Belews Creek GWAP_DENR 12 30 2014a

Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
Proposed Groundwater
Assessment Work Plan
(Rev. 1)
NPDES Permit NC0022406

December 30, 2014

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ ES-1
1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 Site Information ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Plant Description ......................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Ash Basin Description ................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Regulatory Requirements ............................................................................................ 5
3.0 Receptor Information .............................................................................................................. 7
4.0 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology ..................................................................................... 8
5.0 Initial Conceptual Site Model ................................................................................................ 10
5.1 Physical Site Characteristics ..................................................................................... 10
5.1.1 Ash Basin ...................................................................................................... 11
5.1.2 Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill ........................................................................... 12
5.1.3 Structural Fill .................................................................................................. 12
5.2 Source Characteristics .............................................................................................. 13
5.3 Hydrogeologic Site Characteristics ........................................................................... 15
6.0 Compliance Groundwater Monitoring ................................................................................... 18
7.0 Assessment Work Plan ......................................................................................................... 19
7.1 Subsurface Exploration ............................................................................................. 20
7.1.1 Ash and Soil Borings ..................................................................................... 20
7.1.2 Shallow Monitoring Wells .............................................................................. 23
7.1.3 Deep Monitoring Wells .................................................................................. 24
7.1.4 Bedrock Monitoring Wells .............................................................................. 25
7.1.5 Well Completion and Development ............................................................... 25
7.1.6 Hydrogeologic Evaluation Testing ................................................................. 26
7.2 Groundwater Sampling and Analysis ........................................................................ 27
7.2.1 Compliance and Voluntary Monitoring Wells ................................................. 28
7.2.2 Speciation of Select Inorganics ..................................................................... 28
7.3 Surface Water, Sediment, and Seep Sampling ......................................................... 29
7.3.1 Surface Water Samples ................................................................................. 29
7.3.2 Sediment Samples ........................................................................................ 29
7.3.3 Seep Samples ............................................................................................... 30
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ii
7.4 Field and Sampling Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures ......................... 30
7.4.1 Field Logbooks .............................................................................................. 30
7.4.2 Field Data Records ........................................................................................ 31
7.4.3 Sample Identification ..................................................................................... 31
7.4.4 Field Equipment Calibration .......................................................................... 31
7.4.5 Sample Custody Requirements ..................................................................... 32
7.4.6 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Samples ........................................... 33
7.4.7 Decontamination Procedures ........................................................................ 33
7.5 Site Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model ...................................................................... 34
7.6 Site-Specific Background Concentrations ................................................................. 35
7.7 Groundwater Fate and Transport Model ................................................................... 35
7.7.1 MODFLOW/MT3DMS Model ......................................................................... 36
7.7.2 Development of Kd Terms ............................................................................. 37
7.7.3 MODFLOW/MT3DMS Modeling Process ...................................................... 39
7.7.4 Hydrostratigraphic Layer Development ......................................................... 40
7.7.5 Domain of Conceptual Groundwater Flow Model .......................................... 41
7.7.6 Boundary Conditions for Conceptual Groundwater Flow Model .................... 41
7.7.7 Groundwater Impacts to Surface Water ........................................................ 41
8.0 Risk Assessment .................................................................................................................. 43
8.1 Human Health Risk Assessment ............................................................................... 43
8.1.1 Site-Specific Risk-Based Remediation Standards ......................................... 44
8.2 Ecological Risk Assessment ..................................................................................... 45
9.0 CSA Report ........................................................................................................................... 48
10.0 Proposed Schedule ............................................................................................................. 50
11.0 References .......................................................................................................................... 51

Appendix A – Notice of Regulatory Requirements Letter from John E. Skvarla, III, Secretary,
State of North Carolina, to Paul Newton, Duke Energy, dated August 13, 2014.
Appendix B – Review of Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Letter from S. Jay Zimmerman,
Chief, Water Quality Regional Operations Section, NCDENR, To Harry Sideris,
Duke Energy, dated November 4, 2014.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
TABLE OF CONTENTS

iii

List of Figures
1. Site Location Map
2. Site Layout Map
3. Proposed Monitoring Well and Sample Location Map

List of Tables
1. Groundwater Monitoring Requirements
2. Exceedances of 2L Standards
3. SPLP Leaching Analytical Results
4. Groundwater Analytical Results
5. Ash Analytical Results
6. Landfill Leachate Analytical Results
7. Seep Analytical Results
8. FGD Leachate Analytical Results
9. Environmental Exploration and Sampling Plan
10. Soil and Ash Parameters and Constituent Analytical Methods
11. Groundwater, Surface Water, and Seep Parameters and Constituent Analytical Methods

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ES-1

Executive Summary
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy), owns and operates Belews Creek Steam Station
(BCSS), located on Belews Lake in Stokes County, Belews Creek, North Carolina (see
Figure 1). BCSS began operation in 1974 as a coal-fired, generating station and currently
operates two coal-fired units. The coal ash residue from BCSS’s coal combustion process has
historically been disposed in the station’s ash basin located across Pine Hall Road to the
northwest of the station. The discharge from the ash basin is permitted by the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Water Resources
(DWR) under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
NC0022406.
Duke Energy has performed voluntary groundwater monitoring around the ash basin from
November 2007 until May 2010. The voluntary groundwater monitoring wells were sampled two
times each year and the analytical results were submitted to DWR. Groundwater monitoring as
required by the NPDES permit began in January 2011. The system of compliance groundwater
monitoring wells required for the NPDES permit is sampled three times a year and the analytical
results are submitted to the DWR. The compliance groundwater monitoring is performed in
addition to the normal NPDES monitoring of the discharge flows from the ash basin.
It is Duke Energy’s intention that the assessment will collect additional data to validate and
expand the knowledge of the groundwater system at the ash basin. The proposed assessment
plan will provide the basis for a data-driven approach to additional actions related to
groundwater conditions if required by the results of the assessment and for closure.
On August 13, 2014, NCDENR issued a Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NORR) letter to
Duke Energy, pursuant to Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code Chapter (15A NCAC)
02L.0106. The NORR stipulates that for each coal-fueled plant owned, Duke Energy will
conduct a comprehensive site assessment (CSA) that includes a Groundwater Assessment
Work Plan (Work Plan) and a receptor survey. In accordance with the requirements of the
NORR, HDR completed a receptor survey to identify all receptors within a 0.5-mile radius (2,640
feet) of the BCSS ash basin compliance boundary. This receptor survey also addressed the
requirements of the General Assembly of North Carolina Session 2013 Senate Bill 729 Ratified
Bill (SB 729). Similar requirements to perform a groundwater assessment are found in SB 729,
which revised North Carolina General Statute 130A-309.209(a).
In accordance with the NORR, Duke Energy submitted a Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
to the NCDENR on September 25, 2014. Subsequent to their review, the NCDENR provided
comments to the Work Plan in a letter dated November 4, 2014. The letter included general
comments that pertained to each of the work plans prepared for Duke Energy’s 14 coal ash
sites in North Carolina, as well as comments specific to the BCSS work plan and site. This
Revised Work Plan has been prepared to address the general and site-specific comments made
by NCDENR in the November 4, 2014 letter.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ES-2
Soil and groundwater sampling will be performed to provide information pertaining to the
horizontal and vertical extent of potential soil and groundwater contamination. This will be
performed by sampling existing wells; installing and sampling approximately 24 nested
monitoring well pairs (shallow and deep) and 7 bedrock monitoring wells; and collecting soil and
ash samples. This work will provide information on the chemical and physical characteristics of
site soils and ash, as well as the geological and hydrogeological features of the site that
influence groundwater flow and direction and transport of constituents from the ash basin and
ash storage area. Samples of ash basin surface water will be collected and used to evaluate
potential impacts to groundwater and surface water. Seep samples will be collected from
locations identified in July and August 2014 (as part of Duke Energy’s NPDES permit renewal
application) to evaluate potential impacts to groundwater and surface water. In addition, surface
water and sediment samples will be collected from the Dan River and Belews Lake to evaluate
potential impacts from the ash basin.
The information obtained through implementation of this Work Plan will be utilized to prepare a
CSA report in accordance with the requirements of the NORR. If it is determined that additional
investigations are required during the review of existing data or data developed from this
assessment, Duke Energy and HDR will notify the NCDENR regional office prior to initiating
additional sampling or investigations.
HDR will also perform an assessment of risks to human health and safety and to the
environment. This assessment will include the preparation of a conceptual site model
illustrating potential pathways from the source to possible receptors.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
1.0 INTRODUCTION

1

1.0 Introduction
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy), owns and operates Belews Creek Steam Station
(BCSS), located on Belews Lake in Stokes County, Belews Creek, North Carolina (see
Figure 1). BCSS began operation in 1974 as a coal-fired, generating station and currently
operates two coal-fired units. The coal ash residue from BCSS’s coal combustion process has
historically been disposed in the station’s ash basin located across Pine Hall Road to the
northwest of the station. The discharge from the ash basin is permitted by the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Water Resources
(DWR) under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
NC0022406.
Duke Energy has performed voluntary groundwater monitoring around the ash basin from
November 2007 until May 2010. The voluntary groundwater monitoring wells were sampled two
times each year and the analytical results were submitted to DWR. Groundwater monitoring as
required by the NPDES permit began in January 2011. The system of compliance groundwater
monitoring wells required for the NPDES permit is sampled three times a year and the analytical
results are submitted to the DWR. The compliance groundwater monitoring is performed in
addition to the normal NPDES monitoring of the discharge flows from the ash basin.
It is Duke Energy’s intention that the assessment will collect additional data to validate and
expand the knowledge of the groundwater system at the ash basin. The proposed assessment
plan will provide the basis for a data-driven approach to additional actions related to
groundwater conditions if required by the results of the assessment and for closure.
On August 13, 2014, NCDENR issued a Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NORR) letter to
Duke Energy, pursuant to Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code (15A NCAC) Chapter
02L.0106. The NORR stipulates that for each coal-fueled plant owned, Duke Energy will
conduct a comprehensive site assessment (CSA) that includes a Groundwater Assessment
Work Plan (Work Plan) and a receptor survey. In accordance with the requirements of the
NORR, HDR has completed a receptor survey to identify all receptors within a 0.5-mile radius
(2,640 feet) of the BCSS ash basin compliance boundary. The NORR letter is included as
Appendix A.
The Coal Ash Management Act 2014 – General Assembly of North Carolina Senate Bill 729
Ratified Bill (Session 2013) (SB 729) revised North Carolina General Statute 130A -309.209(a)
to require the following:
(a) Groundwater Assessment of Coal Combustion Residuals Surface
Impoundments. – The owner of a coal combustion residuals surface
impoundment shall conduct groundwater monitoring and assessment as provided
in this subsection. The requirements for groundwater monitoring and assessment
set out in this subsection are in addition to any other groundwater monitoring and
assessment requirements applicable to the owners of coal combustion residuals
surface impoundments.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
1.0 INTRODUCTION

2
(1) No later than December 31, 2014, the owner of a coal combustion
residuals surface impoundment shall submit a proposed Groundwater
Assessment Plan for the impoundment to the Department for its review
and approval. The Groundwater Assessment Plan shall, at a minimum,
provide for all of the following:
a. A description of all receptors and significant exposure pathways.
b. An assessment of the horizontal and vertical extent of soil and
groundwater contamination for all contaminants confirmed to be present
in groundwater in exceedance of groundwater quality standards.
c. A description of all significant factors affecting movement and transport
of contaminants.
d. A description of the geological and hydrogeological features influencing
the chemical and physical character of the contaminants.
e. A schedule for continued groundwater monitoring.
f. Any other information related to groundwater assessment required by
the Department.
(2) The Department shall approve the Groundwater Assessment Plan if it
determines that the Plan complies with the requirements of this
subsection and will be sufficient to protect public health, safety, and welfare;
the environment; and natural resources.
(3) No later than 10 days from approval of the Groundwater Assessment
Plan, the owner shall begin implementation of the Plan.
(4) No later than 180 days from approval of the Groundwater Assessment
Plan, the owner shall submit a Groundwater Assessment Report to the
Department. The Report shall describe all exceedances of groundwater
quality standards associated with the impoundment.
This work plan addresses the requirements of 130A-309.209(a)(1)(a) through (f) and the
requirements of the NORR.
On behalf of Duke Energy, HDR submitted to NCDENR a proposed Work Plan for the BCSS
site dated September 25, 2014. Subsequently, NCDENR issued a comment letter dated
November 4, 2014, containing both general comments applicable to all 14 of Duke Energy ash
basin facilities and site-specific comments for the BCSS. In response to these comments, HDR
has prepared this revised Work Plan for performing the groundwater assessment as prescribed
in the NORR. If it is determined that additional investigations are required during the review of
existing data or data developed from this assessment, Duke Energy and HDR will notify the
NCDENR regional office prior to initiating additional sampling or investigations.
HDR will also perform an assessment of risks to human health and safety and to the
environment. This assessment will include the preparation of a conceptual site model
illustrating potential pathways from the source to possible receptors.
The purpose of the work plan contains a description of the activities proposed to meet the
requirements of 15A NCAC 02L .0106(g). This rule requires:
(g) The site assessment conducted pursuant to the requirements of
Paragraph (c) of this Rule, shall include:
(1) The source and cause of contamination;
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
1.0 INTRODUCTION

3
(2) Any imminent hazards to public health and safety and actions taken
to mitigate them in accordance with Paragraph (f) of this Rule;
(3) All receptors and significant exposure pathways;
(4) The horizontal and vertical extent of soil and groundwater
contamination and all significant factors affecting contaminant
transport; and
(5) Geological and hydrogeological features influencing the movement,
chemical, and physical character of the contaminants.

The work proposed in this plan will provide the information sufficient to satisfy the requirements
of the rule. However, uncertainties may still exist due to the following factors:
 The natural variations and the complex nature of the geological and hydrogeological
characteristics involved with understanding the movement, chemical, and physical
character of the contaminants;
 The size of the site; and
 The time frame mandated by the Coal Ash Management Act (CAMA). Site
assessments are most effectively performed in a multi-phase approach where data
obtained in a particular phase of the investigation can be reviewed and used to refine
the subsequent phases of investigation. The mandated 180-day time frame will prevent
this approach from being utilized.
The 180-day time frame will limit the number of sampling events that can be performed after
well installation and prior to report production. Effectively, this time frame will likely reduce the
number of sampling events within the proposed wells to a single sampling event.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
2.0 SITE INFORMATION

4

2.0 Site Information
2.1 Plant Description
BCSS is a two-unit, coal-fired, electric generating plant with a capacity of 2,240 megawatts
located on the west bank of Belews Lake in Stokes County, Belews Creek, North Carolina. The
site is located at 3195 Pine Hall Road and is generally situated between undeveloped land,
residential properties, and Belews Lake (Figure 1). The station’s ash basin is located across
Pine Hall Road to the northwest of the station and is generally bounded by an earthen dike and
a natural ridge to the north, Middleton Loop Road to the west, and Pine Hall Road to the south
and east (see Figure 2). Middleton Loop Road and Pine Hall Road are located along
topographic divides. Topography to the west of Middleton Loop Road and north of the earthen
dike and natural ridge generally slopes downward toward the Dan River. Topography to the
south and east of Pine Hall Road generally slopes downward toward Belews Lake.
2.2 Ash Basin Description
The station’s ash basin consists of a single cell impounded by an earthen dike located on the
north end of the ash basin. The ash basin system was constructed from 1970 to 1972 and is
located approximately 3,200 feet northwest of the station. The area contained within the ash
basin waste boundary, which is shown on Figures 2 and 3, is approximately 283 acres.
The full pond elevation for the BCSS ash basin is approximately 750 feet. The normal pond
elevation of Belews Lake is approximately 725 feet.
The ash basin is operated as an integral part of the station’s wastewater treatment system,
which receives flows from the ash removal system, BCSS power house and yard holding
sumps, chemical holding pond, coal yard sumps, stormwater, landfill leachate, and treated flue
gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater. During station operations, inflows to the ash basin are
highly variable due to the cyclical nature of station operations. Inflows from the station to the
ash basin are discharged into the southeast portion of the ash basin.
The discharge from the ash basin is through a concrete discharge tower located in the
northwest portion of the ash basin. The concrete discharge tower drains through a 24-inch-
diameter Standard Dimension Ratio (SDR) 17 high-density polyethylene (HDPE) conduit for
approximately 1,600 feet and then discharges into a concrete flume box. The ash basin pond
elevation is controlled by the use of concrete stop logs in the discharge tower. The discharge is
to a tributary, locally known as Little Belews Creek, that flows northward to the Dan River. The
discharge from the ash basin is permitted by the NCDENR DWR under NPDES Permit
NC0022406.
Note there is one permitted closed landfill located adjacent to and southwest of the ash basin.
The landfill is permitted by the NCDENR Division of Waste Management (DWM) under Permit
No. 85-03. The landfill is located upgradient to the ash basin and is just north of the Pine Hall
Road topographic divide. The approximate landfill limits and compliance boundary of the closed
Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill (Permit No. 8503) is shown on Figures 2 and 3. Existing
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
2.0 SITE INFORMATION

5
groundwater monitoring wells associated with the Pine Hall Road Landfill are shown on these
figures.
A structural fill comprised of compacted fly ash was constructed southeast of the ash basin.
The structural fill is located south of the Pine Hall Road topographic divide and therefore
groundwater flow beneath the fill should be predominantly away from the ash basin. There are
no groundwater monitoring requirements or compliance boundary associated with the structural
fill. The location of the structural fill is shown on Figures 2 and 3.
2.3 Regulatory Requirements
The NPDES program regulates wastewater discharges to surface waters to ensure that surface
water quality standards are maintained. BCSS operates under NPDES Permit NC0024406
which authorizes Duke Energy to discharge wastewater via three outfalls. Outfall 001
discharges once through cooling water into West Belews Creek/Belews Lake. Outfall 002
(which is internal to the BCSS site) discharges waste streams from the power house and yard
holding sumps, ash sluice lines, chemical holding pond, coal yard sumps, stormwater,
remediated groundwater, and treated FGD wastewater to the ash basin. Outfall 003 discharges
effluent from the ash basin to the Dan River. Discharges from all three NPDES outfalls are in
accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
the NPDES permit.
The NPDES permitting program requires that permits be renewed every five years. The most
recent NPDES permit renewal at BCSS became effective on November 1, 2012, and expires
February 28, 2017.
In addition to surface water monitoring, the NPDES permit requires groundwater monitoring.
Groundwater monitoring has been performed in accordance with the permit conditions
beginning in January 2011. NPDES Permit Condition A (11), Version 1.1, dated June 15, 2011,
lists the groundwater monitoring wells to be sampled, the parameters and constituents to be
measured and analyzed, and the requirements for sampling frequency and reporting results.
These requirements are provided in Table 1.
The compliance boundary for groundwater quality at the BCSS ash basin site is defined in
accordance with Title 15A NCAC 02L .0107(a) as being established at either 500 feet from the
waste boundary or at the property boundary, whichever is closer to the waste. The location of
the ash basin compliance monitoring wells, the ash basin waste boundary, and the compliance
boundary are shown on Figure 2.
The locations for the compliance groundwater monitoring wells were approved by the NCDENR
DWR Aquifer Protection Section (APS). All compliance monitoring wells included in Table 1 are
sampled three times per year (in January, May, and September). Analytical results are
submitted to the DWR before the last day of the month following the date of sampling for all
compliance monitoring wells.
The compliance groundwater monitoring system for the BCSS ash basin consists of the
following monitoring wells: MW-200S, MW-200D, MW-201D, MW-202S, MW-202D, MW-203S,
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
2.0 SITE INFORMATION

6
MW-203D, MW-204S, and MW-204D (shown on Figures 2 and 3). All the compliance
monitoring wells were installed in December 2010.
One or more groundwater quality standards (2L Standards) have been exceeded in
groundwater samples collected at monitoring wells MW-200S, MW-200D, MW-201D, MW-202S,
MW-202D, MW-203S, MW-203D, MW-204S, and MW-204D. Exceedances have occurred for
chromium, iron, manganese, pH, and thallium. Table 2 presents exceedances measured at
each of these groundwater monitoring wells from January 2011 through May 2014.
Monitoring wells MW-200S, MW-202S, MW-203S, and MW-204S were installed with 7.6-foot to
20-foot well screens placed above auger refusal to monitor the shallow aquifer within the
saprolite layer. These wells were installed to total depths ranging from 10 feet below ground
surface (bgs) at MW-200S to 57 feet bgs at MW-202S.
Monitoring wells MW-200D, MW-202D, MW-203D, and MW-204D were installed with 5-foot well
screens placed in the low-rock quality designation (RQD) bedrock zone. Monitoring well MW-
201D was installed with a 10-foot well screen placed in the low-RQD bedrock zone. These
wells were installed to total depths ranging from 16.7 feet below ground surface (bgs) at MW-
200D to 89.6 feet bgs at MW-203D.
Monitoring wells MW-202S and MW-202D are located to the south of the Pine Hall Road Ash
Landfill at the west end of Duke Power Steam Plant Road approximately 2,000 feet south of the
BCSS ash basin compliance boundary and are considered to represent background water
quality.
With the exception of monitoring wells MW-202S and MW-202D, the ash basin compliance
monitoring wells were installed at or near the compliance boundary. Monitoring wells MW-200S
and MW-200D are located to the north of the ash basin dike. Monitoring well MW-201D is
located west of Pine Hall Road near the former ash basin discharge canal. Monitoring wells
MW-203S, MW-203D, MW-204S, and MW-204D are located west of the ash basin along
Middleton Loop Road.
Note that monitoring wells MW-101S, MW-101D, MW-102S, MW-102D, MW-103S, MW-103D,
MW-104S, and MW-104D were installed by Duke Energy in 2006 as part of a voluntary
monitoring system. No groundwater samples are currently being collected from the voluntary
wells. The voluntary wells are shown on Figures 2 and 3.
The compliance boundary for Pine Hall Road Landfill, located south of the ash basin, is also
shown on Figure 2 and Figure 3 along with the groundwater monitoring wells associated with
the landfill. The ash landfill compliance boundary partially intersects th e ash basin compliance
boundary.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
3.0 RECEPTOR INFORMATION

7

3.0 Receptor Information
The August 13, 2014 NORR states:
No later than October 14th, 2014 as authorized pursuant to 15A NCAC 02L
.0106(g), the DWR is requesting that Duke perform a receptor survey at each of
the subject facilities and submitted to the DWR. The receptor survey is required
by 15A NCAC 02L .0106(g) and shall include identification of all receptors within
a radius of 2,640 feet (one-half mile) from the established compliance boundary
identified in the respective National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits. Receptors shall include, but shall not be limited to, public and
private water supply wells (including irrigation wells and unused or abandoned
wells) and surface water features within one-half mile of the facility compliance
boundary. For those facilities for which Duke has already submitted a receptor
survey, please update your submittals to ensure they meet the requirements
stated in this letter and referenced attachments and submit them with the others.
If they do not meet these requirements, you must modify and resubmit the plans.
The results of the receptor survey shall be presented on a sufficiently scaled
map. The map shall show the coal ash facility location, the facility property
boundary, the waste and compliance boundaries, and all monitoring wells listed
in the respective NPDES permits. Any identified water supply wells shall be
located on the map and shall have the well owner's name and location address
listed on a separate table that can be matched to its location on the map.
In accordance with the requirements of the NORR, HDR completed and submitted the receptor
survey to NCDENR (HDR, 2014A) in September 2014. HDR subsequently submitted to
NCDENR a supplement to the receptor survey (HDR, 2014B) in November 2014. The
supplementary information was obtained from responses to water supply well survey
questionnaires mailed to property owners within a 0.5-mile radius of the BCSS ash basin
compliance boundary requesting information on the presence of water supply wells and well
usage.
The receptor survey includes a map showing the coal ash facility location, the facility property
boundary, the waste and compliance boundaries, and all monitoring wells listed in the NPDES
permit. The identified water supply wells are located on the map, and the well owner's name
and location address are listed on a separate table that can be matched to its location on the
map.
During completion of the CSA, HDR will update the receptor information as necessary, in
general accordance with the CSA receptor survey requirements

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY

8

4.0 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology
North Carolina is divided into distinct regions by portions of three physiographic provinces: the
Atlantic Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Blue Ridge (Fenneman, 1938). The BCSS site is located
in the Milton terrane within the Piedmont province. The Piedmont province is bounded to the
east and southeast by the Atlantic Coastal Plain and to the west by the escarpment of the Blue
Ridge Mountains, covering a distance of 150 to 225 miles (LeGrand, 2004).
The topography of the Piedmont region is characterized by low, rounded hills and long, rolling,
northeast-southwest trending ridges (Heath, 1984). Stream valley to ridge relief in most areas
ranges from 75 to 200 feet. Along the Coastal Plain boundary, the Piedmont region rises from
an elevation of 300 feet above mean sea level, to the base of the Blue Ridge Mountains at an
elevation of 1,500 feet (LeGrand, 2004).
The Milton terrane consists primarily of metamorphic bedrock. The fractured bedrock is overlain
by a mantle of unconsolidated material known as regolith. The regolith includes residual soil
and saprolite zones and, where present, alluvium. Saprolite, the product of chemical
weathering of the underlying bedrock, is typically composed of clay and coarser granu lar
material and reflects the texture and structure of the rock from which it was formed. The
weathering products of granitic rocks are quartz-rich and sandy textured. Rocks poor in quartz
and rich in feldspar and ferro-magnesium minerals form a more clayey saprolite.
The groundwater system in the Piedmont Province, in most cases, is comprised of two
interconnected layers, or mediums: 1) residual soil/saprolite and weathered fractured rock
(regolith) overlying 2) fractured crystalline bedrock (Heath 1980; Harned and Daniel 1992). The
regolith layer is a thoroughly weathered and structureless residual soil that occurs near the
ground surface with the degree of weathering decreasing with depth. The residual soil grades
into saprolite, a coarser grained material that retains the structure of the parent bedrock.
Beneath the saprolite, partially weathered/fractured bedrock occurs with depth until sound
bedrock is encountered. This mantle of residual soil, saprolite, and weathered/fractured rock is
a hydrogeologic unit that covers and crosses various types of rock (LeGrand 1988). This layer
serves as the principal storage reservoir and provides an intergranular medium through which
the recharge and discharge of water from the underlying fractured rock occurs. Within the
fractured crystalline bedrock layer, the fractures control both the hydraulic conductivity and
storage capacity of the rock mass. A transition zone at the base of the regolith has been
interpreted to be present in many areas of the Piedmont. The zone consists of partially
weathered/fractured bedrock and lesser amounts of saprolite that grades into bedrock and has
been described as “being the most permeable part of the system, even slightly more permeable
than the soil zone” (Harned and Daniel 1992). The zone thins and thickens within short
distances and its boundaries may be difficult to distinguish. It has been suggested that the zone
may serve as a conduit of rapid flow and transmission of contaminated water (Harned and
Daniel 1992).
The igneous and metamorphic bedrock in the Piedmont consist of interlocking crystals and
primary porosity is very low, generally less than three percent. Secondary porosity of crystalline
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY

9
bedrock due to weathering and fractures ranges from one to ten percent (Freeze and Cherry,
1979) but, porosity values of from one to three percent are more typical (Daniel and Sharpless
1983). Daniel (1990) reported that the porosity of the regolith ranges from 35 to 55 percent near
land surface but decreases with depth as the degree of weathering decreases.
LeGrand’s (1988; 1989) conceptual model of the groundwater setting in the Piedmont
incorporates the above two medium system into an entity that is useful for the description of
groundwater conditions. That entity is the surface drainage basin that contains a perennial
stream (LeGrand 1988). Each basin is similar to adjacent basins and the conditions are
generally repetitive from basin to basin. Within a basin, movement of groundwater is generally
restricted to the area extending from the drainage divides to a perennial stream (Slope-Aquifer
System; LeGrand 1988; 1989). Rarely does groundwater move beneath a perennial stream to
another more distant stream or across drainage divides (LeGrand 1989). The crests of the
water table undulations represent natural groundwater divides within a slope-aquifer system and
may limit the area of influence of wells or contaminant plumes located within their boundaries.
The concave topographic areas between the topographic divides may be considered as flow
compartments that are open-ended down slope.
Therefore, in most cases in the Piedmont, the groundwater system is a two medium system
(LeGrand 1988) restricted to the local drainage basin. The groundwater occurs in a system
composed of two interconnected layers: residual soil/saprolite and weathered rock overlying
fractured crystalline rock separated by the transition zone. Typically, the residual soil/saprolite
is partially saturated and the water table fluctuates within it. Water movement is generally
through the weathered/fractured and fractured bedrock. The near-surface fractured crystalline
rocks can form extensive aquifers. The character of such aquifers results from the combined
effects of the rock type, fracture system, topography, and weathering. Topography exerts an
influence on both weathering and the opening of fractures, while the weathering of the
crystalline rock modifies both transmissive and storage characteristics.
Groundwater flow paths in the Piedmont are almost invariably restricted to the zone underlying
the topographic slope extending from a topographic divide to an adjacent stream. Under natural
conditions, the general direction of groundwater flow can be approximated from the surface
topography (LeGrand 2004).
Groundwater recharge in the Piedmont is derived entirely from infiltration of local precipitation.
Groundwater recharge occurs in areas of higher topography (i.e., hilltops) and groundwater
discharge occurs in lowland areas bordering surface water bodies, marshes, and floodplains
(LeGrand 2004). Average annual precipitation in the Piedmont ranges from 42 inches to 46
inches. Mean annual recharge in the Piedmont ranges from 4.0 to 9.7 inches per year (Daniel
2001).

