �� 2ii\ `�, r,f--- ^a;, ,s«.
• Auger/Piezometer
a'A+ r.' +1] `i 's f $v 11, A • r. `� •+. 1.'N r ' a,•� �ra �. �` 1,:, .r 1
"• � � " +•" t s„� � ,s .: r. _ tt +I s `•1' �1 'A+� r'} '* F= `�� i� , '
n '• � k. SPT-2A(A roximate) � ,�� � 3 "' �� � t `'� �
Inclinometer
pp. •'yJ� ' at _
w ! Y
a � � Airport secur ty fenc �:
• ,-; : r, with concreteffooter - y
. - • - - r
f ib,� tip., ;� a. f�k,. �. _ ... „,., +, '�, "•A' �'t• °�,s� :' �'R: • ;i. * �? R�� ••eft-,.: ;�. '!r ^ r� X'At.
•1 r Yr •, � f + :, xn _ '`-e•: :. t tt"'s IM` _ t E'' 1; '�y,•*tn t ��+"I ,. - ¢Approximate Cross Section Locations
.'10-
Temporary ^s j, M '
r • • Measure ., r +T;.. , w k ..f t •".#yr"
..
y , Ra
S x: ," s iR;rf� ," '��6diamete R@P I
- . y i' - • • •a ; a 11 50 1 100 200 FeetISM
Area
- Network
CROSS SECTION LOCATION MAP
1.Service Layer Credits: Source:Esri,DigitalGlobe,GeoEye, A
Earthstar •• .•hics,CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, KN , wa d`'-,= ,at �'.` s R i i �}^ 3"r„ sa a�,+�R `" •+ +} s. x.■w _ Regional
Airport
_ • • • - - • 'i -tf a 'R °�l .r 4 N' t'' „i"'" ,y ,•ft ps ♦ �5``�, aa•`t •
. Carolina on 29 November 2017.
3. SPT-2A and HA-1 are shown at approximate locations. These2. Field investigation locations were surveyed by McKim&Creed
borings were b t 4
terminated • - to difficult or _ •- -• ground ♦ .: +, ,. . ilru �a ♦ st'} s `:,` :.1\ `R � ... . ' tt a'.. a A-; r.'. a'•:
conditions and were not surveyed.
1 t, . tF s ! ,
4.Parcel boundaries •• -• • • •- • -• s
A,
+

i
2150
o soil Cap
o CCR �
e Residuum
17 CCR/Residuum Tcansitiou of
-
---SoilCap-Selected 1
----CCR-Selected 1 V=300
----Residuum-Selected 1
2140 - -- --1------ ------`-- --
�O O
1 O k
1 O
I
1
I
1 II
1
O 1 O
2130 —.-
1 i
Illi 1
O 1 k
a
1
V=340 1
n I
t
Z io O
a 2120 ----- ---- --- —1 --— — —_ 1
1
y kO i
o O i
1
0 11
I 1
1 )
O 1 1
2110 -- — - -- ---- --- ---1-P---- ----- -----
i
O
II
1 , �
11 O A i
1 I
2100 -1
I14 ' f
tp'=35° 1
I e
I
2090
0 10 20 30 40 50 GO
Effective Friction Angle,V(°)
Figure 3. Estimated Drained Friction Angle versus Elevation
Note(s):
[1] NAVD88: North American Vertical Datum of 1988.
[2] Estimation of drained friction angle by Hatanaka&Uchida[1996] is typically applied to sandy soils. The
applicability of SPT based relationships for CCR is limited. However,the effective friction angle for CCR
based on the SPT results was included for completeness and to provide an indication of the range of
possible effective friction angles.

K Material Nam. Color
[� Residuum D
p Compacted Soil Cap
GCt/CCR Interface ❑
g Compacted CCR ❑
�f Bottom ae ctructural fill
based on—liable borings Geometry beyond survey limit
and Chamh"An Built based on slope pin elevations,visual
B 12rMS obcewadons made In the field,and
U.Itofl01O4117 Approximately 2'thick opproxlmato measurements
McKim and Creed Hall top p
ed Survey cam ce from AVCON"Am.1 and Am.4
GCL along base Approximately V Ihick Improvements,Sheet C-06'Memb 2016.
of cfmdtuml Nl compacted eoil rsp \
B
SPT.l[PZ-1
� Mr
®
----- ------ - _ - W6 MSi Assumed too berm omatry
___ ___ __ L14 2H:1V Im slopqedor clops
w M0 Top of wet area based on field observation
R _ and w.t era.(cl.m to KI and 1 1)
v - --- - 64 /surveyed by McVlm and Creed�- M1 asn
117
w'
I
g
R
o zo +s t1i + + 'U zJ. Z6D A. 1M a c
Figure 4. Cross Section A Geometry

Material Name Color
Residwm
Compacted Soll Cap Q
GCl/CCR Interface ❑y
g Compacted CCR •❑
fl
GCL along hose
of ahactuml fill Approximately 2'thick Top of vnt arse(edJacam m pU H7)
WaUr level measured U PZ2(eveaned cam acted Boll co Limit o11010N17
bolm GCLf at approximatelyalwatlan ApproximaUry B thick p p n�;d by DcKlm and Crood McKim and Creed Survoy
2113 ft RAVDdd La.approximately 1 ft compacted soil cap
abovo GCL SPT21PZ2
(oflsoq HA21PZs Assumad tea hams Raomorty
]H:1V Inf nlor slope
9 ItIL1 SPT2IPZJ
D9
D9
DS Geometry beyond survey limit
W based on approximate measommeme
. Dy from Cheroh'Ar RUIIP'12r29109
i r
r 'lid r e a e .iM x i6o iii ii6 s ..a s e ir. eta
Figure 5. Cross Section B Geometry

Material Noma Color
Residuum
Compacted Soil Cap ❑
GCL/CCR Interface ❑
Compacted CCR ❑
GCL along base Approximately 2'thick Top ofwat area
B of structural fill compacted.11 cap .—yed by IAcKim and Creed
N SPT.21PZ2 Water level ma.—d In P7-2(acroened 11129/17
(ofleaq below GCL(at approximately elevation Approximately 6'thick
2113 R RAV008 Le.approximately 1 R compactod..If cap
above GCL
Limit of 1010N77
SPTAIPZ-0\ HA-0IPZL �MdQ.and Creed Survey
J7 J6Geometry beyond urvety
-; baaod on visual bsorvationsit
._.__�__._____— _. __, � _ _ JA 101MI?
J2
r
r ♦ Iv
BJ
Assumed toe berm geometry
2H:1V Interior slope
H r6. :6. ...o3M do s ek M. e
Figure 6. Cross Section C Geometry

p Matadnl Namo Cnbr Ilnit W.Ijht Cohnlon Phi
pb./rt31 (p0 (de) 1.7
Residwm ❑ 120 0 35
Compacted Soil Cap ❑ 110 0 30
Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 36
1.6
4 J
R
W
o so o3do 90 <
Figure 7. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section A—Veneer Stability

2.0
Material Noma Cclor Unit Weight Coheelon, Phi
Obi/rt3) (PsF) Ida6I
Residuum ❑ 120 0 35
Compacted Soll Cap ❑ 130 0 30
Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 36
13
8
= - -
76 o a Zw a .ado.3 a34a s6 o xa
Figure 8. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section A—Global Stability
Note(s):
[1] Calculated FS for global stability presented herein corresponds to a deep-seated slip surface passing through the top deck. Surficial sloughing, if
present,was evaluated. However,surficial sloughing is considered to be superficial and can be remedied with routine maintenance. Significant Surficial
slip surfaces are evaluated as part of the veneer stability analysis.

2.0
57
1,8
Matarlal Nama Color Unit Weight Cohasian Phi
(Ibs/it3) (pat) (de9)
Resid— ❑ 120 0 35
Compacted Soil Cap ❑ 210 0 30
CCIJCCR Interface ❑ 95 0 20
8 Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 34
A
R
_ J
9 W
8
d
am so m + + + +e ¢.o cl. s
Figure 9. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section A—Base Sliding
Note(s):
[11 In this mechanism it assumed that the CCR and soil cap slide as a deep-seated block along the CCR/GCL interface. Only slip surfaces passing through
the top deck were evaluated.

1.8
a
Material Name Color Unit Walght Cohesion Phi
(Ih>Ht3) EFA (deg)
Resldwre ❑ 120 0 35
Compacted Soil Cap •❑ 110 0 30
Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 38
e
� 1.5
:a
e
R 0.9
R
n
__ - ___ _. ..____ _ -
z u o
Figure 10. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section B—Veneer Stability

1.9
9 •M t.I. .M. Coto,U�t W�'ht.W n Ph`
R _ LM 'P� (Z)
R.Id— ❑ 120 0 35
Compacted3oll Cap m 110 0 30
p Compacted CCR ❑ 1 95 0 1 36
IN
p
8
S
R
LL
n
. - — ------ --- - z 560 1. e.o
Figure 11. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section B—Global Stability
Note(s):
[1] Calculated FS for global stability presented herein corresponds to a deep-seated slip surface passing through the top deck. Surficial sloughing, if
present,was evaluated. However,surficial sloughing is considered to be superficial and can be remedied with routine maintenance. Significant surficial
slip surfaces are evaluated as part of the veneer stability analysis.

a.a
Mrtndsl Noma Color Un@ WaIaM 06hulen Phi
Residuum ❑i 120 0 35
CompactW S5 11 Cap ❑ 110 0 30 1.5
GCUCCR trrterface ❑ 95 0 20
p Compacted CCR ❑. 95 0 34
p i
8
R
8
R -
- =
r r r 2bi. to d. da 3b4 m as . .. .o . .o e.o 0
Figure 12. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section B—Base Sliding
Note(s):
[1] In this mechanism it assumed that the CCR and soil cap slide as a deep-seated block along the CCR/GCL interface. Only slip surfaces passing through
the top deck were evaluated.

R 'Unit Weight Cahosion Phi
iwa.l.tx,m. Color (tba/rta) (pd) (d.2) 1.5
Residuum ❑ 120 0 35
Compacted Soil Cap Q 110 0 30
Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 34 -
8 "
8 "
C
8
8
8.8
—� W
8
aimso �o o ao ameo a c .eo as
Figure 13. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section C—'Veneer Stability

1.9
Matariai Nam. Color Unit Weight Cbh-hm Phi
(n"/ft3) (pf) (deg)
Residuwn ❑-' 120 0 3S
6 Compacted SO Cap ❑ 110 0 30
Ra Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 36
A
A
9
8
n
i
a � �
^:oA. a. o 4ft Moa ao
Figure 14. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section C—Global Stability
Note(s):
[1] Calculated FS for global stability presented herein corresponds to a deep-seated slip surface passing through the top deck. Surficial sloughing, if
present,was evaluated. However,surficial sloughing is considered to be superficial and can be remedied with routine maintenance. Significant surficial
slip surfaces are evaluated as part of the veneer stability analysis.

3.5
Mataald N.— Calor Unit Wotht Comte" Phi
Qb./a9_I [pal) (dqd
R.Idoom ❑i 220 0 35
Compacted SO Cep ❑z' 110 0 30 2.0
GCL/CCR Intel(ace ® 95 0 20
Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 34 -
a
a
a
w N
i'.
z .
Figure 15. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section C—Base Sliding
Note(s):
[1] In this mechanism it assumed that the CCR and soil cap slide as a deep-seated.block along the CCR/GCL interface. Only slip surfaces passing through
the top deck were evaluated.

2.0
r,
Matarlai Nama Calm Unit Weight Cohesion' Phl
pbslit3) (kq (dea)
y Residuum ❑' 120 0 35
17 Compacted Sall Cep ❑ 110 0 30
g Compacted CCII ❑ 95 0 34
f1
8
� 7.6
v -
— —_,
o k xza -a 36. .1a 0 0 o s o _
Figure 16. Slope Stability Analysis Results: Cross Section B—Seepage Face Removed

1.5
p Material Name War Unit Welaht Cohoslon ph'
(Iba/fr3) (wH (deg)
Residuum Q 120 0 35
Compacted Soil Cap ❑Q 110 0 30
Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 34
A
a
Used water level to
947 compete 15 global FS
approa.2120 R
Actual WL based on
measurements taken 1Ir2MT
........................................ ............................................................. ..... BS .T - ; .-
.. .. ..
re x210 z e •o
Figure 17. Slope Stability Analysis: Cross Section B—Sensitivity Analysis

Material Name Color Unit Waisht Cohesion Phi �•5
g Qhe/R3) (psf) (d.Z)
f1 Residwm Q 120 0 35
Compacted Soil Cap ❑ 110 0 30
Compacted CCR ❑ 95 0 36
Sf
Rolled—tor level to
pl compute 15 global FS
_ -opp,...2121 R
6 Actuel WL beeed on
measurements taken 11/29/17
R
........................
.............................................
5:5 II
I
4b 440 0. 4110 140 64 vle eo 0
Figure 18. Slope Stability Analysis: Cross Section C—Sensitivity Analysis

Appendix F
Liquefaction Analyses

i
Table 1. Seismic Liquefaction Susceptibility Calculation
Boring Layer Material Depth Elevation 143 Water Table Elevation 153 Vertical Total Stress Vertical Effective ra[63 CSR[71 Undrained Shear Ka 191 CRR[101 FSi; [113
ID No. Type (ft bgs) (ft NAVD88) (ft-NAVD88) a,.(psf) Stress, (A(psf) Strength Ratio [8I q
1 CCR 27 2113.0 2,690 2,677 0.83 0.18 0.51;` 0.65 0.29 -1.6
SPT-1
2 CCR 29 2111.0 2113.21 2,880 2,742 0.81 0.18 0.51;< 0.65 0.29 1.6
3 CCR 31 2109.0 3,070 2,808 0.79 0.19 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.6
4 CCR 33 2107.0 3,260 2,873 0.78 0.19 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.5
1 CCR 21 2123.9 2,120 2,114 0.87 0.19 0.51 1.00 0.45 2.0
2 CCR 23 2121.9 2,310 2,179 0.86 0.19 0.51 1.00 0.45 2.0
3 CCR 25 2119.9 2,500 2,244 0.84 0.20 0.51 1.00 0.45 2.0
SPT-2 4 CCR 27 2117.9 2124[121 2,690 2,309 0.83 0.21 0.51 1.00 0.45 2.0
5 CCR 29 2115.9 2,880 2,375 0.81 0.21 0.51 1.00 0.45 2.0
6 CCR 31 2113.9 3,070 2,440 0.79 0.21 0.51 1.00 0.45 2.0
7 CCR 33 2111.9 3,260 2,505 0.78 0.22 0.51 1.00 0.45 2.0
1 CCR 25 2114.8 23575 2,494 0.84 0.19 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.6
2 CCR 27 2112.8 2,765 2,559 0.83 0.19 0.51. 0.65 0.29 1.5
3 CCR 29 2110.8 2,955 2,624 0.81 0.20 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.5
SPT-3 4 CCR 31 2108.8 2116.10 3,145 2,689 0.79 0.20 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.5
5 CCR 33 2106.8 3,335 2,754 0.78 0.20 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.5
6 CCR 35 2104.8 3,525 2,820 0.76 0.20 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.4
7 CCR 37 2102.8 3,715 2,885 0.74 0.21 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.4
1 CCR 23 2122.3 2,385 2,268 0.86 0.19 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.5
2 CCR 25 2120.3 2,575 2,333 0.84 0.20 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.5
3 CCR 27 2118.3 2,765 2,398 0.83 0.20 0.51� 0.65 0.29 1.4
SPT-4 2124.18
4 CCR 29 2116.3 2,955 2,463 0.81 0.21 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.4
5 CCR 31 2114.3 3,145 2,529 0.79 0.21 0.51 0.65 0.29 1.4
6 CCR 33 2112.3 3,335 2,594 0.78 0.21 0.5f 0.65 0.29 1.4
Page 1 of 2

1
Note(s):
[11 ft bgs=feet below ground surface;NAVD 88=North American Vertical Datum of 1988;rd=shear stress reduction coefficient;CSR=cyclic stress ratio;K.=correction factor for the effects of an initial static
shear stress ratio;CRR=cyclic resistance ratio;FSi;q=factor of safety against liquefaction;CCR=coal combustion residuals.
[2] The following parameters were used for the calculations provided above:maximum horizontal ground surface acceleration(a,, ),or peak ground surface acceleration(PGA,o,,,,d)=0.33g;earthquake magnitude(M,y)=5.64;total unit weight-for Cover soil(ye,. er)
= 120 pcf;and total unit weight for CCR(7ccx)=95 pcf.
[3] The materials above the water table are not susceptible to seismic liquefaction and FSI;q is set as 2.0 for presentation purposes.
[4] Based on survey information provide by McKim&Creed on 5 December 2017.
[5] Water table was selected as the highest elevation from the measurements taken in November and on 12 December 2017 unless indicated otherwise.
[6] rd Was calculated per Idriss and Boulanger[2008].
[71 CSR= 0.65 amax 6v rd.
g 6v,
[8] An undrained shear strength ratio(S /(3',.)of 0.51 was used for the above calculation for CCR and based on static triaxial test results for non-compacted CCR collected from another North Carolina Duke Energy site.
[9] The South Carolina Department of Transportation Geotechnical Design Manual [2010]was used to estimate K,,. The procedure for Clay-Like Soils was used and a factor of safety for pre-failure geometry of 1.5 was conservatively used for this calculation based
on slope stability analysis results presented in Section 5.3.The SPT-2 was not corrected due to a gentle slope.
[10] CRR=0.8(S /G'v)K.(MSF);MSF represents a magnitude scaling factor and was calculated using an equation for fine grained soils [Idriss and Boulanger,2008].
[11] FSrq=CRR/CSR. FSij,is capped at 2.0 for presentation purposes.
[12] The piezometer was installed for an aquifer below the geosynthetic clay liner at this location. The water table was conservatively assumed based on relative moisture conditions of the samples collected from the boring.
Page 2 of 2

E_( -2.5)
L E_[-2.5..-2)
co
Co E
s a5 S
.sae` o°m•o'o'. j�S C/es E=[-0.5..0)
c� O�Oa®°o'.'. g�S�Os ❑ E=[0...0.5)
® m e o • . ?S �Fa
U B�A�A®0®o•.'.`.'• n�P ❑ E=[0.5..1)
SR
A o 0 0 ° o . . . . . . . S g�prk� ❑■ E=[1..1.5)
�� O o o a o m . . . . • • . .. ,OS �
be ,fl♦o•• ••.•♦♦♦♦.�.�.�.•'.'s'.�♦`♦'• g E=[1.5..2)
8 . •.���.o.�. S6S N E=[2..2.5)
S • • • •
• $5
o llcc;,�4pr�OS 6 `��e`I�t1
�� g8s 5•`'�a��
5
S6S �5
0.
Figure 1. Seismic Hazard Deaggregation for Area 1
Page 1 of I

