GW Assessment Plan REV1_20141231

Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary
1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Site Information .............................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Plant Description ........................................................................................................ 5
2.2 Ash Management Area Description ........................................................................ 5
2.3 Regulatory Requirements ......................................................................................... 6
2.3.1 Groundwater Monitoring ................................................................................... 6
2.3.2 Water Quality Monitoring .................................................................................. 8
2.3.3 Fish Tissue Sampling ........................................................................................... 8
3.0 Receptor Information ................................................................................................... 11
4.0 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology ...................................................................... 13
5.0 Initial Conceptual Site Model .................................................................................... 15
5.1 Physical Site Characteristics ................................................................................... 16
5.2 Source Characterization .......................................................................................... 17
5.3 Hydrogeologic Site Characteristics ....................................................................... 19
6.0 Environmental Monitoring ......................................................................................... 21
6.1 Compliance Monitoring Well Groundwater Analytical Results ...................... 21
6.2 Preliminary Statistical Evaluation Results ........................................................... 21
6.3 Additional Site Data ................................................................................................ 22
6.3.1 Former Ash Disposal Area and Ash Basins ................................................... 23
7.0 Assessment Work Plan................................................................................................. 27
7.1 Subsurface Exploration ........................................................................................... 28
7.1.1 Ash and Soil Borings ......................................................................................... 29
7.1.2 Groundwater Monitoring Wells ...................................................................... 32
7.1.3 Well Completion and Development ............................................................... 36
7.1.4 Hydraulic Evaluation Testing .......................................................................... 37
7.2 Ash Pore Water and Groundwater Sampling and Analysis.............................. 39
7.3 Surface Water, Sediment, and Seep Sampling ..................................................... 42
7.3.1 Water Quality Samples...................................................................................... 42
7.3.2 Sediment Samples .............................................................................................. 43
7.3.3 Seep Samples ...................................................................................................... 43
Page i
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

7.4 Field and Sampling Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures .............. 43
7.4.1 Field Logbooks ................................................................................................... 43
7.4.2 Field Data Records ............................................................................................. 44
7.4.3 Sample Identification ......................................................................................... 44
7.4.4 Field Equipment Calibration ............................................................................ 44
7.4.5 Sample Custody Requirements ........................................................................ 45
7.4.6 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Samples ......................................... 47
7.4.7 Decontamination Procedures ........................................................................... 48
7.5 Influence of Pumping Wells on Groundwater System ....................................... 48
7.6 Site Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model ................................................................. 49
7.7 Site-Specific Background Concentrations (SSBC) ............................................... 50
7.8 Groundwater Fate and Transport Model ............................................................. 50
7.8.1 MODFLOW/MT3D ............................................................................................ 51
7.8.2 Development of Kd Terms ............................................................................... 52
7.8.3 MODFLOW/MT3D Modeling Process ............................................................ 54
7.8.4 Hydrostratigraphic Layer Development ........................................................ 56
7.8.5 Domain of Conceptual Groundwater Flow Model ....................................... 57
7.8.6 Potential Modeling of Groundwater Impacts to Surface Water ................. 57
8.0 Risk Assessment ............................................................................................................ 60
8.1 Human Health Risk Assessment ........................................................................... 60
8.1.1 Site-Specific Risk-Based Remediation Standards .......................................... 61
8.2 Ecological Risk Assessment .................................................................................... 63
9.0 CSA Report ..................................................................................................................... 66
10.0 Proposed Schedule........................................................................................................ 68
11.0 References ....................................................................................................................... 69

Page ii
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

List of Figures
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
Figure 2 - Site Layout Map
Figure 3 - Geology Map
Figure 4 - Water Level Map - June 2014
Figure 5 - Proposed Monitoring Well and Sample Location Map

List of Tables
Table 1 - Groundwater Monitoring Requirements
Table 2 - Exceedances of 2L Standards
Table 3 - SPLP Leaching Analytical Results
Table 4 - Groundwater Analytical Results
Table 5 - Soil and Ash Analytical Results
Table 6 - Surface Water Analytical Results
Table 7 - Ash Basin Pore Water Analytical Results
Table 8 - Environmental Exploration and Sampling Plan
Table 9 - Soil, Sediment, and Ash Parameters and Analytical Methods
Table 10 - Ash Pore Water, Groundwater, Surface Water, and Seep Parameters and
Analytical Methods

List of Appendices
Appendix A - NCDENR Letter of August 13, 2014
Appendix B - Excerpts from Previous Site Assessment Activity Reports
Appendix C - Historical NPDES Surface Water Analytical Data
Appendix D - Historical NPDES Fish Tissue Data

Page iii
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy) owns and operates the L.V. Sutton Energy
Complex (Sutton Plant) located near Wilmington, North Carolina. The Sutton Plant is
located along the east bank of the Cape Fear River northwest of Wilmington and west of
US Highway 421. The Sutton Plant started operations in 1954 and consisted of three
coal-fired boilers that primarily used bituminous coal as fuel to produce steam. The
Sutton Plant ceased burning coal in November 2013 and switched to burning natural
gas to generate power. The facility no longer generates coal ash.
The discharge from the cooling pond and the ash basins is permitted by the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of
Water Resources (DWR) under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES). Duke Energy has performed groundwater monitoring under the NPDES
permit since 1990. The current compliance groundwater monitoring wells required for
the NPDES permit are 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.
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.
In a Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NORR) letter dated August 13, 2014, the
Division of Water Resources (DWR) requested that Duke Energy prepare a
Groundwater Assessment Plan to identify the source and cause of possible
contamination, any potential hazards to public health and safety and actions taken to
mitigate them, and all receptors and complete exposure pathways. In addition, the plan
should determine the horizontal and vertical extent of possible soil and groundwater
contamination and all significant factors affecting contaminant transport and the
geological and hydrogeological features influencing the movement, chemical, and
physical character of the contaminants. This work plan has also been prepared to fulfill
the requirements stipulated in Coal Ash Management Act 2014 – North Carolina Senate
Bill 729 (August, 2014).
The following assessment plan anticipates:
•Implementation of a receptor survey to identify public and private water supply
wells (including irrigation well and unused or abandoned wells), surface water
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra
features, and wellhead protection areas (if present) within a 0.5 mile radius of
the Sutton Plant ash basins compliance boundary;
•Installation of borings within the ash management area for chemical and
geotechnical analysis of residuals and in-place soils;
•Installation of soil borings;
•Installation of monitoring wells;
•Collection and analysis of groundwater and ash pore water samples from
existing site monitoring wells and newly installed monitoring wells;
•Collection and analysis of surface water and sediment samples;
•Statistical evaluation of groundwater analytical data;
•Conduct a groundwater model to evaluate the long term fate and transport of
constituents of concern in groundwater associated with the ash management
area; and
•Development of a screening level human health and ecological risk assessment.
This assessment will include the preparation of a conceptual exposure model
illustrating potential pathways from the source to possible receptors.
The information obtained through this Work Plan will be utilized to prepare a
Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA) report in accordance with the requirements of
the NORR and the Coal Ash Management Act (CAMA). During the CSA process if
additional investigations are required, NCDENR will be notified.
This Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1 was prepared in response to
comments provided to Duke Energy by the NCDENR, in a letter dated November 4,
2014, in regards to the Groundwater Assessment Work Plan submitted to NCDENR
September, 2014, and subsequent meetings among Duke Energy, SynTerra and
NCDENR. The revised work plan addresses the general and site specific comments for
the Sutton Plant including;
•Even though no seeps have been identified at the Sutton Plant, surface water
and sediment sampling are expected as part of site assessment and the final
work plans. Specifically, surface water and sediment sample locations shall
include both Sutton Lake and the Cape Fear River near Outfall 001.
•Include a summary of the historical results of surface water monitoring for coal
ash constituents in the surface waters of both the cooling pond (Sutton Lake)
and the Cape Fear River performed under the NPDES permit.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra
•Include a summary of the results of fish tissue analysis performed under the
NPDES permit when Outfall 004 was rerouted to the Cape Fear River.
•To fully delineate the horizontal & vertical extent, additional monitoring wells
are needed. Specifically;
o Clustered monitoring wells are needed north of MW-27B, southeast of
MW-7C, and South of the Former Ash Disposal Area (FADA).
o Deep interval monitoring wells AW-6D and AW-7D to the East of the ash
management area will be installed. Based on the results from these wells,
additional wells could be required.
o Intermediate depth monitoring wells screened in the 20-25’ interval will
be included in the well clusters in the vicinity of the new wells AW-6D
and AW-7D east of the ash management area.
•It should be noted that the discussion in Section 4.0 summarizes generalizations
and conceptual understandings of groundwater occurrence and movement in
the Coastal Plain region and may not be representative of actual conditions at
the Sutton Plant.
•Ash borings within the ash management area will be extended to the top of the
confining unit, regardless of depth.
•Summary of ongoing site assessment work that has been done under the
Inactive Hazardous Waste Branch for the Former Ash Disposal Area (FADA)
Site ID number: NCD000830646 is to be included in the revised work plan.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy) owns and operates the L.V. Sutton Energy
Complex (Sutton Plant) located on approximately 3,300 acres near Wilmington, North
Carolina. The Sutton Plant is located along the east bank of the Cape Fear River
northwest of Wilmington and west of US Highway 421. The site is shown on Figure 1.
The Sutton Plant started operations in 1954 and consisted of three coal-fired boilers that
primarily used bituminous coal as fuel to produce steam. Ash generated from the coal
combustion was stored on-site originally in the 'ash disposal area' and then in the 1971
ash basin (old ash basin) and followed by the 1984 ash basin (new ash basin) (Figure 2).
These ash storage areas are referred to as the ash management area. The Sutton Plant
ceased burning coal in November 2013 and switched to burning natural gas to generate
power. The facility no longer generates coal ash.
The discharge from the cooling pond and the ash basins is permitted by the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of
Water Resources (DWR) under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit NC0001422. Duke Energy has performed groundwater monitoring
under the NPDES permit since 1990. The current compliance groundwater monitoring
wells required for the NPDES permit are 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.
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.
The current groundwater monitoring program for the Sutton Plant includes the
sampling of 17 compliance monitoring wells. Two additional wells have been added to
the routine sampling on a voluntary basis since November 2013. The 19 wells
comprising the current monitoring well network at Sutton include two (2) background
wells, 15 downgradient compliance wells, and two voluntarily monitored wells. The
locations of the monitoring wells, the waste boundary, and the compliance boundary
are shown on Figure 2.
Page 1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

The compliance boundary for the Plant is defined in accordance with NCAC Title 15A
Chapter 02L.0107(a) (T15 A NCAC 02L .0107(a)) as being established at either 500 feet
from the waste boundary or at the property boundary, whichever is closest to the waste.
In a Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NORR) letter dated August 13, 2014, the DWR
of the NCDENR requested that Duke Energy prepare a Groundwater Assessment Plan
to conduct a Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA) in accordance with 15A NCAC 02L
.0106(g) to address groundwater constituents that appear to have elevated values
greater than 2L groundwater quality standards at the compliance boundary. A copy of
the DWR letter is provided in Appendix A.
The Coal Ash Management Act (CAMA) 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.
(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.
Page 2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

(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, SynTerra submitted to NCDENR a proposed Work Plan for
the Sutton Plant dated September 2014. Subsequently, NCDENR issued a comment
letter dated November 4, 2014 containing both general comments applicable to the Duke
Energy ash basin facilities and site-specific comments for the Sutton Plant. In response
to these comments, SynTerra has prepared this Proposed Groundwater Assessment
Work Plan (Revision 1) on behalf of Duke Energy for performing the groundwater
assessment as prescribed in the NORR and NC Senate Bill 729 as ratified August 2014,
and to address the NCDENR review of the work plan dated November 4, 2014 and
subsequent meetings among Duke Energy, SynTerra, and NCDENR.
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;
(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.
Page 3
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

The work proposed in this plan will provide the information sufficient to satisfy the
requirements of the CAMA and the NORR. 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;
• The time frame mandated by the 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 may prevent this approach
from being utilized; and
• The 180-day time frame will limit the number of sampling events that can be
performed after well installation and prior to report production.
The information obtained through this Work Plan will be utilized to prepare a CSA
report in accordance with the requirements of the NORR and CAMA. In addition to the
components listed above, a human health and ecological risk assessment will be
conducted. This assessment will include the preparation of a conceptual exposure
model illustrating potential pathways from the source to possible receptors. During the
CSA process if additional investigations are required, NCDENR will be notified.
Page 4
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

2.0 SITE INFORMATION
2.1 Plant Description
The Sutton Plant is a former coal-fired electricity-generating facility located in New
Hanover County, North Carolina, near the City of Wilmington. The location of the
Plant is shown on Figure 1. The Sutton Plant started operations in 1954.
As of November 2013, all of the coal-fired units were retired when a new, natural gas-
fired combined-cycle unit began operation. The facility is located northwest of
Wilmington on the west side of Highway 421. The topography around the property is
relatively gentle, generally sloping downward toward the Cape Fear River.
The Sutton Plant utilizes an approximate 1,100-acre cooling pond, referred to as Sutton
Lake, located adjacent to the Cape Fear River. The ash management area is located
adjacent to the cooling pond, north of the Plant, as shown on Figure 2.
2.2 Ash Management Area Description
The Plant, cooling pond and ash management area are located on the east side of the
Cape Fear River. The ash management area is located adjacent to the cooling pond,
north of the Plant, as shown on Figure 2. The ash management area consists of three
locations (Duke Energy, October 31, 2014):
• The 1971 ash basin (old ash basin) is an unlined ash basin built in approximately
1971. The basin contains fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, storm water, ash sluice
water, coal pile runoff, and low volume wastewater.
• An ash basin with a 12 inch clay liner was built in approximately 1984 (new ash
basin), located toward the northern portion of the ash management area, was
operated from 1984 to 2013. The basin contains fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag,
storm water, ash sluice water, coal pile runoff, and low volume wastewater.
• The former ash disposal area (FADA) is located south of the ash basins, on the
south side of the canal. It is believed that ash may have been placed in this area
between approximately 1954 and 1972. Previous investigations by Geosyntec
(Geosyntec, DRAFT 2014), suggest that a 1-ft thick soil layer may overlay 2 to 3
feet of ash in some parts of the FADA.
The 1971 and 1984 ash basins are impounded by an earthen dike. According to Duke
Energy (Duke Energy, October 31, 2014) the old and new ash basins contain
approximately 6,320,000 tons of ash and the FADA area contains approximately 840,000
Page 5
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

tons of ash. No other types of waste other than NPDES permitted waste are believed to
have been placed in the basins or FADA.
During coal-fired electrical generation, inflows to the ash basins were highly variable
due to the cyclical nature of operations. The 500 foot compliance boundary circles the
ash basins and former ash disposal area (Figure 2). According to Duke personnel,
significant quantities of ash have not been stored or placed elsewhere on the site.
2.3 Regulatory Requirements
The NPDES program regulates wastewater discharges to surface waters. The Sutton
Plant is permitted to discharge wastewater under NPDES Permit NC0001422. The
permit authorizes the discharge of cooling pond blowdown, recirculation cooling water,
non-contact cooling water and treated wastewater from Internal Outfalls 002, 003 and
004 via Outfall 001 from the cooling pond to the Cape Fear River. The cooling pond
outfall discharges to the Cape Fear River via permitted Outfall 001.
The NPDES permitting program requires that permits be renewed every five years. The
most recent NPDES permit renewal for the Sutton Plant became effective on January 1,
2012.
2.3.1 Groundwater Monitoring
In accordance with the NPDES program, groundwater monitoring is also
required. These monitoring requirements are provided in Table 1.
The compliance boundary for groundwater quality at the Sutton Plant ash
management area is defined in accordance with Title15A 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 management
area compliance monitoring wells, the ash management area waste boundary,
and the compliance boundary are shown on Figure 2.
The current groundwater compliance monitoring program for the Sutton Plant
includes the sampling of 17 wells. Two additional wells have been added to the
routine sampling on a voluntary basis since November 2013.
The 19 wells comprising the current monitoring well network at Sutton Plant
include two (2) background wells, 15 downgradient wells, and two voluntarily
monitored wells. The locations of the compliance monitoring wells, the waste
boundary, and the compliance boundary are shown on Figure 2.
Page 6
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Based on water levels measured at the site compliance wells, the general
direction of groundwater flow is radial, away from the ash management area.
The site wells provide monitoring data for the groundwater adjacent to and
downgradient of the ash management area to the north, east, and south.
Monitoring wells MW-4B, MW-7C, MW-28B, and MW-28C document
groundwater quality to the south of the ash management area. MW-4B is
currently the designated background well for the southern area. However, road
construction associated with the I-140 extension is ongoing in the area and MW-
4B will be properly abandoned and replaced in the near future. An alternate
location to the south is being evaluated.
The compliance boundary well for the north side of the ash management area is
MW-27B, with MW-5C currently serving as the northern background monitoring
well.
Eight wells (MW-19, MW-21C, MW-22B, MW-22C, MW-23B, MW-23C, MW-24B,
and MW-24C) are located within the eastern compliance boundary. Three wells,
MW-11, MW-12, and MW-31C, are located beyond the compliance boundary,
close to the eastern property line.
Wells MW-32C and MW-33C, which are voluntarily monitored, are also located
toward the eastern property line.
The monitoring wells are sampled three times per year in March, June, and
October for the parameters listed below (Table 1). The analytical results for the
compliance monitoring program are compared to the 2L Standards. A summary
of the detected concentration ranges for constituents detected at concentrations
greater than the 2L Standards through June 2014 is provided in Table 2.