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

10

5.0 Initial Conceptual Site Model
The following Initial Conceptual Site Model (ICSM) has been developed for the BCSS site using
available regional data and site-specific data (e.g., boring logs, well construction records, etc.).
Although the groundwater flow system at the site is not fully understood and heterogeneities
exist, the available data indicates that the LeGrand Slope-Aquifer hydrogeologic conceptual
model for sites within the Piedmont, as described in Section 4.0, is a reasonable preliminary
representation of site conditions. The ICSM served as the foundation for the development of
proposed field activities and data collection presented in Section 7.0. The ICSM will be refined
as needed as additional site-specific information is obtained during the site assessment
process.
The ICSM serves as the basis for understanding the hydrogeologic characteristics of the site , as
well as the characteristics of the ash sources, and will serve as the basis for the Site Conceptual
Model (SCM) discussed in Section 7.5.
In general, the ICSM identified the need for the following additional information concerning the
site and ash:
 Delineation of the extent of possible soil and groundwater contamination;
 Additional information concerning the direction and velocity of groundwater flow;
 Information on the constituents and concentrations found in the site ash ;
 Properties of site materials influencing fate and transport of constituents found in ash;
and
 Information on possible impacts to seeps and surface water from the constituents found
in the ash.
The assessment work plan found in section 7.0 was developed in order to collect and to perform
the analyses to provide this information. Locations of site features described below are
provided on Figure 2.
5.1 Physical Site Characteristics
The station’s ash basin is located across Pine Hall Road to the northwest of the station and is
generally bounded by an earthen dike and a natural ridge to the north, Middleton Loop Road to
the west, and Pine Hall Road to the south and east (see Figures 2 and 3). Middleton Loop
Road and Pine Hall Road are located along topographic divides. Topography to the west of
Middleton Loop Road and north of the earthen dike and natural ridge generally slopes
downward toward the Dan River. Topography to the south and east of Pine Hall Road generally
slopes downward toward Belews Lake.
There is one permitted closed ash landfill located adjacent to and southwest of the ash basin.
The landfill is located upgradient to the ash basin and is just north of the Pine Hall Road
topographic divide. The approximate landfill limits and compliance boundary of the closed Pine
Hall Road Ash Landfill (Permit No. 8503) is shown on Figures 2 and 3. Existing groundwater
monitoring wells associated with the Pine Hall Road Landfill are shown on these figures.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

11
A structural fill comprised of compacted ash was constructed southeast of the ash basin. The
structural fill is located south of the Pine Hall Road topographic divide and therefore
groundwater flow beneath the fill should be predominantly away from the ash basin. The
location of the structural fill is shown on Figures 2 and 3.
Natural topography at the BCSS site ranges from an approximate high elevation of 878 feet
southeast of the ash basin near the intersection of Pine Hall Road and Middleton Loop Road to
an approximate low elevation of 646 feet at the base of the earthen dike located at the north end
of the ash basin. The tributary that originates at the base of the dike (Little Belews Creek) flows
approximately 4,400 feet to the northwest where it drains to the Dan River. The elevation at the
discharge point of the tributary to the Dan River is approximately 578 feet. The elevation of
Belews Lake is approximately 725 feet.
5.1.1 Ash Basin
The station’s ash basin consists of a single cell impounded by an earthen dike located on the
north end of the ash basin. The dike is approximately 2,000 feet long and a maximum of
approximately 140 feet high. The top of the dike is at elevation 770 feet and the crest is 20 feet
wide. The ash basin system was constructed from 1970 to 1972 and is located approximately
3,200 feet northwest of the station. The area contained within the ash basin waste boundary,
which is shown on Figures 2 and 3, is approximately 283 acres.
The full pond elevation for the BCSS ash basin is approximately 750 feet. The normal pond
elevation of Belews Lake is approximately 725 feet. The full pond capacity of the ash basin is
estimated to be 17,656,000 cubic yards (cy).
The ash basin is operated as an integral part of the station’s wastewater treatment system,
which receives flows from the ash removal system, BCSS power house and yard holding
sumps, chemical holding pond, coal yard sumps, stormwater, landfill leachate, and treated flue
gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater. During station operations, inflows to the ash basin are
highly variable due to the cyclical nature of station operations. Inflows from the station to the
ash basin are discharged into the southeast portion of the ash basin.
The discharge from the ash basin is through a concrete discharge tower located in the
northwest portion of the ash basin. The concrete discharge tower drains through a 24-inch-
diameter SDR 17 HDPE conduit for approximately 1,600 feet and then discharges into a
concrete flume box. The ash basin pond elevation is controlled by the use of concrete stop logs
in the discharge tower. The discharge is to a tributary locally known as Little Belews Creek that
flows northward to the Dan River. The discharge from the ash basin is permitted by the
NCDENR DWR under NPDES Permit NC0022406.
The ash basin receives bottom ash sluiced from the station. Prior to approximately 1983, fly ash
and bottom ash generated at the station was sluiced to the ash basin. The Pine Hall Road ash
landfill was permitted in 1983 and the station converted to dry handling of fly ash. Fly ash is still
occasionally sluiced to the ash basin during startup or maintenance.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

12
5.1.2 Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill
The Pine Hall Road ash landfill (Permit No. 85-03) received a permit to operate on December
10, 1984 and a subsequent expansion (Phase I Expansion) was permitted in 2003. The landfill
was a monofill that was only permitted to receive fly ash from the combustion of coal at the
BCSS. The total footprint of the landfill is approximately 52 acres.
The placement of ash within the Phase 1 expansion was discontinued prior to March 2008 after
groundwater monitoring results in excess of the NCAC T15A.0200 standards were observed in
wells adjacent to the ash basin and the landfill expansion. Duke Energy subsequently initiated
and implemented a closure plan for the Pine Hall Road Landfill. From April 2008 to December
2008, a cover system was installed to close the landfill. The cover system consisted of, from
bottom to top, 40 mil linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) geomembrane, geocomposite, 18-
inch thick compacted soil cover, and 6-inch thick vegetative soil cover installed over a 37.9 acre
area. An adjacent 14.5 acre area, located to the northeast, had additional soil cover applied
and was graded to improve surface drainage. Closure construction was determined to be
complete by NCDENR on February 24, 2009 when the post-closure care period was initiated.
A total of approximately 8,500,000 cy of ash was placed within the Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill.
HDR previously prepared and submitted an assessment to the NCDENR Division of Waste
Management for exceedances of 2L Standards at this landfill (Groundwater Assessment Belews
Creek Steam Station Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill, Permit No. 8503, dated October 1, 2012).
The report assessed 2L Standard exceedances at wells MW-3 and MW-6 and found those
exceedances to be attributed to naturally occurring conditions.
The assessment report reviewed the location of wells and surface water sample locations with
exceedances of 2L Standards (MW-4, MW-7, MW2-7, MW2-9, SW-1A, and SW-2) and found
that the hydrologic boundaries and the groundwater flow at the site was such that the
groundwater at these locations was discharging to the ash basin. The report also concluded
that with the reduced infiltration, due to the engineered cover system installed in 2008, the
groundwater concentration of constituents attributable to fly ash in these wells will likely
continue to decrease over time.
5.1.3 Structural Fill
A structural fill comprised of compacted fly ash was constructed southeast of the ash basin.
The structural fill is located south of the Pine Hall Road topographic divide and therefore
groundwater flow beneath the fill should be predominantly away from the ash basin.
This structural fill was constructed under the structural fill rules found in 15A NCAC 13B .1700.
The Notification of the Beneficial Use Structural Fill was submitted by Duke Energy to NCDENR
on May 7, 2003. Ash fill operations were initiated in February 2004 and the last ash placement
occurred in July 2009. Approximately 968,000 cy of ash were placed within the structural fill.
The structural fill is located adjacent to the BCSS and is used as an equipment/material staging
area and for overflow parking.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

13
The ash within the structural fill was placed uniformly and compacted in lifts not exceeding 12
inches in thickness and was compacted to a minimum in-place density as specified by the
design engineer that was considered appropriate for the end use. After completion, a
engineered cover system similar to that previously described for the Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill
was constructed over the structural fill.
5.2 Source Characteristics
The ash in the ash basin consists of fly ash and bottom ash produced from the combustion of
coal. The physical and chemical properties of coal ash are determined by reactions that occur
during the combustion of the coal and subsequent cooling of the flue gas. In general, coal is
dried, pulverized, and conveyed to the burner area of a boiler for combustion. Material that
forms larger particles of ash and falls to the bottom of the boiler is referred to as bottom ash.
Smaller particles of ash, fly ash, are carried upward in the flue gas and are captured by an air
pollution control device. Approximately 70% to 80% of the ash produced during coal
combustion is fly ash (EPRI 1993). Typically 65% to 90% of fly ash has particle sizes that are
less than 0.010 millimeter (mm). Bottom ash particle diameters can vary from approximately 38
mm to 0.05 mm.
The chemical composition of coal ash is determined based on many factors including the source
of the coal, the type of boiler where the combustion occurs (the thermodynamics of the boiler),
and air pollution control technologies employed. The major elemental composition of fly ash
(approximately 90% by weight) is composed of mineral oxides of silicon, aluminum, iron, and
calcium. Minor constituents such as magnesium, potassium, titanium, and sulfur comprise
approximately 8% of the mineral component, while trace constituents such as arsenic,
cadmium, lead, mercury, and selenium make up less than approximately 1% of the total
composition (EPRI 2009). Other trace constituents in coal ash (fly ash and bottom ash) consist
of antimony, barium, beryllium, boron, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel,
selenium, strontium, thallium, uranium, vanadium, and zinc (EPRI 2009).
In addition to these constituents, coal ash leachate contains chloride, fluoride, sulfate, and
sulfide. In the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Proposed Rules Disposal of
Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday,
June 21, 2010, 35206, EPA proposed that the following constituents be used as indicators of
groundwater contamination in the detection monitoring program for coal combustion residual
landfills and surface impoundments: boron, chloride, conductivity, fluoride, pH, sulfate, sulfide,
and total dissolved solids (TDS). In selecting the constituents for detection monitoring, EPA
selected those that are present in coal combustion residuals that would move rapidly through
the subsurface, thereby, providing an early indication that contaminants were migrating from the
landfill or ash basin.
In the 1998 Report to Congress Wastes from the Combustion of Fossil Fuels (USEPA 1998),
EPA presented waste characterization data for CCP wastes in impoundments and in landfills.
The constituents listed were: arsenic, barium, beryllium, boron, cadmium, chromium, cobalt,
copper, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, strontium, vanadium, and zinc. In
this report, the EPA reviewed radionuclide concentrations in coal and ash and ultimately,
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

14
eliminated radionuclides from further consideration due to the low risks associated with the
radionuclides.
The geochemical factors controlling the reactions associated with leaching of ash and the
movement and transport of the constituents leached from ash is complicated. The mechanisms
that affect movement and transport vary by constituent, but, in general, are mineral equilibrium,
solubility, and adsorption onto inorganic soil particles. Due to the complexity associated with
understanding or identifying the specific mechanism controlling these processes, HDR believes
that the effect of these processes are best considered by determination of site-specific, soil-
water distribution coefficient, Kd, values as described in Section 7.7.
The oxidation-reductions and precipitation-dissolution reactions that occur in a complex
environment, such as an ash basin, are poorly understood. In addition to the variability that
might be seen in the mineralogical composition of the ash, based on different coal types,
different age of ash in the basin, etc., it would be anticipated that the chemical environment of
the ash basin would vary over time and over distance and depth, increasing the difficulty of
making specific predictions related to concentrations of specific constituents.
HDR does not believe that conditions in the site groundwater will be likely to produce methane;
therefore methane was not included in the sample parameters.
Duke Energy has performed limited leaching analysis on fly ash and bottom ash. Available data
is presented in Table 3.
Due to the complex nature of the geochemical environment and processes in the ash basin,
HDR believes that the most useful representation of the potential impacts to groundwater will be
obtained from the sampling and analyses of ash in the basin and from pore water and
groundwater samples proposed in Section 7.0 of this work plan.
Understanding the factors controlling the mobility, retention, and transport of the constituents
that may leach from ash are also complicated by the complex nature of the geochemical
environment of the ash basin combined with the complex geochemical processes occurring in
the soils beneath the ash basin along the groundwater flow paths. Mobility, retention, and
transport of the constituents can vary by each individual constituent. As these processes are
complex and are highly dependent on the mineral composition of the soils, it will not be possible
to determine with absolute clarity the specific mechanism that controls the mobility and retention
of the constituents; however, the effect of these processes will be represented by the
determination of the site-specific soil-water distribution coefficient, Kd, values as described in
Section 7.7. As described in that section, samples will be collected to develop Kd terms for the
various materials encountered at the site. These Kd terms are then to be used as part of the
groundwater modeling, if required to predict concentrations of constituents at the compliance
boundary.
The site residual soils were formed by in-place weathering of mica schist, mica gneiss, biotite
gneiss, and biotite quartz gneiss. Iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn), present in groundwater at a
number of the on-site monitoring wells, are constituents of the bedrock, primarily in ferro-
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

15
magnesium minerals. Manganese substitutes for iron and magnesium in a number of minerals
and is enriched in mafic and ultramafic lithologies relative to felsic lithologies (1,000 ppm in
basalt and 400 ppm in granite; Krauskopf 1972). In the Piedmont, manganese oxides occur as
thin coatings along bedrock fractures and as thin-coatings along relict discontinuities in
saprolite. Manganese ranges from 20 to 3,000 ppm in residual soils (Krauskopf 1972).
In a study in Orange County, North Carolina, Cunningham and Daniel (2001) reported
manganese in 94% and iron in 80% of the drinking water wells tested. Iron exceeded North
Carolina drinking water standards in 6% of the wells and for manganese in 24% of the wells
(Cunningham and Daniel 2001). In more recent study, Gillispie (2014) found that approximately
50% of wells in North Carolina have manganese concentrations exceeding the state standard of
0.05 mg/L (Gillispie 2014). The manganese detected in water wells at ten NC Division of Water
Resources groundwater research stations studied by Gillispie (2014) is naturally derived and
concentrations are spatially variable ranging from less than 0.01 to greater than 2 mg/L.
5.3 Hydrogeologic Site Characteristics
Based on a review of soil boring and monitoring well installation logs provided by Duke Energy,
subsurface stratigraphy consists of the following material types: fill, ash, residual soil, saprolite,
alluvium, partially weathered rock (PWR), and bedrock. In general, residual soil, saprolite,
PWR, and bedrock were encountered on most areas of the site. Ash is present within the ash
basin, Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill, and structural fill. Alluvium was restricted to the area north
of the ash basin dike. Based on historic U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps,
alluvium is also expected to be present in areas of historical drainage features (i.e., beneath the
central and northern portion of the ash basin). Bedrock was encountered across the site
ranging in depth from approximately 11 feet below ground surface (bgs) north of the ash basin
dike to approximately 80 feet bgs on the western and southern extents of the site.
The general stratigraphic units, in sequence from the ground surface down, are defined as
follows:
 Fill – Fill material generally consisted of re-worked silts and clays that were borrowed
from one area of the site and re-distributed to other areas. Fill was used in the
construction of dikes and as cover for the Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill and structural fill.
 Ash –Although previous exploration activities, for which Duke Energy provided boring
logs, did not evaluate BCSS ash management areas, coal ash is expected to be present
within the ash basin, Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill, and structural fill. The ash at the site
consists of both fly ash and bottom ash and is generally described as gray to black with
a silty to sandy texture, consistent with fly ash and bottom ash.
 Alluvium – Alluvium is unconsolidated soil and sediment that has been eroded and
redeposited by streams and rivers. Alluvium may consist of a variety of materials
ranging from silts and clays to sands and gravels. Alluvium was encountered in one
boring located at the compliance boundary north of the ash basin dike, which is adjacent
to a historical drainage feature in this portion of the site, and consisted of yellowish
brown clayey sand with some organics and little gravel.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

16
 Residual Soil – Residual soil is the in-place weathered soil that generally consists of
white, yellow, red, brown, gray or olive sandy clay to silty sand at the site. This unit was
encountered in various thicknesses across the site. The residual soil horizon grades into
saprolite at depth.
 Saprolite – Saprolite develops by the in-place weathering of igneous and metamorphic
rocks. Saprolite is characterized by the preservation of structures that were present in
the unweathered parent bedrock. This unit was found across the site and was generally
described as brown, reddish brown, yellow, and yellowish brown micaceous silty sand
with relict rock structure.
 Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) – PWR occurs between the saprolite and bedrock
and contains saprolite and rock remnants. The unit is described as brown and gray with
micaceous and gneissic rock fragments.
 Bedrock – Bedrock was encountered in borings completed around the western,
northern, and eastern extents of the ash basin, and further south of the basin near
Belews Lake. Depth to top of bedrock ranged from 11 feet to 80 feet bgs. Bedrock was
described as biotite gneiss, biotite quartz gneiss, mica gneiss, and mica schist.
Hydraulic conductivity in these hydrostratigraphic units can vary, but is generally thought to fall
within the ranges provided in the table below where Kh refers to hydraulic conductivity in the
horizontal direction and Kv refers to hydraulic conductivity in the vertical direction:

Hydrostratigraphic Unit Range of k Values (cm/sec)
Fill (Kh)2 1.0E-06 to 1.0E-04
Ash (Kh)5 1.0 E-06 to 1.0E-04
Ash (Kv)4 2.8E-05 to 1.2E-04
Alluvium (Kh)1,3 1.3E-06 to 2.7E-03
Residual Soil/Saprolite (Kh)1,3 9.7E-07 to 1.8E-02
Partially Weathered/ Fractured Rock –
TZ (Kh)1,3 1.9E-06 to 3.3E-02
Bedrock (Kh)1,3 1.8E-07 to 9.9E-03

Notes:
1. Data from in-situ permeability tests at sites within the Carolina Piedmont.
2. Estimates for F (fill) based on data that indicates the ‘k’ for fill is about an order of magnitude lower than
the in-situ material used for the fill (after compaction).
3. Hydraulic Conductivity Database - HDR (unpublished data).
4. Hydraulic Conductivity data from site-specific laboratory testing of Shelby tube samples from the Buck
Steam Station (BSS) (HDR, 2014C)
5. Data from in-situ permeability tests at ash basins located within the Carolina Piedmont.

As the site is located in the Piedmont, it is anticipated that the groundwater flow will be primarily
in the saprolite and the transition zone material with flow also occurring in the fractured or
weathered zones in bedrock. The sampling and testing proposed in Section 7 will provide
additional information on the transport characteristics of the materials at the site.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

17
Groundwater flow and transport at the BCSS site are assumed to follow the local slope aquifer
system, as described by LeGrand (2004). Under natural conditions, the general direction of
groundwater flow can be approximated from the surface topography. Topographic divides are
located to the south and east of the ash basin approximately along Pine Hall Road and to the
west of the basin along Middleton Loop Road. Another topographic divide exists north of the
ash basin along a ridgeline that extends from the east dike abutment toward the northeast.
These topographic divides likely also function as a groundwater divide. The predominant
direction of groundwater flow from the ash basin is likely in a northerly direction toward the
valley where Little Belews Creek flows approximately to the northwest to the Dan River with
potential flow to the south and east toward Belews Lake.
Groundwater recharge in the Piedmont is derived entirely from infiltration of local precipitation.
Groundwater recharge occurs in areas of higher topography (i.e., hilltops) and groundwater
discharge occurs in lowland areas bordering surface water bodies, marshes, and floodplains
(LeGrand 2004). At the BCSS site, groundwater recharge is expected to occur on the drainage
divide slopes bounding the east, south, west, and northeast sides of the ash basin where
topography is higher. Groundwater is expected to discharge north of the ash basin dike into
Little Belews Creek and potentially into the Dan River.
Following completion of the groundwater assessment work, a site conceptual model will be
developed, as described in Section 7.5.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
6.0 COMPLIANCE GROUNDWATER MONITORING

18

6.0 Compliance Groundwater Monitoring
As described in Section 2.3, groundwater monitoring is required as a condition of the NPDES
permit. From January 2011 through September 2014, the compliance groundwater monitoring
wells at BCSS have been sampled a total of 12 times. During this period, these monitoring
wells were sampled in:
 January 2011
 May 2011
 September 2011
 January 2012
 May 2012
 September 2012
 January 2013
 May 2013
 September 2013
 January 2014
 May 2014
 September 2014
With the exception of chromium, iron, manganese, pH, and thallium, the results for all monitored
parameters and constituents were less than the 2L Standards. Table 2 lists the range of
exceedances for chromium, iron, manganese, pH, and thallium for the period of January 2011
through May 2014. An assessment work plan was prepared in response to a letter from
NCDENR to Duke Energy dated March 27, 2013; however, approval of the work plan was never
obtained from NCDENR and therefore no work was ever performed for that proposed
assessment.
All available groundwater quality data for ash basin compliance monitoring wells and voluntary
monitoring wells (as shown on Figure 2) are summarized on Table 4. In addition, ash quality
data are provided in Table 5. Analytical results from leachate and contact stormwater collected
from the lined Craig Road Ash Landfill and FGD Landfill are provided in Table 6 and Table 8,
respectively, since the leachate from these two sources is treated and pumped to the ash basin
in accordance with the NPDES permit. Seep analytical results are provided in Table 7. The
groundwater monitoring history for the Pine Hall Road Landfill will be included in the CSA.
Compliance groundwater monitoring will continue as scheduled in accordance with the
requirements of the NPDES permit.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

19
7.0 Assessment Work Plan
Solid and aqueous media sampling will be performed to provide information pertaining to the
horizontal and vertical extent of potential soil and groundwater contamination and to determine
physical properties of the ash and soil. Based on readily available site background information,
and dependent upon accessibility, HDR anticipates collecting the following samples as part of
the subsurface exploration plan:
 Ash and soil samples from borings within and beneath the ash basin,
 Soil samples from borings located outside the ash basin boundary,
 Groundwater samples from proposed monitoring wells,
 Surface water samples from water bodies located within the ash basin waste boundary,
 Surface water and sediment samples from surface water locations potentially impacted
by the ash basin due to their proximity to or downgradient locations from the basin as
well as upgradient background locations, and
 Seep samples from locations identified as part of Duke Energy’s NPDES permit renewal
application (from July and August 2014).
In addition, hydrogeologic evaluation testing will be conducted during and following monitoring
well installation activities, as described in Section 7.1.6. Existing groundwater quality data from
compliance monitoring wells and voluntary monitoring wells will be used to supplement data
obtained from this assessment work.
A summary of the proposed exploration plan, including estimated sample quantities and
estimated depths of soil borings and monitoring wells, is presented in Table 9. The proposed
sampling locations are shown on Figure 3.
Groundwater samples collected from compliance monitoring wells MW-201D, MW-203S/D, and
MW-204S/D are located at or close to the Duke Energy property line and have shown
exceedances of the 2L Standards. These exceedances have primarily consisted of iron and/or
manganese with one thallium exceedance in 2012 in monitoring well MW-201D. Upon approval
of the work plan, HDR proposes to perform an evaluation of these exceedances with respect to
turbidity and to naturally occurring background conditions. If that evaluation finds the
exceedances are caused by turbidity, the well(s) will be redeveloped and replaced, if required,
as described in Section 7.2.1. If that evaluation finds that the exceedances are not caused by
turbidity or naturally occurring conditions, then additional monitoring wells will be installed to
delineate the extent of the exceedances. The proposed potential locations would not be located
on Duke Energy property and would require permission from the adjacent property owners. The
proposed potential locations of these wells are shown on Figure 3. The installation depths of
the well screens will be determined based on site conditions and the depth of the compliance
wells with the exceedance.
If it is determined that additional investigations are required during the review of existing data or
data developed from this assessment, Duke Energy will notify the NCDENR regional office prior
to initiating additional sampling or investigations.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