tip
Wfferm TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Date: December 21, 2017 File: 1026.02.44
To: John Toepfer, Duke Energy
Cc: Kathy Webb, Todd Plating
JL
From: Brian Wilker, NC LG #2546
Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling Report-November 2017
Subject: Asheville Airport Structural Fill-Area 1
BACKGROUND
The Asheville Airport is located near Arden, North Carolina, approximately 13 miles south of
Asheville, North Carolina. Beneficial reuse of coal ash from the nearby Asheville Steam Electric
Plant, owned by Duke Energy Progress,LLC(Duke Energy), occurred at the Asheville Airport
from 2008 to 2015. The ash was used as structural fill for the construction of one additional taxi
way as well as a potential future hangar construction site.
Structural Fill-Area 1 consists of two primary cells, an east cell and west cell. Historically, a
dendritic headwater drainage existed in the southern portion of the Structural Fill-Area 1 and
continued as a blue-lined stream toward the northern property boundary'of the airport.
Recently, an observable increase in groundwater discharges to surface water in lowland areas
and along slopes of the east and west cells of Structural Fill-Area 1 have been documented. In a
letter dated November 17,2017(Davidson to Draovitch),Duke Energy received a Notice of
Violation(NOV)regarding violations of the structural fill permit WQ0000020.SynTerra
conducted two separate field surveys and sampling events in Structural Fill-Area 1 in
November 2017.Photographs taken during each field investigation are included in Attachment
A.
FIELD ASSESSMENTS AND SAMPLING
November 01, 2017
On November 01,2017,SynTerra performed site reconnaissance and split samples with NCDEQ
of recognized surface water locations within Structural Fill-Area 1 (Figure 1). Seven surface
water locations (SW1-Al;SW-3A1,SW4-Al,SW5-Al,SW6-Al,SW7-Al,SW8-Al) in Area 1
were sampled for analysis of total and dissolved phase metals, alkalinity, chloride, and sulfate
(Table 1). SW7-Al was a stagnant puddle at the eastern cell toe-of-slope with limited volume of
water, and was only sampled for dissolved metals due to volume limitations and turbidity(out
of range). The analytical laboratory report for these samples is presented in Attachment B. The
field sampling logs associated with these samples are included in Attachment C.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling Report December 21,2017
Asheville Airport Structural Fill-Area 1 Page 2
November 29, 2017
On November 29,2017,SynTerra conducted an additional groundwater/surface water
inspection of the east and west cells of Area 1 in response to the NOV received November 17,
2017. Area 1,from the top of slope of the east and west cells to lowland areas (e.g. historical
retention basins),was inspected for groundwater seepage and wetted areas. For this field
assessment, standard operating procedures (SOP)for the Duke Energy semi-annual"area of
wetness" (AOW) inspections were followed.The last recordable rain event prior to this
inspection occurred on November 18,2017(0.13 inches).
Identified areas of groundwater seepage were flagged and surveyed for latitude/longitude and
elevation in feet.Samples were collected from six surface water locations and analyzed for
parameters included in the airport structural fill permit as well as dissolved phases of metals.
These analytical results are not yet available,but will be submitted with an evaluation in a
future report upon availability. The field sampling logs are included in Attachment C.
Two of the surface water locations sampled on November 29,2017 were also sampled on
November 01,2017. One location, designated SW413-A1,is most likely representative of SW4-Al
(as sampled on November 01,2017),however the groundwater was emerging approximately 10
feet north of the previous (SW4-Al) sample location.The seep channel of SW4-Al sampled in
the beginning of November no longer contained flow on November 29,2017. Flow observed at
SW8-Al had also decreased from conditions observed on November 01,2017, and was not
sufficient to sample.
Stagnant water from three of the surface water sample locations (SW1-Al,SW6-Al, and SW7-
A1)was sampled on November 01,2017. Since stagnant water may not be representative of
actual groundwater emerging from the subsurface, the AOW SOP does not recommend
sampling stagnant water. Stagnant conditions were again noted at these locations on November
29,2017 and therefore not sampled. The reinforced culvert connected to the pooled water at
SW1-Al was dry (Attachment A),with flowing water heard within but not visible. Note this
location has been intermittently sampled under the NPDES permit as SW1-Al,however the
intended location for permitting purposes was the 18" culvert immediately west of this pool
(Figure 1). This location was designated as SW9-Al and sampled during this investigation.
A new seep was found upwelling at the toe of slope in the western cell, discharging to the small
retention basin upgradient of SW3-Al (Figure 1).A sample was collected from this location and
designated SW10-Al. A spring downgradient of the eastern cell was also sampled and
designated SW11-Al. This location was assessed on November 01,2017 with NCDEQ as a
potential additional background location,however was determined to contain more
groundwater input from beneath I-26 and thus not related to the structural fill.
At most locations inspected on November 29,2017, an observable increase in iron bacteria/floc
mass was present, especially at SW3-Al.A photographic comparison between the beginning
and end of November at SW3-Al is included in Attachment A.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling Report December 21,2017
Asheville Airport Structural Fill-Area 1 Page 3
DATA EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS
The French Broad River in the vicinity of the Asheville Airport structural fills is classified as
Class B waters. Note the 15A NCAC 02B standards for Class B waters (2B)presented in Table 1
are for reference purposes only, as the analytical results from the one-time samples displayed
do not meet determinative criteria for compliance with an acute or chronic metals standard as
outlined in 15A NCAC 02B .0211(11)(e).
On November 01,2017, the concentration of dissolved arsenic in SW8-Al was detected greater
than the chronic freshwater metals standard outlined in 15A NCAC 02B .0211(11)(b)(ii).
Dissolved oxygen results for several samples were reported below the minimum instantaneous
value of 4.0 mg/L,however these sample locations may qualify for a lower standard value
based on 15A NCAC 02B .0211(6). One pH value(SW1-Al,5.6) and one turbidity value (SW7-
A1, out of range) were not within the 2B standards. No other analytical results were reported
greater than the 2B standards for surface water samples collected November 1,2017.
For evaluating potential impacts to groundwater and surface water from coal ash, indicator
constituents were selected in general accordance with Tier 1 procedures outlined in the
Groundwater Quality Signatures for Assessing Potential Impacts for Coal Combustion Product Leachate
(EPRI,2012). Constituents selected for this evaluation based on site-specific information
included boron,strontium, and sulfate. Samples impacted from coal ash associated with the
structural fills have the potential to show elevated concentrations of these constituents.
Boron is not typically detected in background groundwater, and is highly mobile in
groundwater. Therefore boron is widely considered to be an indicator constituent when
evaluating data for coal ash impacts. Four of the seven surface water results collected(SW4-Al,
SW5-Al,SW7-Al,SW8-Al) contained boron greater than the method reporting limit of 50 µg/L.
SW8-Al contained the greatest concentration of boron in both total and dissolved phases (1,290
and 1,380 µg/L), approximately one order of magnitude greater than the other detections. There
is no 2B standard for boron. For reference,the groundwater(2L) standard for boron is 700 µg/L.
Elevated strontium concentrations in the four samples with detectable boron may indicate coal
ash impacts, specifically in SW5-Al,SW7-Al, and SW8-Al. However,the dissolved
concentrations detected in SW7-A1 (1,200 µg/L) and SW8-Al (2,240 µg/L)were much greater
than the detection in SW5-A1 (331 µg/L). SW7-A1 was only analyzed for dissolved metals.
There are no 2B or 2L standards for strontium.
The greatest sulfate concentration, consistent with boron and strontium,was detected at SW8-
A1 (32 mg/L). The next greatest concentration was detected in SW5-A1 (9.9 mg/L);SW7-A1 was
not analyzed for sulfate. There is no 2B standard for sulfate. For reference,the 21,standard for
sulfate is 250 mg/L.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling Report December 21,2017
Asheville Airport Structural Fill-Area 1 Page 4
In summary:
*7 Four wet areas were identified,in addition to previously documented wet areas,by
SynTerra along the slope or toe of slope in Structural Fill-Area 1.These areas include
Syn1,Syn2, Syn3, and SW7-Al.
tz Four areas (SW4B-Al,SW8-Al,SW10-Al, SW11-Al) of active groundwater seepage
were identified and surveyed near or below the toe of slope in Structural Fill-Area 1.
0 Seven surface water samples were collected from Structural Fill-Area 1 on November
01,2017.
47 Six surface water samples were collected from Structural Fill-Area 1 on November 29,
2017.
0 Two locations (SW3-Al,SW5-Al)were sampled in both events.
47 Groundwater interaction with surface water does not appear to be causing 2B
exceedances. Subsequent monitoring could indicate future impacts to surface water in
Structural Fill-Area 1.
0 Four out of seven(4 of 7)surface water samples taken November 01,2017,may indicate
varying concentrations of constituents associated with coal ash.
Figure 1 provides a visual layout of sample locations and dates of sample collection.
Please contact me with any questions or concerns. Thank you for the opportunity to provide our
services.
Figures:
Figure 1 Structural Fill-Area 1 Site Layout Map
Tables:
Table 1 Surface Water Analytical Results
Attachments:
Attachment A Photographic Log
Attachment B Analytical Laboratory Report
Attachment C Field Sampling Logs
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
FIGURE 1
SITE LAYOUT MAP
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

2• CULVERT q
EXISTING WETLANDS
x.
I
. F
1
` + � ISW4k-01
°
F£Ii 4 +
�" ,� -` �� �.�,, , i +, _ ,- • -_, •�,�$ CONRETE HEADWALL '- �-,�•1, `'�I
� � �: s-�u_ `SxV114A1 5,. -_,�` �1t11,� �; •�
t x j pA r ' tia 18"RCP SW7,A—
AREA(SYN 3)
j lip,
� { � ,�i ` � R y7y��� 60"RCP � � �¢,~� � � g `� •����1
y
v � h ��s ��� ��� K r�� Ham'. FENCE
LOCKED GATE
°
LEGEND
g
a3 SVi( =A1 SURFACE WATER COLLECTED 11-01-2017
A SURFACE WATER COLLECTED 11-01-2017 AND 11-29-2017MyK.; � q 4tT
® lSN%P1Q A SURFACE WATER COLLECTED 11-29-2017
MW2AA1 REVIEW BOUNDARY MONITORING WELL / A , ' sU, ` b-
IL
——— COAL COMBUSTION PRODUCT LIMITS ,.y
REVIEW BOUNDARY
50 GROAPHICSC E 5o 10o FIGURE 1
COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY t IN FEET SITE LAYOUT MAP
PROPERTY LINE(APPROXIMATE) 148 RIVER STREET,SUITE 220 DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS
SAMPLE COLLECTION INFORMATION: a 'g• ' GREENVILLE,SOUTH CAROLINA 29601
M SAMPLES COLLECTED ON NOVEMBER 1,2017 BYSYERRAAND NCDEQ. e, �t3 I y PHONE [phone] STRUCTURAL FILL -AREA 1
VIP
SAMPLES COLLECTED ON NOVEMBER 29,2017 BY SYNTERRA. '} 4 F" .^ °�'"
f ���� wwwsynterracorp.com
MARCH SOURCE:,2015 AERWL PHOTOGRAPH OBTAINED FROM NCONE MAPGEOSPATIAC PORTAL AT - �L ASHEVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
DRAWN BY:JOHN CHASTAIN DATE:12/15/2017
http://tlata.nconemap.com/geoportal/catalog/rastef/downloatl,page K' '� t'S�' roc,.•, PROJECT MANAGER:BRIAN WILKER ARDEN, NORTH CAROLINA
WELL LOCATIONS,COAL COMBUSTION PRODUCTS LIMITS,REVIEW BOUNDARY AND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM t k ~ AI '� � <...y>. LAYOUT.FIG 1(SITE LAYOUT MAP)
S&ME DRAWING TffLED°GROUNDWATER FLOW MAP STRUCTURAL FILL,DATED I2-16.2010. EILLEPLNT44.AO4 \ueEne . AH W Area 1\DWG\DE ASHEVILLE AIRPORT STRUCTURAL FILL-AREA ILdw
_ I

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
TABLE 1
SURFACE WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

TABLE 1
SURFACE WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
ASHEVILLE AIRPORT STRUCTURAL FILL-AREA 1
ARDEN,NC
Analytical Parameter pH ORP DO Spec Cond Turbidity Temp Alkalinity Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Bi-carbonate Boron Calcium Cadmium Carbonate Chloride Chromium
Alkalinity Alkalinity
i
Reporting Units S.U. mV mg/L umhos/cm NTU Deg C mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L mg/L ug/L mg/L mg/L ug/L
Phase -- -- -- -- -- -- -- T D T D T I D T D T I D -- T D -- T I D
NE 4.0 NE O Z9 a NE NE NE NE NE NE 0 NE NE NE 6 5 NE NE NE NE NE p, NE NE NE 24
Location ID Sample FIELD PARAMETERS ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Collection Date
SWl-Al 11/1/2017 5. 108.9 B 99.2 2.38 12 28.8 15 8 <1 <1 <1 <1 40 43 <1 <1 28.8 <50 <50 7.43 1 <0.1 <0.1 <5.0 10 <1 <1
SW3-A1 11/1/2017 6.4 79.2 6.78 98 1.95 13 23.4 20 <5 <1 <1 <'1 <1 37 38 <1 <1 23.4 <50 <50 8.04 <0.1 <0.1 <5.0 11 <1 <1
SW4-Al 11/1/2017 6.1 106 108 14.1 12 29.3 291 7 <1 <1 <1 <1 19 19 <1 <1 29.3 85 93 7.18 <0.1 <0.1 <5.0 6.3 <1 <1
SW5-Al 11/1/2017 6.6 7.5 6.52 217 4.93 9 86.5 8 <5 <1 <1 <1 <1 42 47 <1 <1 86.5 168 191 23.5 <0.1 <0.1 <5.0 11 <1 <1
SW6-A1 11/1/2017 6.2 45.2 2 94: 78.8 3.01 it 14.7 54 16 <1 <1 2.59 2.8 27 35 <1 <1 14.7 <50 <50 4.11 <0.1 <0.1 <5.0 7.9 <1 <1
SW7-Al 11/1/2017 7.2 -54.6 1.1 534 ©O`� 19 NA NA 11 NA <1 NA 1.7 NA 67 NA <1 NA NA 351 NA NA <0.1 NA NA NA <1
SW8-Al 11/1/2017 6.9 -89.5 0.8 937 4.1 15 523 65 39 <1 <1 219 217; 219 230 <1 <1 523 1290 1380 147 <0.1 <0.1 <5.0 3.8 <1 <1
Prepared by: BDW Checked by: TDP
Notes:
Values for 15A NCAC 02B,Class B(French Broad River)Ammended Effective January 1,2015.
The lower value of either the acute or chronic standard outlined in 15A NCAC 02B.0211(11)(b)is displayed.Also note the data displayed represents a one-time,single sample;therefore,compliance with either the acute or chronic standard may not be determined based on 15A NCAC 02B.0211(11)(e).
<-concentration not detected at or above the reporting limit
T-total phase mg/L-milligrams per liter NE-not established Temp-temperature
D-dissolved phase umhos/cm-micro ohms per centimeter ORP-oxidation reduction potential Spec Cond-specific conductance
OOR-out of_range ug/L=micrograms-per_liter D_C-dissolved_oxygen
S.U.-standard units NTU-nephelometric turbidity unit Deg C-degrees Celcius
mV-millivolts NA-not analyzed ---not applicable
1.Dissolved oxygen values presented are instantaneous values- 15A NCAC 02B.0202(40).
2.Per 15A NCAC 02B.0211(21),turbidity in the receiving water shall not exceed 50 NTU in streams not designated as trout water(French Broad River).
3.The Site is designated as mountain/upper piedmont waters;temperature standard,based on 15A NCAC 02B.0202(40).
4.Hardness-dependent dissolved metals standards for cadmium,chromium(III),copper,lead,nickel,and zinc are based on the minimum applicable instream hardness of 25 mg/L per 15A NCAC 02B.0211(11)(c).
P:\Duke'Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Table 1 Surface Water Analytical Results.xlsx Page 1 of 2

TABLE 1
SURFACE WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
ASHEVILLE AIRPORT STRUCTURAL FILL-AREA 1
ARDEN, NC
Analytical Parameter Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium Total Hardness Vanadium Zinc
Reporting Units ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L mg/L ug/L mg/L(CaCO3) ug/L ug/L
Phase T D T D T D �Er;n!
-- T D T D T D T D -- P'M_�' N
T D -- T D -- T D -- T NE NE NE Z,7° NE NE NE NE NE0.0 2 NE NE NE NE yt '6, NE NE 6 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
Location ID Sample ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Collection Date
SW1-A1 11/1/2017 2.12 2.06 <1 <1 1190 1200 <0.2 <0.2 2.48 406 466 <0.05 <0.05 <1 <1 <1 <1 1.49 <1 <1 <0.3 <0.3 4.23 69 75 1.5 <0.2 <0.2 28.8 <0.3 <0.3 10 12
SW3-Al 11/1/2017 <1 <1 <1 <1 288 192 <0.2 <0.2 3.41 221 220 <0.05 <0.05 <1 <1 <1 <1 1.72 <1 <1 <0.3 <0.3 5.26 63 67 2.8 <0.2 <0.2 34.1 <0.3 <0.3 9 7
SW4-Al 11/1/2017 1.35 1.31 <1 <1 2710 1750 <0.2 <0.2 3.93 428 476 <0.05 <0.05 <1 <1 <1 <1 1.54 <1 <1 <0.3 <0.3 3.6 78 84 7.9 <0.2 <0.2 34.1 0.421 <0.3 <5 <5
SW5-Al 11/1/2017 1.48 1.52 <1 I <1 2210 2110 1 <0.2 <0.2 7.97 1000 1070 <0.05 <0.05 2.34 2.36 <1 <1 3.29 <1 <1 <0.3 <0.3 4.4 312 331 9.9 <0.2 <0.2 91.6 <0.3 <0.3 <5 <5
SW6-A1 11/1/2017 <1 1.25 <1 <1 5110 7050 <0.2 <0.2 1.94 188 262 <0.05 <0.05 <1 <1 <1 <1 2.01 <1 <1 <0.3 <0.3 2.8 36 43 6.2 <0.2 <0.2 18.3 0.396 <0.3 <5 <5
SW7-Al 11/1/2017 NA 2.04 NA 1.06 NA 140 NA <0.2 NA NA 2080 NA <0.05 NA 14.7 NA <1 NA NA <1 <0.3 <0.3 NA NA 1200 NA I NA <0.2 NA I NA 1 0.508 1 NA 1 10
SW8-Al 11/1/2017 18.1 17.8 <1 <1 2160 2390 <0.2 <0,2 31 9420 9820 <0.05 <0.05 151 149 1.24 1.09 4.42 <1 <1 <0.3 <0.3 7.17 2180 2240 32 <0.2 <0.2 439 0.543 <0.3 <5 <5
Prepared by: BDW Checked by: TDP
Notes:
Values for 15A NCAC 02B,Class B(French Broad River)Ammended Effective January 1,2015.
The lower value of either the acute or chronic standard outlined in 15A NCAC 02B.0211(11)(b)is displayed.Also note the data displayed represents a one-time,single sample;therefore,compliance with either the acute or chronic standard may not be determined based on 15A NCAC 02B.0211 (11)(e).
<-concentration not detected at or above the reporting limit
T-total phase mg/L-milligrams per liter NE-not established Temp-temperature
D-dissolved phase umhos/cm-micro ohms per centimeter ORP-oxidation reduction potential Spec Cond-specific conductance
OOR-out of range ug/L-micrograms per liter DO-dissolved oxygen
S.U.-standard units NTU-nephelometric turbidity unit Deg C-degrees Celcius
mV-millivolts NA-not analyzed ---not applicable
1.Dissolved oxygen values presented are instantaneous values-15A NCAC 02B.0202(40).
2.Per 15A NCAC 02B.0211(21),turbidity in the receiving water shall not exceed 50 NTU in streams not designated as trout water(French Broad River).
3.The Site is designated as mountain/upper piedmont waters;temperature standard based on 15A NCAC 02B.0202(40).
4.Hardness-dependent dissolved metals standards for cadmium,chromium(III),copper,lead,nickel,and zinc are based on the minimum applicable instream hardness of 25 mg/L per 15A NCAC 02B.0211(11)(c).
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Table 1 Surface Water Analytical Results.xlsx Page 2 of 2

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
ATTACHMENT A
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
i
1.
•r
1
4-
S
I
Photograph 1. SW1-Al- concrete headwall at the northern
discharge of south to north culvert beneath Area 1 (taken
November 29, 2017).
' 1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Attachment
A-Photographic Log.docx

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
't
W
t _X..
ky.l 7
! t,
I
f�9 1
Rf II
j bsj't)
Photograph 2. SW1-Al- dry concrete culvert(taken November
29, 2017). View is toward the south, taken from drain gate (see
Photograph 1).
2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Attachment
A-Photographic Log.dooc

r
: ' � � 'ti +• _ � '�� it �� �!� �
' It y�.;- "�- ..} a �Yi r `�Y iG t, - t.✓ •y;y 1 1 fit ,, �•T..�' 'Y
`�_� ,t i r 1"'•'d C t` tr�� -S+ a �y' .L` r :-1 � ♦'� y�f 'y d
'-'-�,_.,A' a' la •• J7.*-i � 'Y..4 i.1 '�r+�• r 11 I. �tr���,{
•�_ - _ - _ _ _ r .irk+�-.•� �d'�X
.'�` �7,�i 's ��, �.12��Y R •r.+ :STD. e�� �.. _ <l
J '-

Area of . - Inspection • Sampling December1
Airport-Asheville
I ;
VIA
1 '�. � �� (� � �..•it I y 1 J ,�,:-
f •- a` - a+�f r9
_ i
� ., ✓ I 'ice � '�a¢`t�.�. ��•
W F '
Photograph ' ' l-reinforced culvert at the northernedge
of property boundary • •• 2017)
P:\Duke Energy •• 1 1 • 20 REV DRAFT Memo\Attadiment

�4 y ''t r., •,t I • �•. a
�yf ;
•fit\� I�I t /F,t b7�. C11 /I' Nil •AS' 1 i` I,,• F,'Y.�i`A�-}•-.
�''i 'i• � r r1 ;art.. =,y{�'
1. N4
In
�t��`Fs �'4"`{ ..+�' S d i• ^`S''{^ t 7 S�/ice w �3 ��.
VJ
4�• Y ��_� � t , r. �� .�I � �yL iy�..4r 4 t t,r�.+h`�I i I
Ora
►.:'i
�.+ ''(�1 +��4�j� ,•�7Y�-i. 4/j�, -t','o- '��S{('{�� �^}y�'�. j�{,N`�-4� KY iyy" .' '
:'P" f-J• ;yam-, � i�1+•.-y T , I , y� � �J�i,-r� S�t,�, _
F-a r. "ti-!`11 L- a1 e ,:,,y� •�''• y �"' +�' rer + f
IN
L yrd
�'7,_ "._ "il',1 ♦!� .t,..-�{•f 1�r Ilie' LIy

yl
y- t
r1 Q 1 N.e� ►. � '�..All
77
ts' Of
}t I f ,�• f� ",i / r
���` - v v'wF�• 'fir �� �"
y`
.,l�Gt ��,. a'7 41Y �� r.,•f
Its
r/
ls
J' .
..t 1 •4j�
}
:, =rah'` r� .��� ;, -'�1.�; fit!� - •, ��• k
• • • oil • •' •

.� .•,,{' rrI ,Ti1 aL 5 ,` �tlr ' i Y'{ Yi'-rfr•J` ' -
I� C 1 �•r,
r.- �'1"i, �'. � .';(�i may'' � �7•!- .� t\,, -�" �` � .(� �`
i[ • ra �� . �Ay�-firf � ��J��' ;,� �, �T!
Fit
AL
-colt " tr
V IC
71
'�`f*r r���R 1 ,- 4Y e+G1�P• r �.S -r. -� •

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
l r� ,mod���..--'_--.,,"� .._�•"'-J`�- .r "'� "'++� f"a h�
5'
r'p
J
4 ,
6A.
1 1 II
� r
�t
1
4 5
y k
Photograph 8. SW5-Al- downstream end of culvert draining the
historic storm water retention basin. View is toward the south
(taken November 29, 2017).
8
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Attachment
'A-Photographic Log.docx

q£':�t},'F "�� ' r,�',4"'}1 ` y`'i.i �{ 1 t '�r i [I •�Y•{�' b �. I r-
+.
%'� � + '47'-c•r'�1� �},������j <'�r ,+a •1• � :; i t��.5�it r - �N�+�,,;ry
„IJt�`i�� • FT �, 7�.` �y J"gs'CI t _. 7 7 _ y74'. 4x ..tf�
�• t 4 + 1
r • r y �;�� L � 1
y,is -� 1-j.���.1 >Lj4z •�rl��'�f7� R.� _ -�� .[.•. t`• t .��.
�� .-,y '� rt' � � )•7 .J if�.-�I•'ALLL `1�,1 ,4 at�' �al�///�.
jok-
•t}({1 t1j� i.' 4 1 tIL F 1
l •[ <"•` Tip }
`•W� '�� *�� �}. � .1 1 t `�:�tiF�-n'•r��r/:^ F { '*� S fir.
4t.. �� �vv - t.....j�f����.. � 11'7i��t�l�r f •'•
it
IN
�r 1
r,
..'� ,1 S lay,w,.1 J"(.
,,���kr � 't„d.1 ��� r a :��S'�,/� 'f "�� %"fit a 'y'" 'i -V 1' �l � �, 1�.i� � -•"�
f.
}
4151
.`
I 1 N i~ rJsa� !•'Sr,l);�, � ;: tF ,�•C � `•���Il�'1�Ii�Y(+v����'
_ ads f•+' �. �'' l � �f'�+ � ( y'c �''1'�t-1,, Il' (�'7
- f lat' .�_ +�� _I..,4 1 ,Q Iran P � iti(�.F!a`•F•f�^�1/�.-�1i'•F
1 1 • • • • • • •. • •
•
•

It 1 1 M gf;fin
.i t' s*,,
r e
si
IL
IEN
o-
n y, � w Y•
`'. _ .Vs� fi `y•
�i'�ffp� �`��t� � sue' f.7•T s + , �/**���{{1'•���' I�t 1.' - /,Zit�'�l�i,
��.n t�nl {. �4S�i'ice:« i t,'"-'•:�,"°yy �I �. f'"_ 1 -y4 Y[ir�.lt,'.f.
�' rt>p •�./Y (+;J' �l1{��, of
�r q. rr r • "f'7'` y ''ty ��il. } 77 W ft 'r�
1