Page 7
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

TABLE 1 Groundwater Monitoring Requirements
Well
Nomenclature Parameter Description Frequency
Monitoring Wells
MW-4B, MW-5C, MW-
7C, MW-11, MW-12,
MW-19, MW-21C, MW-
22B, MW-22C, MW-
23B, MW-23C, MW-
24B, MW-24C, MW-
27B, MW-28B, MW-
28C, and MW-31C
Antimony Chromium Nickel Thallium
March, June,
and October
Arsenic Copper Nitrate Water Level
Barium Iron pH Zinc
Boron Lead Selenium
Cadmium Manganese Sulfate
Chloride Mercury TDS

2.3.2 Water Quality Monitoring
Monitoring of the cooling pond and the Cape Fear River has been conducted
since the 1970s, but only chemistry data since 1982 is readily available in Duke
Energy’s water quality database. Sampling at several stations in the cooling
pond was discontinued in 1983 while station 8A, on the central dike of the
cooling pond near the discharge, has continued to be routinely sampled.
Samples were also collected from the Cape Fear River (Station CF) near Outfall
001 from 1982 through 1988. In 1989, this station was moved further upstream to
where the makeup pump is located (CFP).
Samples are analyzed for select inorganic parameters including calcium,
chloride, sodium, sulfate, alkalinity, arsenic, copper, cadmium, mercury and
selenium. Analysis of cadmium and mercury was discontinued in 2002. Results
of the latest available analyses for 2013 indicated low concentrations of calcium,
chloride, magnesium, sodium, copper and selenium. Copies of the historical
analytical results provided by Duke Energy are included in Appendix C.
2.3.3 Fish Tissue Sampling
Fish tissue sampling is conducted annually as required by the Sutton Plant’s
NPDES permit. In accordance with the permit, Part I, Section A. (14) Fish Study
and Monitoring;
• Fish tissue monitoring will only be completed if the ash pond discharges to
the river for 120 days in a calendar year.
Page 8
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• All contaminant data collected as part of this monitoring requirement will be
reported within 4 months after the calendar year in which the samples are
taken.
• Fish tissue are be analyzed for selenium, arsenic, and mercury.
• Should fish tissue levels indicate concentrations of concern, the Division of
Water Resources may require additional collection of environmental data.
The baseline study for the fish monitoring was completed and approved (1999).
This was required based on the re-routing of Outfall 004 to the Cape Fear River.
A discussion of the most recent (2013) fish tissue monitoring is discussed below.
Historical fish tissue monitoring reports from 2004 through 2013 submitted as
part of the Plant’s NPDES permit are provided in Appendix D.
During 2013, fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (UP, DI, and
DW) were collected. The locations of the stations are shown in Appendix D.
The original primary target species in the study plan for baseline (prior to
discharge of the ash pond pipeline to the river) sampling was blue catfish
Ictalurus furcatus. After operation of the pipeline began in 1999, the target species
list was expanded to include bluegill Lepomis machrochirus, and largemouth bass
Micropterus salmoides. Secondary target fish, such as other species of Lepomis or
flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris have also been included over the years when
availability of the primary target species was limited. During 2013, bluegill,
largemouth bass, and blue catfish were collected as target species.
Three separate sampling trips in June, September, and December were made
during 2013 due to limited availability of some target species. Appropriate
target fish were collected during two of the trips, in June and September.
Therefore, a full complement of fish were not obtained during 2013.
Arsenic, mercury, and selenium concentrations from the fish collected during
2013 were generally similar at the three sampling locations. All total arsenic
values were below the US EPA recreational fisherman screening value of 1.2
µg/g (fresh weight) for inorganic arsenic. However, all total arsenic
concentrations measured, as well as all the laboratory reporting limits, for 2013
analyses were above the US EPA subsistence fisherman screening value of
0.00327 µg/g fresh weight for inorganic arsenic. Since speciation for the fraction
of arsenic as inorganic was not performed, the true percentage of measurements
that were above this screening value is not known.
Page 9
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Values from one largemouth bass and one blue catfish collected at Station DI
were slightly greater than the North Carolina Department of Health and Human
Services (NCDHHS) screening value (0.4 µg/g) for mercury. All other total
mercury measurements at the three sampling locations were below the human
health screening value. All total selenium concentrations measured in fish at the
three sampling locations were low and below both the US EPA and NCDHHS
screening values for human health (NCDNER 2006).

Page 10
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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, SynTerra has conducted a receptor
survey to identify potential receptors including public and private water supply wells
(including irrigation wells and unused or abandoned wells) and surface water features
within a 0.5-mile radius of the Sutton Plant compliance boundary.
SynTerra presented the results of the receptor survey in two separate reports. The first
report submitted in September 2014 (Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey) included
the results of a review of publicly available data from NCDENR Department of
Environmental Health, NC OneMap GeoSpatial Portal, DWR Source Water Assessment
Program (SWAP) online database, Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA),
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. Records Review, the United States Geological
Survey National Hydrography Dataset, as well as a vehicular survey along public roads
located within 0.5 mile radius of the compliance boundary.
Page 11
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

The second report submitted in October 2014 (Supplement to Drinking Water Well and
Receptor Survey) supplemented the initial report with additional information obtained
from questionnaires sent to owners of property within the 0.5 mile radius of the
compliance boundary. The report included a sufficiently scaled map showing the ash
management area location, the facility property boundary, the waste and compliance
boundaries, all monitoring wells and the approximate location of identified water
supply wells. A table presented information about identified wells including the
owner's name, address of the well location with parcel number, construction and usage
data, and the approximate distance from the compliance boundary.
During the groundwater assessment, it is anticipated that additional information will
become available regarding potential receptors. SynTerra will update the receptor
information as necessary, in general accordance with the CSA receptor survey
requirements. If necessary, an updated receptor survey will be submitted with the CSA
report.

Page 12
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
According to the Geologic Map of North Carolina, published by the North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development (1985), the Sutton
Plant lies within the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province. The following section
provides a regional understanding of the hydrogeology of the Coastal Plain area and
may not represent actual conditions at the Sutton Plant.
The North Carolina Coastal Plain is approximately 90 to 150 miles wide from the
Atlantic Ocean westward to its boundary with the Piedmont province. Two natural
subdivisions of the Coastal Plain were described by Stuckey (1965): the Tidewater
region and the Inner Coastal Plain. The Plant is located within the Tidewater region,
which consists of the coastal area where large streams and many of their tributaries are
affected by ocean tides (Winner, Jr. and Coble, 1989). The Sutton Plant is located on the
east side of the Cape Fear River within the alluvial plain between the coastal dunes and
the interior uplands (NUS Corporation, 1989).
The Coastal Plain comprises a wedge shaped sequence of stratified marine and non-
marine sedimentary rocks deposited on crystalline basement. The sedimentary
sequences range in age from recent to lower Cretaceous (Narkunas, 1980).
In the eastern part of the North Carolina Coastal Plain, groundwater is obtained from
the surficial, Castle Hayne, and Peedee aquifers (Figure 3). The Coastal Plain
groundwater system consists of aquifers comprised of permeable sands, gravels, and
limestone separated by confining units of less permeable material.
Unconformably, underlying the surficial aquifer, which has an average thickness of 35
feet, is the Castle Hayne confining unit, with an average thickness of 20 feet. The Castle
Hayne aquifer is composed of fine-grained sand interbedded with gray shell limestone
and shell fragments. Sand beds contain varying amounts of dark green weathered
glauconite. Shells are common throughout the aquifer. The average thickness of the
aquifer is 60 feet in the northern Wilmington area.
In the Wilmington area, the Peedee confining unit has an average thickness of 10 feet.
The Peedee Formation, which underlies the Upper Castle Hayne Formation, contains
fine to medium grained sand interbedded with gray to black marine clay and silt. Sand
beds are commonly gray or greenish gray and contain varying amounts of glauconite.
Thin beds of consolidated calcareous sandstone and impure limestone are interlayered
with the sands in some places.
Page 13
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

According to Winner, Jr. and Coble (1989), the surficial aquifer consists primarily of fine
sands, clays, shells, peat beds, and scattered deposits of coarse-grained material in the
form of relic beach ridges and floodplain alluvium. The areal extent of the surficial
aquifer in the Coastal Plain is approximately 25,000 square miles with an average
thickness of 35 feet. The average estimated hydraulic conductivity is 29 feet per day
(Winner, Jr. and Coble, 1989).
Page 14
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

5.0 INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
Information provided in this section forms the basis for the initial conceptual site model
(ICSM and has been developed based on ash source information (Section 2.0), existing
information from routine permit compliance monitoring, voluntary
sampling/monitoring and other site-specific data (e.g. site observations, topography,
boring logs, well construction records, etc.) summarized in Section 6.0, and the geologic
and hydrogeologic framework discussed in Section 4.0. Site data on the physical
transport characteristics such as porosity and hydraulic conductivity of the site exists
from the Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report, Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton
Plant (Geosyntec, Draft June 2014), which has yet to be finalized, as well as a number of
investigations completed for the Sutton Plant. The sampling and testing proposed in
Section 7.0 will provide additional information on the fate and transport characteristics
of the ash management area materials in groundwater at the site.
The ICSM has been developed to identify data gaps and to optimize assessment 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 7.6.
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 has been developed to collect and evaluate this information.
Page 15
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

5.1 Physical Site Characteristics
The Plant, cooling pond and ash management area are located on the east side of the
Cape Fear River. The ash management area is located adjacent to the cooling pond,
north of the Plant, as shown on Figure 2. The ash management area consists of three
locations (Duke Energy, October 31, 2014):
• The 1971 ash basin (old ash basin) is an unlined ash basin built in approximately
1971. The basin was initially constructed with a crest elevation of 18 ft. and
raised in 1983 to 26 ft. mean sea level (MSL). The basin contains fly ash, bottom
ash, boiler slag, storm water, ash sluice water, coal pile runoff, and low volume
wastewater.
• The 1984 ash basin (new ash basin) was constructed with a 12-in thick clay liner
at the pond bottom which extended along the side slopes where it is protected by
a 2-ft thick sand layer. The basin is located toward the northern portion of the
ash management area, was operated from 1984 to 2013. The basin contains fly
ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, storm water, ash sluice water, coal pile runoff, and
low volume wastewater. The 1984 ash basin crest elevation is 34 ft. MSL. In 2006
an Interior Containment Area was constructed within the 1984 basin with a crest
elevation of 42 ft. MSL.
• The former ash disposal area (FADA) is located south of the ash basins, on the
south side of the canal. It is believed that ash may have been placed in this area
between approximately 1954 and 1972. Previous investigations by Geosyntec
(Geosyntec, DRAFT 2014), suggest that a 1-ft thick soil layer may overlay 2 to 3
feet of ash in some parts of the FADA.
The 1971 and 1984 ash basins are impounded by an earthen dike. According to Duke
Energy (Duke Energy, October 31, 2014) the old and new ash basins contain
approximately 6,320,000 tons of ash and the FADA area contains approximately 840,000
tons of ash. No other types of waste other than NPDES permitted waste are believed to
have been placed in the basins or FADA.
During coal-fired electrical generation, inflows to the ash basins were highly variable
due to the cyclical nature of operations. The Sutton Plant NPDES permit authorizes the
discharge of cooling pond blowdown, recirculation cooling water, non-contact cooling
water and treated wastewater from Internal Outfalls 002, 003 and 004 via Outfall 001
from the cooling pond to the Cape Fear River. The 500 foot compliance boundary
circles the ash basins and former ash disposal area (Figure 2). According to Duke
personnel, significant quantities of ash have not been stored or placed elsewhere on the
site.
Page 16
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

5.2 Source Characterization
Ash in the management area 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 percent to 80 percent of the ash produced during coal combustion is
fly ash (EPRI 1993). Typically 65 percent to 90 percent of fly ash has particle sizes that
are less than 0.010 millimeter (mm) in diameter. Bottom ash particle diameters can vary
from approximately 0.05 mm to 38 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 percent by weight) is
generally composed of mineral oxides of silicon, aluminum, iron, and calcium. Minor
constituents such as magnesium, potassium, titanium and sulfur comprise
approximately 8 percent of the mineral component, while trace constituents such as
arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and selenium make up less than approximately 1
percent 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, vanadium, and zinc
(EPRI 2009).
In addition to these constituents, coal ash leachate can contain chloride, fluoride,
sulfate, and sulfide. In the United Stated Environmental Protection Agency’s (US
EPA’s) Proposed Rules Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities Federal
Register /Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010, US 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 parameters for detection monitoring, US EPA selected
constituents that are present in coal combustion residuals, and would rapidly move
through the subsurface and provide an early detection as to whether contaminants were
migrating from the ash management area.
Page 17
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