20
7.1 Subsurface Exploration
Characterization of subsurface materials will be conducted through the completion of soil
borings and borings performed for installation of monitoring wells as shown on Figure 3.
Installation details for soil borings and monitoring wells, as well as estimated sample quantities
and depths, are described below and presented in Table 9.
For nested monitoring wells, the deep monitoring well boring will be utilized for characterization
of subsurface materials and samples will be collected for laboratory analysis. Shallow, deep,
and bedrock monitoring well borings will be logged in the field as described below.
At the conclusion of well installation activities, well construction details – including casing depth;
total well depth; and well screen length, slot size, and placement within specific
hydrostratigraphic units – will be presented in tabular form for inclusion into the final CSA
Report. Well completion records will be submitted to NCDENR within 30 days of completion.
Duke Energy acknowledges that subsurface geophysics may be useful for evaluation of
subsurface conditions in areas of the site that have not been significantly reworked by
construction or ash management activities, but less useful in basins and fills. Subsequent to
evaluation of field data obtained during the proposed investigation activities, Duke Energy will
evaluate the need for and potential usefulness of subsurface geophysics in select areas of the
site. If it is determined that subsurface investigation is warranted, Duke Energy and HDR will
notify the NCDENR regional office prior to initiating additional investigations.
7.1.1 Ash and Soil Borings
Characterization of ash and underlying soil will be accomplished through the completion and
sampling of borings advanced at ten locations within the ash basin and on the ash basin dams
and dikes (designated as AB-1 through AB-9 and SB-1). In addition, 18 soil borings (designated
as GWA-1 through GWA-12, BG-1 through BG-3, MW-200BR, MW-202BR, and MW-203BR)
will be completed outside of ash management areas to provide additional soil quality data .
Field data collected during boring advancement will be used to evaluate:
 Presence or absence of ash,
 Areal extent and depth/thickness of ash, and
 Groundwater flow and transport characteristics, if groundwater is encountered.
Borings will be advanced using hollow stem auger or roller cone drilling techniques to facilitate
collection of downhole data. Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) (ASTM D 1586) and split-
spoon sampling will be performed at 5-foot increments using an 18-inch split-spoon sampler.
Note that continuous coring will be performed from auger refusal to a depth of at least 50 feet
into competent bedrock for deep bedrock monitoring well borings (designated as BR soil
boring/groundwater monitoring well locations on Figure 3).
Borings will be logged and ash/soil samples will be photographed, described, and visually
classified in the field for origin, consistency/relative density, color, and soil type in accordance
with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487/D2488).
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

21
BORINGS WITHIN ASH BASIN
In areas where ash is known or suspected to be present (i.e., AB-borings), solid phase samples
will be collected for laboratory analysis from the following intervals in each boring:
 Shallow Ash – approximately 3 − 5 feet bgs
 Deeper Ash – approximately 2 feet above the ash/soil interface
 Upper Soil – approximately 2 feet below the ash/soil interface
 Deeper Soil – approximately 8 − 10 feet below the ash/soil interface
If ash is observed to be greater than 30 feet thick, a third ash sample will be collected from the
approximate mid-point depth between the shallow and deeper samples. The ash samples will
be used to evaluate geochemical variations in ash located in the ash basin. The remaining soil
samples will be used to delineate the vertical extent of potential soil impacts beneath the ash
basin.
Ash and soil samples will be analyzed for total inorganic compounds, as presented in Table 10.
Select ash samples will be analyzed for leachable inorganic compounds using the Synthetic
Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) to evaluate the potential for leaching of constituents
from ash into underlying soil. The ash SPLP analytical results will be compared to Class GA
Standards as found in 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater Quality Standards, last amended on
April 1, 2013 (2L Standards).
Ash is located at varying depths beneath the ponded water areas within the active ash basin.
Due to safety concerns, borings will not be completed where ponded water is present within the
ash basin. Safety concerns may also prevent access to proposed boring locations on ash areas
where saturated ash presents stability issues.
BORINGS OUTSIDE ASH BASIN
Borings located outside the ash basin are designated as GWA- and BG- borings. In addition,
three bedrock borings will be performed at the existing MW-200, MW-202 and MW-203
locations and another boring, SB-1, will be performed at the base of the main dike.
The soil samples obtained from the above-listed borings will be used to provide additional
characterization of soil conditions outside the ash basin. Solid phase samples will be collected
for laboratory analysis from the following intervals in eac h boring:
 Approximately 2 – 3 feet above the water table,
 Approximately 2 – 3 feet below the water table,
 Within the saturated upper transition zone material (if not already included in the two
sample intervals above), and
 From a primary, open, stained fracture within fresh bedrock if existent (bedrock core
locations only).
The laboratory analyses performed on these samples will depend on the nature and quantity of
material collected.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

22
One or more of the above listed sampling intervals may be combined if field conditions indicate
they are in close proximity to each other (i.e., one sample will be obtained that will be applicable
to more than one interval).
The boring locations designated as BG- borings will be used to evaluate site-specific
background soil quality. Solid phase samples will be collected for laboratory analysis from the
following intervals in each boring:
 At approximately ten-foot intervals until reaching the water table (i.e., 0 – 2 feet, 10 – 12
feet, 20 – 22 feet, and so forth),
 Approximately 2 – 3 feet above the water table,
 Approximately 2 – 3 feet below the water table,
 Within the saturated upper transition zone material (if not already included in the sample
intervals above, and
 From a primary, open, stained fracture within fresh bedrock if existent (bedrock core
locations only).
The laboratory analyses performed on these samples will depend on the nature and quantity of
material collected.
One or more of the above listed sampling intervals may be combined if field conditions indicate
they are in close proximity to each other (i.e., one sample will be obtained that will be applicable
to more than one interval).
INDEX PROPERTY SAMPLING AND ANALYSES
In addition, physical properties of ash and soil will be tested in the laboratory to provide data for
use in groundwater modeling. Split-spoon samples will be collected at selected locations, with
the minimum number of samples collected from the material types as follows:
 Fill – 5 samples
 Ash – 5 samples
 Alluvium – 5 samples
 Soil/Saprolite – 5 samples
 Soil/Saprolite (immediately above refusal) – 5 samples
Select split-spoon samples will be tested for:
 Natural Moisture Content Determination, in accordance with ASTM D-2216
 Grain size with hydrometer determination, in accordance with ASTM Standard D-422
The select split-spoon samples are anticipated to be collected from the following boring
locations:
 Fill – AB-1S/D, AB-2S/D (two samples), and AB-3S/D (two samples)
 Ash – AB-4S/D/BR, AB-5S/D, AB-6S/D, AB-7S/D, and AB-8S/D
 Alluvium (if present) – MW-200BR (three samples), AB-2S/D (two samples)
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

23
 Soil/Saprolite (two locations each as stated above) – GWA-4S/D, GWA-12S/D/BR, AB-
5S/D, MW-200BR, and MW-203BR
The depth intervals of the select split-spoon samples will be determined in the field by the Lead
Geologist/Engineer.
In addition to split-spoon sampling, a minimum of five thin-walled, undisturbed tubes (“Shelby”
Tubes) in fill, ash, and soil/saprolite layers will be collected from the above-referenced boring
locations. Sample depths will be determined in the field based on conditions encountered
during borehole advancement. The Shelby Tubes will be transported to a soil testing laboratory
and each tube will be tested for the following:
 Natural Moisture Content Determination, in accordance with ASTM D-2216
 Grain size with hydrometer determination, in accordance with ASTM Standard D-422
 Hydraulic Conductivity Determination, in accordance with ASTM Standard D-5084
 Specific Gravity of Soils, in accordance with ASTM Standard D-854
The results of the laboratory soil and ash property determination will be used to determine
additional soil properties such as porosity, transmissivity, and specific storativity. The results
from these tests will be used in the groundwater fate and transport modeling. The specific
borings where these samples are collected from will be determined based on field conditions,
with consideration given to their location relative to use in the groundwater model.
7.1.2 Shallow Monitoring Wells
SHALLOW MONITORING WELLS IN REGOLITH
Groundwater quality and flow characteristics within the regolith aquifer will be evaluated through
the installation, sampling, and testing of 15 shallow monitoring wells at the locations specified
on Figure 3 with an “S” qualifier in the well name (e.g., GWA-1S and BG-1S). Shallow
monitoring wells in regolith are defined as wells that are screened wholly within the regolith zone
and set to bracket the water table surface at the time of installation.
Shallow monitoring wells will be installed using hollow stem auger or roller cone drilling
techniques. At each monitoring well location, a shallow well will be constructed with a 2-inch-
diameter, schedule 40 PVC screen and casing. Each of these wells will have a 10-foot to 15-
foot pre-packed well screen having manufactured 0.010-inch slots.
In the event that the regolith zone is found to be relatively thick at a particular well location and
that more than one discreet flow zone is observed during drilling (e.g., presence of confining
unit), a second shallow monitoring well will be installed to provide groundwater flow and quality
data for upper and lower flow zones. In these instances, the wells will be designated as “S” and
“SL” to differentiate between the upper and lower shallow wells located in the regolith zone.
SHALLOW MONITORING WELLS IN DAMS
Groundwater quality and flow characteristics of the phreatic surface within ash basin dams not
founded on ash will be evaluated through the installation, sampling and testing of three shallow
monitoring wells along the main dam on the north side of the ash basin (AB-1S, AB-2S, AB-3S)
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

24
and one shallow monitoring well along a small dike located in the south end of the ash basin
(AB-9S). Wells will be installed with 10-foot to 15-foot screens with the well screen set to
bracket the phreatic surface at the time of installation.
Shallow monitoring wells will be installed using hollow stem auger or roller cone drilling
techniques. At each monitoring well location, a shallow well will be constructed with a 2-inch-
diameter, schedule 40 PVC screen and casing. Each of these wells will have a 10-foot to 15-
foot pre-packed well screen having manufactured 0.010-inch slots.
SHALLOW MONITORING WELLS IN ASH BASIN POREWATER
The water quality and flow characteristics within the ash basin porewater will be evaluated
through the installation, sampling and testing of 5 porewater wells at the locations specified on
Figure 3. Wells designated as “S” will be installed with 10-foot to15-foot screens with the well
screen set to bracket the water table surface at the time of installation. Wells designated as
“SL” will be installed with the bottom of the well screen set above the ash-regolith interface and
will be installed with 10-foot screens.
These wells will be installed using hollow stem auger or roller cone drilling techniques. The
wells will be constructed with 2-inch-diameter, schedule 40 PVC screen and casing. These
wells will be installed with pre-packed well screens having manufactured 0.010-inch slots.
7.1.3 Deep Monitoring Wells
Groundwater quality and flow characteristics within the transition zone (if present) will be
evaluated through the installation, sampling, and testing of 24 deep monitoring wells at the
locations specified on Figure 3 with a “D” qualifier in the well name (e.g., AB-1D). Deep
monitoring wells are defined as wells that are screened within the partially weathered/fractured
bedrock transition zone at the base of the regolith.
Deep monitoring wells will be installed using hollow stem augers and rock coring drilling
techniques. At each deep monitoring well location, a double-cased well will be constructed with
a 6-inch-diameter PVC outer casing and a 2-inch-diameter PVC inner casing and well screen.
The purpose of installing cased wells at the site is to prevent possible cross-contamination of
flow zones within the shallow and deeper portions of the unconfined aquifer during well
installation. Outer well casings (6-inch casing) will be advanced to auger refusal and set
approximately 1 foot into PWR (if present). Note that location-specific subsurface geology will
dictate actual casing depths on a per-well basis. The annulus between the borehole and casing
will be grouted to the surface using the tremie grout method. After the grout has been allowed
to cure for a period of 24 hours, the borehole will be extended via coring approximately 10 feet
to 15 feet into transition zone rock using an HQ core barrel. A 2-inch-diameter well with a 5-foot
pre-packed well screen will be set at least 2 feet below the bottom of the outer casing.
If the PWR thickness is determined to be greater than 30 feet thick at a nested well location,
additional wells in the transition zone will be considered based on site-specific conditions.
Rock cores will be logged in accordance with the Field Guide for Rock Core Logging and
Fracture Analysis by Midwest GeoSciences Group. Percent recovery and rock quality
designation (RQD) will be calculated in the field. The cores will be photographed and retained.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

25
7.1.4 Bedrock Monitoring Wells
Groundwater quality and flow within fractured bedrock beneath the site will be evaluated
through the installation, sampling and testing of 7 bedrock monitoring wells at the locations
specified on Figure 3 with a “BR” qualifier in the name (e.g., GWA-5BR). Bedrock monitoring
wells are defined as wells that are screened across water-bearing fractures wholly within fresh,
competent bedrock.
At these locations, continuous coring will be performed from refusal to a depth of at least 50 feet
into competent bedrock. Packer testing will be performed on select fractures observed in the
rock cores. See Section 7.1.6 for details regarding packer test implementation.
Water sources to be used in rock coring and packer tests will be sampled for all of the
constituents in Table 11 before use.
Rock cores will be logged in accordance with the Field Guide for Rock Core Logging and
Fracture Analysis by Midwest GeoSciences Group. Percent recovery and RQD will be
calculated in the field. The cores will be photographed and retained.
At each of these locations, a double-cased well will be constructed with a 6-inch-diameter PVC
outer casing and a 2-inch-diameter PVC inner casing and well screen. Outer well casings will
be advanced through the transition zone and set approximately 1 foot into competent bedrock.
The annulus between the borehole and casing will be grouted to the surface using the tremie
grout method. After the grout has been allowed to cure for a period of 24 hours, the borehole
will be extended via coring approximately 50 feet into competent bedrock using an HQ core
barrel. A 2-inch-diameter well with a 5-foot, pre-packed well screen will be set at depth across
an interpreted water-bearing fracture or fracture zone, based on the results of packer testing.
Note that location-specific subsurface geology will dictate actual casing depths and screen
placement on a per-well basis.
7.1.5 Well Completion and Development
WELL COMPLETION
As described above, pre-packed screens will be installed around the monitoring well screens to
reduce turbidity during sample collection. The pre-packed screens will consist of environmental
grade sand contained within a stainless steel wire mesh cylinder. The sand gradation in the
pre-packed screen will be made in advance anticipating a wide range of site conditions;
however, HDR believes that the sand will typically be 20/40 mesh silica sand. The
Geologist/Engineer involved with the specific installation will evaluate field conditions and
determine if changes are required. A minimum one to two-foot-thick bentonite pellet seal,
hydrated with potable water, will be placed above the pre-packed screen. Cement grout will be
placed in the annular space between the PVC casing and the borehole above the bentonite
pellet seal and extending to the ground surface. Each well will be finished at the ground surface
with a two-foot- (2’) square concrete well pad and new four-inch or eight-inch steel, above-grade
lockable covers. Following completion, all wells will be locked with a keyed pad lock.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

26
WELL DEVELOPMENT
All newly installed monitoring wells will be developed to create an effective filter pack around the
well screen and to remove fine particles within the well from the formation near the borehole.
Based on site-specific conditions per 15A NCAC 02C .0108(p), appropriate measures (e.g.,
agitation, surging, pumping, etc.) will be utilized to stress the formation around the screen and
the filter pack so that mobile fines, silts, and clays are pulled into the well and removed .
Water quality parameters (specific conductance, pH, temperature, oxidation-reduction potential
(ORP), and turbidity) will be measured and recorded during development and should stabilize
before development is considered complete. Development will continue unti l development
water is visually clear (< 10 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU) Turbidity) and sediment free as
determined by the absence of settled solids.
If a well cannot be developed to produce low turbidity (< 10 NTU) groundwater samples,
NCDENR will be notified and supplied with the well completion and development measures that
have been employed to make a determination if the turbidity is an artifact of the geologic
materials in which the well is screened.
Following development, sounding the bottom of the well with a water level meter should indicate
a “hard” (sediment-free) bottom. Development records will be prepared under the direction of
the Project Scientist/Engineer and will include development method(s), water volume removed,
and field measurements of temperature, pH, conductivity, and turbidity.
7.1.6 Hydrogeologic Evaluation Testing
In order to better characterize hydrogeologic conditions at the site, falling and constant head
tests, packers tests, and slug tests will be performed as described below. Data obtained from
these tests will be used in groundwater modeling. In addition, historical soil boring data at the
site will be utilized as appropriate to better characterize hydrogeologic conditions and will be
used for groundwater modeling. All water meters, pressure gages, and pressure transducers
will be calibrated per specifications for testing.
FALLING/CONSTANT HEAD TESTS
A minimum of five (5) in-situ borehole horizontal permeability tests, either falling or constant
head tests, will be performed just below refusal in the upper bedrock (transition zone if present).
In each of the hydrostratigraphic units above refusal (ash, fill, alluvium, soil/saprolite), a
minimum of ten falling or constant head tests (five for vertical permeability and five for horizontal
permeability) will be performed. The tests will be at locations based on site-specific conditions
at the time of assessment work. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1995) test method and
calculation procedures as described in Chapter 10 of their Ground Water Manual (2nd Edition)
will be used.
PACKER TESTS
A minimum of five (5) packer tests using a double packer system will be performed in deep
well/transition zone borings at locations based on site-specific conditions, as well as a minimum
of one (1) packer test in each soil/rock core well boring, as described in Section 7.1.4 after
completion of the holes. Packer tests will utilize a double packer system and the interval (5 feet
or 10 feet based on field conditions) to be tested will be based on observation of the rock core
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

27
and will be selected by the Lead Geologist/Engineer. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1995)
test method and calculation procedures as described in Chapter 10 of their Ground Water
Manual (2nd Edition) will be used.
SLUG TESTS
Hydraulic conductivity (slug) tests will be completed in all installed monitoring wells under the
direction of the Lead Geologist/Engineer. Slug tests will be performed to meet the requirements
of the NCDENR Memorandum titled, “Performance and Analysis of Aquifer Slug Tests and
Pumping Tests Policy,” dated May 31, 2007. Water level change during the slug tests will be
recorded by a data logger. The slug test will be performed for no less than ten minutes, or until
such time as the water level in the test well recovers 95% of its original pre-test level, whichever
occurs first. Slug tests will be terminated after two hours even if the 95% pre-test level is not
achieved. Slug test field data will be analyzed using the Aqtesolv (or similar) software using the
Bouwer and Rice method.
7.2 Groundwater Sampling and Analysis
Subsequent to monitoring well installation and development, each newly installed well will be
sampled using low-flow sampling techniques in accordance with USEPA Region 1 Low Stress
(low flow) Purging and Sampling Procedure for the Collection of Groundwater Samples from
Monitoring Wells (revised January 19, 2010). The purposes of the proposed monitoring wells
are as follows:
 AB-series Wells –The AB-series well locations were selected to provide water quality
data in and beneath the ash basin and ash basin dikes
 GWA-series Wells – The GWA-series well locations were selected to provide water
quality data beyond the ash basin waste boundary for use in groundwater modeling (i.e.,
to evaluate the horizontal and vertical extent of potentially impacted groundwater outside
the ash basin waste boundary).
 BG-series Wells – These wells will be used to provide information on background water
quality. The background well locations were selected to provide additional physical
separation from possible influence of the ash basin on groundwater. These wells will
also be useful in the statistical analysis to determine the site-specific background water
quality concentrations (SSBCs).
 MW-200BR, MW-202BR, and MW-203BR – These wells will be installed at existing
monitoring well locations beyond the ash basin waste boundary to provide water quality
data within the bedrock aquifer for use in groundwater modeling.
During low-flow purging and sampling, groundwater is pumped into a flow-through chamber at
flow rates that minimize or stabilize water level drawdown within the well. Indicator parameters
are measured over time (usually at 5-minute intervals). When parameters have stabilized within
±0.2 pH units and ±10 percent for temperature, conductivity, and dissolved oxygen (DO), and
±10 millivolts (mV) for oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) over three consecutive readings,
representative groundwater has been achieved for sampling. Turbidity levels of 10 NTU or less
will be targeted prior to sample collection. Purging will be discontinued and groundwater
samples will be obtained if turbidity levels of 10 NTU or less are not obtained after 2 hours of
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

28
continuous purging. Groundwater samples will be analyzed by a North Carolina certified
laboratory for the constituents included in Table 11. Select constituents will be analyzed for
total and dissolved concentrations.
In 2014, the Electric Power Research Institute published the results of a critical review that
presented the current state-of-knowledge concerning radioactive elements in CCPs and the
potential radiological impacts associated with management and disposal. The review found:
Despite the enrichment of radionuclides from coal to ash, this critical review did no t
locate any published studies that suggested typical CCPs posed any significant
radiological risks above background in the disposal scenarios considered, and when
used in concrete products. These conclusions are consistent with previous
assessments. The USGS (1997) concluded that “Radioactive elements in coal and fly
ash should not be sources of alarm. The vast majority of coal and the majority of fly ash
are not significantly enriched in radioactive elements, or in associated radioactivity,
compared to common soils or rocks.” A year later, the U.S. EPA (1998) concluded that
the risks of exposure to radionuclide emissions from electric utilities are “substantially
lower than the risks due to exposure to background radiation.”
Duke Energy proposes sampling wells MW-101S/D, MW-102D, MW-103S/D, and BG-1S/D for
total combined radium (Ra-226 and Ra-228) and will consult with DWR regional office to
determine if additional wells are to be sampled.
Groundwater sample results will be compared to Class GA Standards as found in 15A NCAC
02L .0202 Groundwater Quality Standards, last amended on April 1, 2013 (2L Standards).
Redox conditions are not likely to be strong enough to produce methane at the site; therefore,
methane was not included in the constituent list (Table 11).
7.2.1 Compliance and Voluntary Monitoring Wells
Groundwater samples will be collected from selected existing voluntary and/or compliance
monitoring wells. Prior to collecting groundwater samples from the existing voluntary and/or
compliance monitoring wells, the historical turbidity values at each of the wells will be evaluated.
For wells where turbidity levels have historically been greater than 10 NTUs, these wells will be
re-developed, as described above, prior to collecting groundwater samples. If the
redevelopment does not reduce turbidity level, the well(s) will be replaced. The DWR regional
office will be contact prior to replacement of a compliance monitoring well.
7.2.2 Speciation of Select Inorganics
In addition to total analytes, speciation of select inorganics will be conducted for select sample
locations to characterize the aqueous chemistry and geochemistry in locations and depths of
concern. Speciation of iron (Fe(II), Fe(III)) and manganese (Mn(II), Mn(IV)) will be conducted in
pore water samples collected from upper and lower elevations of ash within the basin and in
groundwater samples collected from wells outside and downgradient of the ash basin.
Specifically, Duke Energy proposes to speciate iron and manganese in pore water samples
collected from proposed wells AB-4S/SL/D, AB-5S/SL/D, AB-6S/SL/D, and AB-7S/SL/D; in
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

29
groundwater samples collected from compliance wells MW-200S/D, and MW-202S/D; and in
groundwater samples collected from proposed wells GWA-5S/D, and GWA-12S/D. Laboratory
analyses will be performed in accordance with the methods provided in Table 11.
7.3 Surface Water, Sediment, and Seep Sampling
7.3.1 Surface Water Samples
WITHIN ASH BASIN
Surface water samples will be collected from the ash basin at the approximate open water
locations shown on Figure 3 (SW-AB1 through SW-AB9). At each location, two water samples
will be collected – one sample close to the surface (i.e., 0 to 1 foot from surface) and one
sample at a depth just above the ash surface (i.e., 1 foot to 2 feet above the ash to avoid
suspending the ash within the sample). Prior to sampling, the depth to ash will be measured by
slowly lowering a measuring stick or tape until the ash surface is encountered, being careful to
avoid suspending the ash. The depth to ash will be noted, and a sample thief will be slowly
lowered to the desired depth to collect the sample. The sample thief and sample will be
retrieved and the sample will be transferred to the appropriate sample containers provided by
the laboratory. In areas where the water body is less than 5 feet deep, one water sample will be
collected from the location at a depth just above the ash surface. Ash basin surface water
samples will be analyzed for the same constituents as groundwater samples (Table 11). Select
constituents will be analyzed for total and dissolved concentrations.
OUTSIDE ASH BASIN
Four surface water samples will be collected from outside of the ash basin as shown on Figure
3. Two samples will be collected from the Dan River. Samples SW-DR-U and SW-DR-D will be
obtained upstream and downstream, respectively, from the confluence of Little Belews Creek
with the Dan River. Two samples will also be obtained from Belews Lake. Samples SW-BL-U
and SW-BL-D will be obtained upstream and downstream, respectively, of the BCSS (including
the steam station, ash basin, Pine Hall Road Ash Landfill, and structural fill). The upstream
samples will be considered background surface water samples. These surface water samples
will be analyzed for the same constituents as groundwater samples (Table 11). Select
constituents will be analyzed for total and dissolved concentrations.
Analytical results for surface water samples collected from outside the ash basin will be
compared to 15A NCAC 2B .0200 Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to
Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina (2B Standards), from the DWR, and EPA
Criteria Table, last amended on May 15, 2013.
7.3.2 Sediment Samples
Sediment samples will be collected from the bed surface of the four surface water sample
locations outside of the ash basin (designated as SD-DR-U, SD-DR-D, SD-BL-U, and SD-BL-D)
and the seep sample locations as shown on Figure 3 (designated as S-1 through S-11). The
SD-DR-U and SD-BL-U locations will be considered background sediment samples. The
sediment samples will be analyzed for total inorganics using the same constituents list proposed
for the soil and ash samples (Table 10).
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

30
7.3.3 Seep Samples
Water samples will be collected from the seep sample locations shown on Figure 3. These
seep sample locations (designated as S-1 through S-11) will be collected near the time of the
monitoring well sampling to minimize concerns about potential temporal variability between
surface water and groundwater and analyzed for the constituents listed in Table 11. Select
constituents will be analyzed for total and dissolved concentrations.
In March 2014, DENR conducted sampling of seeps and surface water locations at the site.
HDR does not have the analytical results from this sampling event at this time; however, once
data is received, HDR will review the data and determine if changes in the proposed seep or
surface water locations is needed.
Analytical results from the seep sampling will be reviewed to determine if similar speciation
analyses as described in Section 7.2.3 are to be performed for selected seep locations.
After analytical results for seep samples are reviewed, a determination will be made concerning
collection of off-site seep samples. If it is determined that off site seep samples are to be
collected, the DWR regional office will be contacted.
7.4 Field and Sampling Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Procedures
Documentation of field activities will be completed using a combination of logbooks, field data
records (FDRs), sample tracking systems, and sample custody records. Site and field logbooks
are completed to provide a general record of activities and events that occur during each field
task. FDRs have been designated for each exploration and sample collection task, to provide a
complete record of data obtained during the activity.
7.4.1 Field Logbooks
The field logbooks provide a daily handwritten account of field activities. Logbooks are
hardcover books that are permanently bound. All entries are made in indelible ink, and
corrections are made with a single line with the author initials and date. Each page of the
logbook will be dated and initialed by the person completing the log. Partially completed pages
will have a line drawn through the unused portion at the end of each day with the author’s
initials. The following information is generally entered into the field logbooks:
 The date and time of each entry. The daily log generally begins with the Pre-Job Safety
Brief,
 A summary of important tasks or subtasks completed during the day,
 A description of field tests completed in association with the daily task,
 A description of samples collected including documentation of any quality control
samples that were prepared (rinse blanks, duplicates, matrix spike, split samples, etc.),
 Documentation of equipment maintenance and calibration activities,
 Documentation of equipment decontamination activities, and
 Descriptions of deviations from the work plan.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

31
7.4.2 Field Data Records
Sample FDRs contain sample collection and/or exploration details. A FDR is completed each
time a field sample is collected. The goal of the FDR is to document exploration an d sample
collection methods, materials, dates and times, and sample locations and identifiers. Field
measurements and observations associated with a given exploration or sample collection task
are recorded on the FDRs. FDRs are maintained throughout the field program in files that
become a permanent record of field program activities.
7.4.3 Sample Identification
In order to ensure that each number for every field sample collected is unique, samples will be
identified by the sample location and depth interval, if applicable (e.g., MW-11S (5-6’). Samples
will be numbered in accordance with the proposed sample IDs shown on Figure 3.
7.4.4 Field Equipment Calibration
Field sampling equipment (e.g., water quality meter) will be properly maintained and calibrated
prior to and during continued use to assure that measurements are accurate within the
limitations of the equipment. Personnel will follow the manufacturers’ instructions to determine if
the instruments are functioning within their established operation ranges. The calibration data
will be recorded on a FDR.
To be acceptable, a field test must be bracketed between acceptable calibration results.
 The first check may be an initial calibration, but the second check must be a continuing
verification check.
 Each field instrument must be calibrated prior to use.
 Verify the calibration at no more than 24-hour intervals during use and at the end of the
use, if the instrument will not be used the next day or time periods greater than 24 hours.
 Initial calibration and verification checks must meet the acceptance criteria
recommended by each instrument manufacturer.
 If an initial calibration or verification check fails to meet the acceptance criteria,
immediately recalibrate the instrument or remove it from service.
 If a calibration check fails to meet the acceptance criteria and it is not possible to
reanalyze the samples, the following actions must be taken:
- Report results between the last acceptable calibration check and the failed
calibration check as estimated (qualified with a “J”);
- Include a narrative of the problem; and
- Shorten the time period between verification checks or repair/replace the instrument.
 If historically generated data demonstrate that a specific instrument remains stable for
extended periods of time, the interval between initial calibration and calibration checks
may be increased.
- Acceptable field data must be bracketed by acceptable checks. Data that are not
bracketed by acceptable checks must be qualified.
- Base the selected time interval on the shortest interval that the instrument maintains
stability.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

32
- If an extended time interval is used and the instrument consistently fails to meet the
final calibration check, then the instrument may require maintenance to repair the
problem or the time period is too long and must be shortened.
 For continuous monitoring equipment, acceptable field data must be bracketed by
acceptable checks or the data must be qualified.