• -• •- • • • �- -� •- 1
i •yyf /y�.J
FY
��.r,?.e�}+�"—. i'" Ir *� -"� d+ "t fir' •.f'��11 `:
•� •.+ �m � ;•. ��
;4' - ;tl`1�.-_ a t ��y' .,� �►�„a s'�, /'.', {//�_� ' `t //.
, �� a f r ,ter✓�f_,".�
•! 4

Area of -•ness Inspection and Sampling December1
Airport-Asheville
{�,,\u��4`��'y T-t 1y�•. ,i1 ..;�}.'-yx"^r >�\,f+�-"Ya Y,, i."` �;l �i ,( �,w �.
p1k r•`�.[•N,��y �~C4- �S �•�z P� ��t�r:{L'r,r"r� /• ��a r�Ix/� "•�� k /
� '1.+'yF k+`) '•T I1,�1�1� i �_ 'A � y Y_�-Icla 4., �` _ `r:f w ` !��`'
fir. yj/_„ p1 y ' Y•
7
Photograph 12. i ' reduced flow in seep • • • •' of
gravel road (taken November •
12
P:\Duke Energy •• 1 1 • 20 REV DRAFT Memo\

„}g77L4�'�1,', (/`'
'�.N� ,�� ,�� �, •,1� y.� ti- Ewa �T J �_ � ^
1j sue.' t .�� .• n�; � �;
'r. �ti,
'��-�� � -'�ri tom;-�,r-�:�.' . ��-� .�i•' � .-+5.1 c�t - f,.., '”.
��^r .,' _� .'.�+`_.�- '-� ,� �• ��` � •/ `.l It _.�`� 1
r `
t �wf'

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville.Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
�yt�4y4rr� St-, i
k �r 9
r��."W,�[`/�ig���k 1,��,C� •�may? �� rs4�
IRT
�S � 4A t�tz
1
r'
e
w
- s
J
f
Photograph 14. SW10-Al-seep (upwelling of groundwater) at
west cell toe-of-slope basin (taken November 29, 2017).
14
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Attachment
A-Photographic Log.docx

Area of . -ss Inspection an• Sampling December1
Airport-Asheville
5 _
Photograph 15. SW11-Al-surface water in • • area
downgradient of east cell in Area 1 (taken November 29, 2017).
15
•• 1 • 120 REV DRAFT Memo\Attadiment

S� �.r ,( �,� C.V t.�„,1.•YL. � P
NI
sOkAv fir �• - ,�r ��
,fir� ur."_rn,�r.1,��,�r' n � `��• a� e,�.1��"'
41
TR���r���•�=`�� ,tea r�:§ �,•' a'y I t,��i►� �ir�1 ��i,., i !� �•�
}�� ,rl:• �`c�', ;r� 4 r s�. ;�y�0 4. ,� � x tjy-^ •,'_ ,i �
���t-•.•l •�.- Alf' S�t�,q, •-��� -..,.,.-
4'�v y�?.•$}'.r•�� � `h3`4`,1 t r V •,z+ �� w +;_ �'�,-�-��. it *��'�' r �r�'''
�"i�q'• '•r°F .v.�'�i�ra i'•• -.r 11�1
� � •r"r�•`4n t.33*r ����# `J�` ti�L•,�Z'�§'.:jr�`'i t �}•�Y ���}-'gr}r��L4 Cltf,�*7V:�i
` tykl!•B" ; 4t '> ''A"tP. h�+,. r.�.p �* 'i+r,, �'�T••I4.
S ;�,.. � •{ ,` yr, �„ q jyt`i'�.I ir)L�1 ? •.� r ..�r.i�'it �,
�'"�l'• C�I 1i 'L � ��(v( f• �L`fh�,�iS� }�,ly,Y+ �u•�,,Yy}'� �C�. �• � •mil
r+`/ tE Yb •"7f{•,� r•.4TMr3 Y,j; Yy��7 ��l�li'I.•�.4�F�`��t_y��/••[f�� �'t"' t
a�lalat,.. tp+�M.,t':r,'
�t:le,1 y+ ft4YY, .,Ed'(ra ..�nl},� 4•._ SAJ'•-5. h _t ti,�
1 1 ' • • • •

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
ATTACHMENT B
ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORT
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo\Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

Revised Report
DU Analytical Laboratory Page 1 of47
ENERGY.
13339 Hagers Ferry Road
Huntersville, NC 28078-7929
McGuire Nuclear Complex - MG03A2
Phone:[phone] Fax:[phone]
Order Summary Report
Order Number: J17110036
Project Name: AVL Airport Fill Area 1--Surface Water(DEQ Split)
Customer Name(s): John Toepfer
Customer Address: 200 CP and L Drive
Arden,NC 28704
Lab Contact: Peggy Kendall Phone: [phone]
Report Authorized By- pate: 12/22/2017
(Signature) A k-IT, 46v�
Peggy Rendall
Program Comments:
This is a revised report and supercedes the original dated 11/22/17. The Total Ag(LL)reporting limit was incorrect.
At the customer's request,turbidity was analyzed for all samples but SW7-Ai.The sample aliquots were taken from the
alkalinity containers.
Data Flags&Calculations:
Any analytical tests or individual analytes within a test flagged with a Qualifier indicate a deviation from the method quality
system or quality control requirement. The qualifier description is found at the end of the Certificate of Analysis(sample results)
under the qualifiers heading. All results are reported on a dry weight basis unless otherwise noted. Subcontracted data
included on the Duke Certificate of Analysis is to be used as information only. Certified vendor results can be found in the
subcontracted lab final report. Duke Energy Analytical Laboratory subcontracts analyses to other vendor laboratories that have
been qualified by Duke Energy to perform these analyses except where noted.
Data Package:
This data package includes analytical results that are applicable only to the samples described in this narrative.An estimation of
the uncertainty of measurement for the results in the report is available upon request.This report shall not be reproduced,except
in full,without the written consent of the Analytical Laboratory. Please contact the Analytical laboratory with any questions.The
order of individual sections within this report is as follows:
Job Summary Report, Sample Identification, Technical Validation of Data Package,Analytical Laboratory Certificate of Analysis,
Analytical Laboratory OC Reports, Sub-contracted Laboratory Results, Customer Specific Data Sheets, Reports&
Documentation, Customer Database Entries, Test Case Narratives, Chain of Custody(COC)
Certification:
The Analytical Laboratory holds the following State Certifications : North Carolina(DENR) Certificate#248,South Carolina
(DHEC) Laboratory ID#99005. Contact the Analytical Laboratory for definitive information about the certification status of
specific methods.

Revised Report
Sample ID's & Descriptions: Page 2 of47
Collection
Sample ID PlanVStation Date and Time Collected By Sample Description
2017037951 ASHEVILLE 01-Nov-17 9:10 AM Brian Wilker SW1-Ai
2017037952 ASHEVILLE 01-Nov-17 10:50 AM Brian Wilker SW3-A1
2017037953 ASHEVILLE 01-Nov-17 2:40 PM Brian Wilker SW4-A1
2017037954 ASHEVILLE 01-Nov-17 12:42 PM Brian Wilker SW5-A1
2017037955 ASHEVILLE 01-Nov-17 12:10 PM Brian Wilker SW6-A1
2017037956 ASHEVILLE 01-Nov-17 2:05 PM Brian Wilker SW7-A1
2017037957 ASHEVILLE 01-Nov-17 1:25 PM Brian Wilker SW8-A1
7 Total Samples

Revised Report
Page 3 of 47
Technical Validation Review
Checklist:
COC and .pdf report are in agreement with sample totals 0 Yes ❑ No
and analyses (compliance programs and procedures).
All Results are less than the laboratory reporting limits. ❑ Yes ❑ No
All laboratory QA/QC requirements are acceptable. 0 Yes ❑ No
Report Sections Included:
0 Job Summary Report Sub-contracted Laboratory Results
• Sample Identification ❑ Customer Specific Data Sheets, Reports,&Documentation
• Technical Validation of Data Package ❑ Customer Database Entries
❑� Analytical Laboratory Certificate of Analysis ❑ Chain of Custody
❑ Analytical Laboratory QC Report ❑ Electronic Data Deliverable(EDD)Sent Separatel
Reviewed By: DBA Account Date: 11/22/2017

Cw' rarficate of LaboratoryAnal sia Revised Report
y Page 4 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#A 7110036
Site: SW 1-Al Sample#: 2017037951
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 09:10 AM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
ALKALINITY(FIXED END POINT 4.5)-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Vendor Parameter Complete Vendor Method V_PACE
INORGANIC IONS BY IC
Chloride 10 mg/L 0.2 2 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 15:40 BGN9034
Sulfate 1.5 mg/L 0.2 2 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 15:40 BGN9034
MERCURY(COLD VAPOR)IN WATER
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/03/2017 14:09 DMFRANC
Mercury Dissolved(cold vapor)in Water(Filtered)
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/09/2017 13:05 DMFRANC
DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.008 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:18 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.043 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:18 JJMACKE
Boron(B) <0.05 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:18 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 1.20 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 1.0:18 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.466 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:18 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.075 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:18 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) 0.012 mg/L 0.005 .1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:18 JJMACKE
UNDIGESTED METALS BY ICP
Calcium(Ca) 7.43 mg/L 2 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:17 JJMACKE
Magnesium(Mg) 2.48 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:17 JJMACKE
Potassium(K) 1.49 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:17 JJMACKE
Sodium(Na) 4.23 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:17 JJMACKE
Total Hardness(Ca and Mg) 28.8 mg/L 0.045 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:17 JJMACKE
(CaCO3)
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.015 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:39 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.040 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:39 JJMACKE
Boron(B) <0.05 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:39 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 1.19 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:39 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.406 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:39 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.069 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:39 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) 0.010 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:39 JJMACKE

CAI Ufieate of Laboratory Analysis Revised
aep4;
Page
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW 1-Ai Sample#: 2017037951
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 09:10 AM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyse Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 2.06 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Selenium (Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:03 CWSPEN3
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 2.12 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/10/2017 12:16 CWSPEN3
TURBIDITY-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
l
Turbidity Complete Vendor Method V_PACE

vised
rt
G..LAicate of Laboratory Analysis Re
ePage 6 of47
9
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW3-A1 Sample#: 2017037952
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 10:50 AM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Daterrime Analyst
ALKALINITY(FIXED END POINT 4.5)-(Analysis Performed bV Pace Laboratories)
Vendor Parameter Complete Vendor Method V_PACE
INORGANIC IONS BY IC
Chloride 11 mg/L 0.2 2 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 15:57 BGN9034
Sulfate 2.8 mg/L 0.2 2 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 15:57 BGN9034
MERCURY(COLD VAPOR)IN WATER
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/03/2017 14:16 DMFRANC
Mercury Dissolved(cold vapor)in Water(Filtered)
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/09/2017 13:07 DMFRANC
DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:31 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.038 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:31 JJMACKE
Boron(B) <0.05 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:31 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 0.192 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:31 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.220 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:31 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.067 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:31 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) 0.007 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:31 JJMACKE
UNDIGESTED METALS BY ICP
Calcium(Ca) 8.04 mg/L 2 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:30 JJMACKE
Magnesium(Mg) 3.41 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:30 JJMACKE
Potassium(K) 1.72 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:30 JJMACKE
Sodium(Na) 5.26 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:30 JJMACKE
Total Hardness(Ca and Mg) 34.1 mg/L 0.045 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:30 JJMACKE
(CaCO3)
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.020 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/201714:54 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.037 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:54 JJMACKE
Boron(B) <0.05 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:54 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 0.288 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:54 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.221 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:54 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.063 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:54 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) 0.009 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:54 JJMACKE

Cenificate of Laborator Anal sib Revised Report
Y y Page 7 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#A 7110036
Site: SW3-A1 Sample#: 2017037952
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 10:50 AM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:13 CWSPEN3
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 18:26 CWSPEN3
TURBIDITY-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Turbidity Complete Vendor Method V_PACE

Revised Report
G- Iicate of Laboratory Analysis Page 8 of47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW4-A1 Sample#: 2017037953
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 02:40 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
ALKALINITY(FIXED END POINT 4.5)-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Vendor Parameter Complete Vendor Method V_PACE
INORGANIC IONS BY IC
Chloride 6.3 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 16:15 BGN9034
Sulfate 7.9 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 16:15 BGN9034
MERCURY(COLD VAPOR)IN WATER
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/03/2017 14:19 DMFRANC
Mercury Dissolved(cold vapor)in Water(Filtered)
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/09/2017 13:10 DMFRANC
DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.007 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:35 JJMACKE .
Barium(Ba) 0.019 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:35 JJMACKE
Boron(B) 0.093 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:35 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 1.75 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:35 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.476 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:35 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.084 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:35 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:35 JJMACKE
UNDIGESTED METALS BY ICP
Calcium(Ca) 7.18 mg/L 2 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:34 JJMACKE
Magnesium(Mg) 3.93 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:34 JJMACKE
Potassium(K) 1.54 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:34 JJMACKE
Sodium(Na) 3.60 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:34 JJMACKE
Total Hardness(Ca and Mg) 34.1 mg/L 0.045 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:34 JJMACKE
(CaCO3)
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP
Aluminum (AI) 0.291 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:58 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.019 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:58 JJMACKE
Boron(B) 0.085 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:58 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 2.71 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:58 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.428 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:58 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.078 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:58 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 14:58 JJMACKE

CL-,&ificate of Laborator Anal sis Revised Report
y Page 9 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#A 7110036
Site: SW4-A1 SaMDle#: 2017037953
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 02:40 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 1.31 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 20:36 CWSPEN3
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
Antimony(Sb) <1 ,ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 1.35 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level 0.421 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:03 CWSPEN3
TURBIDITY-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Turbidity Complete Vendor Method V_PACE

CL-,cificate of LaboratoryAnal S15 Revised Report
,l Page 10 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW5-A1 Sample#: 2017037954
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 12:42 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
ALKALINITY(FIXED END POINT 4.5)-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Vendor Parameter Complete Vendor Method V_PACE
INORGANIC IONS BY IC
Chloride 11 mg/L 0.2 2 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 16:33 BGN9034
Sulfate 9.9 mg/L 0.2 2 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 16:33 BGN9034
MERCURY(COLD VAPOR)IN WATER
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/03/2017 14:21 DMFRANC
Mercury Dissolved(cold vapor)in Water(Filtered)
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/09/2017 13:12 DMFRANC
DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:40 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.047 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:40 JJMACKE
Boron(B) 0.191 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:40 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 2.11 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:40 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 1.07 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:40 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.331 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:40 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:40 JJMACKE
UNDIGESTED METALS BY ICP
Calcium(Ca) 23.5 mg/L 2 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:39 JJMACKE
Magnesium(Mg) 7.97 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:39 JJMACKE
Potassium(K) 3.29 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:39 JJMACKE
Sodium(Na) 4.40 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:39 JJMACKE
Total Hardness(Ca and Mg) 91.6 mg/L 0.045 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:39 JJMACKE
(CaCO3)
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.008 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:03 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.042 mg/L 0.065 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:03 JJMACKE
Boron(B) 0.168 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:03 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 2.21 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:03 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 1.00 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:03 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.312 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:03 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:03 JJMACKE

Certlificate of LaboratoryAnal si Revised Report
ys Page 11 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW5-A1 Sample#: 2017037954
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 12:42 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 1.52 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) 2.36 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:22 CWSPEN3
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 1.48 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) 2.34 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:12 CWSPEN3
TURBIDITY-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Turbidity Complete Vendor Method V_PACE

C61 LI ficate of Laborator Anal sib Revised Report
Y Y Page 12 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW6-A1 Sample#: 2017037955
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 12:10 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Daterrime Analyst
ALKALINITY(FIXED END POINT 4.5)-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Vendor Parameter Complete Vendor Method V_PACE
INORGANIC IONS BY IC
Chloride 7.9 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 16:51 BGN9034
Sulfate 6.2 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 16:51 BGN9034
MERCURY(COLD VAPOR)IN WATER
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/03/2017 14:24 DMFRANC
Mercury Dissolved(cold vapor)in Water(Filtered)
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/09/2017 13:15 DMFRANC
DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(Al) 0.016 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:45 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.035 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:45 JJMACKE
Boron(B) <0.05 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:45 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 7.05 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:45 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.262 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:45 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.043 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:45 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:45 JJMACKE
UNDIGESTED METALS BY ICP
Calcium(Ca) 4.11 mg/L 2 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:44 JJMACKE
Magnesium(Mg) 1.94 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:44 JJMACKE
Potassium(K) 2.01 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:44 JJMACKE
Sodium(Na) 2.80 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:44 JJMACKE
Total Hardness(Ca and Mg) 18.3 mg/L 0.045 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:44 JJMACKE
(CaCO3)
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.054 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:07 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.027 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:07 JJMACKE
Boron(B) <0.05 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7- 11/09/2017 15:07 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 5.11 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:07 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 0.188 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:07 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 0.036 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:07 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:07 JJMACKE

Certificate of LaboratoryAnal Si Revised Report
yg Page 13 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW6-A1 Sample#: 2017037955
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 12:10 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) 2.80 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 1.25 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:31 CWSPEN3
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) 2.59 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level 0.396 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:50 CWSPEN3
TURBIDITY-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Turbidity Complete Vendor Method V_PACE

0c,&ificate of LaboratoryAnal siio Revised Report
y Page 14 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW7-Ai Sample#: 2017037956
Collection Date: 1 1/01/201 7 02:05 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
Mercury Dissolved(cold vapor)in Water(Filtered)
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/09/2017 13:17 DMFRANC
DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Aluminum (AI) 0.011 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:49 JJMACKE
Barium (Ba) 0.067 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:49 JJMACKE
Boron(B) 0.351 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:49 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 0.140 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:49 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 2.08 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:49 JJMACKE
Strontium (Sr) 1.20 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:49 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) 0.010 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:49 JJMACKE
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) 1.70 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 2.04' ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) 1.06 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11i08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) 14.7 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3
Vanadium (V)Low Level 0.508 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:40 CWSPEN3

CrrrAfficate of Laborator Anal si Revised Report
Y yz Page 15 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW8-Al Sample#: 2017037957
Collection Date: 11/01/2017 01:25 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
ALKALINITY(FIXED END POINT 4.5)-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Vendor Parameter Complete Vendor Method V_PACE
INORGANIC IONS BY IC
Chloride 3.8 mg/L 0.5 5 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 17:09 BGN9034
Sulfate 32 mg/L 0.5 5 EPA 300.0 11/06/2017 17:09 BGN9034
MERCURY(COLD VAPOR)IN WATER
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/03/2017 14:26 DMFRANC
Mercury Dissolved(cold vapor)in Water(Filtered)
Mercury(Hg) <0.05 ug/L 0.05 1 EPA 245.1 11/09/2017 13:19 DMFRANC
DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.039 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:54 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.230 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:54 JJMACKE
Boron(B) 1.38 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:54 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 23.9 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:54 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 9.82 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:54 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 2.24 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:54 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 10:54 JJMACKE
UNDIGESTED METALS BY ICP
Calcium(Ca) 147 mg/L 2 20 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:48 JJMACKE
Magnesium(Mg) 31.0 mg/L 0.1 20 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:48 JJMACKE
Potassium(K) 4.42 mg/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:48 JJMACKE
Sodium(Na) 7.17 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:48 JJMACKE
Total Hardness(Ca and Mg) 439 mg/L 0.045 1 EPA 200.7 11/17/2017 15:48 JJMACKE
(CaCO3)
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP
Aluminum(AI) 0.065 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:11 JJMACKE
Barium(Ba) 0.219 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:11 JJMACKE
Boron(B) 1.29 mg/L 0.05 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:11 JJMACKE
Iron(Fe) 21.6 mg/L 0.01 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:11 JJMACKE
Manganese(Mn) 9.42 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:11 JJMACKE
Strontium(Sr) 2.18 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:11 JJMACKE
Zinc(Zn) <0.005 mg/L 0.005 1 EPA 200.7 11/09/2017 15:11 JJMACKE

Revised Report
CL-i-oficate of Laboratory Analysis` Page 16of47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Site: SW8-A1 Sample#: 2017037957
Collection Date: 1 1/01/201 7 01:25 PM Matrix: SURF WW
Analyse Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) 217 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 17.8 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) 149 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) 1.09 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 21:50 CWSPEN3
TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
Antimony(Sb) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8' 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Arsenic(As) 219 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Beryllium(Be) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level <0.1 ug/L 0.1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Chromium(Cr) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Cobalt(Co) 18.1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Copper(Cu) el ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/201.7 19:59 CWSPEN3
Lead(Pb)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Molybdenum(Mo) 151 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Nickel(Ni) 1.24 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Selenium(Se) <1 ug/L 1 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Silver(Ag)Low Level <0.3 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Thallium(TI)Low Level <0.2 ug/L 0.2 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
Vanadium(V)Low Level 0.543 ug/L 0.3 1 EPA 200.8 11/08/2017 19:59 CWSPEN3
TURBIDITY-(Analysis Performed by Pace Laboratories)
Turbidity Complete Vendor Method V_PACE

Revised Report
Cerifficate of Laboratory Analysis Page 17 of47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#A 7110036
Level II QC Summary
Q17.110095 Dionex INORGANIC IONS BY IC
Blank #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Chloride 0.0132 0.0132 mg/L 1 0.1 <1/2 RDL
Sulfate -0.0387 -0.0387 mg/L 1 0.1 <1/2 RDL
IS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Chloride 3.2 160 mg/L 50 150 101 80 120
Sulfate 6.66 3330 mg/L 500 1500 89 80 120
LSD #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL RPD Qualifier
Chloride 3.19 159 mg/L 50 150 101 80 120 0.244
Sulfate 6.65 3320 mg/L 500 1500 88.5 80 120 0.5
LCS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Chloride 4.99 4.99 mg/L 1 5 99.7 90 110
Sulfate 4.93 4.93 mg/L 1 5 98.7 90 110