In the Report to Congress Wastes from the Combustion of Fossil Fuels (US EPA 1998),
US 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 US EPA reviewed radionuclide
concentrations in coal and ash and ultimately, 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 complex. 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, SynTerra 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 7.8.2.
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 basins, etc., it would be anticipated that
the chemical environment of the ash management area would vary over time and over
distance and depth, increasing the difficulty of making specific predictions related to
concentrations of specific constituents. Duke Energy has performed limited leaching
analysis on ash from the ash management area. This data is presented in Table 3.
Due to the complex nature of the geochemical environment and process in the ash
management area, SynTerra believes that the most useful representation of the potential
impacts to groundwater will be obtained from the sampling and analyses of ash in the
basins, from ash basin pore-water, and groundwater 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 complex due to the nature of the
geochemical environment of the ash management area combined with the geochemical
processes occurring in the soils beneath the ash management area and along the
groundwater flow paths. The mobility, retention, and transport of the constituents will
vary by constituent. As these processes are complex and are highly dependent on the
mineral composition of the soils, it may not be possible to determine with absolute
Page 18
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

certainty the specific mechanisms that control 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 7.8.2. As described in that section, samples will be collected to
develop Kd terms for the various materials encountered at the site. These Kd terms will
be used in the groundwater modeling to predict concentrations of constituents at the
compliance boundary. In addition, physical material properties related to aquifer
geochemistry and fate and transport modeling will be collected as discussed in Section
7.0 to support the Kd information.
5.3 Hydrogeologic Site Characteristics
Previous site investigations indicate the Sutton Plant is underlain by up to 75 feet of
unconsolidated sediments consisting primarily of well drained sands of the surficial
aquifer (Geosyntec, July 2014). Based on monitoring well logs, the surficial aquifer at
the Plant consists generally of brown to tan poorly graded sand with gray, well to
poorly graded sand at depth, with indications of gray clay lenses and fine gravel. The
boring logs do not indicate that the Castle Hayne confining unit was encountered
during drilling activities.
The Cretaceous Peedee Formation underlies the surficial deposits in the local area and
typically consists of unconsolidated green to dark-gray silt, olive-green to gray sand,
and massive black clay with unconsolidated calcareous sandstone and impure
limestone. The Peedee Formation is approximately 700 feet thick in New Hanover
County (Geosyntec, July 2014). Geologic cross-sections prepared by Catlin Engineers
and Scientists (Catlin, July 2012) and Geosyntec (Geosyntec, July 2014 DRAFT), are
provided for reference as Appendix B.
The surface of groundwater at the Sutton Plant is typically located at depths of less than
2 feet below ground surface (bgs) to greater than 20 feet bgs based on topography. An
average transmissivity value of 11,000 square feet per day (ft2/day) was estimated by
Heath (1989) for the surficial sand aquifer in the region. Based on the results of work
conducted by others (BBL, 2004), the average linear groundwater flow velocity near the
Sutton site area ranges from 109 to 339 feet per year.
Monitoring wells at the Site have been installed to assess three depth intervals. Many of
the monitoring wells are installed as clusters. Monitoring wells with the “A”
designation are generally screened five to 15 feet below ground surface (bgs), “B” wells
are screened generally between 22 and 27 feet bgs, and “C” wells are screened between
40 to 45 feet bgs. There is a slight downward vertical gradient among the well clusters
of generally less than 0.05 feet difference. Of the twelve well pairs gauged in May 2014,
Page 19
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

ten of the twelve wells exhibited a downward vertical gradient (Geosyntec, July 2014
DRAFT).
The water level measurements and corresponding elevations from the June 2014 routine
groundwater monitoring event indicated the general direction of groundwater flow
appears to be radial from the ash management area with flow toward the north, east,
and south (Figure 4). However, the water level elevation of the cooling pond is lower
than the groundwater elevation measured in a number of nearby monitoring wells,
indicating a component of groundwater flow from the ash management area would
also be toward the west. Due to only minor differences in vertical gradients in the
surficial aquifer, a single contour map was generated as it is representative of the three
depth intervals.
Following completion of the groundwater assessment work, a site conceptual model
will be developed, as described in Section 7.6.

Page 20
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
6.1 Compliance Monitoring Well Groundwater Analytical Results
The routine analytical data indicates that elevated concentrations of a number of metals
and inorganic constituents, including arsenic, boron, iron, selenium, manganese, and
pH are routinely detected within the ash management area wells. A summary of the
detected concentration ranges for constituents detected at concentrations greater than
the 2L Standards through June 2014 is provided in Table 2 and a summary of historical
groundwater results through June 2014 is provided in Table 4.
The greatest number of elevated concentrations occurs east and southeast of the ash
management area. Monitoring wells north of the ash management area (MW-11, MW-
10, and MW-8) indicate elevated concentrations of iron, manganese, and pH only (Table
2). In addition, shallow water table well MW-22B, southeast of the ash management
area, only indicates elevated concentrations of iron, manganese, and pH, and well MW-
28B only indicates elevated concentrations of manganese, while the paired deeper wells
(MW-22C and MW-28C) indicated a wider range of elevated metals (Table 2).
Several inorganic parameters have been detected in at least one background or
compliance boundary well at concentrations greater than the 2L Standard, but not with
regularity. It is believed that those detections are related to sample turbidity or
represent data outliers, with the exception of selenium at well MW-27B, which has been
detected at a concentration greater than the 2L Standard during each sampling event
since October 2011.
6.2 Preliminary Statistical Evaluation Results
As a preliminary evaluation tool, statistical analysis was conducted on the groundwater
analytical data collected between March 2011 and June 2014 at the Sutton Plant. The
statistical analysis was conducted in accordance with US EPA, Statistical Training Course
for Ground Water Monitoring Data Analysis, EPA530-R-93-003, 1992 and US EPA’s
Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities; Unified Guidance
EPA 530/R-09-007, March 2009.
An inter-well prediction interval statistical analysis was utilized to evaluate the
groundwater data. The inter-well prediction interval statistical evaluation involves
comparing background well data to the results for a recent sample date from
compliance boundary wells and wells beyond the compliance boundary.
Monitoring well MW-4B is the background well for the southern portion of the
monitoring well network and well MW-5C is considered the background well for the
Page 21
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

northern portion of the network. Four wells (MW-7C, MW-11, MW-12, and MW-31C)
are located beyond the compliance boundary. The remaining 11 wells are considered
compliance boundary wells. Statistical analysis was performed on the inorganic
constituents with detectable concentrations in the compliance monitoring wells for the
June 2014 routine sampling event.
The statistical analysis indicated statistically significant increases (SSIs) over
background concentrations for a number of constituents, including arsenic, barium,
boron, iron, manganese, nickel, selenium, sulfate, zinc, and TDS.
Barium was indicated to be an SSI at well MW-7C, MW-11, MW-19, MW-21C, MW-22C,
and MW-31C, but has not been detected at a concentration greater than the 2L
Standard. Likewise, nitrate has not been detected above the 2L Standard, but was
detected as an SSI at wells MW-7C, MW-11, MW-23B, MW-27B, MW-28B, and MW-28C.
Boron, which has been detected at a concentration greater than the 2L Standard, was
indicted to be an SSI at wells MW-7C, MW-12, MW-19, MW-21C, MW-22C, MW-23B,
MW-23C, MW-24B, MW-24C, MW-27B, MW-28C, and MW-31C. Iron has been detected
at concentrations greater than the 2L Standard at most of the monitoring wells, but was
only detected as an SSI at well MW-21C. Manganese has also been detected at an
elevated concentration at most of the monitoring wells, but only detected as an SSI at
wells MW-21C, MW-22C, MW-23C, MW-24C, and MW-31C.
A more robust statistical analysis will be completed as part of the CSA using data from
additional background wells. It is understood that the designation of “background”
well is subject to periodic review based upon increased understanding of site chemistry
and groundwater flow direction. In the event a well is determined to not represent
background conditions, it will no longer be used as such. At least four sampling events
will be required for new background well data to be used for statistical analysis. In the
interim, the new background well data will be pooled with other existing background
well data representative of the site conditions for statistical analysis. The use of
background wells for statistical analysis will be approved by DWR. Site-specific
background determinations will be made by the DWR Director.
6.3 Additional Site Data
In addition to the required groundwater monitoring conducted, additional sampling
activities have been conducted at the Sutton Plant since the late 1980s. Due to the
number of previous activities conducted at Sutton Plant, only the most recent are
discussed here, with the exception of the FADA.
Page 22
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Excerpts from select historical reports are included in Appendix B. Available
groundwater quality data for compliance monitoring wells, voluntary monitoring wells,
and conceptual closure monitoring wells are summarized on Table 4. In addition, soil
and ash quality data from the Geosyntec report are provided in Table 5. Water quality
data from the split sampling conducted by Duke Energy and NCDENR are provided in
Table 6. Ash basin pore water data from the Geosyntec report are provided in Table 7.
6.3.1 Former Ash Disposal Area and Ash Basins
As discussed in Section 2, the FADA is a former ash fill located south of the ash
basins, on the south side of the canal. It is believed that coal ash may have been
placed of in this area between approximately 1954 and 1972. In 2003, Carolina
Power and Light (CP&L) signed an Administrative Order with the NC
Superfund Section Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch to voluntarily remediate the
FADA under the Registered Environmental Consultant (REC) Program (effective
December 30, 2003). Subsequent investigations included a Phase I Remedial
Investigation (RI) completed by Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc. (BBL) in September
2004, and a Phase II RI completed by BBL in May 2006, a Remedial Action Plan
(RAP) completed by BBL in March 2006 and an RAP Addendum completed by
BBL in February 2007. In August 2007, Progress Energy submitted a letter to
NCDENR, Division of Water Management, terminating the Administrative
Agreement (AA) for the Sutton Plant. The AA termination was accepted and the
site transferred from the Responsible Party Voluntary Remedial Action category
to the Sites Priority List category of the Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory.
Catlin Engineers Activities
Catlin Engineers and Scientists (Catlin) conducted Phase I groundwater
assessment activities and selected suitable locations for placement of monitoring
wells for a Phase II work plan (January 15, 2010). Subsequent to submittal of the
work plan and during conversations with NCDENR and Progress Energy
personnel, the groundwater sample collection locations were revised and vertical
profiling of the aquifer was added to the scope of work resulting in the
installation of seven temporary nested well sets. Additional sampling of seven
existing wells/piezometers was also included in the Phase I assessment scope of
work.
The results from the Phase I assessment did not detect arsenic, selenium, or
sulfate at concentrations greater than the 2L Standard in any of the groundwater
samples collected. Boron, iron, and manganese were detected at concentrations
greater than the 2L Standard at one or more of the monitoring wells and
Page 23
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

piezometers. However, as reported in the Phase I report (February 11, 2011),
shallow (“A” zone wells/piezometers) were generally not impacted by chemicals
of potential concern (COPC).
Based on the results of the Phase I report, a Phase II work plan was prepared and
submitted for approval. The work plan proposed targeting intermediate and
deeper zones and also included a telescoping well (MW-28T) to investigate the
potential presence of a confining clay and to collect a discrete deeper well
sample. Further, the Phase II work plan included two (2) temporary leachate
characterization collection points within the ash basin to obtain field scale data
on ash basin leachate composition.
The Phase II work consisted of installing 13 new permanent (intermediate and
deep) monitoring wells, two temporary leachate collection points, and soil
samples from each monitoring well boring for laboratory analysis, groundwater
gauging, slug testing, and two groundwater sampling events.
The results from the Phase II work indicated that arsenic was not detected above
the 2L Standard in any of the new wells.
Boron was detected above the 2L Standard in 8 of the 18 Phase II monitoring
wells sampled, primarily in the deeper wells. Iron was detected above the 2L
Standard in 10 of the 18 Phase II sampled monitoring wells.
Manganese was detected in all the Phase II groundwater samples above the 2L
Standard with the exception of samples collected from wells MW-16 and MW-
28T.
Only two (2) monitoring wells (MW-24B and MW-27B, September/October 2011
and January 2012 sampling events) indicated Selenium concentrations greater
than the 2L Standard.
Geosyntec Consultants Activities
As part of Duke Energy’s ongoing plans to address closure options for the ash
basin at the Sutton Plant, Geosyntec Consultants (Geosyntec) conducted site
assessment activities to develop a conceptual closure plan for the Sutton Plant
ash management area. The assessment activities included both hydrogeologic
and environmental site assessment activities and geotechnical investigations of
subsurface conditions within the ash management area. The environmental
activities included;
Page 24
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• Installation of eight groundwater piezometers (four shallow and four
intermediate-depth) near the toe of the basin dikes. Installation of two
pore water piezometers within the ash basins. Installation of three
intermediate-depth and four deep groundwater monitoring wells outside
of the ash basins to evaluate water levels and potential impacts to
groundwater in the surficial aquifer at the Site;
• Four staff gauges were installed at certain surface water locations to
facilitate monitoring of surface water elevations;
• Soil samples from background locations, from ash within the basins, from
native soil below the ash in the basins, and from monitoring well borings
located around the ash basins were collected and analyzed for COPCs);
• Groundwater and ash pore water samples were collected and analyzed for
select chemical constituents from the newly installed and certain non-
compliance monitoring wells and piezometers located throughout the Site;
and
• Aquifer performance testing was conducted within one ash piezometer to
obtain an estimate of the hydraulic conductivity within the ash basins, and
five groundwater monitoring wells were monitored with pressure
transducers to evaluate water level fluctuations.
The activities associated with the geotechnical investigation included;
• Completion of 11 soil test borings (six through the perimeter dikes, three
within the ash basins and two within an area evaluated for a potential
onsite landfill);
• 14 Cone Penetration Test (CPT) soundings (including six seismic CPT
[SCPT] soundings) and six GeoProbe (GP);
• Pore water dissipation tests were performed at nine selected CPT and
SCPT locations;
• Additionally, two piezometers were installed, one within the 1971 basin
and one within the 1984 ash basin; and
• Standard geotechnical laboratory tests were performed on collected soil
and ash field samples.
The results from Geosyntec activities have not been fully reported and the
information which has been reported to Duke Energy is still in a preliminary
Page 25
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

status. Excerpts from the Catlin and Geosyntec reports are included in
Appendix B. Analytical data collected by Geosyntec is provided in Table 3
through Table 7.
No seeps have been identified at the Sutton Plant. However, NCDENR and
Duke Energy collected split samples from the intake canal from Sutton Lake and
the discharge canal to Sutton Lake on March 10, 2014. The samples were
analyzed for select anions, metals, and total dissolved solids (TDS). Analytical
data provided by Duke Energy from the split sampling they conducted with
NCDENR from the March sampling event are included in Table 6. The
analytical data collected by NCDENR from the March sampling event has not
been provided to Duke Energy, so has not been included in Table 6.