Sampling or field measurement instruments determined to be malfunctioning will be repaired or
will be replaced with a new piece of equipment.
7.4.5 Sample Custody Requirements
A program of sample custody will be followed during sample handling activities in both field and
laboratory operations. This program is designed to assure that each sample is accounted for at
all times. The appropriate sampling and laboratory personnel will complete sample FDRs,
chain-of-custody records, and laboratory receipt sheets.
The primary objective of sample custody procedures is to obtain an accurate written record that
can trace the handling of all samples during the sample collection process, through ana lysis,
until final disposition.
FIELD SAMPLE CUSTODY
Sample custody for samples collected during each sampling event will be maintained by the
personnel collecting the samples. Each sampler is responsible for documenting each sample
transfer, maintaining sample custody until the samples are shipped off-site, and sample
shipment. The sample custody protocol followed by the sampling personnel involves:
 Documenting procedures and amounts of reagents or supplies (e.g., filters) which
become an integral part of the sample from sample preparation and preservation;
 Recording sample locations, sample bottle identification, and specific sample acquisition
measures on appropriate forms;
 Using sample labels to document all information necessary for effective sample tracking;
and,
 Completing sample FDR forms to establish sample custody in the field before sample
shipment.
Prepared labels are normally developed for each sample prior to sample collection. At a
minimum, each label will contain:
 Sample location and depth (if applicable),
 Date and time collected,
 Sampler identification, and
 Analyses requested and applicable preservative.
A manually-prepared chain-of-custody record will be initiated at the time of sample collection.
The chain-of-custody record documents:
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

33
 Sample handling procedures including sample location, sample number and number of
containers corresponding to each sample number;
 The requested analysis and applicable preservative;
 The dates and times of sample collection;
 The names of the sampler(s) and the person shipping the samples (if applicable);
 The date and time that samples were delivered for shipping (if applicable);
 Shipping information (e.g., FedEx Air Bill); and,
 The names of those responsible for receiving the samples at the laboratory.
Chain-of-custody records will be prepared by the individual field samplers.
SAMPLE CONTAINER PACKING
Sample containers will be packed in plastic coolers for shipment or pick up by the laboratory.
Bottles will be packed tightly to reduce movement of bottles duri ng transport. Ice will be placed
in the cooler along with the chain-of-custody record in a separate, resealable, air tight, plastic
bag. A temperature blank provided by the laboratory will also be placed in each cooler prior to
shipment if required for the type of samples collected and analyses requested.
7.4.6 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Samples
The following Quality Assurance/Quality Control samples will be collected during the proposed
field activities:
 Equipment rinse blanks (one per day);
 Field Duplicates (one per 20 samples per sample medium)
Equipment rinse blanks will be collected from non-dedicated equipment used between wells and
from drilling equipment between soil samples. The field equipment is cleaned following
documented cleaning procedures. An aliquot of the final control rinse water is passed over the
cleaned equipment directly into a sample container and submitted for analysis. The equipment
rinse blanks enable evaluation of bias (systematic errors) that could occur due to
decontamination.
A field duplicate is a replicate sample prepared at the sampling locations from equal portions of
all sample aliquots combined to make the sample. Both the field duplicate and the sample are
collected at the same time, in the same container type, preserved in the same way, and
analyzed by the same laboratory as a measure of sampling and analytical precision.
Field QA/QC samples will be analyzed for the same constituents as proposed for the soil and
groundwater samples, as identified on Tables 10 and 11, respectively.
7.4.7 Decontamination Procedures
DECONTAMINATION PAD
A decontamination pad will be constructed for field cleaning of drilling equipment. The
decontamination pad will meet the following requirements:
 The pad will be constructed in an area believed to be free of surface contamination.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

34
 The pad will be lined with a water-impermeable material with no seams within the pad.
The material should be easily replaced (disposable) or repairable.
 If possible, the pad will be constructed on a level, paved surface to facilitate the removal
of decontamination water. This may be accomplished by either constructing the pad
with one corner lower than the rest or by creating a lined sump or pit in one corner.
 Sawhorses or racks constructed to hold field equipment while being cleaned will be high
enough above ground to prevent equipment from being contacted by splashback during
decontamination.
Decontamination water will be allowed to percolate into the ground adjacent to the
decontamination pad. Containment and disposal of decontamination water is not required.
At the completion of field activities, the decontamination pad will be removed and any sump or
pit will be backfilled with appropriate material.
DECONTAMINATION OF FIELD SAMPLING EQUIPMENT
Field sampling equipment will be decontaminated between sample locations using potable
water and phosphate and borax-free detergent solution and a brush, if necessary, to remove
particulate matter and surface films. Equipment will then be rinsed thoroughly with tap water to
remove detergent solution prior to use at the next sample location.
DECONTAMINATION OF DRILLING EQUIPMENT
Any downhole drilling equipment will be steam cleaned between boreholes. The following
procedure will be used for field cleaning augers, drill stems, rods, tools, and associated
downhole equipment.
 Hollow-stem augers, bits, drilling rods, split-spoon samplers and other downhole
equipment will be placed on racks or sawhorses at least two feet above the floor of the
temporary decontamination pad. Soil, mud, and other material will be removed by hand,
brushes, and potable water. The equipment will be steam cleaned using a high
pressure, high temperature steam cleaner.
 Downhole equipment will be rinsed thoroughly with potable water after steam cleaning.
The clean equipment will then be removed from the decontamination pad and either placed on
the drill rig, if mobilizing immediately to the next boring, or placed on and covered with clean,
unused plastic sheeting if not used immediately.
7.5 Site Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model
The data obtained during the proposed assessment will be supplemented by available reports
and data on site geotechnical, geologic, and hydrologic conditions to develop a site
hydrogeologic conceptual model (SCM). The scope of these efforts will depend upon site
conditions and existing geologic information for the site.
The SCM is a conceptual interpretation of the processes and characteristics of a site with
respect to the groundwater flow and other hydrologic processes at the site and will be a
refinement of the ICSM described in Section 5.0.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

35
The NCDENR document, “Hydrogeologic Investigation and Reporting Policy Memorandum,”
dated May 31, 2007, will be used as general guidance. In general, components of the SCM will
consist of developing and describing the following aspects of the site: geologic/soil framework,
hydrologic framework, and the hydraulic properties of site materials. More specifically, the SCM
will describe how these aspects of the site affect the groundwater flow at the site. In addition to
these site aspects, the SCM will:
 Describe the site and regional geology,
 Present longitudinal and transverse cross-sections showing the hydrostratigraphic
layers,
 Develop the hydrostratigraphic layer properties required for the groundwater model,
 Present a groundwater contour map showing the potentiometric surface of the shallow
aquifer, and
 Present information on horizontal and vertical groundwater gradients.
The SCM will serve as the basis for developing understanding of the hydrogeologic
characteristics of the site and for developing a groundwater flow and transport model.
The historic site groundwater elevations and ash basin water elevations will be used to develop
an historic estimated seasonal high groundwater contour map for the site.
A fracture trace analysis will be performed for the site, as well as onsite/near-site geologic
mapping, to better understand site geology and to confirm and support the SCM.
7.6 Site-Specific Background Concentrations
Statistical analysis will be performed using methods outlined in the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) Unified Guidance (USEPA, 2009, EPA 530/R-09-007) to develop SSBCs.
The SSBCs will be determined to assess whether or not exceedances can be attributed to
naturally occurring background concentrations or attributed to potential contamination.
Specifically, the relationship between exceedances and turbidity will be explored to determine
whether or not there is a possible correlation due to naturally occurring conditions and/or well
construction. Alternative background boring locations will be proposed to NCDENR if the
background wells shown on Figure 3 are found to not represent background conditions.
7.7 Groundwater Fate and Transport Model
A three-dimensional groundwater fate and transport model will be developed for the ash basin
site. The objective of the model process will be to:
 Predict concentrations of the Constituents of Potential Concern (COPC) at the facility’s
compliance boundary or other locations of interest over time
 Estimate the groundwater flow and loading to surface water discharge areas
 Support the development of the CSA report and the corrective action plan, if required

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

36
The model and model report will be developed in general accordance with the guidelines f ound
in the memorandum Groundwater Modeling Policy, NCDENR DWQ, May 31, 2007 (DENR
modeling guidelines).
The groundwater model will be developed from the SCM, from existing wells and boring
information provided by Duke Energy, and from information developed from the site
investigation. The model will also be supplemented with additional information developed by
HDR from other Piedmont sites as applicable. The SCM is a conceptual interpretation of the
processes and characteristics of a site with respect to the groundwater flow and other
hydrologic processes at the site. Development of the SCM is discussed in Section 7.5.
Although the site is anticipated in general to conform to the LeGrand conceptual groundwater
model, due to the configuration of the ash basin, the additional possible sources (structural fill
and ash landfills), and the boundary conditions present at the site, HDR believes that a three-
dimensional groundwater model would be more appropriate than performing two-dimensional
modeling. The modeling process, the development of the model hydrostratigraphic layers, the
model extent (or domain), and the proposed model boundary conditions are presented below.
7.7.1 MODFLOW/MT3DMS Model
The groundwater modeling will be performed under the direction of Dr. William Langley, PE,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of North Carolina Charlotte
(UNCC). Groundwater flow and constituent fate and transport will be modeled using Visual
MODFLOW 2011.1 (flow engine USGS MODFLOW 2005 from SWS) and MT3DMS.
Duke Energy, HDR, and UNCC considered the appropriateness of using MODFLOW and
MT3DMS as compared to the use of MODFLOW coupled with a geochemical reaction code
such as PHREEQC. The decision to use MODFLOW and MT3DMS was based on the intensive
data requirements of PHREEQC, the complexity of developing an appropriate geochemical
model given the heterogeneous nature of Piedmont geology, and the general acceptance of
MODLFOW and MT3DMS. However, batch PHREEQC simulations may be used to estimate
sensitivity of the proposed sorption constants used with MODFLOW/MT3DMS, as described
below, if geochemistry varies significantly across the site.
Additional factors that were considered in the decision to use MT3DMS as compared to a
reaction-based code utilizing geochemical modeling were as follows:
1. Modeling the complete geochemical fate and transport of trace, minor, or major
constituents would require simultaneous modeling of the following in addition to
groundwater flow:
 All major, minor, and trace constituents (in their respective species forms) in
aqueous, equilibrium (solid), and complexed phases
 Solution pH, oxidation/reduction potential, alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, and
temperature
 Reactions including oxidation/reduction, complexation, precipitation/dissolution, and
ion exchange
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

37
2. Transient versus steady-state reaction kinetics may need to be considered. In general,
equilibrium phases for trace constituents cannot be identified by mineralogical analysis.
In this case, speciation geochemical modeling is required to identify postulated solid
phases by their respective saturation indices.

3. If geochemical conditions across the site are not widely variable, an approach that
considers each modeled COPC as a single species in the dissolved and complexed, or
sorbed, phases is justified. The ratio of these two phases is prescribed by the sorption
coefficient Kd which has dimensions of volume (L3) per unit mass (M). The variation in
geochemical conditions can be considered, if needed, by examining pH,
oxidation/reduction potential, alkalinity, and dissolved oxygen, perhaps combined with
geochemical modeling, to justify the Kd approach utilized by MT3DMS. Geochemical
modeling using PHREEQC (Parkhurst et al. 2013) running in the batch mode can be
used to indicate the extent to which a COPC is subject to solubility constraints, a
variable Kd, or other processes.
The groundwater model will be developed in general accordance with the guidelines found in
the Groundwater Modeling Policy, NCDENR DWQ, May 31, 2007, and based on discussions
previously conducted concerning groundwater modeling between Duke Energy, HDR, UNCC,
and NCDENR.
7.7.2 Development of Kd Terms
It is critical to determine the ability of the site soils to attenuate, adsorb, or through other
processes reduce the concentrations of COPCs that may impact groundwater. To determine the
capacity of the site soils to attenuate a COPC, the site-specific Kd terms will be developed by
UNCC utilizing soil samples collected during the si te investigation. These Kd terms quantify the
equilibrium relationship between chemical constituents in the dissolved and sorbed phases.
For soils at the site, sorption is most likely the reversible, exchange-site type associated with
hydrous oxides of iron on weathered soil surfaces (NCDENR DWQ 2012). Experiments to
quantify sorption can be conducted using batch or column procedures (Daniels and Das 2014).
A batch sorption procedure generally consists of combining soil samples and solutions across a
range of soil-to-solution ratios, followed by shaking until chemical equilibrium is achieved. Initial
and final concentrations of chemicals in the solution determine the adsorbed amount of
chemical and provide data for developing plots of sorbed versus dissolved chemical and the
resultant Kd term. If the plot, or isotherm, is linear, the single-valued Kd is considered linear as
well. Depending on the chemical constituent and soil characteristics, non-linear isotherms may
also result (EPRI 2004).
The column sorption procedure consists of passing a solution of known chemical concentration
through a cylindrical column packed with the soil sample. Batch and column methods for
estimating sorption were considered in development of the Kd terms. UNCC recommends an
adaption of the column method (Daniels and Das 2014) to develop Kd estimates that are more
conservative and representative of in-situ conditions, especially with regard to soil-to-liquid
ratios.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

38
Soil samples with measured dry density and maximum particle size will be placed in lab-scale
columns configured to operate in the up-flow mode. A solution with measured COPC
concentrations will be pumped through each column as effluent samples are collected at regular
intervals over time. When constituent breakthroughs are verified, a “clean” solution (no COPCs)
will be pumped through the columns and effluent samples will be collected as well. Samples will
be analyzed by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectroscopy (ICP-MS) and ion
chromatography (IC) in the Civil & Environmental Engineering laboratories at the EPIC Building,
UNC Charlotte. COPCs measured in the column effluent as a function of cumulative pore
volumes displaced will be analyzed using CXTFIT (Tang et al. 2010) to select the
appropriate adsorption model and associated parameters of the partition coefficient Kd, either
linear, Freundlich, or Langmuir. This allows use of a nonlinear partition coefficient in the event
that the linear partition coefficient is not suitable for the modeled input concentration range.
It is noted that some COPCs may have indeterminate Kd values by the column method due to
solubility constraints and background conditions. In this case, batch sorption tests will be
conducted in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Technical Resource
Document EPA/530/SW-87/006-F, Batch-type Procedures for Estimating Soil Adsorption of
Chemicals. COPC-specific solutions will be used to prepare a range of soil-to-solution ratios.
After mixing, supernatant samples will be drawn and analyzed as described above. Plots of
sorbed versus dissolved COPC mass will be used to develop Kd terms. Batch tests will be
performed in triplicate.
When applied in the fate and transport modeling performed by MT3DMS, the Kds will determine
the extent to which COPC transport in groundwater flow is attenuated by sorption. In effect,
simulated COPC concentrations will be reduced, as will their rate of movement in advection in
groundwater.
Ten (10) soil core samples will be selected from representative material at the site for column
tests to be performed in triplicate. Additionally, batch Kd tests, if performed, will be executed in
triplicate.
These Kd terms will apply to the selected soil core samples and background geochemistry of
the test solution including pH and oxidation-reduction potential. In order to make these results
transferable to other soils and geochemical conditions at the site, UNCC recommends that the
core samples with derived Kds and 20 to 25 additional core samples be analyzed for hyd rous
ferrous oxides (HFO) content, which is considered to the primary determinant of COPC sorption
capacity of soils at the site. In the groundwater modeling study, the correlation between derived
Kds and HFO content can be used to estimate Kd at other site locations where HFO and
background water geochemistry, especially pH and oxidation-reduction potential, are known. If
significant differences in water geochemistry are observed, batch geochemical modeling can be
used to refine the Kd estimate as described in Section 7.1.1. UNCC recommends that core
samples for Kd and HFO tests be taken from locations that are in the path of groundwater
flowing from the ash impoundments.
Determination of which COPCs will have Kd terms developed will be determined after review of
the analyses on the site ash and review of the site groundwater analyses results. The COPCs
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

39
selected will be considered simultaneously in each test. Competitive sorption is taken into
account implicitly in the lab-measured sorption terms as CPOCs are combined into a single test
solution. Significant competition sorption is not anticipated given that COPCs in groundwater,
where present, will be at trace levels.
7.7.3 MODFLOW/MT3DMS Modeling Process
The MODFLOW groundwater model will be developed using the hydrostratigraphic layer
geometry and properties of the site as described in this section. After the geometry and
properties of the model layers are input, the model will be calibrated to existing water levels
observed in the monitoring wells and ash basin. Infiltration into the areas outside of the ash
basin will be estimated based on available information. Infiltration within the basin will be
estimated based on available water balance information and pond elevation data provided by
Duke Energy.
The MT3MS portion of the model will utilize the Kd terms and the input concentrations of
constituents found in the ash. The leaching characteristics of ash are complex and expected to
vary with time and as changes occur in the geochemical environment of the ash basin. Due to
factors such as quantity of a particular constituent found in ash, mineral complex, solubility, and
geochemical conditions, the rate of leaching and leached concentrations of constituents will vary
with time and respect to each other. The experience that UNCC brings to this process through
their years of working with leaching and characterization of ash, particularly with Duke Energy
ash, will be of particular value.
Since the ash within the basin has been placed over a number of years, the analytical results
from an ash sample collected during the groundwater assessment is unlikely to represent the
current concentrations that are present in the hydrologic pathway between the ash basin and a
particular groundwater monitoring well or other downgradient location.
As a result of these factors and due to the time period involved in groundwater flow,
 Concentrations may vary spatially over time, and
 Peak concentrations may not yet have arrived at compliance wells.
The selection of the initial concentrations and the predictions of the concentrations for
constituents with respect to time will be developed with consideration of the following:
 Site specific analytical results from leach tests (SPLP) and from total digestion of ash
samples taken at varying locations and depths within the ash basin. Note that the total
digestion concentrations, if used, would be considered an upper bound to concentrations
and that the actual concentrations would be lower that the results from the total
digestion.
 Analytical results from appropriate groundwater monitoring wells or surface water
sample locations outside of the ash basin
 Analytical results from monitoring wells installed in the ash basin pore water
(screened-in ash)
 Published or other data on sequential leaching tests performed on similar ash
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

40

The information above will be used with constituent concentrations measured at the compliance
boundary to calibrate the fate and transport model and to develop a representation of the
concentration with respect to time for a particular constituent. The starting time of the model will
correspond to the date that the ash basin was placed in service. The resulting model, which will
be consistent with the calibration targets mentioned above, can then be used to predict
concentrations over space and time. It is noted that SPLP and total digestion r esults from ash
samples will be considered as an upper bound of the total CPOCs available for leaching.
The model calibration process will consist of varying hydraulic conductivity and retardation
within and between hydrostratigraphic units in a manner that is consistent with measured values
of hydraulic conductivity, sorption terms, groundwater levels, and COPC concentrations.
A sensitivity analysis will be performed for the fate and transport analyses.
The model report will contain the information required by Section II of the NCDENR modeling
guidelines, as applicable.
7.7.4 Hydrostratigraphic Layer Development
The three-dimensional configuration of the groundwater model hydrostratigraphic layers for a
site will be developed using the Initial Site Conceptual Model (Section 5.0) and from pre-existing
data and data obtained during the site investigation process. The thickness and extent for the
various layers will be represented by a three-dimensional surface model for each
hydrostratigraphic layer. For most sites the hydrostratigraphic layers will include ash, fills (both
for dikes/dam and/or ash landfills/structural fills), soil/saprolite, transition zone (where present),
and bedrock (Section 5.3).
The boring data from the site investigation and from existing boring data, as available and
provided by Duke Energy, will be entered into the RockWorks16TM program. This program,
along with site-specific and regional knowledge of Piedmont hydrogeology, will be used to
interpret and develop the layer thickness and extent across areas of the site where boring data
is not available. The material layers will be categorized based on physical and material
properties such as standard penetration blow count for soil/saprolite, and percent recovery and
RQD for the transition zone and bedrock. The material properties required for the model such as
total porosity, effective porosity, and specific storage for ash, fill, alluvium, and soil/saprolite will
be developed from laboratory testing (grain size analysis as described in Section 7.1.1) and
published data. Hydraulic conductivity (horizontal and vertical) of all layers will be developed
utilizing existing site data, in-situ permeability testing (falling head, constant head, and packer
testing where appropriate), slug tests in completed monitoring wells, laboratory testing of
undisturbed samples (ash, fill, soil/saprolite), and from an extensive database of Piedmont soil
and rock properties developed by HDR (Sections 7.1.1 and 7.1.6). The effective porosity
(primarily fracture porosity) and specific storage of the transition zone and bedrock will be
estimated from published data.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

41
7.7.5 Domain of Conceptual Groundwater Flow Model
The BCSS Ash Basin model domain encompasses that area where groundwater flow will be
simulated to estimate the impacts of coal ash stored at the site. By necessity, the conceptual
model domain extends beyond the ash basin limits to physical or artificial hydraulic boundaries
such that groundwater flow through the area is accurately simulated. Physical hydraulic
boundary types may include specified head, head dependent flux, no-flow, and recharge at
ground surface or water surface. Artificial boundaries, which are developed based on
information from the site investigation, may include the specified head and no-flow types.
The BCSS model domain is bounded by Belews Lake to the south and east, and the drainage
divide approximately defined by Middleton Loop Road to the west and north.
The lower limit of the model domain coincides with the maximum depth of water yielding
fractures in bedrock. The upper limit coincides with the upper surface of soil, fill, ash, landfilled
materials, or ash basin water surface, where present. The basis for selecting these boundaries
is described in the following section.
7.7.6 Boundary Conditions for Conceptual Groundwater Flow Model
The southern and eastern shores of Belews Lake are considered to be the specified head type
of boundary where the head is the average annual lake elevation for steady-state simulations,
or the elevation observed simultaneously with groundwater level measurements at the site.
The drainage divide located to the west and north of the model domain, approximated by the
alignment of Middleton Loop Road, will be considered a no-flow type boundary. Little Belews
Creek is considered to be an interior, constant head boundary from the toe of the dam to
Middleton Loop Road above the Dan River.
The upper boundary across the site is the recharge type, where recharge is dependent on
regional precipitation estimates and land cover type, either soil, fill, ash, or landfilled materials .
Given that the hydrostratigraphic zones across the site are hydraulically connected, these
boundaries are considered to be applicable to both local (shallow) and regional (deep)
groundwater flow. If site conditions are encountered that warrant changes to the proposed
extent of model, NCDENR will be notified.
7.7.7 Groundwater Impacts to Surface Water
If the groundwater modeling predicts exceedances of the 2L Standards at or beyond the
compliance boundary where the plume containing the exceedances would intercept surface
waters, the groundwater model results will be coupled with modeling of surface waters to predict
contaminant concentrations in the surface waters. This work would be performed by HDR in
conjunction with UNCC.
Model output from the fate and transport modeling (i.e. groundwater volume flux and
concentrations of constituents with exceedances of the 2L Standards) will be used as input for
surface water modeling in the adjacent water bodies (i.e., streams or reservoirs). The level of
surface water modeling will be determined based on the potential for water quality impacts in
the adjacent water body. That is, if the available mixing and dilution of the groundwater plume
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

42
in the water body is sufficient that surface water quality standards are expected to be attained
within a short distance a simple modeling approach will be used. If potential water quality
impacts are expected to be such that the simple model approach is not sufficient, or if the water
body type requires a more complex analysis, then a more detailed modeling approach will be
used. A brief description of the simple and detailed modeling approaches is presented below.
 Simple Modeling Approach – This approach will include the effects of upstream flow on
dilution of the groundwater plume within allowable mixing zone limitations along with
analytical solutions to the lateral spreading and mixing of the groundwater plume in the
adjacent water body. This approach will be similar to that presented in EPA’s Technical
Support Document for Water Quality based Toxics Control (EPA/505/2-90-001) for
ambient induced mixing that considers lateral dispersion coefficient, upstream flow and
shear velocity. The results from this analysis will provide information constituent
concentration as a function of the spatial distance from the groundwater input to the
adjacent water body.
 Detailed Modeling Approach – This approach will involve the use of a water quality
model that is capable of representing a multi-dimensional analysis of groundwater plume
mixing and dilution in the adjacent water body. This method involves segmenting the
water body into model segments (lateral, longitudinal and/or vertical) for calculating the
resulting constituent concentrations spatially in the water body either i n a steady-state or
time-variable mode. The potential water quality models that could be used for this
approach include: QUAL2K; CE-QUAL-W2; EFDC/WASP; ECOMSED/RCA; or other
applicable models.
In either approach, the model output from the groundwater model will be coupled with the
surface water model to determine the resulting constituent concentrations in the adjacent water
body spatially from the point of input. These surface water modeling results can be used for
comparison to applicable surface water quality standards to complete determine compliance.
The development of the model inputs would require additional data for flow and chemical
characterization of the surface water that would potentially be impacted. The specific type of
data required (i.e., flow, chemical characterization, etc.) and the locations where this data would
be collected would depend on the surface water body and the modeling approach selected. If
modeling groundwater impacts to surface water is required, HDR and Duke Energy will consult
with the DWR regional office to present those specific data requirements and modeling
approach.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