Ci IfICSte Of Laboratory Analysis Revised Report
Page 18 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Level II QC Summary
Q17.110084 HG 245..1 MERCURY(COLD VAPOR)IN WATER
Blank #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 0.008 0.008 ug/L 1 0.05 <1/2 RDL
Blank #2
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 0.013 0.013 ug/L 1 0.05 <1/2 RDL
LCS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 1.9 1.9 ug/L 1 2 94.8 85 115
LCS #2
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 1.9 1.9 ug/L 1 2 94.8 85 115
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17090036 -- 2017030816
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 0.761 15.2 ug/L 20 20 71.4 70 130
MSD #1 Parent Sample: J17090036 -- 2017030816
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL RPD Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 0.779 15.6 ug/L 20 20 73.2 70 130 2.49
MS #4 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 0.961 0.961 ug/L 1 1 95.1 70 130
MSD #4 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL RPD Qualifier
Mercury(Hg) 0.962 0.962 ug/L 1 1 95.2 70 130 0.105

Certificate of Laboratory Analysis Revised Report
Page 19 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#A 7110036
Level II QC Summary
Q171.10375 ICP Dissolved DISSOLVED METALS BY ICP
Blank #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Aluminum (Al) -0.000443 -0.000443 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Barium(Ba) -0.000067 -0.000067 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Boron(B) 0.000042 0.000042 mg/L 1 0.05 <1/2 RDL
Iron(Fe) -0.000055 -0.000055 mg/L 1 0.01 <1/2 RDL
Manganese(Mn) -0.000325 -0.000325 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Strontium(Sr) -0.000016 -0.000016 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Zinc(Zn) 0.000672 0.000672 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
LCS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Aluminum(AI) 2.11 2.11 mg/L 1 2 106 85 115
Barium(Ba) 0.984 0.984 mg/L 1 1 98.4 85 115
Boron(B) 1.99 1.99 mg/L 1 2 99.7 85 115
Iron(Fe) 2.06 2.06 mg/L 1 2 103 85 115
Manganese(Mn) 0.975 0.975 mg/L 1 1 97.5 85 115
Strontium(Sr) 1.9 1.9 mg/L 1 2 95 85 115
Zinc(Zn) 1.03 1.03 mg/L 1 1 103 85 115
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Aluminum (AI) 5.22 5.22 mg/L 1 5 104 70 130
Barium(Ba) 5.26 5.26 mg/L 1 5 104 70 130
Boron(B) 5.17 5.17 mg/L 1 5 103 70 130
Iron(Fe) 6.15 6.15 mg/L 1 5 98.8 70 130
Manganese(Mn) 5.66 5.66 mg/L 1 5 104 70 130
Strontium(Sr) 5.05 5.05 mg/L 1 5 99.4 70 130
Zinc(Zn) 5.27 5.27 mg/L 1 5 105 70 130
MSD #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL RPD Qualifier
Aluminum(AI) 5.32 5.32 mg/L 1 5 106 70 130 1.86
Barium(Ba) 5.3 5.3 mg/L 1 5 105 70 130 0.84
Boron(B) 5.22 5.22 mg/L 1 5 104 70 130 0.868
Iron(Fe) 6.22 6.22 mg/L 1 5 100 70 130 1.53
Manganese(Mn) 5.73 5.73 mg/L 1 5 105 70 130 1.2
Strontium(Sr) 5.1 5.1 mg/L 1 5 100 70 130 0.981
Zinc(Zn) 5.33 5.33 mg/L 1 5 106 70 130 1.15

Ce,Lificate of Laborator Anal s6 Revised Report
y y Page 20 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#A 7110036
Level II QC Summary
Q17110405 ICP Undigested UNDIGESTED METALS BY ICP
Blank #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Calcium (Ca) 0.000963 0.000963 mg/L 1 0.01 <1/2 RDL
Magnesium(Mg) -0.000019 -0.000019 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Potassium(K) -0.00985 -0.00985 mg/L 1 0.1 <1/2 RDL
Sodium (Na) 0.00186 0.00186 mg/L 1 0.05 <1/2 RDL
LCS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Calcium(Ca) 1.92 1.92 mg/L 1 2 96 85 115
Magnesium(Mg) 1.88 1.88 mg/L 1 2 93.8 85 115
Potassium(K) 3.77 3.77 mg/L 1 4 94.3 85 115
Sodium (Na) 8 8 mg/L 1 8.1 98.7 85 115
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Calcium(Ca) 12 12 mg/L 1 5 92.1 70 130
Magnesium(Mg) 8.81 8.81 mg/L 1 5 127 70 130
Potassium(K) 6.53 6.53 mg/L 1 5 101 70 130
Sodium (Na) 8.66 8.66 mg/L 1 5 88.6 70 130
MSD #1 . Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL RPD Qualifier
Calcium (Ca) 12.2 12.2 mg/L 1 5 96.3 70 130 4.44
Magnesium(Mg) 8.98 8.98 mg/L 1 5 130 70 130 2.56
Potassium(K) 6.62 6.62 mg/L 1 5 103 70 130 1.85
Sodium (Na) 8.81 8.81 mg/L 1 5 91.5 70 130 3.26

Revised Report
Certificate of Laboratory Analysis Page21 of47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Level II QC Summary
Q17110173 ICP_TRM TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP
Blank #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Aluminum(AI) 0.00108 0.00108 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Barium(Ba) 0.000191 0.000191 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Boron(B) 0.000766 0.000766 mg/L 1 0.05 <1/2 RDL
Iron(Fe) 0.00151 0.00151 mg/L 1 0.01 <1/2 RDL
Manganese(Mn) 0.000114 0.000114 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Strontium (Sr) 0.000079 0.000079 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
Zinc(Zn) 0.00109 0.00109 mg/L 1 0.005 <1/2 RDL
LCS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Soilce %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Aluminum (AI) 4.88 4.88 mg/L 1 5 97.6 85 115
Barium(Ba) 4.69 4.69 mg/L 1 5 93.7 85 115
Boron(B) 4.8 4.8 mg/L 1 5 95.9 85 115
Iron(Fe) 4.68 4.68 mg/L 1 5 93.6 85 115
Manganese(Mn) 4.7 4.7 mg/L 1 5 94 85 115
Strontium(Sr) 4.73 4.73 mg/L 1 5 94.6 85 115
Zinc(Zn) 4.87 4.87 mg/L 1 5 97.5 85 115
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Aluminum (AI) 4.79 4.79 mg/L 1 5 95.4 70 130
Barium(Ba) 4.95 4.95 mg/L 1 5 98.1 70 130
Boron(B) 4.66 4.66 mg/L 1 5 93.1 70 130
Iron(Fe) 5.87 5.87 mg/L 1 5 93.5 70 130
Manganese(Mn) 5.16 5.16 mg/L 1 5 95.1 70 130
Strontium(Sr) 4.94 4.94 mg/L 1 5 97.3 70 130
Zinc(Zn) 4.77 4.77 mg/L 1 5 95.2 70 130
MSD #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037951
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL RPD Qualifier
Aluminum(AI) 5.04 5.04 mg/L 1 5 100 70 130 5.09
Barium(Ba) 4.79 4.79 mg/L 1 5 95 70 130 3.27
Boron(B) 4.74 4.74 mg/L 1 5 94.6 70 130 1.6
Iron(Fe) 5.94 5.94 mg/L 1 5 94.9 70 130 1.46
Manganese(Mn) 5.21 5.21 mg/L 1 5 96.1 70 130 1.09
Strontium(Sr) 4.84 4.84 mg/L 1 5 95.5 70 130 1.89
Zinc(Zn) 5.05 5.05 mg/L 1 5 101 70 130 5.67

Cb1 Ldicate of LaboratoryAnal sib Revised Report
y Page 22 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Level II QC Summary
Q17110175 IMS_DIS_TRM TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
Blank #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 0.023 0.023 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Arsenic(As) 0.009 0.009 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Beryllium(Be) 0 0 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Cadmium (Cd)Low Level 0.001 0.001 ug/L 1 0.1 <1/2 RDL
Chromium(Cr) 0.159 0.159 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Cobalt(Co) 0.003 0.003 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Copper(Cu) -0.079 -0.079 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Lead(Pb)Low Level 0.002 0.002 ug/L 1 0.2 <1/2 RDL
Molybdenum(Mo) 0.015 0.015 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Nickel(Ni) 0.016 0.016 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Selenium(Se) 0.065 0.065 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Silver(Ag)Low Level 0 0 ug/L 1 0.3 <1/2 RDL
Thallium(TI)Low Level 0.004 0.004 ug/L 1 0.2 <1/2 RDL
Vanadium(V)Low Level 0.005 0.005 ug/L 1 0.3 <1/2 RDL
LCS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 49.5 49.5 ug/L 1 50 99.1 85 115
Arsenic(As) 49.4 49.4' ug/L 1 50 98.9 85 115
Beryllium(Be) 46.6 46.6 ug/L 1 50 93.2 85 115
Cadmium (Cd)Low Level 48.9 48.9 ug/L 1 50 97.8 85 115
Chromium(Cr) 49.9 49.9 ug/L 1 50 99.9 85 115
Cobalt(Co) 46 46 ug/L 1 50 92.1 85 115
Copper(Cu) 49.1 49.1 ug/L 1 50 98.2 85 115
Lead(Pb)Low Level 48.3 48.3 ug/L 1 50 96.6 85 115
Molybdenum(Mo) 49.7 49.7 ug/L 1 50 99.3 85 115
Nickel(Ni) 49.4 49.4 ug/L 1 50 98.7 85 115
Selenium (Se) 47.4 47.4 ug/L 1 50 94.8 85 115
Silver(Ag)Low Level 49.5 ug/L 1 50 98.9 85 115
Thallium(TI)Low Level 44.5 44.5 ug/L 1 50 89 85 115
Vanadium(V)Low Level 49 ug/L 1 50 98.1 85 115
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037953
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 50.3 50.3 ug/L 1 50 101
Arsenic(As) 50.8 50.8 ug/L 1 50 101
Beryllium(Be) 48.5 48.5 ug/L 1 50 96.6
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level 49.7 49.7 ug/L 1 50 99.3
Chromium (Cr) 50.7 50.7 ug/L 1 50 101
Cobalt(Co) 48 48 ug/L 1 50 93.4

Certificate of LaboratoryAnal sil5 Revised Report
y Page 23 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Level II QC Summary
Q17110175 IMS_DIS_TRM TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS(DISSOLVED)
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037953
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Copper(Cu) 49.9 49.9 ug/L 1 50 99.7
Lead(Pb)Low Level 49 49 ug/L 1 50 98
Molybdenum(Mo) 50.8 50.8 ug/L 1 50 102
Nickel(Ni) 49.8 49.8 ug/L 1 50 99.2
Selenium(Se) 49.3 49.3 ug/L 1 50 97.4
Silver(Ag)Low Level 50.2 ug/L 1 50 100
Thallium(TI)Low Level 44.6 44.6 ug/L 1 50 89
Vanadium(V)Low Level 50.4 ug/L 1 50 101
MSD #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037953
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Soike %Recovery LCL UCL RPD Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 49.8 49.8 ug/L 1 50 99.6 0.969
Arsenic(As) 49.7 49.7 ug/L 1 50 99.1 2.13
Beryllium(Be) 50.1 50.1 ug/L 1 50 99.9 3.34
Cadmium (Cd)Low Level 48.5 48.5 ug/L 1 50 97 2.38
Chromium (Cr) 50.6 50.6 ug/L 1 50 101 0.236
Cobalt(Co) 47.3 47.3 ug/L 1 50 92 1.56
Copper(Cu) 48.8 48.8 ug/L 1 50 97.6 2.14
Lead(Pb)Low Level 48.2 48.2 ug/L 1 50 96.4 1.64
Molybdenum(Mo) 50.2 50.2 ug/L 1 50 100 1.16
Nickel(Ni) 49.1 49.1 ug/L 1 50 97.7 1.52
Selenium (Se) 48.1 48.1 ug/L 1 50 95 2.48
Silver(Ag)Low Level 49.2 ug/L 1 50 98.4 2.01
Thallium(TI)Low Level 43.9 43.9 ug/L 1 50 87.7 1.51
Vanadium(V)Low Level 50.1 ug/L 1 50 100 0.531

1. Revised Report
Certificate Of Laboratory Analy$1�- Page 24 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#A 7110036 ,
Level II QC Summary
Q171101.81 IMS_TRM TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
Blank.#1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil RDL Relative Concentration Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 0.014 0.014 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Arsenic(As) 0.007 0.007 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Beryllium(Be) 0 0 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Cadmium (Cd)Low Level 0.001 0.001 ug/L 1 0.1 <1/2 RDL
Chromium (Cr) 0.043 0.043 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Cobalt(Co) 0.002 0.002 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Copper(Cu) -0.08 -0.08 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Lead(Pb) Low Level 0 0 ug/L 1 0.2. <1/2 RDL
Molybdenum(Mo) 0.003 0.003 ug/L' 1 1 <1/2 RDL .
Nickel(Ni) 0.024 0.024 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Selenium(Se) 0.054 0.054 ug/L 1 1 <1/2 RDL
Silver(Ag)Low Level 0.006 0.006 ug/L 1 0.3 <1/2 RDL
Thallium(TI)Low Level -0.001 -0.001 ug/L 1 0.2 <1/2 RDL
Vanadium(V)Low Level 0.008 0.008 ug/L 1 0.3 <1/2 RDL
LCS #1
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 47.2 47.2 ug/L 1 50 94.3 85 115
Arsenic(As) 47.2 47.2 ug/L 1 50 94.5 85 115
Beryllium(Be) 48.8 48.8 ug/L 1 50 97.5 85 115
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level 47.2 ug/L 1 50 94.5 85 115
Chromium(Cr) 47.6 47.6 ug/L 1 50 95.2 85 115
Cobalt(Co) 44.4 44.4 ug/L 1 50 88.8 85 115
Copper(Cu) 47.1 47.1 ug/L 1 50 94.1 85 115
Lead(Pb) Low Level 46.4. 46.4 ug/L 1 50 92.8 85 115
Molybdenum(Mo) 47.6 47.6 ug/L 1 50 95.2 85 115
Nickel(Ni) 47.7 47.7 ug/L 1 50 95.3 85 115
Selenium(Se) 46.3 46.3 ug/L 1 50 92.6 85 115
Silver(Ag)Low Level 47,7 ug/L 1 50 95.4 85 115
Thallium(TI)Low Level 42.7 42.7 ug/L 1 50 85.5 85 115
Vanadium(V)Low Level 47.4 47.4 ug/L 1 50 94.9 85 115
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037952
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 48.5 48.5 ug/L 1 50 96.8 70 130
Arsenic(As) 48.9 48.9 ug/L 1 50 97.6 70 130
Beryllium(Be) 51.7 51.7 ug/L 1 50 103 70 130
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level 47.9 ug/L 1 50 95.7 70 130
Chromium(Cr) 49 49 ug/L 1 50 97.8 70 130
Cobalt(Co) 45.7 45.7 ug/L 1 50 90.1 70 130

Certificate of LaboratoryAnalysis Revised Report
Y Page 25 of 47
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order#J17110036
Level II QC Summary
Q17110181 IMS_TRM TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS BY ICP-MS
MS #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037952
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LCL UCL Qualifier
Copper(Cu) 48.6 48.6 ug/L 1 50 96.8 70 130
Lead(Pb)Low Level 47.5 47.5 ug/L 1 50 95 70 130
Molybdenum(Mo) 49.1 49.1 ug/L 1 50 98.2 70 130
Nickel(Ni) 48.5 48.5 ug/L 1 50 95.9 70 130
Selenium(Se) 47 47 ug/L 1 50 93.4 70 130
Silver(Ag)Low Level 48.3 ug/L 1 50 96.6 70 130
Thallium(TI)Low Level 42.9 42.9 ug/L 1 50 85.8 70 130
Vanadium(V)Low Level 49.2 49.2 ug/L 1 50 97.8 70 130
MSD #1 Parent Sample: J17110036 -- 2017037952
Parameter Measured Final Units: Dil Spike %Recovery LC L UCL RPD Qualifier
Antimony(Sb) 48.9 48.9 ug/L 1 50 97.7 70 130 0.886
Arsenic(As) 48.3 48.3 ug/L 1 50 96.4 70 130 1.21
Beryllium(Be) 50.7 50.7 ug/L 1 50 101 70 130 1.96
Cadmium(Cd)Low Level 48.1 ug/L 1 50 96.1 70 130 0.421
Chromium(Cr) 49.2 49.2 ug/L 1 50 98.3 70 130 0.475
Cobalt(Co) 46 46 ug/L 1 50 90.7 70 130 0.699
Copper(Cu) 48.7 48.7 ug/L 1 50 97 70 130 0.184
Lead(Pb)Low Level 47.2 47.2 ug/L 1 50 94.3 70 130 0.706
Molybdenum(Mo) 49.2 49.2 ug/L 1 50 98.4 70 130 0.165
Nickel(Ni) 48.9 48.9 ug/L 1 50 96.7 70 130 0.766
Selenium(Se) 46.2 46.2 ug/L 1 50 91.8 70 130 1.72
Silver(Ag)Low Level 48.8 ug/L 1 50 97.6 70 130 0.98
Thallium(TI)Low Level 43.2 43.2 ug/L 1 50 86.4 70 130 0.674
Vanadium(V)Low Level 49:6 49.6 ug/L 1 50 98.7 70 130 0.875

i P e Ana
y}jcal S rvices,LLC
evlse "hLepor�
g Q. ® l9§8il2gc8f�e. Suite 100
aCemalytieal �J Huntersville,NC 28078
wwripacefabscom [phone]
November 06, 2017
Program Manager
Duke Energy
13339 Hagers Ferry Road
Bldg. 7405 MG30A2
Huntersville, NC 28078
RE: Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Dear Program Manager:
Enclosed are the analytical results for sample(s) received by the laboratory on November 02, 2017.
The results relate only to the samples included in this report. Results reported herein conform to the
most current, applicable TNI/NELAC standards and the laboratory's Quality Assurance Manual,
where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the body of the report.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Bonnie Vang for
Kevin Herring
[e-mail]
1(704)875-9092
HORIZON Database Administrator
Enclosures
cc: Program Manager,Duke Energy
#�{tiGC " vz
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 1 of 20
Cr
I

P evi MyNca rN'ces,Lt_c
/ 0,4�If�� re. Suite 100
/� y
,aC''A(1al1a� Huntersville,NC 28078
w}vwpecelebs:raorri [phone]
CERTIFICATIONS
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Asheville Certification IDs
2225 Riverside Drive,Asheville,NC 28804 North Carolina Wastewater Certification#:40
Florida/NELAP Certification M E87648 South Carolina Certification#:99030001
Massachusetts Certification#:M-NC030 Virginia/VELAP Certification M 460222
North Carolina Drinking Water Certification M 37712
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 2 of 20

r _ a�v�1
P evlsedK;Repopr,f,rvices,LLC
Suite 100
eac�Ar�alytical_ y Huntersville,NC 28078
tvwiv pacelabskorn
[phone]
SAMPLE SUMMARY
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Lab.ID Sample ID Matrix Date Collected Date Received
92361711001 2017037951 Water 11/01/17 09:10 11/02/17 13:15
92361711002 2017037952 Water 11/01/1710:50 11/02/1713:15
92361711003 2017037953 Water 11/01/1714:40 11/02/1713:15
92361711004 2017037954 Water 11/01/1712:42 11/02/1713:15
92361711005 2017037955 Water 11/0111712:10 11/02/1713:15
92361711006 2017037957 Water 11/01/1713:25 11/02/1713:15
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 3 of 20

P e Ana cal S
evise eporr
rvices,LLC
;®
acem real W.-Suite 100
„ , Huntersville,NC 28078
wwwpecelabeinm [phone]
SAMPLE ANALYTE COUNT
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Analytes
Lab ID Sample ID Method Analysts Reported Laboratory
92361711001 2017037951 EPA 180.1 KDF1 1 PASI-A
SM 2320B KDF1 3 PASI-A
92361711002 2017037952 EPA 180.1 KDF1 1 PASI-A
SM 2320B KDF1 3 PASI-A
92361711003 2017037953 EPA 180.1 KDF1 1 PASI-A
SM 2320B KDF1 3 PASI-A
92361711004 2017037954 EPA 180.1 KDF1 1 PASI-A
SM 2320B KDF1 3 PASI-A
92361711005 2017037955 EPA 180.1 KDF1 1 PASI-A
SM 2320B KDF1 3 PASI-A
92361711006 2017037957 EPA 180.1 KDF1 1 PASI-A
SM 2320B KDF1 3 PASI-A
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 4 of 20

✓ i P e Ana cal S rvices,LLC
evlsec� epor� Suite Loo
t ,aV4/ Ilc?llG'+�1., Huntersville,NC 28078
wwwp2celebs carri;
[phone]
SUMMARY OF DETECTION
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID
Method Parameters Result Units Report Limit Analyzed Qualifiers
92361711001 2017037951
EPA 180.1 Turbidity 1.6 NTU 1.0 11/03/17 08:59
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 28.8 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 15:54
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 28.8 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 15:54
92361711002 2017037952
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 23.4 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 16:06
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 23.4 mg/L 5.0 11/03/1,7 16:06
92361711003 20.17037953
EPA 180.1 Turbidity 6.4 NTU 1.0 11/03/17 08:59
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 29.3 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 16:17
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 29.3 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 16:17
92361711004 2017037954
EPA 180.1 Turbidity 10.1 NTU 1.0 11/03/17 08:59
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 86.5 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 16:28
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 86.5 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 16:28
92361711005 2017037955
• EPA 180.1 Turbidity 8.8 NTU 1.0 11/03/17 08:59
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 14.7 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 16:41
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 14.7 mg/L 5.0 11/03/17 16:41
92361711006 2017037957
EPA 180.1 Turbidity 252 NTU 1.0 11/03/17 08:59
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 523 mg/L 5.0 11/05/17 16:10
SM 2320B Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 523 mg/L 5.0 11/05/17 16:10
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 5 of 20

P ewse�yleporrrvices,LLc
e. Suite 100
r3G''A11c3� ICa� y Huntersville,NC 28078
wwwp8celabs_com [phone]
PROJECT NARRATIVE
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Method: EPA 180.1
Description: 180.1 Turbidity
Client: Duke Energy
Date: November 06,2017
General Information:
6 samples were analyzed for EPA 180.1. All samples were received in acceptable condition with any exceptions noted below or on the
chain-of custody and/or the sample condition upon receipt form(SCUR)attached at the end of this report.
Hold Time:
The samples were analyzed within the method required hold times with any exceptions noted below.
Method Blank:
All analytes were below the report limit in the method blank,where applicable,with any exceptions noted below.
Laboratory Control Spike:
All laboratory control spike compounds were within QC limits with any exceptions noted below.
Matrix Spikes:
All percent recoveries and relative percent differences(RPDs)were within acceptance criteria with any exceptions noted below.
Duplicate Sample:
All duplicate sample results were within method acceptance criteria with any exceptions noted below.
Additional Comments:
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 6 of 20