Page 26
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

7.0 ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN
The scope of work discussed in this plan is designed to meet the requirements of 15A
NCAC 02L .0106(g). Solid and aqueous media sampling will be performed to fill data
gaps associated with the source and vertical and horizontal extent, in soil and
groundwater, for the constituents that have exceeded the 2L Standards. Data will also
be collected to obtain a better understanding of the heterogeneity of groundwater flow
zones by assessing the fate and transport mechanisms, such as the physical properties
of the ash and soil. From this information a groundwater fate and transport model will
be created and the risk assessment performed. Based on readily available national,
regional, local and site-specific background information, and dependent upon
accessibility, SynTerra anticipates collecting the following additional samples as part of
the subsurface exploration plan:
• Ash and soil samples from borings within and beneath the ash basin to assess
source conditions;
• Soil samples from borings located outside the ash basin boundary to assess
background and downgradient conditions;
• Groundwater and pore water samples from proposed monitoring wells to assess
the source area and the horizontal and vertical extent of COPCs;
• Water and sediment samples from surface water locations potentially impacted
by the ash basin due to their proximity to downgradient locations from the basin.
In addition, hydrogeologic evaluation testing will be conducted during and following
monitoring well installation activities as described in Section 7.1.2. Existing
groundwater quality data from compliance monitoring wells, voluntary monitoring
wells, and ash management area closure 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 8. The
proposed sampling locations are shown on Figure 5. Samples collected will be
analyzed for the constituents listed in Table 9 and 10. Analytical method reporting
limits will be at or below 15A NCAC 2L standards for groundwater or 15A NCAC 2B
standards for Class C surface water.
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 investigations.
Page 27
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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 5. Installation details for soil borings and monitoring wells, as well as estimated
sample quantities and depths, are described below and presented in Table 8.
The borings and monitoring wells will be installed using sonic drilling (or similar
methods) to provide continuous soil cores through ash and into the underlying native
soil. Cores will be described/logged, photographed, and maintained.
Rotary-sonic (sonic) drilling is a drilling method that improves drilling production,
placement of well materials and minimizes formation and borehole disturbance. Sonic
drilling relies on high frequency vibrations that are applied to the drill rod, casing, or
sampling devices relieving the skin friction on the outer walls of the steel tubing. This
effect helps to free up the formation out a couple of millimeters thus reducing the side-
wall friction. Using a slow rotation rate, there is less smearing and compaction of the
borehole wall than occurs with augers or direct push methods. Sonic drilling thus
allows for rapid penetration of the borehole, increased daily production, better sample
recovery, and it allows the water bearing zones to stay open during well installation. A
key benefit of sonic drilling is that high quality continuous cores through
unconsolidated and consolidated material are obtained. The process of advancing an
outer steel casing during drilling minimizes the possibly of pulling material down into
or below confining units. Well construction materials (the screen, sand filter pack and
bentonite seal) are installed within the steel drill casing as it is withdrawn. Placement
of the sand pack within the clean, stable casing (annulus) provides for a complete sand
pack with less likelihood for turbidity challenges from sand pack bridges. Sonic is
preferable over hollow stem auger drilling when monitoring wells are to be installed
substantially below the water table due to the drill casing providing a stable borehole
during the placement of well materials and the sand pack. For these reasons, as well as
to minimize groundwater sample turbidity, it is anticipated that the wells will be
installed using sonic drilling methodology.
The water source that may be used during drilling activities will be sampled and
analyzed for the groundwater parameter list (Table 11). The data will be reviewed to
determine if concentrations of target analytes are elevated and may pose a potential for
cross-contamination, false positive detections, etc.
For clustered monitoring wells, the deep monitoring well boring will be utilized for
characterization of subsurface materials and sample collection for laboratory analysis.
All subsurface borings will be logged in the field as described below.
Page 28
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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 of field activities.
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 two locations within the ash
management area, with one boring in the 1971 basin and one boring the FADA.
Field data collected during boring advancement will be used to evaluate:
• the presence or absence of ash,
• areal extent and depth/thickness of ash, and
• groundwater flow and transport characteristics.
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).
Borings Within the Ash Management Area
Approximately 25 borings and 30 existing piezometers have been completed
within and around the ash management area during the environmental
assessment conducted by Catlin and Geosyntec (Figure 5). Excerpts from these
reports are provided in Appendix B and analytical data are provided in Tables 3
through 7.
Based on assessment data available from previous studies at the Sutton Plant,
two borings (AB-1 and AB-2) are anticipated within the ash management area to
further assess the thickness of ash as well as to determine the current residual
saturation. No additional borings are anticipated in the 1984 ash basin at this
time since the basin has a clay liner. The anticipated boring locations are shown
on Figure 5.
The borings and monitoring wells will be installed using sonic drilling (or similar
methods), to provide continuous soil cores through ash and into the underlying
native soil. Drilling will be extended to the top of the first confining unit below
the bottom of the ash to allow for characterization of the underlying native soil.
Page 29
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Solid phase samples will be collected for laboratory analysis from each boring at
the following depth intervals:
• 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 – immediately above the first confining unit
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 management area. The soil samples will be used to delineate
the vertical extent of potential soil impacts beneath the ash management area.
Ash and soil samples will be analyzed for total inorganic constituents, as
presented in Table 9. .
Select ash samples will be analyzed for leachable inorganic constituents using the
Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) to evaluate the potential for
leaching of constituents from ash into underlying soil. .
A summary of the boring details is provided in Table 8. The depths at which the
samples are collected will be noted on sample IDs. The borings will be converted
to monitoring wells, a well set at the base of the ash and a well set at the top of
the first confining unit, to measure groundwater fluctuations and ash pore-water
quality at the base of the 1971 ash basin and FADA.
Borings Outside Ash Management Area
Based on assessment data available from previous studies at the Sutton Plant, no
soil borings are anticipated outside of the ash management area. However, after
a thorough review of available data is completed, one or more soil borings may
be completed to address data gaps, if identified.
Index Property Sampling and Analysis
In addition, physical properties of ash and soil will be tested in the laboratory to
provide data for use in groundwater modeling. Samples will be collected at
selected locations, with the number of samples collected from the material types
as follows:
Page 30
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• Ash - 4 samples
• Soil Below Ash - 4 samples
• Soil Outside Basin – 6 samples
Select 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 soil samples are anticipated to be collected from the following boring
locations:
• Ash – AB-1 and AB-2 (two samples at each location)
• Soil below ash - AB-1 and AB-2 (two samples at each location)
• Soil Outside Basin – AW-5B/C, AW-7B/D, AW-8B/C, AW-9B/C, SW-2B/C,
and SW-5B/C
The depth intervals of the selected samples will be determined in the field by the
Lead Geologist/Engineer. A summary of the boring details is provided in Table
8.
In addition to ash and soil sampling, a minimum of five thin-walled undisturbed
tubes (“Shelby” Tubes) in ash and soil will be advanced and collected at the
locations specified by the Lead Geologist/Engineer in the field. 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
Page 31
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Eight soil core samples will be selected from representative material at the site
for column tests to be performed in triplicate. Batch Kd tests, if performed, will
be executed in triplicate as well. It is anticipated that a Kd core sample will be
collected from the ash in FADA and 1971 ash basin, shallow aquifer material
below the ash basins, shallow intermediate aquifer (20-25 ft. bgs), deep
intermediate aquifer (40-45 ft. bgs), deep aquifer zone (> 60 ft. bgs), and from
areas where there is apparent variations in lithology.
The results of the laboratory soil and ash property determination will be used to
determine 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 Groundwater Monitoring Wells
There are more than 70 monitoring wells, observation wells, and piezometers
present at the Sutton Plant that can be used to monitor conditions within the
surficial aquifer zones, horizontally and vertically across the site (Figure 5).
These existing wells will be supplemented with additional wells to complete the
CSA. Soil samples will be collected for laboratory analysis in accordance with
the parameters listed in Table 9 and the sampling plan summarized in Table 8.
The depths at which the samples are collected will be noted on sample IDs.
Monitoring wells will be constructed by North Carolina-licensed well drillers
and in accordance with 15A NCAC 02C (Well Construction Standards). Drilling
equipment will be decontaminated prior to use at each location using a high
pressure steam cleaner as discussed below.
Monitoring wells will be constructed of 2-inch ID, National Sanitation
Foundation (NSF) grade polyvinyl chloride (PVC) (ASTM 2012a,b) schedule 40
flush-joint threaded casing and 0.010-inch machine-slotted pre-packed screens.
The existing compliance monitoring wells at the site generally produce
groundwater samples with turbidities of less than 10 NTU’s. Therefore, the
assessment well design will be similar with improvements in the drilling method
and pre-packed screens. To improve on well installation, the assessment wells
will be installed using sonic drilling and the well construction will include pre-
packed screens, plus additional sand in the annular space, to minimize the
turbidity of samples. The sonic drilling method disturbs the formation much less
Page 32
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

than traditional hollow stem or rotary drilling. The slow rotation rate and
vibration allows for the minimum impact on the formation resulting in better
water quality and flow. As previously discussed, the placement of the sand pack
within the sonic casing also improves the overall quality and uniformity of the
sand pack. One way this is evident is that the amount of time required for
development of a sonic well tends to be less than half the time associated with
other drilling methods. Also with sonic drilling there is very little smearing
effect to the borehole wall allowing quicker aquifer stabilization.
Where assessment of different hydrogeologic zones or depth intervals is needed,
monitoring wells will be installed as well clusters: single wells located within
approximately 10 feet of another well designed to monitor a different depth
interval. Based on historical site data, constituents typically have not been
detected at concentrations greater than the 2L Standard in the shallow (water
table) portion of the aquifer. Therefore, no shallow wells (“A” designation) will
be installed as part of this GAP. Shallow intermediate wells (“B” designation)
will be installed at a depth of approximately 20-25’ within the surficial aquifer.
Deep intermediate monitoring wells (“C” designation) will be installed at a
depth of 40-45’ bgs. Deep wells installed to the base of the surficial aquifer,
above the Peedee formation will be designated as “D” wells. Previous site data
suggests this unit it located greater than 75 feet bgs. These wells will provide
information on the vertical distribution of aquifer characteristics throughout the
surficial aquifer (chemistry and aquifer parameters) as well was determining the
magnitude of vertical hydraulic gradients between these layers and apparent
thickness of any confining unit encountered.
7.1.2.1 Background Wells
Existing background wells MW-4B and MW-5C are positioned to provide
representative data for comparison with background groundwater conditions.
However, road construction associated with the I-140 extension is ongoing in the
area and MW-4B needs to be properly abandoned and replaced. A new
background well cluster (MW-37B/C) is proposed south of MW-4B (Figure 5).
The new background well cluster will be installed as part of the assessment
activities. If possible, the MW-4 well cluster will not be abandoned until
sufficient data has been collected from the MW-37 wells to establish background
conditions for statistical analysis.
Page 33
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

As discussed in Section 6.2, it is understood that the designation of
“background” well is subject to periodic review based upon increased
understanding of site chemistry and groundwater flow direction.
7.1.2.2 Ash Management Area
Currently, there are no piezometers or monitoring wells installed within the ash
basins to provide residual ash saturation, pore water quality, and the depth to
groundwater information. Two monitoring well pairs (ABMW-1S/D and ABMW
-2S/D) will be installed, one within the 1971 ash basin and one within the FADA,
to provide vertical hydraulic gradient information, monitor residual saturation in
the ash, and provide pore water quality data. The monitoring wells are
anticipated to be installed at the locations of ash borings AB-1 and AB-2. The S/D
designations will be changed to A/B/C/D site well designations after installation
once actual installation depths are determined.
A shallow monitoring well, screened at the base of the ash, will be used to
monitor residual saturation and pore water chemistry. A deeper monitoring
well, screened above the first confining unit, will be used to monitor
groundwater levels below the ash and water chemistry.
There are currently four well clusters and one single well (MW-13S/D, MW-14,
MW-15S/D, MW-16S/D, and MW-20S/D) surrounding the former ash disposal
area (Figure 5). Therefore, no additional monitoring wells are proposed beyond
the FADA at this time.
7.1.2.3 Downgradient Assessment Areas
A preliminary review of site data and existing monitoring well locations indicate
that horizontal and vertical coverage around the compliance boundary is mostly
adequate to complete a CSA of the Sutton Plant with the exception of the area
along the downgradient property line, the area north of existing well MW-27B,
and southeast of existing wells MW-7A, 7B, and 7C. There are several
piezometer clusters (PZ-4, PZ-5 and PZ-6) located between the 1984 ash basin
and the cooling pond (Figure 5) to assess gradient changes to the west.
To refine the horizontal and vertical extend to metals in the aquifer, five
additional well pairs (AW-1B/C through AW-5B/C) will be installed along the
property line downgradient from the ash management area (Figure 5). The wells
will be installed as well pairs to also provide vertical information on aquifer
chemistry and vertical gradients.
Page 34
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Existing wells MW-12 and MW-31C are located downgradient from the ash
management area and are installed at the 40 to 45 foot depth interval (“C”). To
provide information on the vertical distribution of constituents of concern at
these locations, two additional well pairs (AW-6B/D and AW-7B/D) will be
installed adjacent to existing wells MW-12 and MW-31C. These pairs will consist
of an intermediate (20 to 25 feet bgs) and a deep well, installed at the base of the
surficial aquifer. A summary of the boring details is provided in Table 8. Based
on the analytical results from AW-6D and AW-7D, additional wells along the
property line and east of the property line may be installed at the base of the
surficial aquifer.
To further define water quality beyond the compliance boundary to the north,
AW-8B/C will be installed north of well MW-27B. MW-9B/C will be installed
south of the MW-7 well cluster to address groundwater conditions beyond the
compliance boundary southeast of the 1971 ash basin and FADA.
7.1.2.4 Off-Site Assessment Areas
In addition to assessment well clusters AW-1 through AW-9, sentinel well
clusters (SW-1B/C through SW-6B/C), used to monitor groundwater conditions
between nearby receptors and the property boundary for the Sutton Plant, are
proposed to be installed at the locations shown on Figures 5. If, after
groundwater sample collection and analysis, it is determined that the sentinel
wells are impacted as a result of the ash management area, these wells will be re-
designated as assessment wells (AWs). The sentinel wells are located on off-site
property not owned by Duke Energy and will require access permission for well
installation and monitoring.
As such, Duke Energy will contact property owners to obtain access to their
respective property(s). Duke Energy will request liaison assistance from DENR,
if Duke Energy is unable to obtain access to a specific property where sampling
is deemed necessary. The liaison request will include available property owner
contact information and details of prior discussions with the property owner(s)
regarding access to the property(s) for site assessment purposes.
In addition to obtaining access permission from property owners, Duke will need
to complete an Application for Permit to Construct a Monitoring Well or Recovery
Well System (GW-22MR, Rev. 8/13) and obtain approval from the Wilmington
Regional Office prior to installation of off-site monitoring wells.
Page 35
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

The approximate locations of the additional monitoring wells are shown on
Figure 5. A summary of the boring details is provided in Table 8.
7.1.3 Well Completion and Development
Well Completion
Each of the wells will be installed as a single cased monitoring well. The well
casing will consist of two-inch diameter NSF PVC schedule 40 flush-joint
threaded casing and pre-packed screens appropriately sized based on soil
conditions identified during previous assessment activities. The well screen
intervals will be a 5 foot length for each of the monitoring wells.
The annular space between the borehole wall and the pre-packed well screens for
each of the wells will be filled with clean, well-rounded, washed, high grade
20/40 mesh silica sand silica sand. The sand pack will be placed to
approximately 2 feet above the top of the pre-packed screen, and then an
approximate 2-foot pelletized bentonite seal will be placed above the filter pack.
The remainder of the annular space will be filled with a neat cement grout from
the top of the upper bentonite seal to near ground surface.
The monitoring wells will be completed with either steel above ground
protective casings with locking caps or steel flush-mount manholes with locking
expansion caps, and well tags. The protective covers will be secured and
completed in a concrete collar and 2-foot square concrete pad.
Well Development
Following installation, the monitoring wells will be developed in order to
remove drill fluids, clay, silt, sand, and other fines which may have been
introduced into the formation or sand pack during drilling and well installation,
and to establish communication of the well with the aquifer. Well development
will be performed using a portable submersible pump, which will be repeatedly
moved up and down the well screen interval until the water obtained is
relatively clear. Development will be continued by sustained pumping until
monitoring parameters (e.g., conductivity, pH, temperature) are generally
stabilized; estimated quantities of drilling fluids, if used, are removed; and,
turbidity decreases to acceptable levels (10 NTUs). The wells will be developed
as installed (but no sooner than 24 hours after installation to allow for grout cure
time). The ongoing well development information will be used to make
adjustments as needed to the well construction design to minimize turbidity and
to address possible other unforeseen factors.
Page 36
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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.
7.1.4 Hydraulic Evaluation Testing
In order to better characterize hydrogeologic conditions at the site, falling and/or
constant head tests and slug tests will be performed as described below. Data
obtained from these tests will be used in groundwater modeling. This data will
be supplemented with slug text and pumping text data collected as part of the
previous assessment reports (Appendix B).
Falling Head/Constant Head Tests
In-situ permeability tests will be performed at two ash boring locations using a
Guelph Permeameter. Guelph permeameter tests will be conducted to measure
in-situ saturated hydraulic conductivity (𝐾𝐾𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓) in the unsaturated zone of the ash
basins. The Guelph permeameter field test uses a Marriotte bubbler device that
creates a flow of water (Q) into an auger hole (radius) held at a constant head of
water (h). The Guelph permeameter has a calibrated set of reservoirs used to
measure the rate that water is added to the auger hole to hold the head constant.
Up to 2.5 liters of water would be used per test.
Measurements will be made in the range of 15 centimeters (cm) to 3 meters
below the ground surface. Access borings for the Guelph Permeameter will be
made with a hand auger. Cuttings will be described in the field and used to
backfill the hole after the test is complete. Details of the testing procedure will
follow the Guelph permeameter manual
(http://www.soilmoisture.com/pdf/82800k1.pdf). The procedure involves
infiltrating up to several liters of water from the bottom of an augered hole.
Potable water from a local source will be used for the tests. The locations and
depths of the measurements will be determined based on access, depth to water,
variability of material, and other factors that will be considered on a site by site
basis.
Page 37
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