43
8.0 Risk Assessment
To support the groundwater assessment and inform corrective action decisions, potential risks
to human health and the environment will be assessed in accordance with applicable federal
and state guidance. Initially, screening level human health and ecological risk assessments will
be conducted that include development of conceptual site models (CSM) to serve as the
foundation for evaluating potential risks to human and ecological receptors at the site.
Consistent with standard risk assessment practice, separate CSMs will be developed for the
human health and ecological risk evaluations.
The purpose of the CSM is to identify potentially complete exposure pathways to environmental
media associated with the site and to specify the types of exposure scenarios relevant to
include in the risk analysis. The first step in constructing a CSM is to characterize the site and
surrounding area. Source areas and potential transport mechanisms are then identified,
followed by determination of potential receptors and routes of exposure. Potential exposure
pathways are determined to be complete when they contain the following aspects: 1) a
constituent source, 2) a mechanism of constituent release and transport from the source area to
an environmental medium, 3) a feasible route of potential exposure at the point of contact (e.g.,
ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation). Completed exposure pathways identified in the CSM
are then evaluated in the risk assessment. Incomplete pathways are characterized by some
gaps in the links between site sources and exposure. Based on this lack of potential exposure,
incomplete pathways are not included in the estimation or characterization of potential risks,
since no exposure can occur via these pathways.
Preliminary constituents of potential concern (COPCs) for inclusion in the screening level risk
assessments will be identified based on the preliminary evaluations performed at the site in
conjunction with recommendations from NCDENR regarding coal ash constituents. Both
screening level risk assessments will compare maximum constituent concentrations to
appropriate risk-based screening values as a preliminary step in evaluating potential for risks to
receptors. Based on results of the screening level risk assessments, a refinement of COPCs
will be conducted and more definitive risk characterization will be performed as part of the
corrective action process if needed.
8.1 Human Health Risk Assessment
As noted above, the initial human health risk assessment (HHRA) will include the preparation of
a CSM, illustrating potential exposure pathways from the source area to possible receptors. The
information gathered in the CSM will be used in conjunction with analytical data collected as
part of the CSA. Although groundwater appears to be the primary exposure pathway for human
receptors, a screening level evaluation will be performed to determine if other potential
exposure routes exist.
The HHRA for the site will include an initial comparison of constituent concentrations in various
media to risk-based screening levels. The data will be screened against the following criteria:
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

44
 Soil analytical results will be compared to USEPA residential and industrial soil Regional
Screening Levels (RSLs) (USEPA, November 2014 or latest update)
 Groundwater results will be compared to USEPA tap water RSLs (USEPA, October
2014) and NCDENR Title 15A, Subchapter 2L Standards (NCDENR, 2006).
 Surface water analytical results will be compared to USEPA national recommended
water quality criteria and North Carolina surface water standards (USEPA, 2006;
NCDENR, 2007).
 The surface water classification as it pertains to drinking water supply, aquatic life,
high/exceptional quality designations and other requirements for other activities (e.g.,
landfill permits, NPDES wastewater discharges) shall be noted.
 Sediment results will be compared to USEPA residential soil RSLs (USEPA, November
2014 or latest update).
 The soil, sediment, and ground water data will also be compared to available
background soil, sediment, and ground water data from previous monitoring and
investigations.
The results of this comparison will be presented in a table, along with recommendations for
further evaluation.
8.1.1 Site-Specific Risk-Based Remediation Standards
If deemed necessary, based on the results of the initial comparison to standards, site-and
media-specific risk-based remediation standards will be calculated in accordance with the
Eligibility Requirements and Procedures for Risk-Based Remediation of Industrial Sites
Pursuant to N.C.G.S. 130A-310.65 to 310.77, North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Division of Waste Management, 29 July 2011.
These calculations will include an evaluation of the following, based on site -specific activities
and conditions:
 Remediation methods and technologies resulting in emissions of air pollutants are to
comply with applicable air quality standards adopted by the Environmental Management
Commission (Commission).
 Site-specific remediation standards for surface waters are to be the water quality
standards adopted by the Commission.
 The current and probable future use of groundwater shall be identified and protected.
Site-specific sources of contaminants and potential receptors are to be identified,
protected, controlled, or eliminated whether on or off the site of the contaminant source.
 Natural environmental conditions affecting the fate and transport of contaminants (e.g.,
natural attenuation) shall be determined by appropriate scientific methods.
 Permits for facilities subject to the programs or requirements of G.S. 130A-310.67(a)
shall include conditions to avoid exceedances of applicable groundwater standards
pursuant to Article 21 of Chapter 143 of the General Statutes; permitted facilities shall be
designed to avoid exceedances of the North Carolina ground or surface water
standards.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

45
 Soil shall be remediated to levels that no longer constitute a continuing source of
groundwater contamination in excess of the site-specific groundwater remediation
standards approved for the site.
 The potential for human inhalation of contaminants from the outdoor air and other site-
specific indoor air exposure pathways shall be considered during remediation, if
applicable.
 The site-specific remediation standard shall protect against human exposure to
contamination through the consumption of contaminated fish or wildlife and through the
ingestion of contaminants in surface water or groundwater supplies.
 For known or suspected carcinogens, site-specific remediation standards shall be
established at levels not to exceed an excess lifetime cancer risk of one in a million. The
site-specific remediation standard may depart from this level based on the criteria set out
in 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 300.430(e)(9) (July 1, 2003). The cumulative
excess lifetime cancer risk to an exposed individual shall not be greater than one in
10,000 based on the sum of carcinogenic risk posed by each contaminant present.
 For systemic toxicants (non-carcinogens), site-specific remediation standards shall be
set at levels to which the human population, including sensitive subgroups, may be
exposed without any adverse health effect during a lifetime or part of a lifetime. Site -
specific remediation standards for systemic toxicants shall incorporate an adequate
margin of safety and shall take into account cases where two or more systemic toxicants
affect the same organ or organ system.
 A comparison will also be made between the concentrations detected in ground water
and the constituent specific primary drinking water standards, as well as the
concentrations in impacted vs. background levels to determine if there are other
considerations that will need to be addressed in risk management decision making.
The site-specific remediation standards for each medium shall be adequate to avoid
foreseeable adverse effects to other media or the environment that are inconsistent with the
state’s risk-based approach.
8.2 Ecological Risk Assessment
The screening level ecological risk assessment (SLERA) for the site will begin with a description
of the ecological setting and development of the ecological CSM specific to the ecological
communities and receptors that may potential be at risk. This scope is equival ent to Step 1:
preliminary problem formulation and ecological effects evaluation (USEPA, 1998).
The screening level evaluation will include compilation of a list of potential ecological receptors
(e.g., plants, benthic invertebrates, fish, birds, etc.). Additionally, an evaluation of sensitive
ecological populations will be performed. Preliminary information on listed rare animal species
at or near the site will be compiled from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) county list to evaluate the potential for presence of
rare or endangered animal and plant species. Rare natural communities will also be evaluated
and identified if near the site.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

46
Appropriate state and federal natural resource trustees and their representatives (e.g., USFWS)
will be contacted to determine the potential presence (or lack thereof) of sensitive species or
their critical habitat at the time the screening is performed. If it is determined a sensitive species
or critical habitat is present or potentially present, a survey of the appropriate area will be
conducted. If it is found that sensitive species are utilizing the site, or may in the future, a
finding concerning the likelihood of effects due to site-related contaminants or activities should
be developed and presented to the trustee agency.
The preliminary ecological risk screening will also include, as the basis for the CSM, a
description of the known fate and transport mechanisms for site-related constituents and
potentially complete pathways from assumed source to receptor. An ecological checklist will be
completed for the site as required by Guidelines for Performing Screening Level Ecological Risk
Assessment within North Carolina (NCDENR, 2003).
Following completion of Step 1, the screening level exposure estimate and risk calculations
(Step 2), will be performed in accordance with the Guidelines for Performing Screening Level
Ecological Risk Assessment within North Carolina (NCDENR, 2003). Step 2 estimates the level
of a constituent a plant or animal is exposed to at the site and compares the maximum
constituent concentrations to Ecological Screening Values (ESVs).
Maximum detected concentrations or the maximum detection limit for non-detected constituents
of potential concern (those metals or other chemicals present in site media that may result in
risk to ecological receptors) will be compared to applicable ecological screening values intended
to be protective of ecological receptors (including those sensitive species and communities
noted above, where available) to derive a hazard quotient (HQ). An HQ greater than 1 indicates
potential ecological impacts cannot be ruled out.
ESVs will be taken from the following and other appropriate sources:
 USEPA Ecological Soil Screening Levels
 USEPA Region 4 Recommended Ecological Screening Values
 USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria and North Carolina Standards
The state’s SLERA guidance (NCDENR, 2003) requires that constituents be identified as a Step
2 COPC as follows:
 Category 1 – Contaminants with a maximum detection exceeding the ESV
 Category 2 – Undetected contaminants with a laboratory sample quantitation limit
exceeding the ESV
 Category 3 – Detected contaminants with no ESV
 Category 4 – Undetected contaminants with no ESV
Exceedances of the ESVs indicate the potential need for further evaluation of ecological risks at
the site. The frequency, magnitude, pattern and basis of any exceedances should also be
considered.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

47
The process ultimately identifies a Scientific-Management Decision Point (SMDP) to determine
if ecological threats are absent and no further assessment is needed; if further assessment
should be performed to determine whether risks exist; or if there is the possibility of adverse
ecological effects, and therefore, a determination made on whether a more detailed ecological
risk and/or habitat assessment is needed, and if so, the scope of the assessment(s).
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
9.0 CSA REPORT

48
9.0 CSA Report
The CSA report will be developed in the format required by the NORR, which include the
following components:
 Executive Summary
 Site History and Source Characterization
 Receptor Information
 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology
 Site Geology and Hydrogeology
 Soil Sampling Results
 Groundwater Sampling Results
 Hydrogeological Investigation
 Groundwater Modeling results
 Risk Assessment
 Discussion
 Conclusions and Recommendations
 Figures
 Tables
 Appendices
The CSA report will provide the results of one iterative assessment phase. No off-site
assessment or access agreements are anticipated to be utilized during this task, other than for
the possible additional off-site wells discussed in Section 6.0.
The CSA will be prepared to include the items contained in the Guidelines For Comprehensive
Site Assessment (guidelines), included as attachment to the NORR, as applicable. HDR will
provide the applicable figures, tables, and appendices as listed in the guidelines.
As part of CSA deliverables, the following tables, graphs, and maps will be provided, at a
minimum:
 Box (whisker) plots for locations sampled on four or more events showing the quartiles
of the data along with minimum and maximum. Plots will be aligned with multiple
locations on one chart. Similar charts will be provided for each COC.
 Stacked time-series plots will be provided for each COC. Multiple wells/locations will be
stacked using the same x-axis to discern seasonal trends. Turbidity, dissolved oxygen,
ORP, or other constituents will be shown on the plots where appropriate to demonstrate
influence.
 Piper and/or stiff diagrams showing selected monitoring wells and surface water
locations as separate symbols.
 Correlation charts where applicable.
 Orthophoto potentiometric maps for shallow, deep, and bedrock wells.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
9.0 CSA REPORT

49
 Orthophoto potentiometric difference maps showing the difference in vertical heads
between selected flow zones.
 Orthophoto iso-concentration maps for selected COCs and flow zones.
 Orthophoto map showing the relationship between groundwater and surface water
samples for selected COCs.
 Geologic cross-sections.
 Photographs of select split-spoon samples and cores at each boring location.
 Others as appropriate.
Recommendations will be provided in the CSA report for a sampling plan to be performed after
completion of this groundwater assessment. The sampling plan will describe the recommended
sampling frequency, constituent and parameter list, and proposed sampling locations including
monitoring wells, seeps, and surface sample locations as required.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
10.0 PROPOSED SCHEDULE

50

10.0 Proposed Schedule
Duke Energy will submit the CSA Report within 180 days of NCDENR approval of this Work
Plan. The anticipated schedule for implementation of field work, evaluation of data, and
preparation of the Work Plan is presented in the table below.

Activity Start Date Duration to Complete
Field Exploration Program 10 days following Work Plan approval 75 days
Receive Laboratory Data 14 days following end of Exploration Program 15 days
Evaluate Lab/Field Data, Develop SCM 5 days following receipt of Lab Data 30 days
Prepare and Submit CSA 10 days following Work Plan approval 170 days

The following permits and approvals from NCDENR are potentially required:
 After the access requirements for the proposed well locations are determined, if
required, an application for an erosion and sediment control permit will be submitted to
the Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources, Land Quality Section.
 Installation of monitoring wells on the dams and/or dikes must be approved by the
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources Dam Safety Section before drilling can
begin. Information on the location and well installation construction will be submitted as
soon as the locations are finalized.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
11.0 REFERENCES

51

11.0 References
1. Daniel, C.C., III, and Sharpless, N.B., 1983, Ground-water supply potential and
procedures for well-site selection upper Cape Fear basin, Cape Fear basin study, 1981-
1983: North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
and U.S. Water Resources Council in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey, 73 p.
2. Cunningham, W. L. and C. C. Daniels, III. 2001. Investigation of ground-water availability and
quality in Orange County, North Carolina: U. S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources
Investigations Report 00-4286, 59p
3. Daniels, John L. and Das, Gautam P. 2014. Practical Leachability and Sorption
Considerations for Ash Management, Geo-Congress 2014 Technical Papers: Geo-
characterization and Modeling for Sustainability. Wentworth Institute of technology,
Boston, MA.
4. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 2014. Assessment of Radioactive Elements in
Coal Combustion Products, 2014 Technical Report 3002003774, Final Report August
2014.
5. EPRI. 1993. Electric Power Research Institute, Physical and Hydraulic Properties of Fly
Ash and Other By-Products from Coal Combustion, EPRI TR-101999. February 1993.
6. EPRI 2004 Electric Power Research Institute, “Chemical Attenuation Coefficients for
Arsenic Species Using Soil Samples Collected from Selected Power Plant Sites:
Laboratory Studies”, Product ID:1005505, December 2004.
7. EPRI. 2009. Electric Power Research Institute, Technical Update – Coal Combustion
Products – Environmental Issues – Coal Ash: Characteristics, Management and
Environmental Issues, EPRI 1019022. September 2009.
8. Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1938. “Physiography of eastern United States.”
McGraw-Hill. 1938.
9. Freeze, R. A., J. A. and Cherry, Ground Water, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice -Hall,
1979.
10. Gillispie, EC., Austin, R., Abraham, J., Wang, S., Bolich, R., Bradley, P., Amoozegar, A.,
Duckworth, O., Hesterberg, D., and Polizzotto, ML. Sources and variability of
manganese in well water of the North Carolina Piedmont. Water Resources Research
Institute of the University of North Carolina System Annual 2014 Conference, Raleigh,
NC, March 2014. Poster Presentation.
11. Harned, D. A. and Daniel, C. C., III, 1992, The transition zone between bedrock and
regolith: Conduit for contamination?, p. 336-348, in Daniel, C. C., III, White, R. K., and
Stone, P. A., eds., Groundwater in the Piedmont: Proceedings of a Conference on
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
11.0 REFERENCES

52
Ground Water in the Piedmont of the Eastern United States, October 16-18, 1989,
Clemson University, 693p.
12. HDR, 2014A. “Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin Drinking Water Supply Well and
Receptor Survey, NPDES Permit NC0022406.”
13. HDR, 2014B. “Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin Supplement to Drinking Water
Supply Well and Receptor Survey.”
14. Heath, R.C., 1980, Basic elements of groundwater hydrology with reference to
conditions in North Carolina: U.S. Geo-logical Survey Open-File Report 80–44, 86 p.
15. Heath, R.C. 1984, “Ground-water regions of the United States.” U.S. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 2242, 78 p.
16. Krauskopf, K.B., 1972. Geochemistry of micronutrients: in Micronutrients in Agriculture,
J.J. Mortvedt, F.R. Cox, L.M. Shuman, and R.M. Walsh, eds., Soil Science Society of
America, Madison, Wisconsin, p. 7-36.
17. LeGrand, H.E. 1988. Region 21, Piedmont and Blue Ridge. In Hydrogeology, The
Geology of North America, vol. O-2, ed. W.B. Back, J.S. Rosenshein, and P.R. Seaber,
201–207. Geological Society of America. Boulder CO: Geological Society of America.
18. LeGrand, H.E. 1989. A conceptual model of ground water settings in the Piedmont
region. In Ground Water in the Piedmont , ed. C.C. Daniel III, R.K. White, and P.A.
Stone, 693. Proceedings of a Conference on Ground Water in the Piedmont of the
Eastern United States, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina. Charlotte, NC:
U.S. Geological Survey.
19. LeGrand, Harry E., 2004. “A Master Conceptual Model for Hydrogeological Site
Characterization in the Piedmont and Mountain Region of North Carolina, A Guidance
Manual,” North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of
Water Quality, Groundwater Section.
20. NCDENR, 2003. Division of Waste Management - Guidelines for Performing Screening
Level Ecological Risk Assessments within North Carolina.
21. NCDENR Memorandum “Performance and Analysis of Aquifer Slug Tests and Pumping
Tests Policy,” May 31, 2007.
22. NCDENR document, “Hydrogeologic Investigation and Reporting Policy Memorandum,”
dated May 31, 2007.
23. NCDENR DWQ NCDENR Division of Water Quality, “Evaluating Metals in Groundwater
at DWQ Permitted Facilities: A Technical Assistance Document for DWQ Staff”, July
2013.
24. Parkhurst, D.L., and Appelo, C.A.J., 2013, Description of input and examples for
PHREEQC version 3—A computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC | Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan
Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Basin
11.0 REFERENCES

53
dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations: U.S. Geological Survey
Techniques and Methods, book 6, chap. A43, 497 p.
25. Tang, G., Mayes, M. A., Parker, J. C., & Jardine, P. M. (2010). CXTFIT/Excel–A modular
adaptable code for parameter estimation, sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis for
laboratory or field tracer experiments. Computers & Geosciences, 36(9), 1200 -1209.
26. USEPA, 1987. Batch-type procedures for estimating soil adsorption of chemicals
Technical Resource Document 530/SW-87/006-F.
27. USEPA, 1997. Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Process for
Designing and Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments
28. USEPA, 2001. Region 4 Ecological Risk Assessment Bulletins—Supplement to RAGS.
29. USEPA, 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment.
30. USFWS, 2009. Range-wide Indiana Bat Protection and Enhancement Plan Guidelines,
at http://www.fws.gov/frankfort/pdf/inbatpepguidelines.pdf.
31. US Geological Survey Geological Survey, Akio Ogata and R.B. Banks Professional
Paper 411-A “A Solution of Differential Equation of Longitudinal Dispersion in Porous
Media”, 1961
32. US Geological Survey (USGS). 1997. Radioactive elements in coal and fly ash:
abundance, forms, and environmental significance. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet
FS-163-97.
33. USEPA, 1998. Study of Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam
Generating Units—Final Report to Congress. Volume 1. Office of Air Quality, Planning
and Standards. Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA-453/R-98-004a.
34. USEPA, 1998. Report to Congress Wastes from the Combustion of Fossil Fuels, Volume
2 Methods, Findings, and Recommendations.

Figures

MW-201DASH BASINELEVATION 750 FT(APPROXIMATE)DUKE POWERSTEAM P
LANTROAD FG
D

W
A
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
TRE
A
T
M
E
N
T

S
Y
S
T
E
M MIDDLETON LOOPPIN
E

H
A
L
L

R
D
MIDDLETON LOOP
BELEWS CREEK STEAMSTATIONBELEWS LAKEELEVATION 725 FT(APPROXIMATE)PINE
HALL
RDPINE HALL ROADASH LANDFILLPERMIT NO. 85-03STRUCTURALFILLSW-DR-U/SD-DR-U(SEE NOTES 10 & 11)SW-DR-D/SD-DR-D(SEE NOTES 10 & 11)SW-BL-U/SD-BL-U(SEE NOTE 12)LITTLEBELEWS CREEKLEGEND:DUKE ENERGY PROPERTY BOUNDARYASH BASIN WASTE BOUNDARYLANDFILL/STRUCTURAL FILL BOUNDARYASH BASIN COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYPINE HALL ROAD ASH LANDFILL COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYASH BASIN COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY COINCIDENT WITHDUKE PROPERTY BOUNDARYSTREAMTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR (4-FT INTERVAL)*EXISTING ASH BASIN COMPLIANCE GROUNDWATERMONITORING WELLEXISTING ASH BASIN VOLUNTARY GROUNDWATERMONITORING WELLPINE HALL ROAD ASH LANDFILL GROUNDWATERMONITORING WELLPROPOSED SOIL BORING/GROUNDWATER MONITORINGWELL LOCATIONPROPOSED POTENTIAL ADDITIONALBORING/GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL LOCATIONPROPOSED SOIL BORING LOCATIONPROPOSED SURFACE WATER SAMPLE LOCATIONPROPOSED SEEP SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENTSAMPLE LOCATIONP5%#.'
(''6žžžžNOTES:1. PARCEL DATA FOR THE SITE WAS OBTAINED FROM DUKE ENERGY REAL ESTATE AND IS APPROXIMATE.2. WASTE BOUNDARY AND ASH STORAGE AREA BOUNDARY ARE APPROXIMATE.3. AS-BUILT MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS PROVIDED BY DUKE ENERGY.4. COMPLIANCE SHALLOW MONITORING WELLS (S) ARE SCREENED ACROSS THE SURFICIAL WATER TABLE.5. COMPLIANCE DEEP MONITORING WELLS (D) ARE SCREENED IN THE TRANSITION ZONE BETWEEN COMPETENT BEDROCK AND THE REGOLITH.6. TOPOGRAPHY DATA FOR THE SITE WAS OBTAINED FROM NCDOT WEB SITE (DATED 2010).7. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WAS OBTAINED FROM WSP DATED APRIL 2014.8. THE COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY IS ESTABLISHED ACCORDING TO THE DEFINITION FOUND IN 15A NCAC 02L .0107 (a).9. PROPOSED SOIL BORING AND WELL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY BE ADJUSTED BASED ON FIELD CONDITIONS.10. SURFACE WATER SAMPLES TO BE COLLECTED FROM DAN RIVER UPSTREAM (SW-DR-U) AND DOWNSTREAM (SW-DR-D) OF CONFLUENCE OF LITTLE BELEWS CREEK AND DAN RIVER.11. SEDIMENT SAMPLES TO BE COLLECTED FROM DAN RIVER UPSTREAM (SD-DR-U) AND DOWNSTREAM (SD-DR-D) OF CONFLUENCE OF DISCHARGE TRIBUTARY AND DAN RIVER.12. SURFACE WATER SAMPLE SW-BL-U AND SEDIMENT SAMPLE SD-BL-U TO COLLECTED FROM BELEWS LAKE UPSTREAM OF THE ASH BASIN, PINE HALL ROAD LANDFILL, AND STRUCTURAL FILL.PROPOSED WELL AND SAMPLE LOCATIONSBELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION ASH BASINDUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLCDATEFIGURENPDES PERMIT NO. NC0022406

Tables

Table 1. Groundwater Monitoring Requirements
Well Nomenclature Constituents and Parameters Frequency
Monitoring Wells: MW-200S, MW-
200D, MW-201D, MW-202S, MW-
202D, MW-203S, MW-203D, MW-
204S, MW-204D
Antimony Chromium Nickel Thallium
January,
May,
September
Arsenic Copper Nitrate Water Level
Barium Iron pH Zinc
Boron Lead Selenium
Cadmium Manganese Sulfate
Chloride Mercury TDS