PK8VI32tlytepOrrvices,LLC
0§60295MAYe. Suite 100
.aceAnalyfrcaI
Huntersville,NC 28078
[phone]
cvirapacela6$:ecagr
PROJECT NARRATIVE
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Method: SM 2320B
Description: 2320B Alkalinity
Client: Duke Energy
Date: November 06,2017
General Information:
6 samples were analyzed for SM 23206. All samples were received in acceptable condition with any exceptions noted below or on the
chain-of custody and/or the sample condition upon receipt form(SCUR)attached at the end of this report.
Hold Time:
The samples were analyzed within the method required hold times with any exceptions noted below.
Method Blank:
All analytes were below the report limit in the method blank,where applicable,with any exceptions noted below.
Laboratory Control Spike:
All laboratory control spike compounds were within QC limits with any exceptions noted below.
Matrix Spikes:
All percent recoveries and relative percent differences(RPDs)were within acceptance criteria with any exceptions noted below.
Additional Comments:
This data package has been reviewed for quality and completeness and is approved for release.
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 7 of 20

P`Kevisetl"I�epor[rvices,PLC
� 100
CeAnN�ical Hun c e. Suite. tersville,NC 28078078
wrrn pacetabs com [phone]
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Sample: 2017037951 Lab ID: 92361711001 Collected: 11/01/17 09:10 Received: 11/02/17 13:15 Matrix:Water
Parameters Results Units Report Limit DF Prepared Analyzed CAS No. Qual
180.1 Turbidity Analytical Method:EPA 180.1
Turbidity 1.6 NTU 1.0 1 11/03/17 08:59
2320E Alkalinity Analytical Method:SM 2320B
Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 28.8 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 15:54
Alkalinity,Carbonate(CaCO3) ND mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 15:54
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 28.8 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 15:54
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date:11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 8 of 20

Pevl edF epor�""ces,Lt c
09604960Ya. Suite 100
Huntersville,NC 28078
wwwWelebscdrir (704)875 sos2
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Sampler 2017037952 Lab ID: 92361711002 Collected: 11/01/17 10:50 Received: 11/02/17 13:15 Matrix:Water
Parameters Results Units Report Limit DF Prepared Analyzed CAS No. Qual
180.1 Turbidity Analytical Method:EPA 180.1
Turbidity ND NTU 1.0 1 11/03/17 08:59
2320B Alkalinity Analytical Method:SM 2320B
Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 23.4 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:06
Alkalinity,Carbonate(CaCO3) ND mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:06
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 23.4 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:06
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date: 11/06/2017 03:58 PM without-the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 9 of 20

P e An cal S rvices,LLC
a
® evisec�Y'eporie
}. aceA>natytical� ����If��c���re. Suite 100
Huntersvill.,NC 28078
wMi. acelabscom [phone]
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Project: J 17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Sample: 2017037953 Lab ID: 92361711003 Collected: 11/01/17 14:40 Received: 11/02/17 13:15 Matrix:Water
Parameters Results Units Report Limit DF Prepared Analyzed CAS No. Qua[
180.1 Turbidity Analytical Method:EPA 180.1
Turbidity 6.4 NTU 1.0 1 11/03/17 08:59
2320B Alkalinity Analytical Method:SM 2320B
Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 29.3 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:17
Alkalinity,Carbonate(CaCO3) ND mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:17
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 29.3 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:17
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date:11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 10 of 20

P e Ana cal S rvices,LLC
® evlse epor� Suite Lao
GCGAIIaIIVCI Huntersvdle,NC 28078
wyvwpacelsbscbrii, [phone]
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Sample: 2017037954 Lab ID: 92361711004 Collected: 11/01/17 12:42 Received: 11/02/17 13:15 Matrix:Water
Parameters Results Units Report Limit DF Prepared Analyzed CAS No. Qual
180.1 Turbidity Analytical Method:EPA 180.1
Turbidity 10.1 NTU 1.0 1 11/03/17 08:59
2320E Alkalinity Analytical Method:SM 2320B
Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 86.5 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:28
Alkalinity,Carbonate(CaCO3) ND mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:28
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 86.5 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:28
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date: 11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 11 of 20

Il aa�� aat�vy�� e
PKEVI3 MyNca On rv'ces,LLC
aceAnJ. ida' e. Suite 100
Huntersville,NC 28078
wwwp8ila6$_corn [phone]
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Sample: 2017037955 Lab ID: 92361711005 Collected: 11/01/17 12:10 Received: 11/02/17 13:15 Matrix:Water
Parameters Results Units Report Limit DF Prepared Analyzed CAS No. Qual
180.1 Turbidity Analytical Method:EPA 180.1
Turbidity 8.8 NTU 1.0 1 11/03/17 08:59
2320E Alkalinity Analytical Method:SM 2320B
Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 14.7 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:41
Alkalinity,Carbonate(CaCO3) ND mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:41
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 14.7 mg/L 5.0 1 11/03/17 16:41
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date:11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 12 of 20

P e Ana cal S rvices,LLC
® evised epor�e. Suite 100
.aceA�aly�icaI' ���� ���
Huntersville,NC 28078
www.b&6 rebs.coiii
[phone]
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Sample: 2017037957 Lab ID: 92361711006 Collected: 11/01/17 13:25 Received: 11/02/17 13:15 Matrix: Water
Parameters Results Units Report Limit DF Prepared Analyzed CAS No. Qual
180.1 Turbidity Analytical Method:EPA 180.1
Turbidity 252 NTU 1.0 1 11/03/17 08:59
2320B Alkalinity Analytical Method:SM 2320B
Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) 523 mg/L 5.0 1 11/05/17 16:10
Alkalinity,Carbonate(CaCO3) ND mg/L 5.0 1 11/05/17 16:10
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 523 mg/L 5.0 1 11/05/17 16:10
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date:11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 13 of 20

a ® P e Anadylcal S
eviseepor rvices,LLC
r e. Suite 100���� eceAnalytica Huntersville,
NC 28078
vrwwpecele6sdom [phone]
QUALITY CONTROL DATA
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
QC Batch: 385123 Analysis Method: EPA 180.1
QC Batch Method: EPA 180.1 Analysis Description: 180.1 Turbidity
Associated Lab Samples: 92361711001,92361711002,92361711003,92361711004,92361711005,92361711006
METHOD BLANK: 2135286 Matrix: Water
Associated Lab Samples: 92361711001,92361711002,92361711003,92361711004,92361711005,92361711006
Blank Reporting
Parameter Units Result Limit Analyzed Qualifiers
Turbidity NTU ND 1.0 11/03/17 08:59
LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE: 2135287
Spike LCS LCS %Rec
Parameter Units Conc. Result %Rec Limits Qualifiers
Turbidity NTU 10 10.0 100 90-110
SAMPLE DUPLICATE: 2135288
92361711001 Dup Max
Parameter Units Result Result RPD RPD Qualifiers
Turbidity NTU 1.6 1.6 1 10
Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the"Units"column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result.
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date:11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 14 of 20

Pff�Ce Ana y}�cal Services,LLC
0 _ Kevise�"I-ZepoR Suite 100
ace.Aalytical � �� e��
Huntersville,NC 28078
wwiup8cslabscorir [phone]
QUALITY CONTROL DATA
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
QC Batch: 385113 Analysis Method: SM 2320B
QC Batch Method: SM 2320B Analysis Description: 2320B Alkalinity
Associated Lab Samples: 92361711001,92361711002,92361711003,92361711004,92361711005,92361711006
METHOD BLANK: 2135247 Matrix: Water
Associated Lab Samples: 92361711001,92361711002,92361711003,92361711004,92361711005,92361711006
Blank Reporting
Parameter Units Result Limit Analyzed Qualifiers
Alkalinity,Carbonate(CaCO3) mg/L ND 5.0 11/03/17 11:13
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 mg/L ND 5.0 11/03/17 11:13
Alkalinity,Bicarbonate(CaCO3) mg/L ND 5.0 11/03/17 11:13
LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE: 2135248
Spike LCS LCS %Rec
Parameter Units Cone. Result %Rec Limits Qualifiers
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 mg/L 50 47.7 95 80-120
MATRIX SPIKE&MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE: 2135249 2135250
MS MSD
92361521001 Spike Spike MS MSD MS MSD %Rec Max
Parameter Units Result Cone. Cone. Result Result %Rec %Rec Limits RPD RPD Qual
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 mg/L 65.8 50 50 114 115 95 99 80-120 2 25
MATRIX SPIKE&MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE: 2135251 2135252
MS MSD
92361521011 Spike Spike MS MSD MS MSD %Rec Max
Parameter Units Result Cone. Cone. Result Result %Rec %Rec Limits RPD RPD Qual
Alkalinity,Total as CaCO3 mg/L 29.4 50 50 76.5 76.6 94 94 80-120 0 25
Results presented on this page are in the units Indicated by the"Units"column except where an alternate unit Is presented to the right of the result.
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date: 11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 15 of 20

P e Ana cal S
evise Mcal P�rvices,LLC
®
aa�+QQ nn� /I /�++- 0§41I�ITY44 e. Suit.100
GdVCr�lll �l.�' �J Huntersville,NC 28078
w�w�pacela6s.corri [phone]
QUALIFIERS
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
DEFINITIONS
DF-Dilution Factor,if reported,represents the factor applied to the reported data due to dilution of the sample aliquot.
ND-Not Detected at or above adjusted reporting limit.
TNTC-Too Numerous To Count
J-Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit.
MDL-Adjusted Method Detection Limit.
PQL-Practical Quantitation Limit.
RL-Reporting Limit.
S-Surrogate
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine decomposes to and cannot be separated from Azobenzene using Method 8270.The result for each analyte is
a combined concentration.
Consistent with EPA guidelines,unrounded data are displayed and have been used to calculate%recovery and RPD values.
LCS(D)-Laboratory Control Sample(Duplicate)
MS(D)-Matrix Spike(Duplicate)
DUP-Sample Duplicate
RPD-Relative Percent Difference
NC-Not Calculable.
SG-Silica Gel-Clean-Up
U-Indicates the compound was analyzed for,but not detected.
Acid preservation may not be appropriate for 2 Chloroethylvinyl ether.
A separate vial preserved to a pH of 4-5 is recommended in SW846 Chapter 4 for the analysis of Acrolein and Acrylonitrile by EPA
Method 8260.
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine decomposes and cannot be separated from Diphenylamine using Method 8270. The result reported for
each analyte is a combined concentration.
Pace Analytical is TN accredited.Contact your Pace PM for the current list of accredited analytes.
TNI-The NELAC Institute.
LABORATORIES
PASI-A Pace Analytical Services-Asheville
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date:11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 16 of 20

Pewsetl'Kepor�rvices,LLC
/+ / ���� g�� e. Suite 100
�CNI�IIVI Huntersville,NC 28078
ww4vpacala6s coin [phone]
QUALITY CONTROL DATA CROSS REFERENCE TABLE
Project: J17110036
Pace Project No.: 92361711
Analytical
Lab ID Sample ID QC Batch Method QC Batch Analytical Method Batch
92361711001 2017037951 EPA180.1 385123
92361711002 2017037952 EPA180.1 385123
92361711003 2017037953 EPA180.1 385123
92361711004 2017037954 EPA 180.1 385123
92361711005 2017037955 EPA180.1 385123
92361711006 2017037967 EPA180.1 385123
92361711001 2017037951 SM 2320B 385113
92361711002 2017037952 SM 2320B 385113
92361711003 2017037953 SM 2320B 385113
92361711004 2017037954 SM 2320B 385113
92361711005 2017037955 SM 2320B 385113
92361711006 2017037957 SM 2320B 385113
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,
Date: 11/06/2017 03:58 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services,LLC. Page 17 of 20

Revised Re ort
Document Name: Document Revised:August'PBD743 of 7
aCBAf]al l N Sample Condition Upon Recel t(SCUR) Pa e 1 of 2
Document No.: Issuing Authority:
F-CAR-CS-033-Rev.04 Pace Quality Office
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville❑ Eden[] Greenwood❑ Huntersville Raleigh❑ Mechanicsviilo[l
l0 �: 236171:.:1Upon Rr-ccipt
= °:.`.:_..,.:.
., ,
^^urJe WSPSaClierr
❑Commerclai Pace ❑Other:,__
Custody Seal Present? [-]Yes No Seals Intact? []Yes to
pate/Initials Person ExaminingCantentsar±L;_._
Packing Materiel: DBubble Wrap ❑Bubble Bags 2None ❑ Other Biological Tissue,,A
Thermometer I wet ❑Fuue ❑None ❑yes '❑No
IR Gun 10: C i Type 1117
Correction Factor: Cooler Temp Corrected('Cl: Temp should be above freezing to 6'C
❑Samples out of temp criteria.Samples on Ice,cooling process
has begun
USOA Regulated Scil N/A,water sample) ��
Did samples odlil in a quarantine zone within the United States:CA,NY,or SC(check maps)? Did samples originate from a foreign source(Intern natty,
Yes a Including Hawaii and Puarto Rico)?[]Yes No
Comments/Oiscre ancy:
Chain of Custody Present? rlNo N A 1.
Samples Arrived within Hold Time? R yes ONO N A 2.
Short Hold Time Analysis 02 hr.)? Elves Eirim 3.
Rush Turn Around Time Requested? OX 'No /A 4.
Sufficient Volume? v f' QNo N/A S.
Correct Containers Used? efy, ❑WA 6.
-Pace Containers Used? yes No EIWA
Containers Intact? RK, QNo N/ 7.
Dissolved analysis:Samples Field Filtered? Y No /A 9.
Sample Labels Match COC? yes ONu ❑N/A 9.
-includes Date/Time/ID/Analysis Matrix:
Head space In VOA Vials(;,S-6mm)? Elves ❑ N/A W.
Trip Blank Present? ❑vea EING rNJA
11.
TripBlank Custody Seals Present? Yes No
CLIENT NOTIFICATION/RESOLUTION Field Data Required? []Yes ❑No
Person Contacted: Date/Time:
Comments/Sample Discrepancy:
Lot in of spot containers:
Project Manager SCURF Review: Date:
Project Manager SRF Review: Date:
Note: whenever there is a discrepancy affecting North Carolina compliance samples,a copy of this form will be sent to the North Carolina DEHNR Certification Office(Le.
Out of hold,incorrect preservative,out of temp,Incorrect containers)
Page 18 of 20

_ Revised Re ort
Document Name: Document devised:August 4,PJUQ 44 o 47
I,,'
Bf�f1a l Sam Is Condition u on Rent t(SCUR Page 2 of 2
Document No.: --_-tssuingAuthority- -
r F+CAR-MO33-Rov.04
*Check mark top half of hox If pH and/or dechlorination Project#
Is verified and within the acceptance range for
MU..
preservation samples. CLIq�Ta -92-Derko Ever`
"Bottom half of box is to list numbor of bottles
p N !a A Pi V V 01 1
CL
g _ - § 4 z
44 LA E i Z r. � 6 j
x
d 6
m 4 e E E e < Q a I<. , A d J 6 6 d d C .J i > J J J J J aig
�
a
11 1 N\
x
3 � '
4
l
S
6
7
8
9
\\N\ N I I I N\
!0
I N
�s I �S\NN- I N
!1
12
pH Adjustment log for Preserved Samples
smote to Type of preservative pH upon receipt Date preservation adjusted Time preservation Amount of preservative trot I
adjusted added
Page 19 of 20

o
/) N
_ CHAIR!OF CUSTODY RECORD AND ANALYSIS REQUEST FORM __ 1. 0
--•-- ---------• ------_----- - -- i ------------ __- _-----------iiabwe - onl--
ke Energy A►slytresi Laocratory N
i Duke Energy ! Page_i_af�1_
en.Ncnaeuamraa feruu■gr■st ! iOrderf. Jry _kbc:, GUM=OMw�'.Gr ac' I 06TRIBUTiON rn
M Laboratory w�wa.e.F�eya■ r i r:..v. .:. [}CT:-' oA,er..or NCB se_
r n ! co
ChaM.cr Custody a Kumnwnr■•PLC. Mrs I l oggotl Bli-/� ous 4 Tlme I GRIGINAL to LAB,COPY to CLIENT
OW
C.w Sam feLo Mw it ! i.._ .. .. .�,E. .... _ >MP FIMIR M
0 o F 9 --_-_ ___._._._._-179-0-_-_.__.____.__. - '�� DiWMq s1 rr UST f
------•---•------._. ttsT
IX L Freled Name: AB GIN Assess ent Water 2017 vf's as •, _;. aurkmsws� �
v Wask
�+ rn tl61—le AVL AIRPORT STRUCTURAL FILL-
Fea a AO•�'ll;'���s�0__-,•._ Fm■nd
iu d r AREA 1 SURFACE WATER(DE O$PUT) 980'07S8o32 Itration(0-45 um) Unllliered
awn..s tlrtlt: P e■: Rem.C■ _Tn Mlam Syr,
Pre"marllve me Ice Ice ;Vi i7`; rm ftw w
s 7w:' IINo9
a a awrn�
ws
�wrlewsx ARGfNA■■■�■m■mw�lw iNKia: wncc+.: Contalner Volume(mr.) 1000 40MI 300 in Wo WD 4L so :50 Soo sw
M009A3
vwt■ r seer.: ASHEVILLS CantaMerType P" glaaa Per PET PET Par Hope Per FNPe HOPE rtoPe
San pie Description or 10 Custamermealtpkre spappropreate ' jr mC.
l101FdlalrPdraraari. d� Q •• C S rL
CPS Location Colkcicn hiexmailm a vpp A
Date Time a Signature n t� F r t3 1-Z �'.'t�> /ivy ►- EE
.+c-••� �_ `� rf� �+ 11 ( p U x 1 _ 71 W 1 4 (y
�V Y J lov : I '•:i: 1 .� 1
14
i I -
7755.. SW -A-i PAD I :► i I 4
r ^sue Su411 a X t
I r o
JEWs.wit Big.
i o
0
�� D
i f
i t 0
o
0
1 I 0
i r
0
"spa
amer to sla I dale
Pdir+epliseed ote Accepted 08t■liime m
a Requasted Turnaround Total 1-14
Z v
qu D lme Accepted °
RCdfr� hod By Dale mme Aec■pt CL
m
J1 Z-l7 SIC
� E '�'s
Be01
Daiamme SEA Lock 0 9 Dawrims g •40 Hr
I r E$
m
E .M�
`Atltl.Cost Wit Apply
PLEASE SEE ElL FROM HEATHER SMITH REGARDINO SPECIFIC METAL ANALYTES 9
U
rup.a...e�aQ�o w�nivJa.rnr MrpN w.r,wemrm•

REGCk€ At t}AF AI.YSl3 EQUEST FORM
».».
_ CHAIN Of CUST�UY - --1 Revised Report
r » ._ _»- GickaF »�iUiatyt3sfLaboratary itna �ati�barraixa�ttsaNrt -i 'itP361t:
._...,, ,• 46 of 4• � page_ 7
ARai cal Uborstoty , rtriY QISTRIEtr:Duke Energy uutc�acaaz�i�mna7�1 I10rder �`— � » �� �X sc— 3
'•� ORIGINAL to LAB,COPY to CQENT�
C"MofC 16. NuKwriife N rn I.LoppaA7r oato&Tl 7AMPt.E PRoomm !
Y
1 Santpia t.ag r1Dt}a3a?'ts !'. �.............._a,.• � �4mmM Water X _. NPM
Znt:
Nanw R9'G Y AsaetsrFsant911+alar 201, I NINE
as AVL AIRPORT STRUCTURAL FILL- etiaat5 363 Itntlon(OAS um) lJn4ittsred
AREA 1 SURFACE WATER DEQ SPLIT, k.ta„-
'Set
Soo 41'
°t�prq.aw: AE6WA+a�atfi�irtYlt�rMtiv '!D Rtd7mAs `.. , , p71t91�'CWttalnt!'T�L) r!T IHf 00 I PES PETS• `PE�. " PEt. N E PET A41,
BI[GOA3
w,y,,,dy atim,�, ASHEYIU E _ ,., TYPO
_r,. g HOPE tti� HnrE
�.
409
Sampli DesGriptlot or 10 GutL
st�mertairompl tc+ntF nA��Nriaa E
7t(a11.S�1Qala8� 9C. t C� '� Z C7 G p 2� �. q' R,.S. � m-� M .. i! •.,,£.
"' Ca{IaCNOif t(e4o tf a n .. Q ,sre 1 �..} 0,. ,. �
NOW ME--
. .,. ... a ._
_ u t y o
t
( 0
0 '
9
-
O= }
I 1 0.
i i
f — D 0
4
nrzaener ac wa as be cr tlatatitt7aq m
Raiinqulalsed y �, pa trna � � Actysta�S � • � � RagbeafUdTumaroand -Total
114
p a2a llecopta9 a g Pa nq, •� ' l! rf O
a ,, s
Ace 7 Da� •
batatrfota y
I Ralf istisd By 1 Y
8a m oa9fe'me 6aa Open EY $ , .48)ir -
BatetTEm�t:
,
m. - .,.. i
co,nrant■ �. 'Other
i O
PLEASE SEE EMAIL F3 OM HEATHER SMITWREGAROING SPECIFIC METAL ANALYTES Add.Cost Will Appty t
;. z.., ---------------

{
" Revised Report y
Page 47 of 47
,
pescript an af.Sdrfki Water Sampling
!
n, , 4
.A
5
� r
• SWl Ai Di charge#,rom p[ ed stirearn.beneath;C P structural �) Currently beFn x
sampled`,In April4hd Novo ber, ..
•° 5W2-Ai B kgeor nd same' In site for,SV i AI.C reently bef'"' sampled in April antl'
November `
• .-SW3 AV U riamad tributafV"atAsli Ole Airport�roperty boon ar�r} $
• ` SWMAL-Se `page�from st+a fnwater pond located at foe of`the est'C�Pceli :3
• SWS-AS DI charge from st rmwater pond located at toe of ea CCP`cell
•
r ..
,
SVU6 St nding iiVater in { etan located at to of east II " ° j d CCP
• SW7-A1 Se page at toe of ast CCP cell;
�, 8 •ap'aSW8 A1AI ernative backg ound surface water si a
Su ce Water Monitorin Analytes {
„
MOO,
� 1Net Chemistry
7,.Aluminum Chloride '
,Ahtimo,6 Sulfate , �,
Arsenic`° 1
� •;Sar�um Other Parameters
Bery"llittm
.
Boron il
-- � AlkaUnity �
Cadmium Hardness
rofriurrt`{totatj Turb�di
;,.Cobalt` '
Copped _ l=ield 'aramete"rs :1
;--Aron
Lead Temperature
'^ Nlagnoswm SpeC'fic Condltctlltlt
"Mangar►ese Ditto lved`0xygen m �
°.Merctu pH.
Molybdenum ORP�
` Nickel;
�►Potassium
SelerfmTI
� a �
Sher-`
�--;Sodium Y
9 S
Thallium
Vanadium E j