In addition, vertical hydraulic conductivities in upper and lower surficial aquifer
and deep confined aquifer will be determined in accordance with ASTM
Standard D-5084 for from the collection of Shelby tube samples for geotechnical
analysis. The Shelby tubes will be collected at locations based on site-specific
conditions at the time of assessment work.
Slug Tests
After the wells have been developed, hydraulic conductivity tests (rising head
slug tests) will be conducted on each of the new wells. The slug tests will be
performed in general accordance with NCDENR Memorandum titled,
“Performance and Analysis of Aquifer Slug Tests and Pumping Tests Policy,”
dated May 31, 2007 and ASTM D4044-96 Standard Test Method (Field
Procedure) for Instantaneous Change in Head (Slug) Tests for Determining
Hydraulic Properties of Aquifers.
Prior to performing each slug test, the static water level will be determined and
recorded and a Solinst Model 3001 Levelogger® Edge electronic pressure
transducer/data logger, or equivalent, will be placed in the well at a depth of
approximately six-inches above the bottom of the well. The Levelogger® will be
connected to a field laptop and programmed with the well identification,
approximate elevation of the well, date, and time.
The slug tests will be conducted by lowering a PVC “slug” into the well casing.
The water level within the well is then allowed to equilibrate to a static level.
After equilibrium, the slug is rapidly withdrawn from the well, thereby
decreasing the water level in the well instantaneously. During the recovery of
the well, the water level is measured and recorded electronically using the
pressure transducer/data logger. Two separate slug tests will be conducted for
each well.
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 percent of its original pre-test level,
whichever occurs first. Slug tests will be terminated after two hours even if the
95 percent pre-test level is not achieved.
The data obtained during the slug tests will be reduced and analyzed using
AQTESOLV™ for Windows, version 4.5, software to determine the hydraulic
conductivity of the soils in the vicinity of wells.
Page 38
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

7.2 Ash Pore Water and Groundwater Sampling and Analysis
Subsequent to monitoring well installation and development, each newly
installed well will be sampled twice using low-flow sampling techniques in
accordance with US EPA Region 1 Low Stress (low flow) Purging and Sampling
Procedure for the Collection of Groundwater Samples from Monitoring Wells
(revised January 19, 2010) and Groundwater Monitoring Program Sampling, Analysis
and Reporting Plan, L.V. Sutton Energy Complex, (SynTerra, July 2014). Each new
well will be sampled after development, and at the completion of drilling
activities (two sampling events) for inclusion in CSA reports.
The new monitoring wells will provide water quality data downgradient or
sidegradient from the ash management area 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). Background
wells MW-4B and MW-5C and potential background wells MW-37B/C 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).
Subsequent to the two new well sampling events, quarterly sampling of new
background wells will be performed to develop a background data set. A site-
wide groundwater monitoring schedule will be developed following review of
initial data sets collected during the groundwater assessment.
The purposes of the proposed monitoring wells are as follows:
• AW-series Wells – The AW-series well locations were selected to provide
water quality data downgradient or sidegradient from the ash
management area for use in groundwater modeling (i.e., to evaluate the
horizontal and vertical extent of potentially impacted groundwater
outside the ash management area).
• SW-series Wells – The SW-series well locations were selected to provide
water quality data between nearby receptors and the property boundary
for the Sutton Plant. The data will also be used in groundwater modeling
(i.e., to evaluate the horizontal and vertical extent of potentially impacted
groundwater outside the ash management area waste boundary).
Page 39
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• ABMW-series Wells – The ABMW-series well locations were selected to
provide water quality/pore-water data within and below the ash basins.
The data will also be used in groundwater modeling (i.e., to evaluate the
horizontal and vertical extent of potentially impacted groundwater below
the ash management area).
• MW-37 Well Cluster – MW-37 wells will be used to provide information
on background water quality south of the ash management area. The
background well locations were selected to provide additional physical
separation from possible influence of the ash management area on
groundwater. These wells will also be useful in the statistical analysis to
determine the site-specific background water quality concentrations
(SSBCs).
At the Sutton Plant, a low-flow purging technique has been selected as the most
appropriate technique to minimize sample turbidity.
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. At the Sutton Plant, low-flow sampling is conducted using a
peristaltic pump with new tubing. The intake for the tubing is lowered to the
mid-point of the screened interval. A multi-parameter water quality monitoring
instrument is used to measure field indicator parameters within the flow-
through chamber during purging. Measurements include pH, specific
conductance, and temperature.
Indicator parameters are measured over time (usually at 3-5 minute intervals).
When parameters have stabilized within ±0.2 pH units and ±10 percent for
temperature and specific conductivity over three consecutive readings,
representative groundwater has been achieved for sampling. Turbidity is not a
required stabilization parameter, however turbidity levels of 10 NTU or less are
targeted. Purging will be discontinued and groundwater samples will be
obtained if turbidity levels of 10 NTU or less are not obtained after 1 hour of
continuous purging. If the turbidity for a well increases over time, the well may
be re-developed to restore conditions.
In addition to the groundwater samples collected from the new monitoring
wells, groundwater samples will be collected from one or more of the existing
site monitoring wells, as well as from the existing site water supply wells.
Groundwater samples will be collected from the existing onsite water supply
Page 40
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

well using the pumping system installed in the well. Water supply wells will be
purged for a minimum of 15 minutes prior to collection of a sample. Water
samples will be collected prior to any filtration system. A summary of the
anticipated groundwater samples are included in Table 8.
During groundwater sampling activities, water level measurements will be made
at the existing site monitoring wells, observation wells, and piezometers, along
with the new wells. The data will be used to generate potentiometric maps of the
shallow, intermediate, and deep portions of the surficial aquifer, as well as to
determine the degree of residual saturation beneath the ash management area.
The water levels used for preparation of flow maps will be collected during a
single 24-hour period.
Ash pore water and groundwater samples will be analyzed by a North Carolina
certified laboratory for the parameters listed in Table 11. Total and dissolved
metals analysis will be conducted. Speciation of iron, manganese and arsenic
will be conducted on pore water samples and select groundwater monitoring
well samples.
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 coal combustion products (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
not 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.”
To confirm these general findings, Duke Energy proposes to analyze potentially
worst-case groundwater samples collected from the ash basin for radium-266
and radium-228 (Ra226 and Ra228). Existing monitoring well MW-44SA, which
is screened in the shallow surficial aquifer immediately below the ash basin, and
Page 41
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

new monitoring well BW-2S, located upgradient of the ash basin, are proposed to
be sampled for radium analysis, with NCDENR concurrence.
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).
In addition to total analytes, speciation of inorganics will be conducted for select
sample locations to characterize the aqueous chemistry and geochemistry in
locations and depths of concern. Inorganic speciation of iron (Fe(II), Fe(III)) and
manganese (Mn(II), Mn(IV)) will be conducted at the following locations.
Representative samples of ash pore water within each basin, groundwater below
each basin, from a potential background location, and from a downgradient
location will be collected. Laboratory analyses will be performed in accordance
with the methods provided in Table 10.
7.3 Surface Water, Sediment, and Seep Sampling
Seeps have not been identified at the Sutton Plant. However, as part of the NPDES
permit renewal, and as discussed in Section 2.3.2, Duke Energy has been collecting
water quality samples from the cooling pond and the Cape Fear River. A summary of
the analytical data is provided in Appendix C.
7.3.1 Water Quality Samples
To provide information on surface water quality in the cooling pond and Cape
Fear River, with respect to the ash management area, seven surface water
samples will be collected. Four samples, (SW-004, SW-8A, SW-6A, an SW-1C),
will be collected from the cooling pond at the locations shown on Figure 5. The
samples from SW-8A, correspond to current a locations sampled by Duke Energy
personnel.
Three samples (SW-CFUP, SW-CFP, and SW-CF001) will be collected from the
Cape Fear River (Figure 5). SW-CFUP will be considered an upgradient sample.
SW-CPF will be collected from the makeup pump to the pond, which is routinely
sampled as part of the NPDES permit. SW-CF001 will be collected from just
downgradient of NPDES Outfall 001.
The collection of water samples from the previously sampled locations will
provide information regarding variability in water chemistry over time. The
water samples will be analyzed for the parameters listed in Table 10.
Page 42
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Analytical results for surface water samples collected will be compared to 15A
NCAC 2B .0200 Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to
Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina (2B Standards Class C Water).
7.3.2 Sediment Samples
Sediment samples will be collected from the bed surface at each of the surface
water sample locations discussed above (Figure 5). The SW-CFUP location will
be considered a background sediment sample. The sediment samples will be
analyzed for total inorganics, using the same constituents list proposed for the
soil and ash samples (Table 9), and pH, cation exchange capacity, particle size
distribution, percent solids, percent organic matter, and redox potential.
7.3.3 Seep Samples
As mentioned above, seeps have not been identified at the Sutton Plant.
Therefore, no seep samples will be collected as part of these activities. However,
if seeps are identified during the assessment activities, samples will be collected
for laboratory analysis for the parameters listed in Table 10.
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 hand written 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;
Page 43
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• 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.
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 and 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., AW-1S (5-6’)). Samples will be numbered in accordance with the proposed
sample IDs shown on Figure 5.
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.
Page 44
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• 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
listed in the table below.
• 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.
- 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 instrument 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
Page 45
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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 analysis, 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:
• Sample handling procedures including sample location, sample number and
number of containers corresponding to each sample number;
• The requested analysis and applicable preservative;
Page 46
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• 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);
• The names of those responsible for receiving the samples at the laboratory;
and,
• 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
during 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.
Page 47
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Field QA/QC samples will be analyzed for the same constituents as proposed for
the soil and groundwater samples, as identified on Tables 9 and 10, respectively.
7.4.7 Decontamination Procedures
Proper decontamination of sampling equipment is essential to minimize the
possibility of cross contamination of samples. Previously used sampling
equipment will be decontaminated before sampling and between the collection
of each sample. New, disposable sampling equipment will be used for sampling
activities where possible.
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
Decontamination of drilling equipment (drill rods, cutting heads, etc.) will be
completed at each well or boring location following completion of the well or
boring. The decontamination procedures area as follows;
• After completion of well or boring a hot water pressure cleaner will be
used to decontaminate tooling as it is extracted from the bore hole.
• The decontamination water will be collected in the drill through tubs that
are in place under the deck during drilling activities. There is a seal
installed between the tub and land surface to ensure decontamination
water does not migrate back down the bore hole before last tool joint is
removed.
• Recovered water is then pumped from tub into drums, other IDW
containers, or directly onto the ground, away from the drilling location.
• The tooling is then loaded directly back on support equipment ready for
the next location.
7.5 Influence of Pumping Wells on Groundwater System
There are several public and private water supply wells located within a 0.5 mile radius
of the compliance boundary for the ash management area. Several of these wells are
located close to the compliance boundary. The wells appear to be located
downgradient from the ash management area. Data loggers will be installed in one or
Page 48
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

more of the site monitoring wells/piezometers to monitor groundwater fluctuations that
may be a result of nearby pumping wells. Additional information on the potential off-
site water supply wells will also be collected as part of the assessment.
7.6 Site Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model
The ICSM for the Sutton Plant has been developed using data discussed in Section 2.0
through 6.0 above and was used to develop the Assessment Work Plan in Section 7.1
through 7.4. The ICSM has provided sufficient detail to be able to understand the flow
dynamics at the Sutton Plant and to identify potential data gaps, such as areas where
monitoring well need to be installed and additional soil and groundwater analytical
needs. Sections 7.1 through 7.5 were prepared to address these data gaps.
The data obtained during the proposed assessment will be supplemented by available
reports and data on site geotechnical, geologic, and hydrologic conditions to develop
the hydrogeologic Site Conceptual Model (SCM).
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.
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 and fate and transport of the ash constituents at
the site. In addition, 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 groundwater contour maps showing the potentiometric surfaces of the
hydrostratigraphic layers, and
• present information on horizontal and vertical groundwater gradients.
Additionally, iso-concentration maps, block diagrams, channel networks, and other
illustrations may be created to illustrate the SCM. Figure 5 shows the proposed
locations for geologic cross sections anticipated for the SCM.
Page 49
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