TABLE 2 – EXCEEDANCES OF 2L STANDARDS JANUARY 2011 – MAY 2014

Parameter Chromium Iron Manganese pH Thallium
Units µg/L µg/L µg/L SU µg/L
2L Standard 10 300 50 6.5 - 8.5 0.2
Well ID Range of Exceedances
MW-200S No
Exceedances 440 – 3,540 68 – 1,300 5.0 – 6.1 No
Exceedances
MW-200D No
Exceedances 310 – 1,240 83 – 110 6.1 – 6.5 No
Exceedances
MW-201D No
Exceedances 335 – 1,790 53 – 101 5.8 – 6.4 0.21
MW-202S No
Exceedances No Exceedances No
Exceedances 5.3 – 5.7 No
Exceedances
MW-202D 15 350 – 7,280 62 – 413 5.6 – 6.3 No
Exceedances
MW-203S No
Exceedances No Exceedances No
Exceedances 5.4 – 5.7 No
Exceedances
MW-203D No
Exceedances No Exceedances No
Exceedances 6.3 – 6.5 No
Exceedances
MW-204S No
Exceedances 3,230 – 14,100 748 – 3,600 5.5 – 6.3 No
Exceedances
MW-204D No
Exceedances 345 – 1,350 175 – 1,130 5.5 – 6.1 No
Exceedances
Table 3 - SPLP Leaching Analytical Results
pH Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Cobalt Copper Fluoride Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury
SU mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
6.5 - 8.5 NE 0.001*0.01 0.7 0.004*0.7 0.002 NE 250 0.01 0.001*1 2 0.3 0.015 NE 0.05 0.001
Analytical Method 200.8 200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.8 245.1
Site Name Protocol Sample Collection Date
GCB SPLP 6/12/2012 7.4 N/A <0.01 <0.01 0.031 N/A <0.5 <0.001 611 <1 <0.005 N/A <0.01 3.97 <0.05 <0.005 <1 <0.15 <0.001
GCB SPLP 6/14/2012 7.5 N/A <0.01 <0.01 0.03 N/A <0.5 <0.001 655 <1 <0.005 N/A <0.01 3.97 <0.05 <0.005 <1 <0.15 <0.001
GCB SPLP 6/15/2012 7.6 N/A <0.01 <0.01 0.026 N/A <0.5 <0.001 623 <1 <0.005 N/A <0.01 3.97 <0.05 <0.005 <1 <0.15 <0.001
GCB SPLP 6/18/2012 7.6 N/A <0.01 <0.01 0.027 N/A <0.5 <0.001 642 <1 <0.005 N/A <0.01 3.67 <0.05 <0.005 <1 <0.15 <0.001
PONDED SPLP 1/1/2003 5.51 N/A N/A 0.018 0.015 N/A <0.1 <0.001 1.294 <1 0.002 N/A <0.002 <1 0.245 <0.09 0.403 0.002 <0.001
Field Measurement
Analytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Table 3 - SPLP Leaching Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Site Name Protocol Sample Collection Date
GCB SPLP 6/12/2012
GCB SPLP 6/14/2012
GCB SPLP 6/15/2012
GCB SPLP 6/18/2012
PONDED SPLP 1/1/2003
Analytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Molydenum Nickel Nitrate as N Phosphorus Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium Zinc
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
NE 0.1 10 NE NE 0.02 20 NE NE 250 0.0002*1
200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.8 200.7
N/A <0.01 <0.1 0.403 <1 0.023 <0.005 N/A N/A 1500 N/A 0.117
N/A <0.01 <0.1 0.483 <1 0.013 <0.005 N/A N/A 1440 N/A <0.05
N/A <0.01 <0.1 0.477 <1 0.015 <0.005 N/A N/A 1500 N/A <0.05
N/A <0.01 <0.1 0.452 <1 0.014 <0.005 N/A N/A 1520 N/A <0.05
N/A <0.002 <1 <0.06 0.3 0.009 <0.005 N/A N/A <1 N/A 0.004
Table 3 - SPLP Leaching Analytical Results
Notes:
1.TDS = Total dissolved solids
SPLP = Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure
TCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
2.Units:
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/L = micrograms per liter
3.* IMAC (interim maximum allowable concentration)
4.Sample depth interval in parentheses
5.Highlighted values indicate values that exceed the 15A NCAC 2L Standard
6.Analytical results with "<" preceding the result indicates that the parameter was not detected at a
concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Depth to
Water Temp.DO Cond.pH ORP Turbidity Aluminum Beryllium
Feet ˚C mg/L µmhos/cm SU mV NTU mg/L CaCO3 mg/L HCO3-mg/L CO32-N/A µg/L
NE NE NE NE 6.5 - 8.5 NE NE NE NE NE NE 4*
Analytical Method 2320B4d N/A N/A N/A N/A
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007 N/A 14.04 N/A 114.6 5.43 N/A 11.6 5.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 34 N/A
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008 N/A 14.71 N/A 121.7 5.44 N/A 30.5 5.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 37 N/A
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008 N/A 13.97 N/A 399.1 5.25 N/A 3.21 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 115 N/A
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009 N/A 14.31 N/A 890.3 4.9 N/A 38.3 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.08 N/A 281 N/A
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009 N/A 13.5 N/A 1223 5.11 N/A 3.6 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.1 N/A 340 N/A
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010 14.5 14.12 N/A 1400 5 N/A 0.86 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 362 N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007 N/A 14.33 N/A 115.5 5.63 N/A 9.67 6.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 30 N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008 N/A 14.83 N/A 124.2 5.51 N/A 55 5.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 34 N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008 N/A 14.02 N/A 490.3 5.32 N/A 67.3 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.71 N/A 133 N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009 N/A 14.51 N/A 1034 5.05 N/A 99.1 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.58 N/A 279 N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009 N/A 13.45 N/A 1324 5.22 N/A 74.2 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 N/A 298 N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010 9.88 14.3 N/A 1456 5.14 N/A 14.1 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.4 N/A 305 N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011 9.79 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011 9.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011 9.84 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012 9.77 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007 N/A 16.34 N/A 297.8 7.7 N/A 10.1 115 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 6 N/A
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008 N/A 15.02 N/A 291.4 7.43 N/A 8.39 120 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 6 N/A
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008 N/A 12.34 N/A 302.3 7.31 N/A 4.54 110 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A <5 N/A
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009 N/A 13.45 N/A 547.4 7.29 N/A 3.91 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 8 N/A
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009 N/A 11.78 N/A 929.3 7.48 N/A 3.71 93 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <5 N/A
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010 0.27 13.72 N/A 1156 7.36 N/A 2.78 93 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <5 N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007 N/A 14.88 N/A 71.1 5.73 N/A 9.6 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 12 N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008 N/A 14.3 N/A 64.8 5.42 N/A 5.82 8.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 13 N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008 N/A 13.39 N/A 64.1 5.61 N/A 2.32 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 11 N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009 N/A 12.71 N/A 82.7 5.17 N/A 6.07 7.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 15 N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009 N/A 12.72 N/A 146.1 5.3 N/A 2.78 5.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 28.3 N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010 10.83 13.53 N/A 287.9 4.97 N/A 1.47 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 57.2 N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011 10.88 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011 10.87 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011 10.88 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012 10.84 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007 N/A 16.39 N/A 57.8 5.64 N/A 16 19.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.63 N/A 16 N/A
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008 N/A 14.95 N/A 56.9 5.71 N/A 23.2 17 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.39 N/A 14 N/A
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008 N/A 15.54 N/A 68 6.02 N/A 278 20 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.17 N/A 15 N/A
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009 N/A 14.32 N/A 53 5.54 N/A 163 13 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 22.5 N/A 15 N/A
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009 N/A 15.36 N/A 57 5.92 N/A 22.9 16 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.6 N/A 14.6 N/A
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010 6.37 14.21 N/A 62.9 5.64 N/A 2.22 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.1 N/A 15.6 N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007 N/A 16.75 N/A 183.8 6.54 N/A 4.89 57 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 54.71 N/A 8 N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008 N/A 14.66 N/A 187 6.69 N/A 5 17 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 48.5 N/A 8 N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008 N/A 16.2 N/A 198 6.9 N/A 3.58 34 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 63.6 N/A 7 N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009 N/A 13.66 N/A 189 6.59 N/A 5.23 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 60.5 N/A 8 N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009 N/A 15.76 N/A 180 6.99 N/A 2.41 23 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 67.5 N/A 6.3 N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010 5.66 14.19 N/A 205.9 6.73 N/A 2.71 22 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 56.7 N/A 8.65 N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011 5.47 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011 5.57 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011 5.91 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012 5.59 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007 N/A 14.95 N/A 107 6.57 N/A 88.2 44.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 44 N/A
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008 N/A 15.16 N/A 109.2 6.68 N/A 33.3 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 29 N/A
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008 N/A 14.6 N/A 98 6.76 N/A 52.5 41 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 20 N/A
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009 N/A 14.63 N/A 112 6.5 N/A 13.2 53 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 17 N/A
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009 N/A 14.2 N/A 89 6.72 N/A 20.4 42 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 14.8 N/A
Alkalinity
200.8 200.8 200.7
Units µg/L µg/L µg/L
Total
Analytical Parameter Antimony Arsenic Barium
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard 1*10 700
Field Measurements
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Depth to
Water Temp.DO Cond.pH ORP Turbidity Aluminum Beryllium
Feet ˚C mg/L µmhos/cm SU mV NTU mg/L CaCO3 mg/L HCO3-mg/L CO32-N/A µg/L
NE NE NE NE 6.5 - 8.5 NE NE NE NE NE NE 4*
Analytical Method 2320B4d N/A N/A N/A N/A
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total
Alkalinity
200.8 200.8 200.7
Units µg/L µg/L µg/L
Total
Analytical Parameter Antimony Arsenic Barium
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard 1*10 700
Field Measurements
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010 41.71 14.57 N/A 117 6.74 N/A 2.72 54 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 11.9 N/A
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007 N/A 15.15 N/A 30.8 5.5 N/A 16.9 13 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 57 N/A
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008 N/A 15.28 N/A 35.6 5.78 N/A 18.5 13 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 61 N/A
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010 42.67 14 N/A 33 5.5 N/A 5.34 13 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 60.9 N/A
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011 42.34 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011 42.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011 42.16 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012 43.03 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011 6.03 13 N/A 160.3 6.33 N/A 16.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.76 N/A <5 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011 5.74 12.79 N/A 140.1 6.1 N/A 15.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 3.36 N/A <5 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011 6.85 16.41 N/A 285.6 6.12 N/A 18.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.76 N/A 6 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012 6.33 13.79 1.56 257.4 6.36 309 6.43 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.56 N/A 5 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012 6.22 13.52 1.74 221 6.15 392 8.16 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.92 N/A <5 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012 6.57 16.3 0.41 518 6.15 354 1.63 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.45 N/A 7 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013 6.37 14.07 1.04 424 6.45 372 5.44 68 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.58 N/A 6 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/8/2013 5.41 12.88 1.77 253 6.2 385 15.3 66 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 4.49 5 5 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2013 6.53 17.96 3.66 241 6.26 242 14.4 67 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 3.86 N/A <5 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014 5.95 12.97 3.4 298 6.16 444 17.5 66 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 5.23 N/A 7 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014 5.81 12.62 4.45 194 6.17 258 13 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 2.06 N/A <5 N/A
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014 6.57 15.23 2.25 271 6.22 312 9.44 44 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.76 N/A <5 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011 5.2 9.52 N/A 109.7 6.06 N/A 12.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 31 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011 4.23 13.95 N/A 43.2 5.18 N/A 4.47 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 14 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011 6.96 19.56 N/A 102.5 5.82 N/A 111 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 5.58 N/A 31 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012 5.85 11.43 2.1 67.1 5.71 331 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 15 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012 5.55 15.11 1.18 52 5.35 415 24.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.43 N/A 15 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012 5.84 19.49 3.21 62 5.63 344 35.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.55 N/A 11 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013 5.8 10.01 3.47 59 5.6 398 13.7 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 9 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/8/2013 3.78 12.98 3.13 40 5.39 414 12.3 12 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 10 10 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2013 6.74 18.24 2.11 90 5.51 181 9.8 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.61 N/A 14 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014 4.97 9.69 0.9 43 5.13 465 15.8 3.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 13 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014 5.09 12.52 0.14 33 4.99 274 13.1 <5 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 11 N/A
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014 6.61 17.75 2.37 90 5.64 292 8.15 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 1.86 N/A 10 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/6/2011 33.39 13.51 N/A 150.2 6.41 N/A 17.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 17 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/4/2011 33.53 14.12 N/A 129.6 5.8 N/A 16.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 12 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/6/2011 33.82 15.71 N/A 132.3 6.14 N/A 35.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 11 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/9/2012 33.66 13.58 5.76 128.2 6.24 301 24.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 12 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2012 33.7 15.11 5.86 122 6.05 393 10.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/5/2012 33.51 15.61 5.68 130 6.04 357 9.55 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 11 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2013 33.3 14.11 2.24 325 6.79 312 4.15 130 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 10 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2013 32.71 14.97 5.73 155 6.06 363 6.86 66 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 6 6 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/10/2013 33.46 16.6 5.5 147 6.04 356 12.3 67 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2014 32.33 13.84 4.62 160 6.1 465 22.9 82 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 13 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/6/2014 33.97 15.03 6.01 147 6.16 405 5.5 65 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/9/2014 35.88 15.48 6.24 141 6.23 253 16 42 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 9 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/6/2011 47.42 14.46 N/A 111 6.3 N/A 513 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 78 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/4/2011 47.33 14.66 N/A 84 6.15 N/A 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 8 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/6/2011 48.22 16.95 N/A 65 5.79 N/A 18.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 12 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2012 49.25 14.34 7.51 65 6.11 325 5.75 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 11 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/9/2012 48.88 15.28 7.75 64 6.08 372 3.09 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 6 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/5/2012 49.55 16.16 7.89 62 5.94 439 12.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2013 50.18 14.52 8.05 63 6.12 408 5.71 26 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 6 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/8/2013 48.59 15.26 7.49 63 5.97 395 6.32 27 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 <5 5 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2013 47.88 17.71 7.15 65 5.64 375 5.13 23 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 5 N/A
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Depth to
Water Temp.DO Cond.pH ORP Turbidity Aluminum Beryllium
Feet ˚C mg/L µmhos/cm SU mV NTU mg/L CaCO3 mg/L HCO3-mg/L CO32-N/A µg/L
NE NE NE NE 6.5 - 8.5 NE NE NE NE NE NE 4*
Analytical Method 2320B4d N/A N/A N/A N/A
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total
Alkalinity
200.8 200.8 200.7
Units µg/L µg/L µg/L
Total
Analytical Parameter Antimony Arsenic Barium
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard 1*10 700
Field Measurements
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/8/2014 49.25 13.46 6.87 63 5.67 498 11.7 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/6/2014 47.18 15.32 6.38 66 5.83 372 2.8 27 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 6 N/A
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2014 47.83 16.29 5.41 69 5.69 346 2.05 26 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 9 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/6/2011 47.6 14.24 N/A 35 5.6 N/A 8.44 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 23 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/4/2011 47.6 14.84 N/A 32 5.55 N/A 6.78 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 21 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/6/2011 48.34 16.79 N/A 36 5.26 N/A 2.96 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 24 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2012 49.09 14.36 8.37 37 5.61 341 2.25 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 24 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/9/2012 48.8 15.62 8.36 36 5.63 376 2.77 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 25 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/5/2012 49.42 16.09 8.42 35 5.54 433 2.56 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 23 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2013 49.94 14.7 8.46 36 5.73 410 2.6 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 24 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/8/2013 48.62 15.38 8.56 34 5.58 420 3.76 15 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 20 21 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2013 48.03 15.93 8.39 35 5.38 379 3.79 9.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 22 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/8/2014 49.22 14.02 8.33 35 5.29 499 3.47 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 22 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/6/2014 47.42 15.38 8.5 35 5.52 434 2.1 8.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 21 N/A
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2014 48.04 15.67 8.52 35 5.4 395 1.78 11 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 22 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011 33.01 13.73 N/A 107 6.36 N/A 2.96 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011 33.04 14.83 N/A 106 6.46 N/A 1.75 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 6 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011 33.6 15.56 N/A 104 6.3 N/A 0.97 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012 33.37 14.17 5.53 103 6.56 317 1.37 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 6 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012 33.48 14.98 5.46 105 6.55 364 0.76 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012 33.8 16.08 5.77 104 6.4 391 0.57 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2013 33.87 14.6 5.37 106 6.53 385 0.94 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013 32.84 14.6 5.23 107 6.44 379 1.31 51 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 6 6 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013 33.31 15.97 5.6 105 6.3 309 8.77 46 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2014 32.91 13.34 5.44 103 6.34 440 5.5 46 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014 32.14 14.92 5.55 105 6.38 351 3.4 49 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 7 N/A
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014 32.99 15.29 6.67 102 6.35 295 2.75 44 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 8 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011 33.48 13.57 N/A 35 5.52 N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 48 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011 33.51 14.83 N/A 34 5.62 N/A 0.93 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 50 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011 34.15 16.58 N/A 30 5.35 N/A 1.46 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 55 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012 34 13.86 7.75 34 5.73 354 0.67 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 53 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012 33.91 15.21 7.84 32 5.65 399 0.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 51 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012 34.51 16.49 7.73 29 5.47 469 0.84 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 55 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2013 34.63 14.61 8.01 31 5.71 428 1.43 11 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 52 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013 33.55 14.74 8.26 33 5.62 423 0.62 12 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 50 51 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013 33.7 16.31 8.1 31 5.4 357 8.29 6.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 55 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2014 33.58 13.85 8.17 33 5.56 466 1.97 9.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 54 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014 32.53 15.33 8.55 31 5.67 441 1.1 6.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 52 N/A
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014 33.47 15.27 8.26 29 5.3 377 1.08 6.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 49 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011 26.37 13.57 N/A 93.4 6.11 N/A 9.36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 45 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011 26.61 14.45 N/A 80.3 5.76 N/A 8.34 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 41 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011 26.96 15.87 N/A 63.8 5.79 N/A 32.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 43 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012 26.58 13.35 5.19 53.6 5.79 303 3.54 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 38 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012 26.76 15.13 5.72 51 5.6 357 5.73 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 39 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012 26.48 16.15 6.5 56 5.57 346 5.55 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 37 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013 26.04 13.6 7.15 77 5.73 349 8.96 20 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 50 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013 25.52 15.05 4.56 64 5.45 330 2.15 21 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 44 45 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013 26.39 15.87 5.7 78 5.59 282 6.7 16 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 42 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014 25.16 13.23 6.72 62 5.55 383 13.4 13 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 43 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014 26.66 15.2 4.89 43 5.45 371 10.4 6.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 35 N/A
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014 28.85 15.17 6.74 44 5.5 352 3.56 11 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 30 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011 25.86 13.76 N/A 149.8 6.32 N/A 10.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 229 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011 26.12 14.53 N/A 138.7 5.97 N/A 6.33 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 227 N/A
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Depth to
Water Temp.DO Cond.pH ORP Turbidity Aluminum Beryllium
Feet ˚C mg/L µmhos/cm SU mV NTU mg/L CaCO3 mg/L HCO3-mg/L CO32-N/A µg/L
NE NE NE NE 6.5 - 8.5 NE NE NE NE NE NE 4*
Analytical Method 2320B4d N/A N/A N/A N/A
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total
Alkalinity
200.8 200.8 200.7
Units µg/L µg/L µg/L
Total
Analytical Parameter Antimony Arsenic Barium
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard 1*10 700
Field Measurements
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011 26.46 15.96 N/A 114.4 5.98 N/A 16.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 202 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012 26.08 13.54 1.95 101.9 6.06 144 1.24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 194 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012 26.25 14.99 1.88 85 5.83 235 2.48 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 184 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012 25.95 15.75 1.99 80 5.73 222 1.31 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 183 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013 25.53 14 2.23 83 5.88 279 1.49 32 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 188 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013 25.01 14.99 2.02 78 5.6 277 2.1 30 N/A N/A N/A <1 <1 <1 <1 196 200 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013 25.88 15.58 2.21 66 5.46 260 5.18 19 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 205 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014 24.64 13.77 2.79 68 5.58 318 5.4 19 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 185 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014 26.17 14.84 2.6 59 5.52 223 4.86 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 204 N/A
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014 28.39 15.13 2.34 59 5.77 225 3.34 18 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A <1 N/A 163 N/A
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Chloride
mg/L
250
300
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
N/A 241 N/A <0.5 N/A 5.392 7.06 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 425 N/A <2 N/A 2.282
N/A 273 N/A <0.5 N/A 5.9 8.5 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 311 N/A <2 N/A 2.54
N/A 400 N/A <0.5 N/A 25.8 89 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 32 N/A <2 N/A 10
N/A 1270 N/A 1.23 N/A 74.7 270 N/A 2.02 N/A N/A N/A 0.002 N/A 1280 N/A <2 N/A 28.4
N/A 3390 N/A <1 N/A 117 340 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 46.5 N/A <1 N/A 42.7
N/A 4550 N/A <1 N/A 135 430 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 11.7 N/A <1 N/A 46.4
N/A 244 N/A <0.5 N/A 5.895 7.13 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 723 N/A <2 N/A 1.9
N/A 260 N/A <0.5 N/A 6.66 8.2 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 604 N/A <2 N/A 2.24
N/A 538 N/A <0.5 N/A 36.2 120 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 2230 N/A <2 N/A 11.7
N/A 1700 N/A 0.72 N/A 98.4 290 N/A 1.56 N/A N/A N/A 0.003 N/A 2550 N/A 2.42 N/A 31.5
N/A 4310 N/A <1 N/A 138 370 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.002 N/A 1550 N/A 1.6 N/A 43.6
N/A 5390 N/A <1 N/A 152 470 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 1190 N/A <1 N/A 45.5
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 223 N/A <0.5 N/A 40.665 6.64 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 178 N/A <2 N/A 3.699
N/A 224 N/A <0.5 N/A 43.5 6.5 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.003 N/A 39 N/A <2 N/A 4
N/A 232 N/A <0.5 N/A 44.4 23 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.004 N/A 59 N/A 2.97 N/A 4.22
N/A 425 N/A <0.5 N/A 80.1 130 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.003 N/A 58 N/A <2 N/A 7.93
N/A 1290 N/A <1 N/A 132 200 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.002 N/A 224 N/A 1.3 N/A 13.2
N/A 2340 N/A <1 N/A 158 310 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A N/A 0.001 N/A 214 N/A <1 N/A 17
N/A 237 N/A <0.5 N/A 2.787 7.43 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 1581 N/A <2 N/A 1.229
N/A 230 N/A <0.5 N/A 2.32 7.2 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 705 N/A <2 N/A 1.12
N/A 190 N/A <0.5 N/A 2.04 8.3 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 646 N/A <2 N/A 0.965
N/A 230 N/A <0.5 N/A 2.87 13 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 989 N/A <2 N/A 1.34
N/A 215 N/A <1 N/A 6.12 34 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 1080 N/A <1 N/A 2.83
N/A 268 N/A <1 N/A 13.8 78 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 1060 N/A <1 N/A 6.13
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 1.735 5.22 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 2055 N/A <2 N/A 1.489
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 1.88 5.1 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 1650 N/A <2 N/A 1.7
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 1.69 5.3 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 4080 N/A <2 N/A 1.5
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 1.63 5.9 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.002 N/A 14000 N/A <2 N/A 1.51
N/A 105 N/A <1 N/A 1.85 8 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 1190 N/A <1 N/A 1.61
N/A 86.9 N/A <1 N/A 1.91 10 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 900 N/A <1 N/A 1.7
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 0.676 4.93 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 42403 N/A <2 N/A 1.259
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 0.747 4.7 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 46500 N/A <2 N/A 1.42
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 0.682 4.9 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 44600 N/A <2 N/A 1.26
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 0.741 8.2 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 46600 N/A <2 N/A 1.35
N/A 81.2 N/A <1 N/A 0.829 8 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 46100 N/A <1 N/A 1.35
N/A 73.7 N/A <1 N/A 0.768 12 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 48100 N/A <1 N/A 1.41
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 6.604 1.22 N/A 3.03 N/A N/A N/A 0.003 N/A 2697 N/A <2 N/A 2.739
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 7.42 1.1 N/A 1.64 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 1160 N/A <2 N/A 2.95
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 5.01 0.95 N/A 1.87 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 960 N/A <2 N/A 1.61
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 8.33 1.1 N/A 1.3 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 262 N/A <2 N/A 3.37
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 5.97 3.4 N/A 1.1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 362 N/A <1 N/A 1.9
200.7200.7 200.8 200.8200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7
mg/L µg/L
NE1300157002
mg/L
NE 10 1*
µg/L µg/L
MagnesiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperBoronIronLeadCadmium
µg/Lmg/L µg/L µg/L
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/8/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/8/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/6/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/4/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/6/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/9/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/5/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/10/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/6/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/9/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2013
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/8/2013
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2013
Chloride
mg/L
250
300
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
200.7200.7 200.8 200.8200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7
mg/L µg/L
NE1300157002
mg/L
NE 10 1*
µg/L µg/L
MagnesiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperBoronIronLeadCadmium
µg/Lmg/L µg/L µg/L
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 8.87 1.3 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.001 N/A 30 N/A <1 N/A 3.77
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 2.293 1.03 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 26 N/A <2 N/A 0.465
N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 2.43 0.94 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <0.002 N/A 100 N/A <2 N/A 0.53
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2.38 1.2 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.001 N/A 43.6 N/A <1 N/A 0.491
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 271 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1160 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A 75 N/A <1 N/A N/A 46 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 280 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A 108 N/A <1 N/A N/A 36 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 182 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A 86 N/A <1 N/A N/A 26 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 310 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A 422 N/A <1 N/A N/A 100 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 151 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A 408 N/A <1 N/A 45.2 78 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 259 N/A <1 N/A 11
132 163 <1 <1 23.5 26.6 36 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 <10 1060 <1 <1 6.43 6.79
N/A 118 N/A <1 N/A 22.5 28 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 679 N/A <1 N/A 5.48
N/A 268 N/A <1 N/A 33 47 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1240 N/A <1 N/A 8.02
N/A 96 N/A <1 N/A 21.6 23 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 450 N/A <1 N/A 5.49
N/A 191 N/A <1 N/A 30.4 40 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 290 N/A <1 N/A 7.01
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 4.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 189 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 3.2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 506 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 3.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 3540 N/A 2.54 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 3.8 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 440 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 3.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 688 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 3.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 907 N/A 1.16 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.03 6.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 284 N/A <1 N/A 1.57
<50 <50 <1 <1 1.72 1.74 3.2 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 191 282 <1 <1 0.766 0.778
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 4.1 9.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1110 N/A <1 N/A 1.78
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2.48 5.3 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 685 N/A <1 N/A 0.902
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.61 2.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 754 N/A <1 N/A 0.627
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 4.63 11 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 755 N/A <1 N/A 2.11
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 3.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 335 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 668 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 408 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 893 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 208 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 820 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A 94 N/A <1 N/A 40.4 17 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 169 N/A <1 N/A 10.9
<50 <50 <1 <1 15.2 14 9.5 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 <10 158 <1 <1 5.45 5.25
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 17.6 4.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 273 N/A <1 N/A 6.07
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 19.2 4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1790 N/A 1.15 N/A 6.65
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 14.1 6.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 236 N/A <1 N/A 5.45
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 14.8 4.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1100 N/A <1 N/A 5.63
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 3.3 N/A 15 N/A N/A N/A 0.008 N/A 7280 N/A 7.52 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.3 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 223 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 707 N/A 1.15 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 850 N/A 1.11 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.3 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 131 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 260 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.45 2.3 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 114 N/A <1 N/A 1.63
<50 <50 <1 <1 3.27 3.32 2.5 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 65 76 <1 <1 1.49 1.52
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.61 2.3 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 113 N/A <1 N/A 1.67
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/8/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/8/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/8/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
Chloride
mg/L
250
300
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
200.7200.7 200.8 200.8200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7
mg/L µg/L
NE1300157002
mg/L
NE 10 1*
µg/L µg/L
MagnesiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperBoronIronLeadCadmium
µg/Lmg/L µg/L µg/L
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.62 2.3 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 350 N/A <1 N/A 1.74
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.65 2.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 43 N/A <1 N/A 1.65
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.83 2.4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 64 N/A <1 N/A 1.75
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 69 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 81 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 40 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 31 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 113 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 51 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.19 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 64 N/A <1 N/A 0.573
<50 <50 <1 <1 1.03 1.09 1.6 <5 8 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 <10 73 <1 <1 0.464 0.493
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.08 1.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 53 N/A <1 N/A 0.496
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.06 1.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 72 N/A <1 N/A 0.517
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.09 1.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 32 N/A <1 N/A 0.495
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.08 1.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 25 N/A <1 N/A 0.506
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.8 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 108 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 37 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 42 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 19 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 7.86 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 16 N/A <1 N/A 4.27
<50 <50 <1 <1 7.57 7.53 1.9 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 <10 41 <1 <1 4.09 4.07
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 7.67 1.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 95 N/A <1 N/A 4.14
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 7.83 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 191 N/A <1 N/A 4.31
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 7.84 2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 131 N/A <1 N/A 4.2
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 7.37 1.8 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 89 N/A <1 N/A 4.02
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 13 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 14 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.12 2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 17 N/A <1 N/A 0.548
<50 <50 <1 <1 3.03 3.1 1.9 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 <10 <10 <1 <1 0.498 0.506
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3 2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 11 N/A <1 N/A 0.527
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.4 1.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 24 N/A <1 N/A 0.564
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 3.06 2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A 0.514
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2.53 2.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A 0.569
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.3 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 345 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 867 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1090 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 480 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1350 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 0.9 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 454 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2.66 1.7 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 644 N/A <1 N/A 1.57
<50 <50 <1 <1 2.11 2.12 1.7 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 340 391 <1 <1 1.53 1.55
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2.31 1.2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 466 N/A <1 N/A 1.33
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2.46 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 1030 N/A <1 N/A 1.56
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.68 1.4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 194 N/A <1 N/A 1.26
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.86 1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 141 N/A <1 N/A 1.13
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.8 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 7870 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 14100 N/A <1 N/A N/A
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
Chloride
mg/L
250
300
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
200.7200.7 200.8 200.8200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7
mg/L µg/L
NE1300157002
mg/L
NE 10 1*
µg/L µg/L
MagnesiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperBoronIronLeadCadmium
µg/Lmg/L µg/L µg/L
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 10200 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 8850 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 2.1 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 7300 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A N/A 1.6 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 6410 N/A <1 N/A N/A
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2.37 2.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 6880 N/A <1 N/A 2.13
<50 <50 <1 <1 2.06 2.09 2.8 <5 <5 N/A N/A <0.005 <0.005 5530 5620 <1 <1 1.88 1.92
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.95 2 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 4260 N/A <1 N/A 1.8
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 2 2.5 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 4130 N/A <1 N/A 1.97
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.87 2.4 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 3230 N/A <1 N/A 1.73
N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1.95 1.8 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <0.005 N/A 3680 N/A <1 N/A 1.72
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Nitrate as N Strontium Sulfate TDS
mg-N/L N/A mg/L mg/L
10 NE 250 500
300.0 N/A 300.0 2540C
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Total Total
N/A 494 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 1.76 N/A <2 N/A 9.759 N/A 35.99 80
N/A 546 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 1.9 N/A <2 N/A 10.8 N/A 31 14
N/A 2190 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 2.8 0.23 N/A 3.19 N/A <2 N/A 17.7 N/A 17 228
N/A 5500 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 6.9 <0.02 N/A 5.05 N/A 4.5 N/A 23.3 N/A 15 816
N/A 7260 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 5.9 <0.02 N/A 5.08 N/A <1 N/A 22.5 N/A 20 816
N/A 7580 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A N/A 5.8 <0.02 N/A 5.03 N/A <1 N/A 20.9 N/A 23 933
N/A 559 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 1.44 N/A <2 N/A 9.504 N/A 32.41 83
N/A 616 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.02 N/A 1.58 N/A <2 N/A 10.6 N/A 54 53
N/A 2850 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 2.7 <0.02 N/A 2.96 N/A 2.28 N/A 18.2 N/A 16 276
N/A 6200 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 5.1 <0.02 N/A 4.2 N/A 5.52 N/A 23 N/A 17 864
N/A 7170 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 4.3 <0.02 N/A 4.11 N/A <1 N/A 20.9 N/A 26 916
N/A 7190 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 4.4 <0.02 N/A 4.11 N/A <1 N/A 19.2 N/A 37 931
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 57 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.02 N/A 2.08 N/A <2 N/A 10.255 N/A 25.3 197
N/A 53 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 2.23 N/A <2 N/A 11.5 N/A 25 120
N/A 61 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 2.23 N/A <2 N/A 11.1 N/A 19 222
N/A 79 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 3.11 N/A 2.65 N/A 16.1 N/A 15 608
N/A 171 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 <0.02 N/A 4.07 N/A <1 N/A 20.5 N/A 19 684
N/A 309 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 5.2 <0.02 N/A 4.38 N/A <1 N/A 21.8 N/A 25 666
N/A 1856 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A 2 <0.02 N/A 0.78 N/A <2 N/A 5.897 N/A 9.41 48
N/A 1740 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 0.72 N/A <2 N/A 6.12 N/A 8.1 <10
N/A 1620 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 0.69 N/A <2 N/A 5.57 N/A 6.8 52
N/A 2360 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 0.71 N/A <2 N/A 7.38 N/A 6.1 52
N/A 5170 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 2.6 <0.02 N/A 1.07 N/A <1 N/A 10.4 N/A 3 138
N/A 12500 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 5.3 <0.02 N/A 1.43 N/A <1 N/A 14.4 N/A 2.7 174
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 1803 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A 4.1 0.04 N/A 1.42 N/A <2 N/A 4.398 N/A 1.3 42
N/A 1700 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 4.3 0.03 N/A 1.51 N/A <2 N/A 4.88 N/A 1.4 18
N/A 1930 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 4.2 0.04 N/A 1.48 N/A <2 N/A 4.79 N/A 1.4 58
N/A 1120 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 2.8 0.05 N/A 1.49 N/A <2 N/A 4.95 N/A 2 50
N/A 1530 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 3.9 0.04 N/A 1.57 N/A <1 N/A 5.51 N/A 1.5 36
N/A 1080 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 2.6 0.05 N/A 1.55 N/A <1 N/A 5.29 N/A 1.4 33
N/A 2304 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 1.09 N/A <2 N/A 4.224 N/A <0.1 79
N/A 2470 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 1.1 N/A <2 N/A 4.54 N/A 0.54 10
N/A 2340 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 <0.02 N/A 1.13 N/A <2 N/A 4.64 N/A 0.12 76
N/A 2350 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.02 N/A 1.1 N/A <2 N/A 4.66 N/A 8.2 60
N/A 2410 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 <0.02 N/A 1.2 N/A <1 N/A 4.89 N/A <0.1 72
N/A 2370 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 <0.02 N/A 1.16 N/A <1 N/A 5.29 N/A <0.1 62