Area of Wetness Inspection and Sampling December 21,2017
Asheville Airport-Structural Fill Area 1 SynTerra
ATTACHMENT C
FIELD SAMPLING LOGS
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\02.ASHEVILLE PLANT\44.AOW Area 1\Dec.20 REV DRAFT Memo Structural
Fill-Area 1 AOW Inspection and Sampling Memo.docx

GROUNDWATER MONITORING DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING ,LOG
:�-
FIELD PERSONNEL,
e WEATHER: ❑ SUNNV OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROIO:
a
140 River Street,Suite Z20 MULTI METER'TYPE/SM: _ _ `'
GreenYllle,South Caialina29601 -/ _ a�(� .
[phone].[phone] Fax TUBI7IDY METER TYPE/Slt
www.synTerracorp.com .... . -.-,- -
-WELL D: PUMPlrUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FT) START PURGE TIME:
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE: IJILL END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: Iiri) END PURGE DATE: 1( ) " FINAL READING TIME: U`�U
WELL DEPTH: (FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (aaL)
DEPTH'TO WATER: (Fr) SAMPLE DATE: SAMPLE COLLECTION
(I•.'-s-�--2-t--- TIME: .D 1 I•V-
PURGE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump %Peristaltic
eristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Ballvr ❑Polyethylene Bailer
� r✓ SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
J!
WATER
LEVEL FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE DO CONDUCTANCE pH ORP• TURBIDITY' OBSERVATION
r I} ? TyPdC Clear,Cloudy, NOTES
(FT) (mUmm) (°Celslusl, (mg/L) (µS/cm) (su► (mV) (NTU) W/Floc,
.tt«�._. _ -. . - I- ._ -w/Fines-.
Z , 3 8 Z. 3 c rem ;
CO
f, A C-1 _
E
F
� •
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS PRESERVATION
I
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED _, t_ ;, _
M'ALs It m[ACURY. 9
'NITRATE.CHLORIDE SULFATE
'ALIlAUNITY,BICAROONATE,CAREONATE . _ _. ... 1 +_ ! ✓.: -
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY>10 NTUS,REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED ❑YES ❑NO ALL SAMPLES ON ICE❑YES
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF TUBING OR PUMP IN WELL'
IF NO,PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL CONDITIONS:
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES '❑NO
.
-Associated midday/end-of-day 00,conductivity,pH within`range?(See'calibration sheet for this sample date)❑-YES❑-NO. -
cif NO,- }itch ametir NOTE that re crted,data should be considered as ft ed•accordln ..
"SynTerra is not NC-certified for these'parameters.Data collected for Information purposes only.
To convert ORP to Eh:using YSI Professional Plus Multi-Meter.add 205 mV..
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK = CAP CONCRETE PAD
❑GOOD (]BAD ❑NONE ❑GOOD ❑0AD ❑NONE C):GO00 Q BAD ❑NONE -CI GOOD ❑BAO ❑NONE ❑GOOD 1 ❑BAD ❑NONE;
A� 1 4 T ___ , - l
P:1Duke Energy Progress.1 026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITEAsheville1Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I.doc

a
GROUNDWATER iviONITORING DUKE .-rERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
- .
'.LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG .-
STRUCTURAL FILL I
`( FIELD PERSONNEL: ,
WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
148 River Street,Suite'220 MULTI METER TYPE/S#:, +`
Greenville,South Carolina 29601
, ! -
(864)'421.9999.•[phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S# At. �7 iy
ID 'j PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FT) START PURGE TIME:
MEASURIN7_010111WT.- TOC T START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME: ;
WELL DIAMETER: (IN) END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH: (FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
i DEPTH TO WATER: (F r) SAMPLE DATE: SAMPLE COLLECTION i I ', TIME:
t f PURGE METHOD: El Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump `LT Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
i . SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump P eristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑•Polyethylene Bailer
3 WATER' " . FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE ' DO CONDUCTANCE pH ORP" TURBIDITY' OBSERVATION `
LEVEL._.
TIME _� ._ „_.._._ Clear,-Cloudy, NOTES f
(FT) (mUmin) ('Celsius) (mg/L)' (µS/cm) (su) (mV) (NTU) w/Floc,
w/1 F nes I
a 3 9 _ G19 Z. C1 .� ,
3
.5 �+..
�t
4
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS PRESERVATION
E F= E a
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED _ _ _ t
METALS&MERCURY ( 4,. 1., - - _ 7. . . r ..
NITRATE�CMLORIDE SULFATE
' - ALKALINITY,.,BICARBONATE,.CARBONATE._.. -
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY>10 NTUS,REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED ❑YES alto ALL SAMPLES,ON IGE`
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF TUBING OR PUMP IN '
IF NO, PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL CONDITIONS: .
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES1q
Associated midday/end=of-day`DO,conductivity,pH within range?(See-calibration sheet for this sample date)'[]'YES[I NO.
If NO,,which parameter - . - , NOTE that reported data should be considered as flavgged_accordingly.
"SyriTerra is not NC-'certified for these'parameters.'Data collected for information-purposes only. -----,-__
To convert ORP,to Eh ti'slt g,YM Professional Plus Multi-Meterx add 205 mV..
WELL TAG. i` PROTECTIVE CASING- - - `- K; CAP - CONCRETE PAD
❑GOOD (.❑BAD ❑NONE ❑GOOD' ❑,NONE ❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE ;'❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE ❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑-NONE
PADuke Energy Progress,1026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITE\Asheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL Ldoc

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
A HEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
` ��'r � LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL:
3 i�f WEATHER: �❑ SUNNY, OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
r- 148 River Street;Suite 220
Greenvllle,south"Carol)a-29601 MULTI METER TYPE/5# t
(864)4 9999-[phone] Fax
ww ^w..
Terrac6ro.com TURBIDITY METER TYPE/S# k 0 d
WELL ID G PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH. (Fr> START PURGE TIME:
MEASURING'POINT y T17C START PURGE DATE „` 4 END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: (IN} END PURGE DATE. FINAL READING TIME: L 3•
WELL DEPTH:. :(FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED. (GAL)< '
E - .
DEPTH TO WATER: (Fr) SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE COLLECTION
l ) TIME. y p
PURGE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump []Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
2.
WATER FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE 'DO I ,CONDUCTANCE I pH ORP• TURBIDnY• ! OBSERVATION
TIME ._ ...R; ro m clear;Cloudy'": 1 NOTES
(FT) (mL/min), (°Celslus) (mg&) :,.(VS/cm) : (sU) (mV) (NTU) w/Fioc,
- - w/Fines -
te
i
IL c
r/
;I
NUMBER OF.CONTAINERS- PRESERVATION
E E E v E ,E'�E 3
_CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED__ _ g_ �. '.g: a 8.. $ _. __-;: •- t
C`METALS._.•_.�� -."...i .-- "` - - .: _ ;1 i - _ - .✓' _ -
VVIDE
= "ALKALINITY^BICARRONATE`•CARSONATE ""`._ -„ y.. _..- ,1, _ ,,a:. �,.. r� _✓: r _, I ..
."TOTAL MANIC CARBON_. _�,-»,_,...._ _.-K..a.W ..�.-.;. ;_� -.1 -- ,-_. !-✓ -�__ �""
ORG o
:-CHROMIUM(VI
RADIUM ':
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY>IO triTUS,REOEYEEOAMENT NEEDECt;[J Yf.S ❑NO ALL SAMPLES ON I� YEs
IF YES,QBSERI!{bNS.PQLLQVI(I -k- 0*WERINGf3 TU01N{i3OR PUMP IN'WE
IF NO PROVIDE QBSER�►k�- ON$,RE+GRDING tiATIlltAl.'C�7tItIlTIONS: �
- _.
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YEO
Associated midday/end=of-day DO,conductivity,pH within range?(See calibi=atiori sheet-for thls'sample date) YES❑N0.
lf..NO,,which parameter, NOTE:,that reported data"should be considered as flagged accordin-7
*'WhTerra is not INC-certified for these-parameter`s:'Data collected`for-information"purposes only:To convert,ORP,_ao Eh 0&I ` YSI'Rvfessl" I`.Plus Mtilti-Meter;add 205 mV.
WELL TAG• ` PROTECTIVE CASING ,LOCK .,' CAP .._____ .-.�_CONCRETE-PAD.
- I
❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE ❑GOOD a
�M^ D ❑BAD i{� ❑GOOD ❑BAD ' ❑NONE '❑GOOD a❑BAD ❑'HONE
PADuke Energy Progress.1026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS:PER SITE\Asheville\Low Flow Sampling Log 1MP.doc "

GROUNDWATER .-.JNITORING DUKE ERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG STRUCTURAL FILL I
FIELD PERSONNEL:
WEATHER: ❑0 SUNNf_X OVERCAST ❑[3 RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
Meha, yn ........
148 River Street,Suite 220 MULTI METER TYPE/S#:
Greenville,South Carolina 29601(864)421,9999-[phone] Fax
www.synTerracarp.com TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S#
WELL ID: SW A i1i PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (Fr) START PURGE TIME-
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME:.
WELL DIAMETER: END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME:,
WELL DEPTH: FT), TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
DEPTH TO WATER: (Fr) tAMPJI_11 04 SAMPLE COLLECTION
TE" ;j(I I-,
TIME:
"Ci P PURGE METHOD: E]Grundfos Pump 12 Volt Pump' -0 Dedicated Pump [I Teflon Sailer ❑[I Polyethylene Sailer
SAMPLE METHOD: [I Grundfos Pump [112 Volt Pump ka( [3 Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer [3 Polyethylene Bailer
WATER
FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE DO CONDUCTANCE pH ORP* ,,TURBIDFTY* OBSERVATION
LEVEL
TIME Clear,,Cloudy,, NOTES
(FT) (mL/min) (*Celsius) (mg/L) (IIS/CM) (su) (MV) (NTU) w/Floc,
w/Fines
jillb
_­7
Za)l q 0 Jz 14 (4
r
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS PRESERVATION
z jx:
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED
METALS&MERCURY
NITRATE,CHLORIDE'SULFATE -_71
TDS/TSS
ALKAUNrry BICARBONATE CARBONATE A
COMMENTS* IF TURBIDITY>10 NTUS,REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED El YES D NO ALL SAMPLES ON ICE
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF TUBING OR P0140.
IF NO,PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING;NATURAL CONDITIONS:
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLEE]YES!Who
Associated mjdday/end-ofmday DO,conductivity,pH within range?(See calibration sheet for this sample date) DYES E]NO.
If NO,which parameter, NOTE that reported'data should be considered as flagged accordingly.
SynTerra is not NC-certified for these parameters.Data collected for information pu
To convert ORP to Eh Usth#:YSI Professional Plus Multi-Meter,,add 205 mv.-
WELL TAG �E= CAP CONCRETE PAD
G_OODJ, I BAD ❑NONE 0 GO D ii 3-GOOD*[ ESAD E'N "GRE GOOD AD [ NONE
PADuke Energy Progress j 026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITE\Asheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I,,doc

GROUNDWATER -IJNITORING DUKE .-,,vERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
- STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLORA/ SAMPLING LOG
C Q FIELD PERSONNEL: �W
SjrP er1' WEATHER: ❑ SUNNY ttt OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX): S
148 River Street,Suite 220 MULTI METER TYPE/S# -
Greenville,South Carolina 29601
[phone]•[phone] Fax
www.synTerracorp.com TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S# 'T Z(u j
_ WELL ID: b' PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FT) START PURGE TIME: 'Y`
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE: -1 END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: (IN) END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH: (FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT) SAMPLE DATE=
SAMPLE COLLECTION
' � TIME:
>t� PURGE METHOD [3 m I]Grundfos Pup 12 Volt Pump Peristaltic,Pump, ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump�( 1Per(sialtfc Put(jp (]Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer [I Polyethylene Bailer
WATER'LEVEL FLOW RATE `TEMPERATURE I DO CONDUCTANCE pH ORP• TURBIDITY• : OBSERVATION
,. i
" TIME '•'— - - - - -" - - Clear,Cloudy, NOTES
(FT) (mVmin) (°Celsius) (mg/L) (µS/cm) (su) (mV) (NTU) w/Floc,
w/Fines
e45+
j
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS PRESERVATION S S
p 0 J 4 O
I E. E _ o o
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED
METALS CfMERCURY =-_._. :. _.-- _ 1 j ` _ `.✓. --
' .'"NITRATE'CNLORIDE.SULFATE_.,..
I TDSTT5S..; ft
_._
'ALKALINITY BICARBONATE.CARBONATE _ _-_ _ 'I .. 1 _ - __... �,• ......_ .
COMMENTS; IF TURBIDITY>10 NTUS, REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED ❑YES []NO ALL SAMPLES ON ICE YES
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF TUBING OR PUMP IN. E
IF NO, PROVJDEDlBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL CONDITIONS:
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE-❑YES NQ`
ssac d�►idi d,a-� a ,DOt,sol�diiCEtYit' pH within range?(See calibration sheet fortllls sample date),j j YESrmCj NO:
} If tl%which' arametel' dTE that-re ortedldata should bee-considered as-N d'aecdrd I
SynTerra is nat;NC cetttfied,tar thasse parame ,` a,collected for information purposes only,
__ , - _ -
To convert ORP to Eh usin YSI Professional Plus Mu(tWje , _ 5'mV.,
WELL T11G $(t4TECTIVE ! ) LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
•❑GOOD ❑BAD GQOD ❑BAD- � ❑NONE ❑.GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE'
❑GOOD ❑BAD GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE
PADuke Energy Progress.1 026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITE\Asheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL%doc

GROUNDWATER . .JNITORING DUKE ERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLAINT
STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG
90 FIELD PERSONNEL:
WEATHER. SUNNY 0 OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
; Teroa
148 River Street,Suite 220
Greenville,south Carolina 296DI MULTI METER TYPE/S#
[phone] [phone].Fax
TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S# "
wwvrsynTerracorp.com
WELL ID: A-( PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH:_,. (Fr) START PURGE TIME:
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE:- END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: (IN), END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME: t f V
_ -~
WELL DEPTH: (Fr) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
,-
DEPTH TO WATER: (Fr) SAMPLE DATE: l l �I SAMPLE COLLECTION
- .- TIME;
PURGE METHOD; ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump .❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump 0 12 Volt Pump Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
' WATER
LEVEL FLOW RATE ` TEMPERATURE DO CONDUCTANCE' pH ORP', TURBIDITY' - OBSERVATION
'..._TIME "Clear,Cleudy, NOTES
(FT) (mUmin) (°Celsius) (mg/L) (PS/cm) (su) (mV) (NTU) w/Floc,
_ wlFInes
1 1.Z S3`9 Z ,(, 0 a! GI vie
i /L
jAe
J.
NUMBER_OF CONTAINERS "PRESERVATION
>' s
o 2 2
z
E E- E W,,.' � �, f i
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED
'METALS I!MERCURY _ __n—_ - _ - _ ,_1 -_ ,::: ._.. .✓. ..- '. - -
NITRATE CHLORIDE4 SULFATE
-TDS/TSS-_._ " ' �; .-1={ - ✓ :` ,.,
-ALI(ALINITY,BICARBONATE,CARBONATE'
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY>10 NTUS, REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED ❑YES ❑NO ALL SAMPLES ON ICE❑YES
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF TUBING OR PUMP IN WELL:
IF NO,PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL CONDITIONS:
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES ❑NO
Associated midday/end-of-day DO,conductivity,pH within range?(See calibration sheet for this sample date)❑YES❑NO.
f NO,which parameter. NOTE,that reported data should be considered as flae,gamed accordingly.--.
'SynTerra is not NC-certified for these parameters.Data collected for information purposes only.
To convert ORP to Eh using YSI Professional Plus Multi-Meter,add 205-mV.
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK f CAP T CONCRETE PAD
' El GOOD ❑BAD' []NONE, ❑GOOD, ❑8AD ❑NONE GOOD ❑"•BAD ❑ ONE O GOOD �❑BAD - ❑NONE ❑GOOD;: ❑BAD_`❑NONE
PADuke Energy P.rogress,1026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITEWsheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL Woo

I
GROUNDWATER ,-,. NITORING DUKE L-ERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL:
N�� _4 F - .
Terra WEATHER: SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
14812iver Street,Suite 220
MULTI METER TYPE/5#:
Graenvllle,,South Carolina 29601
1•"' [phone]•[phone] Fax TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S#
wwW.synTerracorp.com III At 4 Z,(O D 1
O14 's�`�$-� PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (Fr) START PURGE TIME:
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME: _
WELL DIAMETER: (IN) END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME r �(
WELL DEPTH: (Fr) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT) SAMPLE DATE: _ SAMPLE COLLECTION
TIME: f 3zs
PURGE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump EYPeristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
WATER _
LEVEL FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE DO CONDUCTANCE pH ORP• TURBIDITY* .OBSERVATION
TIME - - - -- — Clear,Cloudy,', .NOTES
(FT) (mL/min) (°Celsius) (mg/L) (PS/cm) (Su) (mV) (NTU) w/Floc,
w/Fines— -
13z�( 15 0 G 8 93 l K s . 40
`�L q
Wr_(
-
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS PRESERVATION ,
0 a _0 Z
E E' EI. �i o 6..
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED _ 3t
. ;:METALS B MERCURY-' i_.-_-
NITRATE LHLbRIDE..SULFATE -
i TOS/TSS' 1 y
ALKALINITY;DICARBONA7EttONATE
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY>10 NTUS, REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED ❑YES ❑NO ALL SAMPLES ON ICEYES
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF TUBING OR PUMP IN W
IF NO, PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL CONDITIONS: 'F
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YESO
I
� oS(at midd,�f?(ond*af��ay'D ;'� uctlylty, pH within range?(See calibration cheat fob.(t�#ss�tllQlE�:date�},(�'YES ONO.
If NO,which a`rairtetier t>F8 ort8ata should be cons!dered-asfia"e -
*IynTerrolt not,NC�c rtlfied for these parameters.. oliected fot tnforrriatibn es only..
To convert,ORP to,Eh usth'-,YSI Professional Plus Mult(-MeEer 205 m '
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑NONE . ❑ D, ❑-NONE ❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑ ❑ONE -❑.GOOD QAI...[�NONE, ❑GOOD '. BAD ❑NONE
P;\Duke Energy Progress.1 026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITEWsheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I.doc

SURFACE WATER MONITORING' DUKE Cis ERGY PROGRESS, LLC
'd ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
— STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL
WEATHER. SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑'RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
148 Rivet Street,Suite 220 MULTI METER TYPE/S#: =.�,
Greenville,South Carolina 29601 _Y.S r'.
[phone]• TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S#
[phone] Fax '" — _': ".`'
www.synTerracorp.com
WELL ID: s'(J -4 PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: - - ( ) START PURGE TIME:
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: (IN? END PURGE DATE;_ FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH: (Fr) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (caL) _
DEPTH TO WATER: (Fr) SAMPLE DATE: ]f SAMPLE COLLECTION
Z9 l TIME:
PURGE METHOD: ❑Grinn os'Pump ❑12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer 'f ^
SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene BIlileC '
_�.-ter;.-•
WATER' ..., .;
FLOW RATE : TEMPERATURE DO CONDUCTANCE : H ORP• TURBIDITY- OBSERVATION
LEVEL P
TIME .„.F __r ,..._ - -. ._.._•;j.,. _:-Clear,Cloudy; NOTES
(FT) (mVmin) (I Celsius) (mg/L) (µ —) (su) (mV) (NTU) w/Floc,
_. .. -_.•.. _ .__, --- w/F1nes
o y, 8 q,3g..
_ -
°
e
F
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS_ __. PRESERVATION
I
is
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED
METALS@'MERCURY. °.,. . . ..,. -
,..NITRATE SILORIDE SULFATE. ..� ,, „..._.. 1° ,rR _ ..v.-
_
f
TDSITSS.__..° 4 j -
.-ALKALINITY,HICARBONATE,'CAR60NATE
r, .
COMMENTS: IF-TURBIDITY>10 NTUS,REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED ❑YES []. _ALL SAMPLES ON ICYRYES
IT
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF TUBI�tG¢ R P! Li. -
IF NO,PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL, O
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES pr�_
O
tissatfatled ml y afro of-'day DO,"conductivity,"pH"within range?"(See ca(ibrat oh eat for:this s rrift datey ° YESt
If NO,which.Oatkinetef" .NOTE that teported,data should b_e considered as flagged acc stding[y:
•SynTerra is not NC-certified foi='tbese,parameters. Data collected for information purposes only:
To convert ORP to Eh using YSI Professional Plus Multi-Meter,add 205 mV. -- - -- --
CONCRETE PAD "
WELL TAG PROTECTIYE CAS INCr_ LiJCi( - GP "" -- q
❑GOOD ❑BAD ❑N ❑BAD "❑NONE ' ❑000D Q!OPQ�iNE �O GODD'-a BAD ❑NONE"
P:1Duke Energy Progress,1026100 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITE1Asheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL boot