The SCM will serve as the basis for developing the groundwater flow, and fate and
transport models.
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.
7.7 Site-Specific Background Concentrations
Statistical analysis will be performed using methods outlined in the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Unified Guidance (US EPA, 2009, EPA 530/R-
09-007) to develop Site-Specific Background Concentrations (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.
The relationship between exceedances and turbidity will also 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 5 are found to not represent
background conditions.
7.8 Groundwater Fate and Transport Model
Data from existing and new monitoring wells will be used to develop a groundwater
fate and transport model of the system. A 3-dimensional groundwater fate and
transport model will be developed for the ash management area. 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, and
• support the development of the CSA report and the groundwater corrective
action plan, if required.
The model and model report will be developed in general accordance with the
guidelines found in the memorandum Groundwater Modeling Policy, NCDENR DWQ,
May 31, 2007 (NCDENR modeling guidelines).
The groundwater model will be developed from the site hydrogeologic SCM, from
existing wells and boring information provided by Duke Energy, and information
developed from the site investigation. The SCM is a conceptual interpretation of the
processes and characteristics of a site with respect to the groundwater flow and other
Page 50
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

hydrologic processes at the site. Development of the ICSM is discussed in section 5.0
and the SCM discussed in Section 7.6.
Due to the hydrogeologic complexities at the site, SynTerra believes that a 3-
dimensional groundwater model would be more appropriate than performing 2-
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.
7.8.1 MODFLOW/MT3D
The groundwater modeling will be performed under the direction of Dr. Ron
Falta, Jr., Professor, Department of Environmental Engineering and Earth
Sciences, Clemson University. Groundwater flow and constituent fate and
transport will be modeled using MODFLOW and MT3DMS via the GMS v. 10
MODFLOW III Software Package.
Duke Energy, SynTerra, and Dr. Falta considered the appropriateness of using
MODFLOW and MT3D as compared to the use of MODFLOW coupled with a
geochemical reaction code such as the PH REdox EQuilibrium (PHREEQC)
model. The decision to use MODFLOW and MT3D was based on the intensive
data requirements of PHREEQC, the complexity of developing an appropriate
geochemical model given the heterogeneous nature of site geology, and the
general acceptance of MODLFOW and MT3D. However, batch simulations of
PHREEQC may be used to perform sensitivity analyses of the proposed sorption
constants used with MODFLOW/MT3D, as described below, if geochemistry
varies significantly across the site.
Additional factors that were considered in the decision to use MT3D 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
Page 51
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• Reactions including oxidation/reduction, complexation,
precipitation/dissolution, and ion exchange
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 modeled constituents as a single species in the dissolved,
complexed, and solid 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.
7.8.2 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 constituents of potential
concern that may impact groundwater. To determine the capacity of the site
soils to attenuate a constituent, the site specific soil adsorption coefficients, Kd
terms, will be developed by University of North Carolina Charlotte (UNCC)
utilizing soil samples collected during the site investigation. The soil-water
distribution coefficient, Kd, is defined as the ratio of the adsorbed mass of a
constituent to its concentration in solution and is used to quantify the
equilibrium relationship between chemical constituents in the dissolved phase
and adsorbed phase.
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-
Page 52
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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 adsorbed
versus dissolved chemical and the resultant partition coefficient Kd with units of
volume per unit mass. If the plot, or isotherm, is linear, the single-valued
coefficient 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 regards to soil- to-liquid
ratios.
Soil samples with measured dry density and maximum particle size will be
placed in lab-scale columns configured to operate in the upflow mode. A
solution with measured concentrations of the COPCs will be pumped through
each column, effluent samples will be 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 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 model and
associated parameters of the sorption coefficient Kd, either linear, Freundlich, or
Langmuir. This allows use of a nonlinear coefficient in the event that a linear one
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 US 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
Page 53
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

and analyzed as described above. Plots of sorbed versus dissolved COPC mass
will be used to develop Kd values.
When applied in the fate and transport modeling performed by MT3D, these Kd
values 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 advecting groundwater.
Eight soil core samples will be selected from representative material at the site
for column tests to be performed in triplicate. Batch Kd tests, if performed, will
be executed in triplicate as well. It is anticipated that a Kd core sample will be
collected from the ash in FADA and 1971 ash basin, shallow aquifer material
below the ash basins, shallow intermediate aquifer (20-25 ft. bgs), deep
intermediate aquifer (40-45 ft. bgs), deep aquifer zone (> 60 ft. bgs), and from
areas where there is apparent variations in lithology.
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 where Kd terms have not been derived, UNCC
recommends that the core samples with derived Kds and 20 to 25 additional core
samples be analyzed for hydrous 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, geochemical modeling can be used to refine the Kd estimate. 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 developed will be determined after
review of the analyses on the site total ash and SPLP concentrations, pore water
data and review of the site groundwater analyses results. SynTerra anticipates
that the constituents which have exceeded the 2L Standards at the site will be
specifically evaluated.
7.8.3 MODFLOW/MT3D Modeling Process
The MODFLOW groundwater model will be developed using the
hydrostratigraphic layer geometry and properties of the site described in the
Page 54
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

following 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 in the ash management area. Infiltration into the areas
outside of the ash management area will be estimated based on available
information. Infiltration within the ash management area will be estimated
based on available water balance information and pond elevation data.
The MT3D portion of the model will utilize the Kd terms and the input
concentrations of constituents found in the ash, ash SPLP leachate and pore
water. The leaching characteristics of ash are complex and are expected to vary
with time and as changes occur in the geochemical environment of the ash basin.
Due to factors such as the quantity of a particular constituent found in ash, and
to other factors such as the mineral complex, solubility, and geochemical
conditions, the rate of leaching and the leached concentrations of constituents
will vary with time and with respect to each other.
Since the ash within a management area has been placed over a number of years,
the analytical results from an ash sample is unlikely to represent the
concentrations that are present in the hydrologic pathway between the ash basins
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 after closure may vary over time and peak concentrations
may not yet have arrived at compliance wells. Therefore, 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 management area (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 groundwater monitoring wells or surface water
sample locations outside of the ash management area,
• Analytical results from monitoring wells installed in the ash management
area pore-water (screened in ash),
Page 55
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• Published or other data on sequential leaching tests performed on similar
ash.
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
results 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.
7.8.4 Hydrostratigraphic Layer Development
The 3-dimensional configuration of the groundwater model hydrostratigraphic
layers will be developed from information obtained during the site investigation
process and from the SCM. The thickness and extent for the various layers will
be represented by a 3-dimensional surface model for each hydrostratigraphic
layer.
The boring data from the site investigation and from existing boring data, as
available and provided by Duke Energy, will be entered into the GMS program.
The program, along with site specific and regional knowledge of Coastal Plain
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 properties such as visual soil identification
and previous data from the site. The material properties required for the model
such as total porosity, effective porosity, hydraulic conductivity, and specific
storage will be developed from the data obtained in the site investigation and
from previously collected data for the site.
Page 56
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

To further define heterogeneities, a 2-D scatter point set will be used to define
specified hydraulic values within vertical and/or horizontal zones. Specified
hydraulic values will be given set ranges that reflect field conditions from core
measurements, slug tests, and pump tests (if available).
7.8.5 Domain of Conceptual Groundwater Flow Model
The Sutton Plant ash management area model domain encompasses areas where
groundwater flow will be simulated to estimate the impacts of the ash
management area. By necessity, the conceptual model domain extends beyond
the management area 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.
Model sources and sinks such as drains, springs, rivers, and pumping wells will
be based on the SCM. As discussed in Section 5.0, Sutton Plant is underlain by at
least 75 feet of unconsolidated sediments consisting primarily of well drained
sands of the surficial aquifer (Geosyntec, July 2014). The Cape Fear River to the
west and the North Cape Fear River to the east act as groundwater discharge
areas and will be used as model boundaries to the east, west, and south. Local
mounding of the water table occurs beneath the 1971 and 1984 basins. Artificial
head boundaries will be established north based on apparent flow conditions.
The model layers will consist, at a minimum, of the surficial aquifer and the
Peedee Formation and identified confining units. If site conditions are
encountered that warrant changes to the proposed extent of model, NCDENR
will be notified.
7.8.6 Potential Modeling of 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.
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
Page 57
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

(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 in the water body is sufficient enough 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
greater or the water body type requires a more complex analysis, then a more
detailed modeling approach will be used. A brief description of the proposed
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
water quality modeling that is capable of representing multi-dimensional
analysis of the 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 in 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
Page 58
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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, SynTerra and Duke Energy
will consult with the DWR regional office to present those specific data
requirements and modeling approach.

Page 59
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT
To support the groundwater assessment and inform corrective action decisions based
on current and future land use, 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 exposure models (CEM) to serve as the foundation
for evaluating potential risks to human and ecological receptors at the site. Consistent
with standard risk assessment practice for developing conceptual models, separate
CEMs will be developed for the human health and ecological risk evaluations.
The purpose of the CEM 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 CEM is
to characterize the site and surrounding area. Source areas and potential transport
mechanisms are then identified, followed by identification of potential receptors and
routes of exposure. Potential exposure pathways are determined to be complete when
they contain the following elements: 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, inhalation). A complete exposure pathway is one in which constituents can be
traced or are expected to travel from the source to a receptor (US EPA 1997). Completed
exposure pathways identified in the CEM 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 COPCs for inclusion in the screening level risk assessments will be
identified based on the preliminary evaluations performed at the site. 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 first steps of the human health risk assessment will include the
preparation of a CEM, illustrating potential exposure pathways from the source area to
Page 60
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

possible receptors. The information gathered in the CEM 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 human health risk assessment 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:
• Soil analytical results collected from the 0 to 2 foot depth interval will be
compared to US EPA residential and industrial soil Regional Screening Levels
(RSLs) (US EPA, November 2014 or latest update);
• Groundwater results will be compared to NCDENR Title 15A, Subchapter 2L
Standards (NCDENR, 2006);
• Surface water analytical results will be compared to North Carolina surface
water standards (Subchapter 2B) and US EPA national recommended water
quality criteria (NCDENR, 2007; US EPA, 2006);
• 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 US EPA residential and industrial soil RSLs
(US EPA, October 2014 or latest update); and
• Sediment, soil and ground water data will also be compared to available local,
regional and national background sediment, soil and ground water data, as
available.
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 human health risk assessment, 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. In accordance with this guidance document, it is
anticipated that the calculations will include an evaluation of the following,
based on site-specific activities and conditions:
Page 61
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• 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.
• 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,
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.
Page 62
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• 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.
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 include a
description of the ecological setting and development of the ecological CEM specific to
the ecological communities and receptors that may be exposed to COPCs. This scope is
equivalent to Step 1: preliminary problem formulation and ecological effects evaluation
(US EPA, 1998). The objective of the SLERA is to evaluate the likelihood that adverse
ecological effects may result from exposure to environmental stressors associated with
conditions at the site.
The screening level evaluation will include compilation of a list of potential ecological
receptors (e.g., plants, benthic invertebrates, fish, mammals, 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 county
list to evaluate the potential for presence of rare or endangered animal and plant
species. Existing ecological studies publically available for the site will be reviewed and
incorporated as appropriate to support the SLERA.
Appropriate state and federal natural resource agencies will be contacted to determine
the potential presence (or lack thereof) of sensitive species or their critical habitat at the
time the SLERA is performed. If sensitive species or critical habitats are present or
potentially present, a survey of the appropriate area will be performed. If sensitive
species are utilizing the site, an evaluation of the potential for adverse effects due to
site-related constituent or activities will be developed and presented to the appropriate
agencies.
The SLERA will include, as the basis for the CEM, a description of the known fate and
transport mechanisms for site-related constituents and potentially complete pathways
Page 63
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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.
Ecological screening values will be taken from the following and other appropriate
sources:
• US EPA Ecological Soil Screening Levels;
• US EPA Region 4 Recommended Ecological Screening Values; and
• US EPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria and North Carolina
Standards.
North Carolina’s SLERA guidance (NCDENR, 2003) requires that constituents be
identified as a Step 2 COPC as follows:
• Category 1 - Contaminants whose maximum detection exceeding the media
specific ESV included in the COPC tables.
• Category 2 - Contaminants that generated a laboratory sample quantitation limit
that exceeds the US EPA Region IV media-specific ESV for that contaminant.
• Category 3 - Contaminants that have no US EPA Region IV media-specific ESV
but were detected above the laboratory sample quantitation limit.
• Category 4 - Contaminants that were not detected above the laboratory sample
quantitation limit and have no US EPA Region IV media-specific ESV
Page 64
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• Category 5 - Contaminants with a sample quantitation limit or maximum
detection exceeds the North Carolina Surface Water Quality Standards.
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 will be
considered as part of the refinement of COPCs.
The risk assessment process identifies a Scientific-Management Decision Point (SMDP)
to evaluate whether the potential for adverse ecological effects are absent and no further
assessment is needed or if further assessment should be performed to evaluate the
potential for ecological effects. If additional evaluation of potential ecological effects is
required, a baseline ecological risk and/or habitat assessment will be developed.

Page 65
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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 may provide the results of one iterative assessment phase.
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. SynTerra will provide the applicable figures, tables, and appendices as
listed in the guidelines. For summary statistics tables, "average" value(s) will be
avoided unless the constituent(s) at the location in question is (are) normally
distributed, in which case a mean and standard deviation will be used. For non-normal
data, the median value will be used and maximum values will be noted, as appropriate.
As part of CSA deliverables, a minimum the following tables, graphs, and maps will be
provided:
Page 66
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

• 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 select
COPCs,
• Stacked time-series plots will be provided for select COPCs. 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/seep locations as separate symbols.
• Correlation charts where applicable.
• Orthophoto potentiometric maps for shallow, intermediate, and deep wells.
• Orthophoto potentiometric difference maps showing the difference in vertical
heads between selected flow zones.
• Orthophoto iso-concentration maps for selected COPCs and flow zones.
• Orthophoto map showing the relationship between groundwater and surface
water samples for selected COPCs.
• Geologic cross sections that include the relative position of the bottom of the ash
basins and the water table.
• Photographs of soil cores for each boring location.
• Others as appropriate.

Page 67
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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 CSM 5 days following receipt of Lab Data 30 days
Prepare and Submit CSA 10 days following Work Plan approval 170 days

Project Assumptions Include:
• Data from no more than one iterative assessment step will be included in the CSA
report. Iterative assessment data may be provided in supplemental reports, if
required;
• Data will not reflect all seasonal or extreme hydrologic conditions;
• During the CSA process if additional investigations are required, NCDENR will be
notified immediately with a description of the proposed work and a timeline for
completion.

Page 68
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

11.0 REFERENCES
ASTM D4044-96 Standard Test Method (Field Procedure) for Instantaneous Change in
Head (Slug) Tests for Determining Hydraulic Properties of Aquifers.
BBL, 2004. Phase I Remedial Investigation Report for the Former Ash Disposal Area,
L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Catlin Engineers and Scientists, Phase I Groundwater Quality Assessment for Ash Pond
Impacts at the L.V. Sutton Electric Plant, Wilmington, North Carolina. Catlin Project
No. 209-100, February 11, 2011.
Catlin Engineers and Scientists, Phase II Groundwater Quality Assessment for Ash Pond
Impacts at the L.V. Sutton Electric Plant, Wilmington, North Carolina. Catlin Project
No. 209-100, July 2012.
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.
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.
Duke Energy Progress, Inc., Arsenic, Mercury, and Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape
Fear River, 2013 New Hanover County, North Carolina, L. V. Sutton Electric Plant,
NPDES Permit No. NC0001422, April 2014.
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 2014. Assessment of Radioactive Elements in
Coal Combustion Products, 2014 Technical Report 3002003774, Final Report
August 2014.
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.
Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report, Conceptual
Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, June 2014.
Page 69
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report-Addendum
No. 1, Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, July
2014.
Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Data Interpretation and Analysis Report, Conceptual
Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, July 2014.
Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Data Interpretation and Analysis Report-Addendum No. 1,
Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, August 2014.
Heath, R.C., 1989. Preliminary Summary of Hydrogeologic Conditions in Vicinity of
Lake Sutton, New Hanover County, North Carolina.
Horton, J. W. and Zullo, V. A., 1991, The Geology of the Carolinas, Carolina Geological
Society Fiftieth Anniversary Volume, 406 pp.
Narkunas, J., 1980, Groundwater Evaluation in the Central Coastal Plain of North
Carolina, North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development, 119 pp.
NCDENR Document, “Hydrogeologic Investigation and Reporting Policy
Memorandum”, dated May 31, 2007.
NCDENR Document, “Groundwater Modeling Policy Memorandum”, dated May 31,
2007.
NCDENR Document, “Performance and Analysis of Aquifer Slug Tests and Pumping
Test Policy”, dated May 31, 2007.
NCDENR Document, “Guidelines for Performing Screening Level Ecological Risk
Assessments within North Carolina”, dated 2003.
NCDHHS. 2006. Health effects of methylmercury and North Carolina’s advice on
eating fish. North Carolina Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology
Branch. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Geological Survey, 1985, Geologic map of North Carolina: North Carolina
Geological Survey, General Geologic Map , scale 1:500000.
NUS Corporation 1989. Screening Site Inspection Phase I, Carolina Power and Lighting,
Sutton Steam Plant, Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina, EPA
I.D. NCD000830646.
Page 70
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