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 162 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.04 N/A 3.41 N/A <2 N/A 12.132 N/A 9.11 115
N/A 108 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.05 N/A 3.19 N/A <2 N/A 11.4 N/A 4 30
N/A 68 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.04 N/A 2.8 N/A <2 N/A 11.1 N/A 3.9 122
N/A 30 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.1 N/A 2.55 N/A <2 N/A 9.54 N/A 2.1 104
N/A 22.3 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 0.07 N/A 2.47 N/A <1 N/A 10.5 N/A 2.6 78
200.7
Sodium
mg/L
NENE20
mg/L µg/L
Potassium Selenium
200.7
100
200.7 200.8
Nickel
µg/L
200.8 245.1 200.8
µg/L
50 1 NE
µg/L µg/L
Manganese Mercury Molydenum
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/8/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/8/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/6/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/4/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/6/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/9/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/5/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/10/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/6/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/9/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2013
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/8/2013
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2013
Nitrate as N Strontium Sulfate TDS
mg-N/L N/A mg/L mg/L
10 NE 250 500
300.0 N/A 300.0 2540C
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Total Total
200.7
Sodium
mg/L
NENE20
mg/L µg/L
Potassium Selenium
200.7
100
200.7 200.8
Nickel
µg/L
200.8 245.1 200.8
µg/L
50 1 NE
µg/L µg/L
Manganese Mercury Molydenum
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 0.1 N/A 2.22 N/A <1 N/A 8.82 N/A 1.8 93
N/A 23 N/A <0.1 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.13 N/A 2.32 N/A <2 N/A 1.616 N/A 0.4 40
N/A 14 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <2 0.1 N/A 2.45 N/A <2 N/A 1.85 N/A 0.42 39
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 0.07 N/A 2.42 N/A <1 N/A 1.95 N/A 0.27 27
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 110 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 4.7 82
N/A 83 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 4 88
N/A 13 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.5 200
N/A 39 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 4 150
N/A 14 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.2 156
N/A 20 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 4.1 440
N/A 32 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.03 N/A 2.92 N/A <1 N/A 10.8 N/A 4.2 330
73 96 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 <0.023 2.26 2.3 <1 <1 8.35 8.39 N/A 3.6 190
N/A 22 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.03 N/A 2.04 N/A <1 N/A 6.75 N/A 3.1 160
N/A 95 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A 2.65 N/A <1 N/A 9.31 N/A 3.8 220
N/A 24 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A 2.06 N/A <1 N/A 7.05 N/A 3.1 130
N/A 9 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.02 N/A 2.38 N/A <1 N/A 7.79 N/A 3.1 200
N/A 497 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 9.2 52
N/A 872 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.4 23
N/A 1300 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 7.1 160
N/A 248 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.03 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 4.2 59
N/A 306 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.1 70
N/A 321 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.5 93
N/A 470 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A 2.13 N/A <1 N/A 5.66 N/A 2.4 56
349 338 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 <0.023 1.34 1.36 <1 <1 3.62 3.6 N/A 2.9 48
N/A 435 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A 2.48 N/A <1 N/A 5.75 N/A 2.2 74
N/A 68 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A 1.39 N/A <1 N/A 3.7 N/A 1.9 52
N/A 157 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A 1.01 N/A <1 N/A 2.93 N/A 2.2 36
N/A 445 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 <0.023 N/A 2.57 N/A <1 N/A 5.67 N/A 2 74
N/A 101 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.27 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 1.7 100
N/A 53 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.33 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 1.6 110
N/A 35 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.27 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.9 130
N/A 48 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.32 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 1.6 110
N/A 13 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.25 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 1.3 117
N/A 24 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.27 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.5 140
N/A 28 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.11 N/A 2.01 N/A <1 N/A 8.15 N/A 8.9 200
9 13 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 0.11 2.24 2.25 <1 <1 8.05 7.88 N/A 3.2 140
N/A 13 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.22 N/A 1.56 N/A <1 N/A 7.24 N/A 2.9 130
N/A 35 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.22 N/A 2.1 N/A <1 N/A 7.3 N/A 4.2 160
N/A 8 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.19 N/A 1.67 N/A <1 N/A 8.19 N/A 3.4 120
N/A 20 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.12 N/A 1.62 N/A <1 N/A 6.49 N/A 1.8 130
N/A 413 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 6 0.1 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 8.2 113
N/A 62 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.08 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 5.9 60
N/A 43 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.1 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.5 97
N/A 37 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.1 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 3.8 82
N/A 12 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.11 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.7 78
N/A 14 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.12 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.3 78
N/A 5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.11 N/A 0.7 N/A <1 N/A 7.47 N/A 2.1 71
<5 <5 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 0.12 0.662 0.661 <1 <1 7.08 7.11 N/A 2.1 79
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.1 N/A 0.706 N/A <1 N/A 7.62 N/A 1.9 70
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/8/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/8/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/8/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
Nitrate as N Strontium Sulfate TDS
mg-N/L N/A mg/L mg/L
10 NE 250 500
300.0 N/A 300.0 2540C
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Total Total
200.7
Sodium
mg/L
NENE20
mg/L µg/L
Potassium Selenium
200.7
100
200.7 200.8
Nickel
µg/L
200.8 245.1 200.8
µg/L
50 1 NE
µg/L µg/L
Manganese Mercury Molydenum
N/A 7 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.11 N/A 0.744 N/A <1 N/A 7.81 N/A 1.8 82
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.11 N/A 0.889 N/A <1 N/A 7.71 N/A 2.1 67
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.11 N/A 0.977 N/A <1 N/A 7.88 N/A 1.9 80
N/A 26 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.03 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.35 35
N/A 18 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.12 30
N/A 11 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 1.2 52
N/A 9 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.4 35
N/A 9 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.3 49
N/A 5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2 49
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.05 N/A 0.721 N/A <1 N/A 5.54 N/A 1.9 48
<5 <5 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 0.05 0.615 0.655 <1 <1 5.03 5.31 N/A 1.2 46
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A 0.651 N/A <1 N/A 5.32 N/A 0.97 45
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A 0.657 N/A <1 N/A 5.39 N/A 1 54
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A 0.669 N/A <1 N/A 5.36 N/A 0.94 42
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.03 N/A 0.647 N/A <1 N/A 5.38 N/A 0.73 50
N/A 15 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.5 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.4 85
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.52 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.2 79
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.5 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2 100
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.46 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 1.8 88
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.43 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 1.9 107
N/A 10 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.46 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.1 100
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.44 N/A 1.81 N/A <1 N/A 7.5 N/A 1.8 98
<5 <5 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 0.44 1.75 1.76 <1 <1 7.12 7.12 N/A 1.7 110
N/A 6 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.44 N/A 1.82 N/A <1 N/A 7.42 N/A 1.4 99
N/A 10 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.44 N/A 1.85 N/A <1 N/A 7.58 N/A 1.6 110
N/A 8 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.48 N/A 1.84 N/A <1 N/A 7.53 N/A 1.6 95
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.45 N/A 1.75 N/A <1 N/A 7.18 N/A 1.3 110
N/A 37 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.32 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.55 <25
N/A 40 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.35 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.16 17
N/A 16 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.27 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.17 39
N/A 46 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.37 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.14 20
N/A 10 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.33 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.14 40
N/A 5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.32 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 0.15 37
N/A 12 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.34 N/A 1.36 N/A <1 N/A 1.35 N/A 0.14 29
<5 8 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 0.35 1.26 1.28 <1 <1 1.36 1.38 N/A 0.23 37
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.28 N/A 1.39 N/A <1 N/A 1.33 N/A 0.13 34
N/A 16 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.28 N/A 1.3 N/A <1 N/A 1.45 N/A 0.12 41
N/A 9 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.29 N/A 1.31 N/A <1 N/A 1.34 N/A <0.1 29
N/A <5 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.22 N/A 1.35 N/A <1 N/A 1.12 N/A 0.14 36
N/A 1130 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.06 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 16 56
N/A 776 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 12 53
N/A 775 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.05 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 8.4 52
N/A 394 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.06 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 6.2 31
N/A 453 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.06 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 5.4 50
N/A 556 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.06 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 6 46
N/A 671 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.21 N/A 2.48 N/A <1 N/A 8.13 N/A 10 58
319 325 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A <5 <5 0.14 2.03 2.04 <1 <1 5.86 6.04 N/A 7.8 54
N/A 562 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.06 N/A 2.22 N/A <1 N/A 6.54 N/A 8.7 54
N/A 412 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.17 N/A 2.14 N/A <1 N/A 5.57 N/A 6.3 54
N/A 175 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.07 N/A 1.73 N/A <1 N/A 3.58 N/A 3.9 35
N/A 283 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.04 N/A 1.78 N/A <1 N/A 3.83 N/A 3.9 48
N/A 3600 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.12 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.6 86
N/A 2850 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.15 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.4 72
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
Nitrate as N Strontium Sulfate TDS
mg-N/L N/A mg/L mg/L
10 NE 250 500
300.0 N/A 300.0 2540C
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Total Total
200.7
Sodium
mg/L
NENE20
mg/L µg/L
Potassium Selenium
200.7
100
200.7 200.8
Nickel
µg/L
200.8 245.1 200.8
µg/L
50 1 NE
µg/L µg/L
Manganese Mercury Molydenum
N/A 2130 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.08 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.3 80
N/A 2020 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.12 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.3 59
N/A 1650 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.08 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.4 71
N/A 1520 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.1 N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 2.5 59
N/A 1540 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.22 N/A 2.98 N/A <1 N/A 3.64 N/A 2.3 58
1270 1280 <0.05 <0.05 N/A N/A 6 6 0.25 2.96 2.99 <1 <1 3.31 3.33 N/A 3.7 65
N/A 997 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 6 0.23 N/A 2.71 N/A <1 N/A 3.15 N/A 3.8 54
N/A 1100 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 6 0.24 N/A 2.64 N/A <1 N/A 3.42 N/A 3 55
N/A 748 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 6 0.35 N/A 2.42 N/A <1 N/A 2.93 N/A 3.7 44
N/A 760 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A <5 0.07 N/A 2.43 N/A <1 N/A 2.89 N/A 4.5 58
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-101D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-101S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-102D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-102S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
MW-103D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/6/2008
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/5/2009
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 11/16/2009
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-103S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/14/2007
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/20/2008
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/6/2008
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/5/2009
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 11/16/2009
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
TOC TOX TSS
mg/L µg/L mg/L
NE NE NE
5310B 2450D
Dissolved Total Total Total Total Dissolved Total
N/A N/A 0.39 <1000 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.32 30 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.332 <1000 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.367 150 N/A N/A 0.009
N/A N/A 0.433 <50 N/A N/A 0.009
N/A N/A 0.333 <100 N/A N/A 0.01
N/A N/A 0.47 <1000 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.44 40 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.707 <1000 N/A N/A 0.007
N/A N/A 0.765 160 N/A N/A 0.009
N/A N/A 0.559 <50 N/A N/A 0.009
N/A N/A 0.405 <100 N/A N/A 0.007
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.67 N/A N/A N/A 0.006
N/A N/A 0.51 <20 N/A N/A 0.013
N/A N/A 0.434 <1000 N/A N/A 0.583
N/A N/A 0.485 70 N/A N/A 0.01
N/A N/A 0.472 <50 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.359 N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.38 <1000 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.32 <20 N/A N/A 0.005
N/A N/A 0.301 <1000 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.326 60 N/A N/A 0.005
N/A N/A 0.315 <50 N/A N/A 0.005
N/A N/A 0.214 <100 N/A N/A 0.016
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.25 <1000 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.17 30 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.189 <1000 N/A N/A 0.011
N/A N/A 0.256 <20 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.235 <50 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.113 <100 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.55 <1000 N/A N/A 0.006
N/A N/A 0.54 <20 N/A N/A 0.008
N/A N/A 0.481 <1000 N/A N/A 0.05
N/A N/A 0.623 <20 N/A N/A 0.007
N/A N/A 0.554 <50 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.48 <100 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.15 <1000 N/A N/A 0.009
N/A N/A <0.1 20 N/A N/A 0.006
N/A N/A <0.1 <1000 N/A N/A 0.007
N/A N/A 0.124 <20 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.111 <50 N/A N/A <0.005
1
200.8 200.7
Thallium
µg/L
0.2*
Zinc
mg/L
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-104D Voluntary Bedrock 5/18/2010
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 11/14/2007
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/20/2008
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/18/2010
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-104S Voluntary Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/8/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2013
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-200D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/8/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2013
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-200S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/6/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/4/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/6/2011
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/9/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/5/2012
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/9/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/10/2013
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 1/8/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 5/6/2014
MW-201D Compliance Not Reported 9/9/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/9/2013
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/8/2013
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2013
TOC TOX TSS
mg/L µg/L mg/L
NE NE NE
5310B 2450D
Dissolved Total Total Total Total Dissolved Total
1
200.8 200.7
Thallium
µg/L
0.2*
Zinc
mg/L
N/A N/A <0.1 <100 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A 0.2 <1000 N/A N/A 0.008
N/A N/A 0.13 <20 N/A N/A 0.006
N/A N/A <0.1 <100 N/A N/A <0.005
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A 12 <0.005 <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.009
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A <5 <0.005 <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A 0.207 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A 6 <0.005 <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.045
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A <5 <0.005 <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-202D Background Bedrock 1/8/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-202D Background Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/9/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/8/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2013
MW-202S Background Residuum 1/8/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-202S Background Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-203D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-203S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/6/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/4/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/6/2011
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/5/2012
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/8/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/9/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/10/2013
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 1/9/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 5/6/2014
MW-204D Compliance Bedrock 9/9/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/6/2011
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/4/2011
TOC TOX TSS
mg/L µg/L mg/L
NE NE NE
5310B 2450D
Dissolved Total Total Total Total Dissolved Total
1
200.8 200.7
Thallium
µg/L
0.2*
Zinc
mg/L
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.006
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A <5 <0.005 <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A <5 <0.005 <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A <5 <0.005 <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.006
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.005
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A <5 0.006 0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.007
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Well Type Hydrostratigraphic
Unit
Sample Collection
Date
Units
Analytical Parameter
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/6/2011
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/5/2012
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/8/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/9/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/10/2013
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 1/9/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 5/6/2014
MW-204S Compliance Residuum 9/9/2014
TOC TOX TSS
mg/L µg/L mg/L
NE NE NE
5310B 2450D
Dissolved Total Total Total Total Dissolved Total
1
200.8 200.7
Thallium
µg/L
0.2*
Zinc
mg/L
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A <0.005
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.006
<0.2 <0.2 N/A N/A <5.2 0.009 0.01
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.016
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.014
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.017
N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.012
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Notes:
1.Depth to Water measured from the top of well casing
2.Analytical parameter abbreviations:
Temp. = Temperature
DO = Dissolved oxygen
Cond. = Specific conductivity
ORP = Oxidation reduction potential
TDS = Total dissolved solids
TSS = Total suspended solids
TOC = Total organic carbon
3. Units:
°C = Degrees Celsius
SU = Standard Units
mV = millivolts
NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/L = micrograms per liter
µmhos/cm = micromhos per centimeter
CaCO3 = calcium carbonate
HCO3- = bicarbonate
CO32- = carbonate
4.N/A = Not applicable
5.NE = Not established
6.* Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration (IMAC) standards
7.Highlighted values indicate values that exceed the 15A NCAC 2L Standard
8.Analytical results with "<" preceding the result indicates that the parameter was
not detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting
limit.
Table 5 - Ash Analytical Results
pH % Solids Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molydenum Nickel Phosphorus Potassium
SU %mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
100000 0.9 5.8 5800 63 45 3 NE 3.8 0.9 700 150 270 NE 65 1 NE 130 NE NE
NE 82 2.4 380000 400 40000 160 NE 5.6 60 8200 100000 800 NE 4600 3.1 1000 4000 4 NE
Analytical Method 200.8 200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.7 200.8 245.1 200.8 200.7 200.7
Site Name Sample Collection Date
Reuse Comp (M)2/15/2007 7.86 N/A N/A 0.1 0.31 22 N/A 2.9 0.006 230 0.91 N/A 0.91 N/A 0.36 30 3.2 <0.024 N/A 1.3 5.7 49
Reuse Comp (M)3/15/2007 7.84 N/A N/A 0.12 0.34 25 N/A <30 0.006 360 0.82 N/A 1.1 N/A 0.26 36 3.9 <0.024 N/A 1.6 5.9 55
Reuse Comp (M)12/7/2010 7.2 68.5 N/A <2 2.85 21.1 N/A <3.33 <0.33 146 2.19 N/A 1.74 N/A <2 32.6 15.3 0.14 <0.33 3.18 12.1 28.2
IHSB Protection of Groundwater PSRG
Units
Analytical Parameter
IHSB Industrial Health-Based PSRG
Field Measurement
Table 5 - Ash Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Site Name Sample Collection Date
Reuse Comp (M)2/15/2007
Reuse Comp (M)3/15/2007
Reuse Comp (M)12/7/2010
IHSB Protection of Groundwater PSRG
Units
Analytical Parameter
IHSB Industrial Health-Based PSRG
Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Thallium Zinc
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
2.1 3.4 NE NE 0.28 1200
1000 1000 NE 100000 2 62000
200.8 200.7 200.8 200.7
0.23 <0.31 17 N/A N/A 1.1
<0.6 <0.3 16 N/A N/A 0.96
<2 <0.33 21.9 N/A N/A 1.72
Table 5 - Ash Analytical Results
Notes:
1.Units:
SU = Standard Units
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
2.N/A = Not applicable
NE = Not established
3.Sample depth interval in parentheses
Table 6 - Landfill Leachate Analytical Results
Temp.DO Cond.pH ORP Turbidity Alkalinity Aluminum Beryllium
˚C mg/L µmhos/cm SU mV NTU mg/L CaCO3 µg/L
NA NA NA 6.5 - 8.5 NA NA NE NE 4*
Analytical Method 2320B4d
Well Name Sample Collection Date Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/30/2007 7.79 N/A 49 6.53 N/A N/A 8000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 16 N/A N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 3023
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/5/2009 10.85 N/A 23 6.47 N/A 2.16 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <5 N/A 12.2 N/A N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1040
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/6/2010 7.52 N/A 21.2 5.24 N/A 31.8 6580 N/A N/A N/A N/A <5 N/A 13.6 N/A N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 960
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/19/2011 8.17 N/A 25.1 6.65 N/A 2.65 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <5 N/A 13.3 N/A N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1290
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/20/2011 23.91 N/A 37.1 6.12 N/A 0.54 8280 N/A N/A N/A N/A <1 N/A 35.9 N/A N/A <50 N/A <1 N/A 1990
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/10/2012 10.22 N/A 465 5.6 N/A 4.6 4280 N/A N/A N/A 2.11 2.09 111 111 N/A 152 152 <1 <1 68970 68620
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/30/2012 23.82 N/A 475 6.16 N/A 2.11 5740 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.73 N/A 67.4 N/A N/A 455 N/A <1 N/A 47400
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/30/2013 17.1 8090 5276 4.04 501 6 <100 N/A N/A N/A N/A 85.3 N/A 31.6 N/A N/A 64200 N/A 14.4 N/A 318000
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/29/2013 21.73 8080 1843 4.74 420 1000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/27/2014 12.8 8830 2972 4.76 475 10.4 <100 N/A N/A N/A N/A 47.9 N/A 59.1 N/A N/A 32800 N/A 5.41 N/A 308000
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/29/2014 20.35 8440 4065 4.43 496 8.73 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A 63.1 N/A 34 N/A N/A 43400 N/A 6.34 N/A 415000
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/30/2007 8.14 N/A 34 6.45 N/A N/A <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <2 N/A 34 N/A N/A <100 N/A <0.5 N/A 806
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/5/2009 10.26 N/A 274.1 4.91 N/A 3.18 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <5 N/A 153 N/A N/A 1640 N/A <1 N/A 9410
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/6/2010 13.28 N/A 1617 4.39 N/A 6.28 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <50 N/A <50 N/A N/A <500 N/A <10 N/A 28300
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/26/2010 21.27 N/A 4792 4.08 N/A 0.72 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <500 N/A <500 N/A N/A 37700 N/A <100 N/A 293000
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/19/2011 17.47 N/A 5437 8.36 N/A 2.91 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A 378 N/A <250 N/A N/A 35600 N/A <50 N/A 205000
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/20/2011 20.35 N/A 5649 3.93 N/A 0.88 <100 N/A N/A N/A N/A 224 N/A 37.7 N/A N/A 51400 N/A 10.9 N/A 328000
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/10/2012 15.67 N/A 4818 4 N/A 1.05 <100 N/A N/A N/A 145 144 31 30.9 N/A 46580 46570 14.4 14.4 233700 233300
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/30/2012 20.81 N/A 5345 3.97 N/A 1.05 <100 N/A N/A N/A N/A 92.4 N/A 33.9 N/A N/A 58600 N/A 10.9 N/A 282000
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/30/2013 14.23 9200 778 5.61 467 1.98 5490 N/A N/A N/A N/A <5 N/A 79.1 N/A N/A 2950 N/A <5 N/A 96600
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/30/2013 22.39 7860 4835 3.97 485 72.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/27/2014 16.02 7890 5705 3.85 480 11.6 <100 N/A N/A N/A N/A 87.9 N/A 33.6 N/A N/A 75400 N/A 12.2 N/A 395000
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/29/2014 18.58 8030 6157 3.95 448 14.9 <5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A 103 N/A 32.2 N/A N/A 79000 N/A 9.72 N/A 419000
Analytical Parameter Antimony Arsenic Barium
Units µg/L µg/L µg/L
200.7
Boron
µg/Lµg/L
Cadmium
NE
Calcium
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard 1*10 700 700 2
µg/L
Field Measurements
200.7 200.8 200.7200.8 200.8
Table 6 - Landfill Leachate Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Sample Collection Date
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/30/2007
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/5/2009
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/6/2010
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/19/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/20/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/10/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/30/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/30/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/29/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/27/2014
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/29/2014
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/30/2007
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/5/2009
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/6/2010
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/26/2010
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/19/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/20/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/10/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/30/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/30/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/30/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/27/2014
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/29/2014
Analytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Chloride Fluoride
µg/L µg/L
250000 2000
300
Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
4720 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A <2 <100 N/A 47 N/A <2 N/A 1211 N/A 142 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
<5000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <100 N/A <50 N/A <5 N/A 649 N/A 12.6 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
<5000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <100 N/A <50 N/A <5 N/A 763 N/A 14.6 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
<5000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <500 N/A <50 N/A <5 N/A 1040 N/A <5 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
631 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <100 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A 1389 N/A 120 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
1870 <5 <5 N/A N/A <5 <5 177 <10 <10 <1 <1 9634 9552 2030 2006 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
2020 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 326 N/A <10 N/A <1 N/A 25600 N/A 1800 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
182000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A 14.1 <5000 N/A 176 N/A 17.8 N/A 330000 N/A 70800 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
120000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 1260 N/A 1160 N/A 3.72 N/A 215000 N/A 47800 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
197000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 1730 N/A 57.5 N/A 7.11 N/A 263000 N/A 49300 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
4910 N/A 1.68 N/A N/A N/A <2 <100 N/A 992 N/A <2 N/A 1012 N/A 90 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
63800 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <100 N/A <50 N/A <5 N/A 12500 N/A 507 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
126000 N/A <50 N/A N/A N/A <50 <100 N/A 1020 N/A <50 N/A 2180 N/A 76.4 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
149000 N/A <500 N/A N/A N/A <500 <100 N/A <5000 N/A <500 N/A 292000 N/A 59200 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
198000 N/A <250 N/A N/A N/A <250 <500 N/A <2500 N/A <250 N/A 227000 N/A 46800 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A
149800 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 1425 N/A 139800 N/A 17.6 N/A 299200 N/A 59000 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
153200 <5 <5 N/A N/A 65.2 65.6 2963 50.8 78.1 14.5 14.5 244500 244700 58980 58400 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
151000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 3120 N/A 48.8 N/A 15.9 N/A 293000 N/A 64100 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
9580 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <2000 N/A 12.1 N/A <5 N/A 38300 N/A 7070 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
219000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 1180 N/A 571 N/A 18.1 N/A 360000 N/A 61600 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
237000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 2200 N/A 1010 N/A 18.5 N/A 371000 N/A 53100 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A
µg/L µg/L µg/L
10 1*1000 300
MolydenumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercury
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/Lµg/Lµg/L
15 NE 50 1 NE
200.8200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7 245.1 200.8200.7 200.8
Table 6 - Landfill Leachate Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Sample Collection Date
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/30/2007
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/5/2009
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/6/2010
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/19/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/20/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/10/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/30/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/30/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/29/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-1 1/27/2014
BCCRLF-CWB-1 7/29/2014
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/30/2007
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/5/2009
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/6/2010
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/26/2010
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/19/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/20/2011
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/10/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/30/2012
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/30/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/30/2013
BCCRLF-CWB-2 1/27/2014
BCCRLF-CWB-2 7/29/2014
Analytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Nitrate as N Sulfate TDS TOC TOX TSS
µg-N/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
10000 250000 500000 NE NE NE
300.0 300.0 2540C 5310B 2450D
Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Total Dissolved Total Total Total Total Dissolved Total
N/A <2 460 N/A 1480 N/A <2 N/A N/A N/A 2042 3320 26000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5
N/A <5 337 N/A <5000 N/A <10 N/A N/A N/A <5000 <5000 178000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <10
N/A <5 <100 N/A <5000 N/A <10 N/A N/A N/A <5000 <5000 1120000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <10
N/A <5 <100 N/A <5000 N/A <10 N/A N/A N/A <5000 <5000 <25000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <10
N/A <5 155 N/A 1932 N/A <1 N/A N/A N/A 763 6387 17000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <5
9.92 9.67 218 3381 3407 2.51 2.43 <1 <1 2117 2113 232100 359000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.3 17.6
N/A 21.7 521 N/A 4150 N/A 12.3 N/A N/A N/A 3350 223000 375000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10.2
N/A 787 11700 N/A 149000 N/A 432 N/A N/A N/A 213000 3350000 5100000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1970
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 238 19800 N/A 21100 N/A 243 N/A N/A N/A 105000 1900000 2870000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 517
N/A 249 34300 N/A 44200 N/A 75.2 N/A N/A N/A 149000 2290000 3640000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 601
N/A <2 100 N/A 1950 N/A <2 N/A N/A N/A 1271 2640 24000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6
N/A 7.2 243 N/A <5000 N/A <10 N/A N/A N/A <5000 21100 160000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.5
N/A <50 3150 N/A <50000 N/A <100 N/A N/A N/A <50000 685000 <20000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 487
N/A 762 6650 N/A <500000 N/A <1000 N/A N/A N/A <500000 40400 4540000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2510
N/A 605 6370 N/A <250000 N/A <500 N/A N/A N/A <250000 3730000 5270000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1670
N/A 697 5867 N/A 139800 N/A 68 N/A N/A N/A 211400 3506500 5164000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1853
754 745 7328 116300 116100 61.1 59.4 <1 <1 165900 165100 2918600 4168000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2062 2039
N/A 712 7690 N/A 150000 N/A 454 N/A N/A N/A 209000 3080000 4880000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1750
N/A 28.3 5390 N/A 3750 N/A 39.8 N/A N/A N/A 8290 408000 660000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.3
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 584 17700 N/A 176000 N/A 374 N/A N/A N/A 230000 3640000 5150000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1540
N/A 470 18400 N/A 186000 N/A 75.1 N/A N/A N/A 235000 3670000 5460000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1150
Selenium Sodium Thallium ZincNickelPotassiumSilver
µg/Lµg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L ug/Lµg/L
1000100NE
200.8 200.7 200.8 200.7
20 NE 0.2*20
200.7200.7
Table 6 - Landfill Leachate Analytical Results
Notes:
1.TDS = Total dissolved solids
DO = Dissolved oxygen
Cond. = Specific conductivity
ORP = Oxidation reduction potential
TDS = Total dissolved solids
TSS = Total suspended solids
TOC = Total organic carbon
2.Units:
˚C = Degrees Celsius
SU = Standard Units
mV = millivolts
NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
µmhos/cm = micromhos per centimeter
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/L = micrograms per liter
3.* IMAC (interim maximum allowable concentration)
4.Highlighted values indicate values that exceed the 15A NCAC 2L Standard
5.Analytical results with "<" preceding the result indicates that the parameter was not
detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit
Table 7 - Seep Analytical Results
Temp.Cond.pH Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Boron Cadmium Calcium COD Chloride Chromium Copper Flow Fluoride Hardness Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Oil and Grease Selenium Sulfate TDS Thallium TSS Zinc
˚C µmhos/cm SU mg/L µg/L µg/L mg/L mg/L µg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L µg/L µg/L MGD mg/L mg/L (CaCO3)mg/L µg/L mg/L mg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L mg/L µg/L mg/L mg/L µg/L mg/L mg/L
NE NE 6.0 - 9.0 0.087 5.6 10 1 NE 2 NE NE NE 50 0.007 N/A 2 100 1 25 NE 0.2 0.012 160 25 see note 2 5 250 500 0.24 NE 50
EPA 200.7 EPA 200.8 EPA 200.8 EPA 200.7 EPA 200.7 EPA 200.8 EPA 200.7 HACH 8000 EPA 300.0 EPA 200.8 EPA 200.8 N/A EPA 300.0 EPA 200.7 EPA 200.7 EPA 200.8 EPA 200.7 EPA 200.7 EPA 245.1 EPA 200.8 EPA 200.8 EPA 1664B EPA 200.8 EPA 300.0 SM2540C EPA 200.8 SM2540D EPA 200.7
S-1 20.4 50.5 5.5 0.35 < 1 < 1 0.022 < 0.05 < 1 3.89 < 20 2.4 < 1 2.63 0.0053 < 1 19.1 0.947 < 1 2.28 0.037 < 0.05 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 1 1.4 61 < 0.2 16 < 0.005
S-2 22.1 119 5.9 0.202 < 1 < 1 0.082 0.059 < 1 4.7 < 20 34 < 1 < 1 0.0063 < 1 32.7 0.366 < 1 5.1 0.094 < 0.05 < 1 1.03 < 5 < 1 < 1 100 < 0.2 17 < 0.005
S-3 20.2 30.45 6.77 0.169 < 1 1.39 0.012 < 0.05 < 1 1.38 < 20 2.9 < 1 1.42 0.0015 < 1 7.72 0.567 < 1 1.04 0.052 < 0.05 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 1 < 1 36 < 0.2 < 5 < 0.005
S-4 20.3 105.7 5.7 0.032 < 1 < 1 0.039 < 0.05 < 1 5.7 < 20 29 < 1 < 1 0.0048 < 1 32.2 0.216 < 1 4.36 0.043 < 0.05 < 1 1.04 < 5 < 1 < 1 95 < 0.2 < 5 < 0.005
S-5 22.2 38.2 6.32 0.244 < 1 < 1 0.01 < 0.05 < 1 2.16 < 20 3 < 1 < 1 0.0059 < 1 11.4 0.46 < 1 1.46 0.023 < 0.05 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 1 1.3 44 < 0.2 7 < 0.005
S-6 22.7 730 6.55 0.057 < 1 1.57 0.081 3.76 < 1 80.6 < 20 160 < 1 < 1 0.0034 < 1 288 0.188 < 1 21 0.21 < 0.05 2.9 1.17 < 5 < 1 36 630 < 0.2 < 5 0.006
S-7 24.4 54.7 6.09 0.103 < 1 10.6 0.055 < 0.05 < 1 1.61 < 20 4.2 < 1 13.9 0.0011 < 1 9.31 13.3 < 1 1.28 0.604 < 0.05 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 1 1.5 34 < 0.2 37 < 0.005
S-8 20.8 94.6 5.5 0.026 < 1 < 1 0.041 0.064 < 1 5.33 < 20 11 < 1 2.62 0.0057 < 1 24.9 0.06 < 1 2.81 0.013 < 0.05 < 1 < 1 < 5 3.58 8.7 91 < 0.2 < 5 0.012
S-9 25.4 869 6.41 0.138 < 1 < 1 0.053 2.72 < 1 88 < 20 8.2 < 1 3.58 0.0017 < 1 427 0.148 < 1 50.4 0.31 < 0.05 < 1 9.79 < 5 7 440 750 < 0.2 6 0.061
S-10 20.2 1081 5.73 0.128 < 1 1.81 0.307 5.83 1 98.1 < 20 380 < 1 < 1 0.0129 < 1 499 4.01 < 1 61.8 5.21 0.09 < 1 11.4 < 5 < 1 11 1100 0.419 38 0.007
S-11 22.3 1448 5.92 0.065 < 1 2.14 0.301 9.84 < 1 194 < 20 430 < 1 < 1 0.181 < 1 713 1.22 < 1 55.6 9.71 < 0.05 < 1 11.1 < 5 < 1 81 1500 0.487 < 5 0.01
Lake Wylie-Upstream 31.6 81.2 7.12 0.48 < 1 < 1 0.018 < 0.05 < 1 4.17 < 20 3 < 1 < 1 158.3 < 1 17.2 0.71 < 1 1.66 0.024 < 0.05 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 1 2.5 45 < 0.2 10 < 0.005
Lake Wylie-Downstream 29.7 153.8 6.47 0.392 < 1 < 1 0.023 0.661 < 1 14.1 < 20 23 < 1 < 1 158.3 < 1 54.8 0.629 < 1 4.77 0.045 < 0.05 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 1 8 120 < 0.2 7 < 0.005
Units
Analytical Parameter
Seep Monitoring Location
Site Name
15A NCAC 02B .0200 Surface Water Quality Standard
Table 7 - Seep Analytical Results
Notes:
1.Analytical parameter abbreviations:
Temp. = Temperature
Cond. = Specific conductivity
TDS = Total dissolved solids
TSS = Total suspended solids
2.Units:
˚C = Degrees Celsius
SU = Standard Units
µmhos/cm = micromhos per centimeter
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/L = micrograms per liter
CaCO3 = calcium carbonate
3.Take the lowest LC50 available for the particular type of OG you have (or similar OG) and
multiply it by a safety factor of 0.01 to obtain the criteria
4.N/A = Not applicable
5.NE = Not established
6.Flow measurements and analytical samples were collected on July 8, 15, and 16 of 2014
7.S-7 sample temperature upon receipt in the analytical lab was slightly above 6 degrees
Celsius (7.9 degrees C)
8.Flow at locations upstream and downstream of BCSS in the Dan River is from the USGS
Dan River-Pine Hall daily average flows for the date of river sampling
9.Highlighted values indicate values that exceed the 15A NCAC 2B Standard
10.Analytical results with "<" preceding the result indicates that the parameter was not
detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit
Table 8 - FGD Leachate Analytical Results
Temp.DO Cond.pH ORP Turbidity Alkalinity Aluminum Beryllium
˚C mg/L µmhos/cm SU mV NTU µg/L CaCO3 µg/L µg/L
NA NA NA 6.5 - 8.5 NA NA NE NE 4*
Analytical Method 2320B4d
Well Name Sample Collection Date Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total
BC-FGDLF 5/6/2009 15.9 N/A 2447 5.5 N/A 7 17300 N/A N/A N/A N/A 25 N/A 17.1 N/A N/A 6380
BC-FGDLF 11/17/2009 15.88 N/A 3136 5.81 N/A 12.8 45800 N/A N/A N/A N/A 20 N/A 6.8 N/A N/A 5600
BC-FGDLF 5/17/2010 16.58 N/A 2753 5.82 N/A 357 32300 N/A N/A N/A N/A 77 N/A 113 N/A N/A 7030
BC-FGDLF 11/29/2010 14.92 N/A 2411 5.62 N/A 12.7 46900 N/A N/A N/A N/A <100 N/A <100 N/A N/A 8700
BC-FGDLF 5/16/2011 17.38 N/A 2664 6.42 N/A 46 86271 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12.9 N/A 20.7 N/A N/A 10820
BC-FGDLF 11/7/2011 16.96 N/A 2714 6.04 N/A 1.74 130700 N/A N/A N/A 1.839 9.37 18.34 17.97 N/A 9597 9527
BC-FGDLF 5/8/2012 16.96 7410 2890 6.59 289 1.39 177000 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4.3 N/A 17.3 N/A N/A 12300
BC-FGDLF 11/26/2012 15.78 N/A 2800 6.63 N/A 0.93 193000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <5 N/A 17 N/A N/A 11900
BC-FGDLF 5/14/2013 15.77 9100 2799 6.96 264 0.67 199000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <5 N/A 17.4 N/A N/A 9970
BC-FGDLF 11/25/2013 15.27 7390 2793 6.56 289 3.34 224000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <10 N/A 18.7 N/A N/A 10600
BC-FGDLF 5/7/2014 16.57 6430 2839 6.42 315 4.15 223000 N/A N/A N/A N/A <10 N/A 16.3 N/A N/A 8010
200.8 200.7 200.7
10 700 700
µg/L µg/L µg/L
Arsenic Barium BoronAnalytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Field Measurements
Antimony
µg/L
1*
200.8
Table 8 - FGD Leachate Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Sample Collection Date
BC-FGDLF 5/6/2009
BC-FGDLF 11/17/2009
BC-FGDLF 5/17/2010
BC-FGDLF 11/29/2010
BC-FGDLF 5/16/2011
BC-FGDLF 11/7/2011
BC-FGDLF 5/8/2012
BC-FGDLF 11/26/2012
BC-FGDLF 5/14/2013
BC-FGDLF 11/25/2013
BC-FGDLF 5/7/2014
Analytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Chloride Fluoride
µg/L µg/L
250000 2000
300
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
N/A 1.3 N/A 397000 343000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 330 N/A 31.1 N/A <5 N/A 42200
N/A <1 N/A 428000 412000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 490 N/A 75.6 N/A <5 N/A 26800
N/A <10 N/A 501000 186000 N/A <50 N/A N/A N/A <50 1500 N/A 13600 N/A <50 N/A 63800
N/A <20 N/A 452000 116000 N/A <100 N/A N/A N/A <100 1100 N/A <1000 N/A <100 N/A 63000
N/A 1.13 N/A 577000 133000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 364 N/A 313 N/A <1 N/A 73040
<1 <5 596000 593000 143400 <5 <5 N/A N/A <5 <5 521.6 <10 12.85 <1 <5 73900 74300
N/A <1 N/A 609000 139000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <1000 N/A 16.7 N/A <1 N/A 85300
N/A <5 N/A 614000 124000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 1200 N/A 22.8 N/A <5 N/A 82400
N/A <5 N/A 626000 110000 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 1190 N/A <10 N/A <5 N/A 74600
N/A <10 N/A 639000 91200 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 1140 N/A 11.8 N/A <10 N/A 78900
N/A <10 N/A 666000 99600 N/A <5 N/A N/A N/A <5 <1000 N/A 321 N/A <10 N/A 71100
200.7200.7 200.8 200.7 200.7 200.8200.8 200.7
NE101*1000 300 152NE
µg/Lµg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/Lµg/L µg/L
MagnesiumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadCadmiumCalcium
Table 8 - FGD Leachate Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Sample Collection Date
BC-FGDLF 5/6/2009
BC-FGDLF 11/17/2009
BC-FGDLF 5/17/2010
BC-FGDLF 11/29/2010
BC-FGDLF 5/16/2011
BC-FGDLF 11/7/2011
BC-FGDLF 5/8/2012
BC-FGDLF 11/26/2012
BC-FGDLF 5/14/2013
BC-FGDLF 11/25/2013
BC-FGDLF 5/7/2014
Analytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Nitrate as N
µg-N/L
10000
300.0
Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total
N/A 4690 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A 30.9 571 N/A 4460 N/A 11 N/A 1.2 N/A 6470
N/A 5380 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A 19.6 156 N/A <5000 N/A 25 N/A <5 N/A <5000
N/A 15200 N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A <50 104 N/A <50000 N/A <100 N/A <50 N/A <50000
N/A 30300 N/A <0.2 N/A N/A N/A <100 <100 N/A <100000 N/A <200 N/A <100 N/A <100000
N/A 32020 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A N/A 45.8 147 N/A 5068 N/A 153 N/A <5 N/A 5463
22560 22560 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A 23.87 24.42 211 4848 4759 27.39 140.5 <5 <5 5624 5497
N/A 16400 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 15.6 176 N/A 5227 N/A 396 N/A <5 N/A 6517
N/A 10900 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 8.84 318 N/A 5050 N/A 823 N/A <5 N/A 6350
N/A 12500 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 11.5 2670 N/A 5420 N/A 1190 N/A <5 N/A 6160
N/A 9680 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 8.29 2830 N/A 6260 N/A 1160 N/A <5 N/A 6520
N/A 14800 N/A <0.05 N/A N/A N/A 12.4 2360 N/A 5790 N/A 1010 N/A <5 N/A 6030
200.7 200.8 200.7200.8 245.1 200.8 200.7
NE 20 NE20501NE100
µg/L µg/L µg/Lµg/Lµg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
Potassium Selenium SodiumSilverManganeseMercuryMolydenumNickel
Table 8 - FGD Leachate Analytical Results
Analytical Method
Well Name Sample Collection Date
BC-FGDLF 5/6/2009
BC-FGDLF 11/17/2009
BC-FGDLF 5/17/2010
BC-FGDLF 11/29/2010
BC-FGDLF 5/16/2011
BC-FGDLF 11/7/2011
BC-FGDLF 5/8/2012
BC-FGDLF 11/26/2012
BC-FGDLF 5/14/2013
BC-FGDLF 11/25/2013
BC-FGDLF 5/7/2014
Analytical Parameter
Units
15A NCAC 02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality Standard
Sulfate TDS TOC TOX TSS
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
250000 500000 NE NE NE
300.0 2540C 5310B 2450D
Total Total Dissolved Total Total Total Total Dissolved Total
987000 2570000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 51.3
1380000 2630000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24.2
1330000 2480000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 136
1410000 2250000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A <200
1610000 2625000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 37.7
1616000 2616000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.69 21.09
1540000 2120000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 16.8
1630000 2720000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10.3
1500000 2780000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.6
1420000 2670000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.8
1530000 2740000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.96
200.8 200.7
0.2*1000
ug/L µg/L
Thallium Zinc
Table 8 - FGD Leachate Analytical Results
Notes:
1.TDS = Total dissolved solids
DO = Dissolved oxygen
Cond. = Specific conductivity
ORP = Oxidation reduction potential
TDS = Total dissolved solids
TSS = Total suspended solids
TOC = Total organic carbon
2.Units:
˚C = Degrees Celsius
SU = Standard Units
mV = millivolts
NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
µmhos/cm = micromhos per centimeter
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/L = micrograms per liter
3.* IMAC (interim maximum allowable concentration)
4.Highlighted values indicate values that exceed the 15A NCAC 2L Standard
5.Analytical results with "<" preceding the result indicates that the parameter was not
detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit

TABLE 9 – ENVIRONMENTAL EXPLORATION AND SAMPLING PLAN
BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION

Exploration
Area Soil Borings Shallow Monitoring Wells Deep Monitoring Wells Bedrock Monitoring Wells Water Supply Wells Surface Water
Boring IDs Quantity
Estimated
Boring Depth
(ft bgs)
Well IDs Quantity
Estimated
Well Depth
(ft bgs)
Screen
Length
(ft)
Well IDs Quantity
Estimated
Casing
Depth
(ft bgs)
Estimated
Well
Depth
(ft bgs)
Screen
Length
(ft)
Well IDs Quantity
Estimated
Casing
Depth
(ft bgs)
Estimated
Well
Depth
(ft bgs)
Screen
Length
(ft)
Well IDs Quantity Quantity of
Locations
Quantity of
Samples
Ash Basin
AB-1
through
AB-9, and
SB-1
10 15-75

AB-1S,
AB-2S
AB-3S
AB-4S/SL
AB-5S/SL
AB-6S/SL
AB-7S/SL
AB-8S/SL
AB-9S

14 15-55 10-15
AB-1D, AB-2D, AB-
3D, AB-4D, AB-5D,
AB-6D, AB-7D, AB-
8D, and AB-9D
9 15-75 30-85 5 AB-4BR 1 50-105 100-155 5 N/A N/A 9 18
Beyond
Waste
Boundary
GWA-1
through
GWA-12,
MW-200,
MW-202,
and
MW-203
15 15-70
GWA-1S,
GWA-2S,
GWA-3S,
GWA-4S,
GWA-5S,
GWA-6S,
GWA-7S
GWA-8S,
GWA-9S,
GWA-10S,
GWA-11S,
and
GWA-12S
12 15-60 15
GWA-1D, GWA-2D,
GWA-3D, GWA-4D,
GWA-5D, GWA-6D,
GWA-7D, GWA-8D,
GWA-9D, GWA-
10D, GWA-11D, and
GWA-12D
12 15-90 30-105 5
GWA-5BR,
GWA-12BR,
MW-200BR,
MW-202BR,
MW-203BR
5 50-125 100-175 5 N/A N/A
2 Dan River
2 Belews
Lake
11 Seep
30
Background
BG-1, BG-
2, and BG-
3
3 30-80
BG-1S, BG-
2S, and BG-
3S
3 30-60 15 BG-1D, BG-2D, and
BG-3D 3 30-80 45-95 5 BG-2BR, 1 65-115 115-165 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Notes:
1. Estimated boring and well depths based on data available at the time of work plan preparation and subject to change based on site-specific conditions in the field.
2. Laboratory analyses of soil, ash, groundwater, and surface water samples will be performed in accordance with the constituents and methods identified in Tables 10 and 11.
3. Additionally, soils will be tested in the laboratory to determine grain size (with hydrometer), specific gravity, and permeability.
4. During drilling operations, downhole testing will be conducted to determine in-situ soil properties such as horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity.
5. Actual number of field and laboratory tests will be determined in field by Field Engineer or Geologist in accordance with project specifications.
6. Surface water, stream, and seep sample locations include both water and sediment samples.

TABLE 10 – SOIL AND ASH PARAMETERS AND CONSTITUENT ANALYTICAL
METHODS
INORGANIC COMPOUNDS UNITS METHOD
Antimony mg/kg EPA 6020A
Arsenic mg/kg EPA 6020A
Barium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Boron mg/kg EPA 6010C
Cadmium mg/kg EPA 6020A
Chloride mg/kg EPA 9056A
Chromium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Copper mg/kg EPA 6010C
Iron mg/kg EPA 6010C
Lead mg/kg EPA 6020A
Manganese mg/kg EPA 6010C
Mercury mg/kg EPA Method 7470A/7471B
Nickel mg/kg EPA 6010C
pH SU EPA 9045D
Selenium mg/kg EPA 6020A
Thallium (low level) (SPLP Extract only) mg/kg EPA 6020A
Zinc mg/kg EPA 6010C
Notes:
1. Soil samples to be analyzed for Total Inorganics using USEPA Methods 6010/6020 and pH
using USEPA Method 9045, as noted above.
2. Ash samples to be analyzed for Total Inorganics using USEPA Methods 6010/6020 and pH
using USEPA Method 9045; select ash samples will also be analyzed for leaching potential
using SPLP Extraction Method 1312 in conjunction with USEPA Methods 6010/6020. SPLP
results to be reported in units of mg/L for comparison to 2L Standards.

TABLE 11 – GROUNDWATER, SURFACE WATER, AND SEEP PARAMETERS AND
CONSTITUENT ANALYTICAL METHODS
PARAMETER RL UNITS METHOD
FIELD PARAMETERS
pH NA SU Field Water Quality Meter
Specific Conductance NA mmho/cm Field Water Quality Meter
Temperature NA ºC Field Water Quality Meter
Dissolved Oxygen NA mg/L Field Water Quality Meter
Oxidation Reduction Potential NA mV Field Water Quality Meter
Turbidity NA NTU Field Water Quality Meter
Ferrous Iron NA mg/L Field Test Kit
INORGANICS
Aluminum 5 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Antimony 1 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Arsenic 1 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Barium 5 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Beryllium 1 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Boron 50 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Cadmium 1 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Chromium 1 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Cobalt 1 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Copper 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Iron 10 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Lead 1 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Manganese 5 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Mercury (low level) 0.012 µg/L EPA 245.7 or 1631
Molybdenum 5 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Nickel 5 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Total Combined Radium (Ra-226 and
Ra-228)4
5 pCi/L EPA 903.0
Selenium 1 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Strontium 5 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Thallium (low level) 0.2 µg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Vanadium (low level) 0.3 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Zinc 5 µg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
ANIONS/CATIONS
Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 20 mg/L SM 2320B
Bicarbonate 20 mg/L SM 2320
Calcium 0.01 mg/L EPA 200.7
Carbonate 20 mg/L SM 2320
Chloride 0.1 mg/L EPA 300.0 or 9056A
Magnesium 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7
Nitrate as Nitrogen 0.023 mg-N/L EPA 300.0 or 9056A
Potassium 0.1 mg/L EPA 200.7
Sodium 0.05 mg/L EPA 200.7
Sulfate 0.1 mg/L EPA 300.0 or 9056A
Sulfide5 0.05 mg/L SM4500S-D
Total Dissolved Solids 25 mg/L SM 2540C
Total Organic Carbon 0.1 mg/L SM 5310
Total Suspended Solids 2 mg/L SM 2450D
ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CONSTITUENTS
Iron Speciation (Fe(II), Fe(III) Vendor Specific µg/L IC-ICP-CRC-MS
Manganese Speciation (Mn(II), Mn(IV) Vendor Specific µg/L IC-ICP-CRC-MS
Notes: 1. Select constituents will be analyzed for total and dissolved concentrations.
2. RL is the laboratory analytical method reporting limit.
3. NA indicates not applicable.
4. Following wells to be sampled for Total Combined Radium: MW-101S/D, MW-102D, MW-103S/D, and BG-1S/D. DWR
regional office will be consulted to determine if additional wells are to be sampled.
5. Sulfide as H2S sampled in groundwater samples only.
6. All EPA methods and RLs are at or below respective 2L or 2B standards for constituents with standards.

Appendix A
Notice of Regulatory Requirements Letter from
John E. Skvarla, III, Secretary, State of North
Carolina, to Paul Newton, Duke Energy, dated
August 13, 2014.

1

Appendix B
Review of Groundwater Assessment Work
Plan Letter from S. Jay Zimmerman, Chief,
Water Quality Regional Operations Section,
NCDENR, To Harry Sideris, Duke Energy,
dated November 4, 2014.