SURFACE WATER MONITORING DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL:
_sv -T WEATHER: SUNNY ❑0 OVERCAST'[I RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX): VVV
o.rra
148 River Street,Suite 220 MULTI METER TYPE/S#:
Greenville,South Carolina 29601
[phone]-[phone] Fax
www.synTerracerp.com TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S#
WELL D' PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FT) START PURGE TIME:
' Al
MEASURING POINT: tOC START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: (IN) 0 END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH (FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
SAMPLE COLLECTION
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT) SAMPLE DATE: TIME:,. 11i5
PURGE METHOD: [I Grundfas Pump [1 12 Volt Pump El Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump E]Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD: []Grundfas Pump [] 12 Volt Pump E]Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump E]Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
WATER FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE 00 CONDUCTANCE PH ORP. TURBIDITY*' OBSERVATION
LEVEL
TIME -Clear,Cloudy, NOTES
(FT) (mUrnin) Celsius) (mg/L) (AS/CM) (su) (MV) (NTU) w/Floc,
w/Fines
)Z.?
..........
_NUMBER,0F CONTAINERS_____'__­_
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED
METALs,WMERcuFtY
iMTRATE IL&RIDE,SULFATE
-TDSITSS
ALKALINITY;�BICARBOHATE.CARBONATE
le"I I 1 7—
A.
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY:10 NTUS,:REDEVELOPMENT NE PD YES 0. ALL SAMPLES ON ICE' YES
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING INPi:0
IF NO, PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL`
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES1
Y!
-,§60�calibration sheetfi*this;saimpW441:6),L)i ES DO'; Ji WIthIn ran#6?
" — I-- - _ data
_41" , this
I'I- I ­ - '
parame r- NOTE t dik e If IL46 hait livpii�.'Itciil a should be consild red asAdgglik a6cded1hily. A
�-e,'SynTerrA-'jt-n[ot MC40irtifig'd for;thqso,parafmetett;.,Dat;ii-tdilettto for informr3ttoPtPpurposes only.
to'cionvert ORP to Eh-using YSI Professional Plus Multi-Meter,'add 205 mW
­1. ­ PROTECTg)t
71 CAP
CONCR
EG D b [ E0A (E NO E [ GOO ")AD� � N6N4[ 'GOOD, _
, HONES
PADuke Energy Progress.11026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITE\AshevilleXLow Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I,doc

l SURFACE WATER MONITORING DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC :PLANT
STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG,,
FIELD PERSONNEL? j
WEATHER SUNNY OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
s `Rri ��� ❑
148 River Street,Suite 22D' - -MULTI METER TYPE/S#
Greenville,South Carolina 29601.
[phone].[phone] Fax www.synTerracarp.com TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S# }
WELL ID; PUMPlfUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FT) START PURGE TIME: ,
MEASURING POINT: ,TOC: START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME;
WELL DIAMETER: 1iNj END PURGE DATE: ;'.` FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH,
(Fr) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED "(GAL) -
SAMPLE COLLECTION
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT) SAMPLE DATE TIME:,.y
PURGE METHOD:' ❑Grundfos Pump Q 12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑,Polyethylene Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump -E]Peristaltic Pump ❑'Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon-Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
WATER
A FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE _-.D::..
LEVEL0 CONDUCTANCE PH OPP• TURBIDITY OBSERVATION }
TIME Clear;Cloudy, NOTES
(FT) (mL/min) (°Celsius) (m8/L) (;IS/cm) (su) (mV) (NSU) I;I w/Floc,
w/Fines _—
_
E
_-_NUMBER'OF CON TAINERS., ,PRESERVATION" .
„ E' 19
.
CONSTITUENTSSAMPLED=-_ I �F: .__ _. ._ _ .
MErALsBr'MEflcuev..._a
NITRATE CHLORIDE,SULFATE T_; ,.:..
-;TDS/TSS__
ALIUUNIIYy.BIC BONATE,CARBONATE --. '-- _ '.:� •. 1 4.i; ': -. _.'. ,
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY,>1 O NTUS,=REDEVELOPMENT NEEDS Y ALL SAMPLES ON fC- ES=
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF UB G OR'PUMP IN WELL: `
IF NO, PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING"ATU _ ` .+D6�DITIONS.
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES N0
A�4tdd miftdhV`iotid-of-ddy DO G6n �activtty,'pH-yt[�Hin r`�cige�;`�S00 to fbl`ntlori shoe for.•.is sample )'El YES O.,
If NQ;which"14 ranter' :NOTE that[e oite&clata�'should:beconside[ed as fl` ed�accordltl�ty_ i
•SynTerra is not,NC=certified for these`parameters:Data.cot[ectedf4rlhfo matiatt'purposes.ctll
: Y;
To convert ORP to Eh•USii �YSI Professional Plus Multi-Meter,.add_205 mV;
" WELL TAG ! PRO'TE1rT'(VE51 CR'ETf'PAD
r
❑GOOD❑BAD Q N Q GOOD ` ❑BAD ❑NONE ;❑GODD , Q BAD ❑NONE D ❑BAD s-❑NONE` GOOD Q BAD ❑NONE',
PADuke Energy Progress.1026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITEIAsheville\Low Flow-Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I.doc

SURFACE WATER MONITORING DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC' PLANT
3 ;,4 LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG STRUCTURAL FILL I
FIELD PERSONNEL:
Terra WEATHER: SUNNY CI OVERCAST 0 RAIN TEMPE RATURE(APPROX):
syn
148 River Street,Suits 220 MULTI METER TYPEJS#:
e C, Greenville,South Carolina 29601 j, P".
[phone].[phone] Fax
www.synTerracarp.com TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S# 0 0
WELL ID: A PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FT) START PURGE TIME:j
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: (IN) END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH: (FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
SAMPLE COLLECTION
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT)-)­ SAMPLE DATE: TIME:
7 L
PURGE METHOD: [I Grundfos Pump ❑U Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump E]Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer [I Polyethylene Batter
SAMPLE METHOD: []Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump Ej Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer [I Polyethylene Baiter
WATER
LEVEL.
FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE DO CONDUCTANCE PH oRP* TURBIDITY- OBSERVATION
TIME I Clear,Cloudy, NOTES
(FT) (ml-Imin) Celsius) (Me/L) (AS/cm) (5u) I (MV) (NTU) w/Floc,
yr/Flnes
�7
ID 9
-----------
_NUMBE -OF-CONTAINERS.-. PRESERVATION.-
R R
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED_ . d 75
;METALS MERCURY 'j;
V NITRATE,CHLORIDE,SULFATE
D A ;'BICARBONATES SaS A,
CARaoNATE7 J- I J- I I 1 4111 1
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY->10 NTUS, REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED 0 ALL SAMPLES ON ICE IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF'tU 1. G OR ,'4 -,WELL:
IF NO, PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL CON IONS,
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES
A.
Assoc ecl-rriiddaylend=of-day DO,conductivity;pH within range?(See calibration sheet 0 thji sample— 14644J,YES, 0. "V -Y
If NO,which parameter.---:- , .'N'OTE-thaC"r-epor'tij;d'ata,should be conslderedas flagged accONIni
SynTerra is not NC=certifled for'thdse parameters.-Data-collected for Information purposes only.'
To convert ORP to Eh Using YSI Professional Plus Multi-meter,-add 205 mV.
A D [3 NONE
CAP PAD G PROT WELL TA
s
0 G49T 0 NONE BAD "E' E -AD GOOD B
NJ 13 N
�A ❑NO [3 NaNd-10
PADuke Energy Progress.1026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER Sl'fE\Asheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I.doc

SURFACE WATER MONITORING DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
STRUCTURAL FELL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LOG
FIELD PERSONNEL
WT
� L Ii G WEATHER: f SUNNY [IOVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX):
148 River Street,Suite 220 MULTI METER TYPE/S#: `' `I
Greenville,South Carolina 29601 .( 1. b
[phone]•[phone] Fax TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S#
www.synTerracorp.cam (��(�] OQ
WELL ID: 5 PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FT) START PURGE TIME:
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE: END PURGE TIME:
WELL DIAMETER: (IN) END PURGE DATE: FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH: (FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL)
SAMPLE COLLECTION
DEPTH TO WATER: (FT) SAMPLE DATE: TIME:
I PURGE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pum Peristaltic Pump El Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD: ❑Grundfos Pump ❑ 12 Volt Pump Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
LEVEL FLOW RATE TEMPERATURE DO CONDUCTANCE pH ORP" TURBIDITY* "- OBSERVATION
TIME Clear,Cloudy, NOTES
(FT) (mUmin) I',., (°Celsius) (mg/L) (AS/CM) (su) .(MV) (NTU) w/Floc;
w/Fines
LIM, fa
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS—
"PRESERVATION _
w w
CONSTITUENTS SAMPLED .: .- ; " ; . - _'
...METALS$'MERNRYe. -✓1 _
NITRATE;CNLDRIDE SULFATE --. .''� `.` .1" -'`. r
.�.ALICAMNITY�BICARBCNATE,..CAR90NATE .-:: -:' .-• '--1' r- -9 " �. ,
COMMENTS: IF TURBIDITY>10 NTUS,REDEVELOPMENT NEEDED YES ❑NO ALL SAMPLES ON ICE YES
IF YES,OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING LOWERING OF, ,J,ING OR PUMP IN WELL:
IF NO,PROVIDE OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NATURAL CONDITIONS:
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES = NO'
zAssodated Wdd#/ettdw»may DQ condu%tivlijrra '_�niftttirl r 11gr7(S le:ca ib►a op;s�ieet ft i:thi sampled j Q YES" NO,,
If.NO;which attmeteir -,.NOTE that re orted data ihould,be considered as Zia ed accordici
SynTerra-Is notNC•certified for these parameters.Data coltettedfor informs ott u p rposes on[y
To convert ORP_to Eh using YSl Professional Plus Multi-Meter,add 205 mV;
WELL TAG PROTECTIVE CASING LOCK CAP CONCRETE PAD
❑G00� ❑8 ❑NO ❑-G' # BAD ❑G00 H )-w :NON _❑ 6AD `; 0 -❑ �� ❑NON
PADuke Energy Progress,1026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITE\Asheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I.doc

SURFACE WATER MONITORING DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
ASHEVILLE STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
— STRUCTURAL FILL I
LOW FLOW SAMPLING LQ±G -
FIELD PERSONtrIEL:
Q WEATHER '' SUNNY ❑ OVERCAST ❑ RAIN TEMPERATURE(APPROX): 1�
�4 .
148 River Street,Suite 220 MULTI METER TYPE/S#: 1n `
i Greenville,South Carolina 29601 �. ` r0 "� ._ •- .__._..
[phone].[phone] Fax
www.synTerracarp.com TUBITIDY METER TYPE/S#
WELL ID; -r j(, �( I PUMP/TUBING INTAKE DEPTH: (FO START PURGE TIME:
MEASURING POINT: TOC START PURGE DATE END PURGE TIME i
WELL DIAMETER: (IH) END PURGE DATE FINAL READING TIME:
WELL DEPTH; (FT) TOTAL VOLUME PURGED: (GAL) •�
l DEPTH TO WATER: (FT) SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE COLLECTION
I „Z Ir�.� TIME:
PURGE METHOD:. ❑Grundfos Pyfn ❑12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene'Bailer
SAMPLE METHOD:. ❑Grundfos Pump ❑12 Volt Pump ❑Peristaltic Pump ❑Dedicated Pump ❑Teflon Bailer ❑Polyethylene Bailer
I: -- _:. -• WATER
_ LEVEL-"re FLOM%RATE • TEMPERATURE DO " CONDUCTANCE f pH ORP• TURBIDITY- OBSERVATION .
TIME Clear,Cloudy, NOTES ;
(FT) (mVmin) (°Celsius) (mg/L) ()IS/Cm) (su) (mV) (NTU) w/Floc,
`r =- -- -- -- -- - -- -- - w/Fines.
`l'3`� 1 Z` 35 3s1 5.�1 . }zs !�-
_.
1
NUMBEROFrCONTAINERS .PRESERVATION
qg`, '
0 9 {d ` G
`.E E ,_ zd ec
CONSTITUENTS:SAMPLED _ _ '_• __ _` o
:.'METALS @"MERCURY__.
NITRATE"CHL'ORIRE�SULTATE._
ALKALINITY',SICARBONATE,.CARBONATE �:- -+;_
COMMENTS: IF'TIJttB�DITY�1D CtTItS,HED£ItELOPMEtfTHEEDED ?­;YE5'n�' ALL SAMPLES ON IGE SIF YESr t3851£RVATIQNS16LL6W!NG LOWERING C!f 1 PIJ 4-WELL:
IF N0,� OY�b>=OBSERVAllQNS.ttEi3ARl�lMG.NATiJRAL ONndlrs
E
FIELD VEHICLE ACCESSIBLE❑YES N .
rl V�
V
`Associated middy /end=of-da mconriuctiVi pH Within:wi e7, See'callbration shbet for"this sarri_1e dAte" 'Y,£S ` NCI: !,
If Adj:,_which aramotdr' ,NOTE thatae-ol`tedjka,should be considered as''#la "` accordiilgC
Syn't tot*nit NC t�rtift d for.�these;parameters.`Dat,�,tallected-.for°triformation'purposes oy.nl
__To convert ORP to Eh us1nB YSI Professional Plus Multi Meter,add_205 mV.
1 O`BAD ❑NO' PROTE YS- .,INGCAP 4 CONCRETE PAD`- ,.
-- _.
NE ❑GOOD ❑BAD [7 ej BAD, ❑NONE �O ❑BAD ❑NONE tl= ❑BAD ❑NONE
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\00 BLANK SAMPLE LOGS PER SITEWsheville\Low Flow Sampling Log-STRUCTURAL FILL I,doc

NOTES: `
-ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND z
DISTANCES(US SURVEY FOOT)UNLESS OTHER'SE NOTED.
•PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ANY VAUD&ENFORCEABLE
-SITE
EASEMENTS,RESTRICTIONS&RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD.
•SURVEY PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AND
EXISTING MONUMENTS FOUND DURING THE SURVEY.
ALL COORDINATES LISTED HEREON ARE PROJECT COORDINATES UNLESS �, e
OTHERWISE NOTED. A'
0 CONTOUR INTERVAL SHOWN AT V AND 5'
.THE COORDINATE SYSTEM DEVELOPED FOR THIS PROJECT IS BASED
ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATES ESTABLISHED BY
GPS METHODS USING VRS SOFTWARE-
PROJECT COMBINED SCALE FACTOR(GROUND TO GRID): 0.99978084
GEOID MODEL: 12(B)
UNITS: US SURVEY FOOT VICINITY MAP
PROJECT DATUM: HORIZONTAL-NAD83/2011 (NOT TO SCALE)
VERTICAL-NAVD88 MON N£LL MW-2A
-DATE OF FIELD SURVEY.10/04/17 AND 11/01/17 209swJ� TOP OF CONC.ELEV:2099.71' REPAIR AREA 92
REPAIR BY: DUKE ENERGY
MONITORED WET AREA Zosa.,o� �psa'T2 WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 25,2017
IDENTIFIED BY NCDEO, [PZ-e]
1.5'PVC PIPE
GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA t TOP ELEV:2121.47' MONITORED WET AREA s
SURVEY POINT#30030 269a7, TOP OF CO C ELEV:2119.26' IDENTIFIED BY NCOEO,
REPAIR AREA 01 _ GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA \
REPAIR BY:DUKE ENERGY ---- = S Oil
SURVEY POINT#30015
WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 25,ZO7
LEGEND REPAIR AREA®3 ~-----`�-
Zna3\
—,— FENCEUNE MON WELL MA REPAIR BY: DUKE ENERGY
EDGE OF CHANNEL TOP OF CONC.ELEV.2097.49'�Bf209B92 MONITORED WET AREA WEEK OF NOVEMBER 13,2017 4LT
-rr SILT FENCE IDENTIFIED BY NCDEO, (PZ-5]
M97.nf BOTTOM OF CON C CEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA 1.5'PVC PIPE
--,BB-TO OF BANK ELEV 2090.76' SURVEY POINT p3369 TOP ELEV:2119.60'
----TB- TOP OF BANK (CAN NOT GET INVERT) TOP OF CONC.ELEV:2116.56'
5.5'WDE HEAOMUL I} .-'.�/ rn ✓f''Gi f/ r/ .%.-
f7 25907
2o9eiRo
MONITORED WET AREA 'i \ \ / /�'l>8--=i �,,,,,,.. A r // K"� u� %r/'OI %i��'ij�i '",rSB�i
IDENTIFIED BY NCDEO f r>��J 1'.',..''/ / /' \
GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA
2,.s 113
2a� r2f40,n
21
A-
PVC PIPE TOP///' ��9os�-•i��oFs�-ir'...�j // �T�:'z,efisz• \ \ \� \\\\\\\\\\\\\\)
EL \ \ I M1
017 TOP OF CONC, W 2145.67 \\ \ ♦\ \\\ \\\\ ♦\\ 1
ziaasl II {) MONITORED wET AREA V // // / // //,pay/ j�/O'-E7�SjT9'� / /( \ \ \ \\ I •--�j
/ III I I I I I IDENTIFIED BY NCOEO. // �('- -- IOHB IRT / /// le \\\\ \\\\\\\\\�\\\( I r i
\- \ j„T)/J)1)] WEST SLOPE MONITORING GRID GEOSYNTEC AND SYNTERRA /� ///j //// /////,D'P� )O(GB( (
a
( I I((I(//r/ INSTALLED:GEOSYNTEC SURVEY POINT#30132 //
NOVEMB\R 14.2017 YUM'R ��/\///i� %// / OD�J Pv9PIPE TOP ELEV.214261' NOTCH) ---'/ \�\
/ /// '///// '�ii/ �%/ q /SIJ9.lef / PVC PIPE TOP
ELEV:2192.6JIE:"ITCHNOTLH) /// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\
.ON WELL MW-5 OC> ��a / )
TOP OF CONC. / Y%///%/ // ] / // // / // / / ) PVC PIPE TOP ELEV.2192.62'(W NOTCH) / \ \\\\\ \ \ \ 4
y ELEV:2151.76' / /" {//. /�// 0
88 / / /
\Q TRANSFORMER PAD , \\\\\" �L7���C3K,1„" / // + I// / //// / / //// //// O / // LP21] / �\ \\\\\\\ \ \\� j )
\�^ PVC PIPE/TOP ELEV:T142.7V / \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \/
R\ \�\\\\\\�� --� _ ^' //-• il// f/�///////'//// ///// // .ts // /JOP OF CO[iC.ELEV:T1�.16�
\O.N7 \\,\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\�- -..-- '•' -".-'� // ///// / ////// / EAST
/ f u,/,.t7 J/(////�II,�'.•vI/f'IZ I//I//I//!I/I�/lI/lI/� / �/`\ L \\\\ '1\A\\\\\\�\\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\�\��\\\-\�_��_r-_--.-0-�2--_--_=-CS�K --_^J-a.i//'.-sy}}--_�////i///////��//////////////�//////fi/�r/////' / // /� / / . / / 5YTN0
/ER IN GGIB`
CT DER 4. 017 NB 0 INST : MO
MW O LLED
Nil
f MONITORED SLOUGHM3 — k7 IDENTIFIED BjNCDEO.
cEosrN TE \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\m d\\\\\\\ I/
/
/
\ I
SURVEYED11-15-17
A_:E(iva�
OM5�,.-"'OL5 -OK5- Yn
\\_,/ \\\\\-25908- -
\\\\ \\
] t \ \\\\ \ 213T.66 .�--
__ _ h2140.m---.`
\\ \\\ —_ _ — _ _O�M7/ OL71 OK7��--_----.:�\I\rY.-''_/
.�" - - 1.5'PVC PIPE TOP ELEV:2142.72'
1P5-2t/C PIPE TOP ELEV:214Z69'.'''
\\ - "-_/'' �' / T�OF CONC.ELEv."2i45.,7'
- -- // / S
\ � uiTs
Si
VIET AREA
\
GRAPHIC SCALE
20
(IN FEET)
1 inch= 40 TL
DATE REVISION INITAL
. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PROJECT#: 00159-0660
4" OF PROD. SVYR JC
PRELIMINARY PLAT `�j [`LI 11�W/11 l}J1�I1�1-1i 4Li Ill) DRAwN BY: JC0
NOT FOR RECORDATION, 1 FILL AREA ON ASHEVILLE AIRPORT FIELD SK. : NA
FOR
CONVEYANCES, OR SALES 8020 Tower Point Drive COM SHEET 1 OF 1
P. FILE: 2017-10-04 AIRPORT
Charlotte, North Carolina 28227
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] DUKE ENERGY
F-1222
DATE:OCTOBER 4,2017 SCALE:1"= 40'
Internet Site: http://WWW.MCkimcreed.com DATE: ARDEN BUNCOMBE NORTH CAROLINA DWG. #

Emergency Response Plan
ASHEVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
:AREA 1 STRUCTURAL- FILL
Property Owner Information;
Greater Ashevlie Regional Airport Authority
61 Terminal Drive, Suite. 1
Fletcher; North'Carolina 2$732
Permit Holder Information:
Duke Energy
526.S. Church'Street, EC3XP
Charlotte, NC 28202
Reviewed:
Date /Z- °-/ 1. . MA f PIGKe , P;E. Date. 1278-17
Michael A. Reisman, Deputy Executive Director Matt.Pickett, CCP System Owner
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority Duke Energy
Date 12-7-17
Tim Hill, CCP Regional General Manager
Duke Energy
AshevilleAegional Airport;Area I'Structural Fill,Buncombe,NC
Emergency Response Plan Page;l.of 8'

I
TABLE.OF CONTENTS
ecti e
1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE ...„... ..................... ..... ..... .......... ........
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION'&IlVI ACTS.. ....... ................................... ............. .1
3. SLOPE FAILURE INDENTIFICATION CRITERIA............................ ,........ ........I
4., NOTIFICATION SEQUENCE..............................................:........ .................................5
5. RESOURCES AVAILABLE............................................................ ..........................:...7
i
t
t
f
i
i
1
Ii
t
i
i
i
S
t
r
4
t
Ashev.'i116 Regional,:Airport,Area I Structural Fill,Buncombe,NC
Emergency Responsa?lan Paget of