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-
dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations: U.S. Geological
Survey Techniques and Methods, book 6, chap. A43, 497 p.
Stuckey, J.L., 1965, North Carolina: Its Geology and Mineral Resources, Raleigh, North
Carolina Department of Conservation and Development, 550p.
SynTerra, Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey for L.V. Sutton Energy Complex,
NPDES Permit# NC0001422, September 2014.
SynTerra, Supplement to Drinking Water Well and Receptor Survey- L.V. Sutton Energy
Complex, NPDES Permit# NC0001422, November 2014.
SynTerra, Groundwater Monitoring Program Sampling, Analysis, and Reporting Plan for L.V.
Sutton Energy Complex, NPDES Permit# NC0001422, July 2014.
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.
US EPA, 1987. Batch-type procedures for estimating soil adsorption of chemicals
Technical Resource Document 530/SW-87/006-F.
US EPA. 1995. Guidance for assessing chemical contaminant data for use in fish
advisories. Vol. 1. Fish sampling and analysis. Second edition. EPA 823-R-95-
007. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,
Washington, DC.
US EPA Document, “Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Process for
Designing and Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments”, Interim Final. EPA
540-R-97-006, dated June 1997.
US EPA Document, “Amended Guidance on Ecological Risk Assessment at Military
Bases: Process Considerations, Timing of Activities, and Inclusion of
Stakeholders”, Memorandum from Simon, Ted. W., Ph.D., Office of Technical
Services, dated 2000.
Page 71
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx
Proposed Groundwater Assessment Work Plan Revision 1: December 2014
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex SynTerra

US EPA Document, “Generic Ecological Assessment Endpoints for Ecological Risk
Assessment”, EPA/630/P-02-004F, dated 2004.
http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/geae.htm.
US EPA Document “National Recommended Water Quality Criteria,” EPA 822-R-02-
047, dated 2004, available at www.epa.gov/waterscience/pc/revcom.pdf.
US EPA Document, “US EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs)”, available at
http://www.epa.gov/region9/superfund/prg/. dated, November 2014 (last
update).
US EPA, 2001. Region 4 Ecological Risk Assessment Bulletins—Supplement to RAGS.
US EPA, 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment.
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.
US EPA, 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.
US EPA, 1998. Report to Congress Wastes from the Combustion of Fossil Fuels, Volume
2 Methods, Findings, and Recommendations.
Winner, M.D., Jr., and Coble, R.W., 1989, Hydrogeologic Framework of the North
Carolina Coastal Plain Aquifer System: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File
Report.
Page 72
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Sutton
GW Assessment Plan REV1.docx

FIGURES

P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Figures\DE SUTTON FIG 1 (SITE LOCATION MAP).dwg
PROJECT MANAGER:
LAYOUT:
DRAWN BY:
KATHY WEBB
DATE:J. CHASTAIN
FIG 1 (USGS SITE LOCATION)
2014-12-15
CONTOUR INTERVAL:
MAP DATE:
10ft
2013
APPROXIMATE ROUTE OF THE
NEW WILLMINGTON BYPASS (I-140)
148 RIVER STREET, SUITE 220
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA
PHONE [phone]
www.synterracorp.com
FIGURE 1
SITE LOCATION MAP
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
801 SUTTON POWER PLANT RD
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
LELAND AND CASTLE HAYNE NC QUADRANGLES
RALEIGH
WILMINGTON
GREENVILLE
GREENSBORO
3000
GRAPHIC SCALE
1500
IN FEET
15000US H
IGHWAY
421
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
500' COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY
WASTE BOUNDARY
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
SOURCE:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OBTAINED FROM THE USGS STORE AT
http://store.usgs.gov/b2c_usgs/b2c/start/%%%28xcm=r3standardpitrex_prd%%%29/.do
L.V. SUTTON
ENERGY COMPLEX
MW-11MW-5C60006001200GRAPHIC SCALEIN FEETFIG 2 (SITE LAYOUT)2014-12-24H. FRANKJ. CHASTAINPROJECT MANAGER:LAYOUT NAME:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:K. WEBBDATE:DATE:FIGURE 2SITE LAYOUT MAPwww.synterracorp.com148 River Street, Suite 220Greenville, South Carolina 29601864-421-9999LEGEND2014-12-24500 ft COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYDUKE ENERGY PROGRESS SUTTON PLANTWASTE BOUNDARYBACKGROUND MONITORING WELL (SURVEYED)COMPLIANCE MONITORING WELL (SURVEYED)MW-11MW-5CL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX801 SUTTON POWER PLANT RDWILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINASOURCES:1.2014 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WAS OBTAINED FROM WSPFLOWN ON APRIL 17, 20142.2013 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WAS OBTAINED FROM THENRCS GEOSPATIAL DATA GATEWAY AThttp://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/3.DRAWING HAS BEEN SET WITH A PROJECTION OF NORTHCAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM FIPS 3200(NAD 83).4.WELL LOCATIONS AND MEASURING POINTS WERE BASEDON A SURVEY BY JAMES L. HAINES & ASSOCIATES FOR ISH,INC. DATED DECEMBER 23, 2008. ISH DRAWING IS TITLED"POTENTIAL LOCATIONS FOR PROPOSED GEOPROBE ANDWELL INSTALLATIONS", DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2009 WITH ACAD FILE NAME Figure 22.dwg5.NEW WELL LOCATIONS AND MEASURING POINTS WEREBASED ON A TABLE BY PARAMOUNTE ENGINEERING,WILMINGTON NC DATED 2012-03-05 SUPPLIED BYPROGRESS ENERGY. HORIZONTAL DATUM ISNAD83(NSRS2007) AND THE VERTICAL DATUM IS NGVD29.6.THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY FOR THE L.V. SUTTON STEAMELECTRIC PLANT WAS BASED ON A COMPOSITE MAPPREPARED BY DAVIS-MARTIN-POWELL & ASSOC., INC. THEDRAWINGS ARE DATED JUNE, 1995 WITH REVISION NOTEFOR MARCH 4, 2004. FILE NAME IS L-D-9022-7.DWG.HORIZONTAL DATUM IS NAD83 AND THE VERTICAL DATUMIS NGV 29.7.THE LOCATION OF THE FORMER ASH DISPOSAL AREASWAS BASED ON A FIGURE 2-2 PREPARED BY BLASLAND,BOUCK & LEE, INC. THE FIGURE IS TITLED "HORIZONTALEXTENT OF THE ASH WITHIN THE FORMER DISPOSALAREA".NC WILDLIFELAKE ACCESSSUTTON
LAKE
RDOLD ASHBASIN AREANEW ASHBASIN AREAFORMER ASHDISPOSAL AREACANALCANALSOLARFARMASTCONCRETEPADCAPE FEAR RIVERSUTTON STEAM PLANT RDSUTTON LAKE RDRAILROADCOOLING POND WATER LEVEL = 9.58 ftPROVIDED BY DUKE ENERGY 04-08-2014FREDRICKSON RDMETRO
C
IRC
LECOOLING PONDCOOLING PONDNC HIGHWAY 421IN
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E

1
4
0

(
U
S

H
I
G
H
W
A
Y

1
7
)
TRANSCOM
C
T
BEVEL RDROYMAC DRFREDRICKSON RDCANALEZZELLTRUCKINGLCHHOLDINGSS. T. WOOTENCORPORATIONINVISTANEW HANOVERCOUNTYSAUNDERS &SAUNDERS, LLCROYMACBUSINESSPARKROYMACPARTNERSHIPABSOLUTEPROPERTIESHURRICANEPROPERTIES
MAOLA MILK &ICE CREAM CO.MW-4BMONITORING WELL (SURVEYED)MW-32CMW-27BMW-31CMW-24CMW-24BMW-12MW-23CMW-23BMW-22CMW-22BMW-21CMW-19MW-28BMW-28CMW-7CMW-32CMW-33CAPPROXIMATE ROUTE OF THENEW WILLMINGTON BYPASS (I-140)
12/25/2014 10:25 AM P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Figures\DE SUTTON FIG 3 (GEOLOGY MAP).dwg
148 RIVER STREET, SUITE 220
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29601
PHONE [phone]
www.synterracorp.com
PROJECT MANAGER:
LAYOUT:
DRAWN BY:
KATHY WEBB
DATE:J. CHASTAIN
FIG 3 (GEOLOGY MAP)
2014-12-24
FIGURE 3
GEOLOGY MAP
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
801 SUTTON POWER PLANT ROAD
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
2000
GRAPHIC SCALE
1000
IN FEET
10000
COOLING POND
GEOLOGY SOURCE NOTE:
GEOLOGY SHAPEFILES OBTAINED FROM THE USGS Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United
States - Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina, DATED 2007 AT
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1323/
500 ft COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS SUTTON PLANT
WASTE BOUNDARY
MW-7C MONITORING WELL
LEGEND
LEGEND - UNIT NAME
Kp CRETACEOUS, PEEDEE FORMATION - MARINE SAND, CLAYEY SAND AND CLAY
MW-4B
MW-7C
MW-33C
MW-32C
MW-28B
MW-28C
MW-19MW-21C
MW-22CMW-22B
MW-23CMW-23B
MW-23C
MW-23B
MW-24CMW-24B
MW-12
MW-31C
MW-11MW-27B
MW-5C
Kp
Kp
Kp
Kp
OLD ASH
BASIN AREA
NEW ASH
BASIN AREA
FORMER ASH
DISPOSAL AREA
L.V. SUTTON
ENERGY COMPLEX NC H
IGHWAY
421
CAPE FEAR RIVER
WATER LEVEL MAP06/10/201406/16/2014KATHY WEBBS. ARLEDGEPROJECT MANAGER:LAYOUT NAME:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:KATHY WEBBDATE:DATE:FIGURE 4WATER LEVEL MAPJUNE 201412/25/2014 10:26 AM P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Figures\DE SUTTON FIG 4 (WATER LEVEL MAP JUNE 2014).dwg1200GRAPHIC SCALE(IN FEET)0600300600www.synterracorp.com148 River Street, Suite 220Greenville, South Carolina 29601864-421-9999WASTE BOUNDARY500 ft COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYSUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX801 SUTTON POWER PLANT RDWILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAPROPERTY LINE (BASED ON SURVEY)LEGENDMONITORING WELLSOURCES:2012 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NRCS GEOSPATIAL DATAGATEWAY AT http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/PARCEL DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE LIBRARIES AThttp://www.lib.ncsu.edu/gis/counties.html FOR NEW HANOVER COUNTY.THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY FOR THE L.V. SUTTON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT WAS BASEDON A COMPOSITE MAP PREPARED BY DAVIS-MARTIN-POWELL & ASSOC., INC. THEDRAWINGS ARE DATED JUNE, 1995 WITH REVISION NOTE FOR MARCH 4, 2004. FILE NAMEIS L-D-9022-7.DWG. HORIZONTIAL DATUM IS NAD83 AND THE VERTICAL DATUM IS NGV 29.WELL LOCATIONS AND MEASURING POINTS WERE BASED ON A SURVEY BY JAMES L.HAINES & ASSOCIATES FOR ISH, INC. DATED DECEMBER 23, 2008. ISH DRAWING IS TITLED"POTENTIAL LOCATIONS FOR PROPOSED GEOPROBE AND WELL INSTALLATIONS", DATEDFEBURARY 25, 2009 WITH A CAD FILE NAME Figure 22.dwgTHE LOCATION OF THE FORMER ASH DISPOSAL AREAS WAS BASED ON A FIGURE 2-2PREPARED BY BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC. THE FIGURE IS TITLED "HORIZONTALEXTENT OF THE ASH WITHIN THE FORMER DISPOSAL AREA".NEW HANOVER CO. PARCEL LINE (APPROXIMATE)WATER LEVEL IN FEET (msl.)WATER LEVEL CONTOUR IN FEET (msl.)MW 21C197773.532306913.7331.4729.0COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 22C198349.482307023.2920.4018.0COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 23C198972.102306903.5217.9415.5COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 24B200712.122306251.0916.6713.9COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 24C200716.552306263.9016.3213.7COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 27B202585.272304679.4515.5912.7COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 28C197356.572307354.0932.2329.8MW 31C201046.822306858.1718.8716.2WELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYWELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYMW 22B198349.052307016.9620.3417.8COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 23B198967.442306901.7617.5015.3COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 28B197368.432307359.9733.0730.2WELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYMW 19197833.5782 2307041.344231.3828.39COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY WELLMW 11MW 12202542.0838199646.31302306295.05022307508.221725.3720.8322.1918.47WELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYWELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYMW 5C205903.1285 2303858.950514.3514.19BACKGROUND WELLMW 7C196600.8144 2307567.437816.9816.77WELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYMW 4B194233.8941 2308898.652518.0916.90BACKGROUND WELLNORTHINGEASTINGWELL IDMEASURING PTFEET (msl.)GROUND SURFACEFEET (msl.)MONITORING WELLSWELL STATUSNEW WELL LOCATIONS AND MEASURING POINTS WERE BASED ON A TABLE BYPARAMOUNTE ENGINEERING, WILMINGTON NC DATED 2012-03-05 SUPPLED BY PROGRESSENERGY. HORIZONTAL DATUM IS NAD83(NSRS2007) AND THE VERTICAL DATUM IS NGVD29.109
MW 32C197686.222307879.0435.5733.48WELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYMW 33C197598.342308275.7025.4522.28WELL BEYOND COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY109
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS SUTTON PLANTNOTE:1. CONTOUR LINES ARE USED FOR REPRESENTATIVE PURPOSES ONLYAND ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.2. SYNTERRA COLLECTED WATER LEVELS ON JUNE 2 & 3, 2014.MW 1111.18MW 5C9.95MW 1210.75MW 1910.20MW-7C9.27MW-23C11.18MW-24B11.37MW-24C11.35MW-27B10.77MW-22C10.67MW-21C10.47MW-28C10.14MW-23B11.10MW-22B10.71MW-28B10.16MW-32C9.92MW-33C9.70MW-4B8.47NC WILDLIFELAKE ACCESSSUTTON LAKE
RDNC HIGHWAY 421OLD ASH POND AREANEW ASH POND AREAFORMER ASH DISPOSAL AREACANALCANALSOLAR FARMASTCONCRETEPADCAPE FEAR RIVERSUTTON STEAM PLANT RDSUTTON LAKE RDRAILROADCOOLING POND WATER LEVEL = 9.60 ftPROVIDED BY DUKE ENERGY 06-02-2014FREDRICKSON RDMETRO
C
IRC
LECOOLING PONDCOOLING PONDNC HIGHWAY 421IN
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E