1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
The purpose of this Emergency Response Plan is to-safeguard the lives and reduce
damage to Asheville Regional Airport surrounding properties,'in the event of slope
failure of the structural fill.'
This Emergency Response Plan establishes slope instability identification criteria,
identifies emergency response entities, identifies potentially impacted areas, establishes
procedures for notification and.provides contact information for emergency notifications. I
This Emergency Response Plan provides a framework for consistent and appropriate
response to slope failure events, should they occur. Implementation and familiarity with
the elements of the Emergency Response Plan will reduce the risk associated with
structural fill operations and help to mitigate impacts resulting from slope failure events.
,DukeaEnergy will assume the lead role in responding to any emergency associated-with
the fill area.The Asheville Regional Airport,to the best of their ability,will provide I
support for issues such as site access and select administrative logistics such as locating `
command,centers,conference rooms,telecom support etc.
i
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & IMPACTS
The Areal Structural Fill site is located near the northeast property boundary of the
Asheville Regional Airport property. The Area 1 Structural-Fill site is bound to the !
north by a small residential community,to the east by I-26, and to the south and west by i
Asheville Regional Airport property.Potentially impacted areas are located immediately
adjacent to the Asheville Regional Airport property:The critical slope, in regards to the !
health and safety of the general public, is the northern slope of the Area 1 eastern
impoundment area.
i
3. SLOPE FAILURE IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA
I
3.1 Abnormal Operating Conditions
Abnormal conditions identified during routine inspections that do not meet Alert or
Emergency status as defined below will be reported to the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality as required in the governing permit WQ0000020.
In an electronic mail dated September 19,2017;North Carolina Department ofEnvironmental-Quality's Division
of Water Resources recommended that Duke Energy"develop an emergency action plan(EAP)for Area 1 of the j
subject CCR structural fill site." The purpose of an EAP is to identify°potential emergency conditions at surface
impoundments and to specify actions to be followed to minimize loss of life and property damage in the.event of a
failure. No such risks are associated with the subject structural fill. Moreover,no type of emergency response
document for structural fills is required under either state or federal law,because as noted above,.such documents
are required for purposes of identifying actions necessary to minimize damage to life and property in the event of a
CCR.surface impoundment failure. The subject structural fill is not a CCR surface;impoundment under either the
North Carolina Coal Ash Management Act-or the federal Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric
Utilities rule,and any failure thereof would not have the potential to pose the level of risks associated with high
hazard potential CCR surface-impoundments or significant/intermediate hazard potential CCR surface
impoundments/dams. In recognition of these important distinctions,this document,which is being voluntarily
submitted by Duke Energy,is styled as an"Emergency Response Plan"rather than an EAP.
Asheville Regional.Airport,,Area 1 Structural Fill,Buncombe,NC
Emergency Response Plan Page 3 of 8

j, 3
Under normal conditions the Airport would be the first party to identify an Alert or
Emergency status-as defined below, and should contact Duke Energy immediately if such a
condition is suspected to exist.
3.2 Alert Status
Alert status is entered when:
• A slope failure resulting from a large slough or slide has occurred resulting in ash
deposition beyond the footprint of the fill area and onto the downslope area, but has I
not traversed the property line of the airport.
• In the judgement of the Duke Energy Engineer, indications of a structural failure are
present that could result in the above condition such as severe bulging, cracking, f
I
seepage/flow. j
Upon determining an Alert status condition exists,Duke Energy will initiate
notification sequence 1 as outlined in Section 4. k
While under Alert Status;Duke Energy shall continuously monitor slope conditions of
the Structural Fill site and communicate regularly with North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality personnel and the Duke Energy Engineer. Duke Energy shall
determine if conditions warrant a transition to Emergency Status, and notify the
emergency management authorities.
3.3 Emergency Status
An Emergency status is entered when:
• A slope failure resulting from a large slough or slide has occurred resulting in ash
deposition beyond the property line of the airport.
a
Upon determining an Emergency status condition exists,Duke Energy,will.initiate
notification-sequence 2 as outlined in Section 4.
f
t
f
4
1
Asheville Regional Airport,Area 1 Structural Pill,Buncombe,NC.
Emergency Response Plan Page 4 of 8
i
G

4. NOTIFICATION SEQUENCE
Sequence L, If an Alert Condition exists the following notification sequence is to
w be folloed:
Permit Holder(Duke
Energy.)
i
i
Duke Energy Environmental Health>&Safety
John Toepfer- (919)632-37`14 d
I
North Carolina Department:of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources,Asheville Regional Office
82&296-4500
f
Michael Reisman,A.A.E.
Deputy Executive Director
Development&Operations
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority
E-mail:mreismanD-flvavl.com
Office: 8287654-5258 f
Mobile:[phone] f
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Communications.
Center
i
24 Hour Line: 828-68474577
Proceed to"'Sequence 2,if conditions warrant ti
i
I
k
i
t�
i
9
Asheville Regional Airport;-Area 1 Structural Fill,Buncombe,NC
Emergency Response Plan, Page 5 of

}
Segaen-ce 2: If one of the Emergency Conditions-'is occurring.or slope failure app_ears to
be otherWise imminent,the,following notification.sequence is to be
fQllowed:
r
Permit Holder(Duke i.
Energy).
Duke Energy Environmental'Healtlh&Safety I
John'Toepfer_,(-919)632-37t4
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water.Resources,Asheville,Regional Office
828-2964500
Mjcjhael Reisman,A.A.E.
Deputy Executive Director
Development&Operations
Greater,Asheville Regional Airport;Authority .
�-mail:mreisman(�flva4Lcom,
Office: 828-654=3253 j.
Mobile:828-772A 915
Greater Asheville Regional Airport-Cor municatiogs
-Center
24 Hour Line: °828-684-4577
- i
Buncombefounty EmergencYManaaement-
828-25076650
State Emer encv Operations Center
800-858-0368' I
- i
I
i
S
,
i
Asheville Regional Airport,Area 7 Structural Fill,Buncombe,:NC
Emergency Response Plan Page 6 of 8

't yti
t
5. Resources Available
Incident Command-Upon declaration of an Emergency Status,Duke Energy will staff an
Incident Command structure consisting of the basic Command Staff functions, in a location
near the fill area as designated by the airport, if available:
Duke Energy has resources available at the Asheville steam plant, including excavators,
dump trucks, bull dozers, etc.These can be deployed.as necessary to the fill area in response
to an emergency.Duke Energy-also maintains emergency stockpiles of materials at the steam
plant that can be used.Duke Energy also maintains travelling maintenance services,
complete with heavy equipment that can be on site within.8 hours.
Duke Energy has contracts with the following companies to provide materials; supplies,
equipment and services within an appropriate response time. Locally available resources
in
i t r 7ft
Heavy equipment service Ready tnix coricrete� s
"�Sand,andQgravel supply - ;
and rental r upply
i
United Rentals Vulcan Materials Southern Concrete j
1190 Smoky Park I
.338 Airport Road Materials Highway 35 Meadow Road
Arden,NC 28704 Candler,NC28715 Asheville,NC 28813
828-6844491
828-255.-8561 828-253-6421 i
Hertz Equipment Rental Grove Stone&Sand Co. Kingsway Ready Mix 9
842 Old Hwy 70 14 Nix.Road
30 Walden Drive I
Arden,NC 28704 Black 28711 28792 Mountain,NC Hendersonville,NC
j
828-654-7376 828-6.86-3844 828-697-8866 !!
E
r; k?umps # �': Dlv�ng`contractoz } ,an. bags:
Glenn Underwater
Sunbelt Rentals 5325 Marshall Air Drive Fastenal
200 Commercial Road Charlotte,NC 9.Glenbridge Road
Spartanburg, SC 29303 704-540-9777 After Arden,NC 28-704
864=578-6308 hours: use number above 828-684-1530
or call Rick Glenn 7.04-
996-1326
Asheville Regional Airport,Area 1 Structural Fill,Buncombe,NC
Emergency Response•Plan Page 7 of 8

IrI
Godwin Pumps Eason Diving and Earnhardt Grading
Marine Inc.
1362 Constitution Blvd.
2668 Spruill Ave. 7525 Old Plank Rd
Rock Hill, SC 29732 Charleston, SC 29405 Stanley,NC 28-164
803-909-7867
843-747-0548 704-601-4290
Alternate-
on, rj ; Work Phone
Boom Deployment/ A&D
Spill Cleanup Environmental 800-434-7750 336-289-2827
33
Asheville Regional Airport,Area I Structural Fill,Buncombe,NC
Emergency Response Plan Page 8 of 8

a
F ALPHA-OMEGA
ENVIRONMENTALAJI
September 21, 2009
Mr. Charles Price
Charah, Inc.
Unit M, Suite 100
307 Townepark Circle
Louisville, KY 40243
Reference: Asheville Airport
Leachate Evaluation
Louisville, Kentucky
Project No: 09-107
Dear Charles:
In accordance with your request, Alpha-Omega Environmental Management is
pleased to provide this brief summary of our evaluation into the anticipated leachate
production at the referenced property. The investigative procedures used, discussion
of results, and conclusions are described below.
INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES
Coal combustion products (CCP) are being used as beneficial fill in a construction
project at the Asheville Airport. Site plans, historic field data and descriptions of
placement activities were evaluated to establish current and final site conditions. We
evaluated the eastern (11.14 acres) and western (6.89 acres) fill areas that are
separated by a 100-foot wide soil fill area that covers a 60-inch diameter storm water
pipe. This pipe is used for conveyance of runoff from an area adjacent to the project,
but is not hydraulically connected to the project area. The depth of ash fill is up to
approximately 35 feet.
It is our understanding that the percolation of water through the CCP was to be
evaluated. To accomplish this, the EPA HELP v. 3.07 model was used to simulate
site conditions in order to make estimates of percolation through the ash. The HELP
model is widely used to establish general hydraulic movement through a wide variety
of landfill materials. Draper Aden Associates of Blacksburg, Virginia was responsible
for preparing the models and presenting the results. The parameters of the model
were based upon information provided by Charah, Inc and on default material and
weather conditions within the HELP model. Synthetic precipitation values, based upon
the HELP model algorithm for Asheville, North Carolina, for 20 years were used.
The HELP model was run for various scenarios using the simulated and measured
moisture content of the ash, whether capped (soil and pavement), and the duration of
the model cycle for both the east and west fill areas. A brief description of the
scenarios is shown in Table 1. For each condition, the bottom 12 inches of the fill was
modeled as a lateral drainage layer to account for any tendency for percolation to
move laterally along the top of the GCL.
[phone] • 366 Waller Ave., Suite 217 • Lexington, Kentucky 40504

Asheville Leachate Evaluation September21,2009
Project No: 09-107 Page 2
MODEL RESULTS
It should be noted that although the HELP model is an excellent resource for
hydraulic simulations through landfill material, it is not specifically designed for ash.
Therefore, the model results should be considered somewhat qualitative and tend to
take a very conservative approach to hydraulic movement within the fill due to its
default parameters. To better simulate actual field conditions, some of the default
parameters within the HELP model were modified with field data from proctor reports
including the average moisture content of the placed ash. Table 1 below summarizes
the results of the HELP model runs:
TABLE 1
HELP Model Output Summary
Initial Moisture Content in Ash vol/vol Final Water Final Volume of
Duration of Storage above Liquid In
Model Area Vertical Percolation Lateral Drainage Bottom Liner Saturated Zone
Model Precipitation In utFile ears Acres Layer Layer inches cubic feet
Area 1 E,with no soil
cover,default initial HELP-generated synthetic 20 11.14 0.1908 0.1908 6.2805 253,972
moisture
Area 1 E.with pavement
and soil cover,default HELP-generated synthetic 20 3.94 0.1870 0.1870 2.2440 32,094
initial moisture content
Area 1 W,no soil cover, HELP-generated
initial moisture content
m average optimum 4-hour
is with 10-year, 1 6.89 0.3583 0.3583 6.4920 162,369
moisture content 4-hour storm (6 inches)
added to Year 1
Area 1 W,with HELP-generated
pavement and soil synthetic with 10-year,
cover,initial moisture 4-hour storm (6 inches) 10 0.89 0.3583 0.3583 4.9407 15,961
content from average added to Year 1
optimum moisture
Notes:
1. HELP v3.07 was used for modeling purposes
2. Field and optimum moisture content values calculated from data provided in reorts prepared by S&ME,Inc
From the various runs, the HELP model output a maximum value of 6.4920 inches of
water storage above the liner on the west area (6.89 Acres) and 6.2805 inches of
water storage above the liner on the east area (11.14 Acres). These outputs were a
result of the areas existing in an uncapped and unpaved condition assuming a 10-
year, 24-hour storm event prior to final cover placement. The output values for
percolation decrease substantially once the clay cap and pavement are in place.
It is important to note that these runs were not modeled to reflect the current practice
of placing the ash within the west area (300-foot wide sections), nor do they consider
that the existing 30-foot ± thick soil cap over two-thirds of the east fill area. The
outputs also do not consider the ability of ash to retain water, giving it the potential to
stay in suspension and not necessarily move. Unless being pushed by a hydraulic
head from above, the moisture will tend to migrate towards dryer pockets of ash no
matter what direction in which that occurs.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The HELP model has been used to simulate anticipated field conditions based upon
statistical weather data at various stages of development. This conservative estimate
has shown the potential for water retention upon the GCL bottom liner. Therefore, we
propose the installation of a pipe system along the north end of both the east and

t Asheville Leachate Evaluation September 21,2009
Project No: 09-107 Page 3
west fill areas. Each pipe system will have a riser pipe that extends out the 4-foot
thick clay side slope. Once the caps (soil and pavement) are in place, the pipe
systems will be monitored for water infiltration. If no water is encountered, we
recommend the riser pipes be abandoned. However, if water is encountered, it will be
pumped out of the systems and either recycled for use as dust control or hauled back
to the power plant's ash pond.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you on this project. If you have any questions
or need additional information, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
ALPHA-OMEGA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT LLC
aurice A. LI yd, P.E., CHMM
President

To: Mr. Scott Sewell—Charah Inc.
From: Tim Silar—Silar Services Incorporated
Date: October 24, 2008
Subject: Hydrogeologic Assessment Summary Report
Charah Inc. (Charah) has requested that Silar Services Incorporated (SSi) conduct a
hydrogeologic assessment to addresses requirements related to Permit Number
WQ0000020 issued by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR), specifically - evaluate seasonal high water table as per section II.
Operation and Maintenance Requirements, 9b. To accomplish this objective four
groundwater monitoring wells were installed around the perimeter of the ash fill area.
Continuous water levels were collected in two monitoring wells for an extended period.
In additional, several rounds of water level measurements were collected to develop
potentiometric surface maps. These activities are summarized below.
Monitoring Well installation
Four monitoring wells were installed in early January 2008 to provide groundwater
elevation measuring points and thereby an understanding of groundwater conditions. The
monitoring wells were be installed by a Geologic Exploration from Statesville, NC using
hollow-stem auger and air rotary techniques and constructed in accordance with Federal
and State guidelines. The location of the monitoring wells is illustrated on Figure 1. A
summary of the monitoring wells construction is included in Table 1. Monitoring wells
were screened across the water table (first water).
Water Level Measurements
Continuous water level measurements were collected from monitoring well MW-1 from
January 4 to March 4, 2008. A summary of water level elevation from MW-1 from
January 4 to March 4, 2008 are included in Figure 2. Continuous water level
measurements were collected from monitoring well MW-2 from January 4 to September
19, 2008. A summary of water level elevation from MW-2 are included in Figure 3.
Measurements were collected with in-well pressure transducers at a frequency of one
reading every ten minutes to gain requisite data to access the seasonal high water
elevation. MW-1 data indicated that the groundwater water elevation has fluctuated in a
narrow range from approximately 2,087.3' to 2,088.7' above mean sea level (MSL).
MW-2 data indicated that the groundwater water elevation has fluctuated in a narrow
range from approximately 2,102.5' to 2,106.7' above mean sea level (MSL).
Three rounds of groundwater measurements were collected at the site. A summary of the
water level elevations is included in Table 2. Potentiometric surface maps, which
illustrate groundwater elevations, were developed form measurements collected on
Hydrogeologic Assessment Summary Report October 24, 2008
Chara- Asheville Regional Airport

SS .
�:
March 5, 2008 and September 19, 2008. The potentiometric surface as measured on
March 5, 2008 is illustrated in Figure 4. At this time, groundwater elevations ranged
from 2,112.71' MSL at monitoring well MW-4 to 2,088.29' MSL at monitoring well
MW-1. In the area of ash fill the groundwater elevations are a minimum of 8 feet below
ground surface. This is illustrated in the northwest corner of the fill area where the
2,094' MSL potentiometric surface line intersects the 2,102' MSL topographic contour
line (Point 1 on Figure 4). The separation between the water table and ground surface
increases to the southeast, as illustrated by the approximate 12' of separation at Point 2
on Figure 4. Groundwater flow direction, as illustrated in Figure 4 is toward the
northwest. The potentiometric surface as measured on September 19, 2008 is illustrated
in Figure 5. At this time measured groundwater elevations ranged from 2,111.61' MSL
at monitoring well MW-4 to 2,087.06' MSL at monitoring well MW-1. The separation
between the water table and ground surface is slightly greater than that measured during
March.
Summary
Four monitoring wells were installed to evaluate groundwater elevations in the project
area. Water levels collected to data indicate that groundwater elevations fluctuate in a
fairly narrow range. The groundwater elevation contours illustrated in Figure 4 (which
depict the highest elevations collected during the three rounds) indicates approximately
8' of separation from the water table to the ground surface. As illustrated in Figure 3 the
highest recorded groundwater elevation collected during the long term monitoring at
monitoring well MW-2 was approximately 2,106.7', or 1' greater than the March 5, 2008
measurement of 2,105.81 MSL. By interpolation if the water table elevation was 1.2
higher than the potentiometric surface as measured on March 5, 2008 and illustrated on
Figure 4, the separation between the water table and ground surface is approximately 7',
significantly greater than the permit requirement of 1'.
Hydrogeologic Assessment Summary Report October 24, 2008
Chara- Asheville Regional Airport

r
TABLES
Hydrogeologic Assessment Summary Report October 24, 2008
Chara- Asheville Regional Airport

Table 1
Monitoring Well Construction Summary
Charah Asheville Regional Airport
Fletcher,North Carolina
Annular Fill Material
Well ID. Well Depth TOC Ground Surface Screen Interval Sand Seal Concrete
(TOC) (MSL) Elevation(MSL) (feet bgs) Interval Interval Interval
(feet bgs) (feet bgs) (feet bgs)
MW-1 23 2,098.94 —2,096.5 23-8 23-6 1 6-4 4-0
MW-2 25 2,117.70 —2,115.5 25-15 25-13 13-11 11-0
MW-3 60 2,147.76 —2,145.5 60-30 60-27.7 17.7-24.8 24.8-0
MW-4 41 2,143.73 —2,141.5 41-31 41-29.2 29.2-27 27-0
Notes:
bgs-Below Ground Surface
TOC-Top of Well Casing

Table 2
Water Level Summary
Charah Asheville Regional Airport
Fletcher,North Carolina
Water Level Data
Well TOC Ground Surface Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater
Well ID. Depth(TOC) (MSL) Elevation(MSL) Elevation Elevation Elevation
(MSL) (MSL) MSL
3/5/2008 8/7/2008 9/19/2008
MW-1 23 2,098.94 —2,096.5 2,088.29' 2,086.69 2,087.06
MW-2 25 2,117.70 —2,115.5 2,105.81 2,102.85 2,103.26
MW-3 60 2,147.76 —2,145.5 DRY 2,090.46 2,091.87
MW-4 41 1 2,143.73 1 —2,141.5 1 2,112.71' 2,111.98 2,111.61
Notes:
bgs-Below Ground Surface
TOC-Top of Well Casing
Elevations in feet above mean seal level

FIGURES
Hydrogeologic Assessment Summary Report October 24, 2008
Chara- Asheville Regional Airport

2151.7
2135
\" / j2,DD �i
PEN 09AGE,
�2111
<
\\
•�\`\�\� \\\\\�\`\`� , `� �� \\\III u \ I I / J _ 1 /s
:a® °�
21
1111
�_- -
o° .2
\ \ \ I\I 1} i �-/
\\�\ 1 \ I I II III I IIII I I '� %�%
`\\ °
ENSE FOU
A E
2„ .2149.7
(/ \\�\�`\\\\\ _
(/N
\\\\\\\\\ J2143.3/ ��4{.B
\O \\ II I• 1 \\\\�
01 \ .215\ 1 \\\ I - / ��2i44.3 \
�145,8 I / /
*21 \ \ ` I ✓l 21� �214J.7\
°
�\ .
200 0 200 400 600 B00
SCALE: 1 INCH = 200 FEET CHARAH ASHEVILLE AIRPORT
CONTOUR INTERVAL, 2 FEET/4 FEET Asheville, NC
LEGEND
MW-2* MONITORING WELL Figure 1
Site Layout Map
PREPARED BY'PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS USING AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED NOVEMBER 27.2006
GROUND CONTROL SURVEYS BY SANBORN.LLC,CHARLOTTE,NC HAD /_
ALL HORIZONTAL
OF DASHEDCAL CONTOURS WASURVEYS
NOT MEET NATIONAL MAPON NORTH CAROLINA ACCURACY SATE TAND DS AND SHOULD IBENFIELD VERIFIED
AERIAL SURVEY BY SANBORN,LLC CHARLOTTE,NCL : Silar Services Inc.

Figure 2 - MW-1 Groundwater Elevations - January - March 2008
2089
2088.5
Ln
� 2088
c
0
M
>
a)
v
w 2087.5
Elevation
2087
2086.5
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
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•
00%OOg 00�00�003 000b OOW OOg 00%00'b 00�00�00b 00�00�00�00�00%00�00b 00�00�00�00�00�00'b 00�00�00�00�00�
"IN N\�� \'Y V'V 11\" \T�� \03 I\ \ V\'V 11\11 I-IS"h-V\" \ IbN
Time

FIGURE 3 MW-2 Groundwater Elevations - January-March 2008
2107.00
2106.50
2106.00
2105.50
=, 2105.00
H
c 2104.50
0
Mco
Cu
w 2104.00
MW-2
2103.50
2103.00
2102.50
2102.00
61 61 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00' 00' 00 00 00' 00 00 00' 00' 00
tiff' tip' tiff' tip' tip' titi' tip' by tiff' tiff' tiff' tiff' tiff'
oo� oo� oo� oo� oo� oo� oo� 00% oo� oo�
Date/Time

"9
FIGURE 3 (Con't) MW-2 Groundwater Elevations - April-June 2008
2107.00
2106.50
2106.00
2105.50
2105.00
a 2104.50
0
41
v
w 2104.00
MW-2
2103.50
2103.00
2102.50
2102.00
PS P4 P� P� P� P� P� P� P1 P�
O° 00 00 O° 61 O° O° O° 00 O° O° O° O°
O� O' Z. O� OZ. O Z. OZ. Z. O� OQ). OZ. OZ.
ly
O°gly °°'b OO�b °°IO °°� °O00 00� OO§b °°� °S§1 O°(b
Date/Time

FIGURE 3 (Con't) MW-2 Groundwater Elevations - July-September 2008
2107.00
2106.50
2106.00
2105.50
2105.00
0
2104.50
+1
m
a)
a)
uw 2104.00
MW-2
2103.50
2103.00
2102.50
2102.00
00 61 61 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 0Z. Z. Z. Z. Z. 0Z. 00 00 00 00 00
tip' y�. yam. y�. < ti� y�. yam. y�. ly
00� 00� 00� 00J 00b 00� 00� 00, 00� 00� 00� 00Cb
Date/Time

� r
�� .� ►11111111��\ ��1:�1. ��y
r 1 _
ARAH ASHEVILLE AIRPORT
Asheville, NC
. > Figure 4
Potentiometric Surface
March 5,
> >
2008

4
e rat �• �
• � '1i!� Sri-. �i'1i�`��� 1�i ,�� ` . ,
1 IN
ANS
�� � , : ��• `may
1 •' �
AIRPORTCHARM ASHEVILLE
Asheville, NC
1Figure
Potentiometric
Silar Services Inc.