1
4
0

(
U
S

H
I
G
H
W
A
Y

1
7
)TRANSCOM CTBEVEL RDROYMAC DRFREDRICKSON RDCANALEZZELL TRUCKINGLCHHOLDINGSS. T. WOOTEN CORPORATIONINVISTANEW HANOVER COUNTYSAUNDERS &SAUNDERS, LLCROYMACBUSINESSPARKROYMACPARTNERSHIPABSOLUTEPROPERTIESHURRICANEPROPERTIES
MAOLA MILK &ICE CREAM CO.NOT MEASUREDMW 8*NMMW 8*NM1111MW 1111.18MW-31C11.19
0H2H2GPE-SW2PE-SW4PE-SW3PE-SW5PE-SW6APE-SW6BPE-SW6DPE-SW6E2014-12-242014-12-24H. FRANKJ. CHASTAINPROJECT MANAGER:LAYOUT NAME:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:KATHY WEBBDATE:DATE:FIGURE 5PROPOSED MONITORING WELL ANDSAMPLE LOCATION MAP12/25/2014 10:28 AM P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Figures\DE SUTTON FIG 5 (MW & SAMPLE LOC MAP).dwg
FIG 5 (MW AND SAMPLE LOC MAP)1200GRAPHIC SCALE(IN FEET)0600300600www.synterracorp.com148 River Street, Suite 220Greenville, South Carolina 29601864-421-9999L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX801 SUTTON POWER PLANT RDWILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINANC WILDLIFELAKE ACCESSSUTTON LAKE
RDCAPE FEAR RIVERSUTTON LAKE RDCOOLING POND WATER LEVEL = 9.60 ftPROVIDED BY DUKE ENERGY 06-02-2014METRO C
IRCLE EZZELL TRUCKINGLCHHOLDINGSS. T. WOOTEN CORPORATIONNC HIGHWAY 421TRANSCOM CTBEVEL RDROYMAC DRNEW HANOVER COUNTYSAUNDERS &SAUNDERS, LLCROYMACBUSINESSPARKROYMACPARTNERSHIPABSOLUTEPROPERTIESHURRICANEPROPERTIES
MAOLA MILK &ICE CREAM CO.SOURCES:1. 2014 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WAS OBTAINED FROM WSPFLOWN ON APRIL 17, 20142. 2013 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NRCSGEOSPATIAL DATA GATEWAY AThttp://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/3. DRAWING HAS BEEN SET WITH A PROJECTION OF NORTHCAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM FIPS 3200(NAD 83).4. PARCEL DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NORTH CAROLINASTATE LIBRARIES AT http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/gis/counties.htmlFOR NEW HANOVER COUNTY.5. 2ft CONTOUR INTERVALS FROM NCDOT LIDAR DATED 2007https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/gis/pages/cont-elev_v2.aspx6. WELL LOCATIONS AND MEASURING POINTS WERE BASED ONA SURVEY BY JAMES L. HAINES & ASSOCIATES FOR ISH, INC.DATED DECEMBER 23, 2008. ISH DRAWING IS TITLED"POTENTIAL LOCATIONS FOR PROPOSED GEOPROBE ANDWELL INSTALLATIONS", DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2009 WITH ACAD FILE NAME Figure 22.dwg7. NEW WELL LOCATIONS AND MEASURING POINTS WEREBASED ON A TABLE BY PARAMOUNTE ENGINEERING,WILMINGTON NC DATED 2012-03-05 SUPPLIED BY PROGRESSENERGY. HORIZONTAL DATUM IS NAD83(NSRS2007) AND THEVERTICAL DATUM IS NGVD29.8. THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY FOR THE L.V. SUTTON STEAMELECTRIC PLANT WAS BASED ON A COMPOSITE MAPPREPARED BY DAVIS-MARTIN-POWELL & ASSOC., INC. THEDRAWINGS ARE DATED JUNE, 1995 WITH REVISION NOTE FORMARCH 4, 2004. FILE NAME IS L-D-9022-7.DWG. HORIZONTALDATUM IS NAD83 AND THE VERTICAL DATUM IS NGV 29.9. THE LOCATION OF THE FORMER ASH DISPOSAL AREAS WASBASED ON A FIGURE 2-2 PREPARED BY BLASLAND, BOUCK &LEE, INC. THE FIGURE IS TITLED "HORIZONTAL EXTENT OFTHE ASH WITHIN THE FORMER DISPOSAL AREA".10. MONITORING WELLS/PIEZOMETERS/SOIL BORINGSCOMPLETED AT PART OF PREVIOUS ASSESSMENTACTIVITIES. LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.NOTE:1. CONTOUR LINES ARE USED FOR REPRESENTATIVEPURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN ORCONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.DUKE ENERGY PROGRESSPRODUCTION WELL (APPROXIMATE)PE-SW2NHC-SW4CFPUA PRODUCTION WELL (APPROXIMATE)0H2INVISTA REPORTED PRODUCTION WELLLOCATIONDUKE ENERGY PROGRESSPRODUCTION WELL (SURVEYED)PE-SW2MW-32CPROPOSED ASH/SOIL BORING (AB) ANDMONITORING WELL (ABMW) LOCATIONOLD ASHBASIN AREANEW ASHBASIN AREAFORMER ASHDISPOSAL AREACANALCANALASTCONCRETEPADRAILROADSOLARFARMCOOLINGPONDCOOLINGPONDSUTTON STEAM PLANT RDTRANSCOM CTROYMAC DRFREDRICKSON RDCANALACCESS ROADNHC-SW4NHC-SW3NHC-SW2(NOT IN USE)IN
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E

1
4
0

(
U
S

H
I
G
H
W
A
Y

1
7
)FREDRICKSON RDAPPROXIMATE ROUTE OF THENEW WILMINGTON BYPASS (I-140)NC HIGHWAY 421NC HIGHWAY 421NC HIGHWAY 421RAILROADRAILROADRAILROADRAILROADNHC-SW1(ABANDONED)INVISTACFPUAMW-4BMW-5CMW-33CMW-32CMW-27BMW-31CMW-24CMW-24BMW-23CMW-23BMW-22CMW-22BMW-19MW-21CMW-28BMW-28CMW-7CMW-11MW-12SW-3SMW-5BMW-5AMW-9MW-8PZ-1PZ-APZ-BPZ-7PZ-9PZ-12PZ-10DPZ-10SPZ-11MW-10PZ-14PZ-16MW-13PZ-18PZ-15PZ-17PZ-19PZ-21MW-34CPZ-2APZ-2BPZ-1PZ-1BPZ-3BMW-36CPZ-3ACPT-4PZ-4BPZ-4APZ-5ASPT-6PZ-6ACPT-7APZ-INTCPT-5SPT-3ASPT-8SCPT-5ASPT-6SPT-2PZ-23PZ-22PZ-24PZ-26SPT-4MW-6BMW-6AMW-6CPZ-20MW-4MW-4APZ-11DGP-5B-1HA-1-2HA-1-1GP-3GP-6GP-2SPT-7SPT-4CPT-3CPT-2B-1HA-2-1HA-2-2SPT-1B-3HA-3-1HA-3-2GP-1PZ-1971SPT-3CPT-8SCPT-1GP-4MW-18MW-17PZ-30MW-14MW-13MW-13DMW-16MW-16DMW-3AMW-3BMW-2AMW-2BMW-2CSB-2MW-7BMW-7AMW-15MW-15DMW-20MW-20DASH LANDFILL LEACHATE MONITORINGLOCATION (APPROXIMATE)P-2EXISTING MONITORING WELLS / PIEZOMETERS /SOIL BORINGS (APPROXIMATE)MW-5B500 ft COMPLIANCE BOUNDARYDUKE ENERGY PROGRESS SUTTON PLANTLEGENDWASTE BOUNDARYBACKGROUND MONITORING WELL (SURVEYED)COMPLIANCE MONITORING WELL (SURVEYED)MW-12MW-4BGENERALIZED GROUNDWATER FLOWDIRECTION•SUPPORTED BY GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATAPOINTS OR TOPOGRAPHIC DATAPROPOSED GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONMONITORING WELL (SURVEYED)PARCEL LINES (ROXBORO CO GIS)PROPOSED MONITORING WELL LOCATIONBI-ANNUAL WATER LEVEL PIEZOMETERNPDESOUTFALL 003NPDES OUTFALLSW-2PROPOSED WATER QUALITY ANDSEDIMENT LOCATIONPZ-12SW-8APZ-9ANPDESOUTFALL SW-004SW-CFPSW-1CSW-6ANPDESOUTFALL SW-002NPDESOUTFALL SW-001SW-CF001COOLINGPONDSW-6ASW-CFUPCAPE FEAR
R
IVER
INSET AUPSTREAM SAMPLE LOCATION ON THE CAPE FEAR RIVER1200GRAPHIC SCALE(IN FEET)0600300600SEE INSET A (THIS FIGURE) FORUPSTREAM SAMPLE LOCATIONON THE CAPE FEAR RIVERSW-004MW-28T

TABLES

TABLE 2SUMMARY OF CONCENTRATION RANGES FOR CONSTITUENTS DETECTED GREATER THAN 2L STANDARDSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAPARAMETER ANTIMONY ARSENIC BORON CADMIUM CHLORIDE CHROMIUM IRONLEAD MANGANESE SELENIUM SULFATE THALLIUM TDS pH2L STANDARD (eff. 4/1/2013)0.0010.010.70.0020.250.010.30.0150.050.020.250.0002500 6.5 - 8.5Units(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)SUMW-4B Background <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L 0.050 - 9.700 <2L 0.014 - 0.062 <2L <2L <2L <2L 6.0 - 7.4MW-5C Background <2L <2L <2L <2L 12 - 295 <2L 0.011 - 2.210 <2L 0.111 - 0.602 <2L <2L <2L 47 - 500 4.9 - 6.0MW-7C Beyond CB <2L <2L 0.157 - 0.767 0.000083 - 0.00334 10.9 - 446 <2L 0.045 - 5.200 <2L 0.060 - 0.458 0.001 - 0.027 <2L <2L 64 - 897 4.6 - 6.3MW-11 Beyond CB <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L 0.017 - 4.900 <2L 0.060 - 0.117 <2L <2L <2L <2L 4.0 - 5.2MW-12 Beyond CB <2L <2L 0.928 - 1.560 <2L <2L <2L 0.047 - 8.000 0.00132 - 0.0173 0.055 - 0.281 0.001 - 0.034 <2L <2L 170 - 524 4.7 - 6.6MW-19 CB <2L 0.00063 - 0.010 0.850 - 2.110 <2L <2L <2L 0.0251 - 0.725 <2L 0.0143 - 0.539 <2L <2L 0.00023 - 0.011 293 - 500 6.2 - 6.7MW-21C CB <2L 0.00125 - 0.0285 1.490 - 2.000 <2L <2L <2L 727 - 7680 <2L 0.764 -1.520 <2L 96 - 814 <2L 404 -511 6.4 - 7.0MW-22B CB <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L 0.013 - 0.460 <2L 0.016 - 0.116 <2L <2L <2L <2L 5.1 - 7.3MW-22C CB <2L <2L 1.650 - 2.500 <2L <2L <2L 0.171 - 0.628 <2L 0.018 - 1.360 <2L <2L 0.000226 - 0.00035 <2L 6.2 - 7.0MW-23B CB <2L <2L 0.394 - 1.830 <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L 0.013 - 0.354 <2L <2L <2L 140 - 1990 6.1 - 6.9MW-23C CB <2L <2L 1.640 - 3.000 <2L <2L <2L 0.0534 - 0.395 <2L 0.970 - 1.630 <2L <2L <2L 335 - 540 6.0 - 6.6MW-24B CB 0.00107 - 0.0011 <2L 1.130 - 1.500 <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L 0.019 - 0.805 0.0216 - 0.0433 <2L 0.00023 - 0.000586 <2L 6.2 - 6.8MW-24C CB <2L <2L 0.988 - 1.240 <2L <2L <2L 0.515 - 7.450 <2L 0.852 - 2.360 <2L <2L <0.0001 - 0.00023 530 - 610 5.6 - 6.1MW-27B CB <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L 0.153 - 0.406 0.0227 - 0.0617 <2L <2L <2L 4.5 - 6.5MW-28B Beyond CB <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L <2L 0.014 - 0.0894 <2L <2L <2L <2L <2LMW-28C Beyond CB <2L <2L 0.0949 - 1.260<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L 0.017 - 0.409 <2L<2L<2L69 - 1240 6.0 - 6.5MW-31C Beyond CB<2L<2L 0.985 - 1.410 <2L<2L<2L 0.232 - 3.420 <2L 0.220 - 2.390 <2L<2L<2L349 - 570 5.1 - 5.8MW-32C Beyond CB<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L 0.047 - 0.424 <2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L 5.5 - 9.2MW-33C Beyond CB<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L 5.2 - 9.7MW-2CRB<2L0.0055 - 0.290 1.600 - 2.790 0.000068 - 0.023 <2L 0.00018 - 0.011 0.050 - 8.050 <2L 0.065 - 0.350 0.00058 - 0.035 <2L 0.00011 - 0.00071 88 - 526 5.0 - 6.9MW-6CRB<0.0005 - 0.003 <2L 0.739 - 1.690 <2L<2L<2L 0.102 - 7.140 <2L 0.301 - 1.280 0.0012 - 0.025 <2L<2L116 - 798 4.1 - 7.1MW-8Beyond CB<2L<2L<2L<2L7.2 B - 260 <2L 0.050 - 13.000 <2L 0.270 - 0.376 <2L<2L<2L<2L 5.1 - 6.2MW-9Beyond CB<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L 0.016 - 4.300 <2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L 4.7 - 6.7MW-10 Beyond CB<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L<2L 0.041 - 3.800 <2L 0.084 - 0.0867 <2L<2L<2L<2L 4.5 - 6.2MW-17RB0.00033 -0.004 0.0071 - 0.041 2.000 - 3.060 <2L<2L<2L 0.386 - 2.840 <2L 0.162 - 0.455 <2L<2L 0.00011 - 0.00038 342 - 574 6.1 - 6.6MW-18 Between WB & RB<2L0.0269 - 0.169 1.150 - 1.550 <2L35.2 - 407 <2L 0.420 - 6.910 <2L 0.215 - 0.266 <2L<2L<2L358 - 1040 6.5 - 6.7Notes:Prepared by: RBI Checked by: BER B - Data flagged due to detection in field blankCB - Compliance BoundaryRB - Review BoundaryWB - Waste Boundary< 2L - Constituent has not been detected above the 2L Standard or beyond range for pHShown concentration ranges only include concentrations detected above the laboratory's reporting limit through June 2014.Well IDWell Location Relative to Compliance BoundaryConcentration RangePage 1 of 1P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Table 2 Summary Concentration Ranges Sutton.xlsx
TABLE 3SPLP LEACHING ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAAntimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Calcium Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Thallium Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NANA NANANA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NALocationSample Date1971 Pond5/16/2014 0.0053 u 0.188 0.172 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 4.69 <0.03 0.0027 u <0.400 0.0047 u 0.5840001 <0.01 <0.02 0.0015 u <1 <0.04 0.0021 u 0.003 0.194 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/19/2014 <0.04 0.258 0.146 0.00067 u 0.34 0.00076 u 8.240001 <0.03 <0.02 4.95 <0.030 1.66 0.0177 0.688 <0.02 <1 0.0084 u 0.0021 u 0.0151 0.228 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/20/2014 <0.04 0.0561 0.0957 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 5.87 0.0016 u 0.0027 u 0.043 u 0.0047 u 0.836 <0.01 0.153 0.0015 u <1 <0.04 0.0021 u 0.0036 0.179 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/20/2014 <0.04 0.208 0.0766 0.00067 u 0.12 0.00076 u 4.1 <0.03 0.0027 u <0.400 0.0047 u 1.02 <0.01 <0.02 0.0015 u <0.1 <0.04 0.0021 u 0.0047 0.277 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/20/2014 <0.04 0.192 0.0444 0.00067 u 0.113 0.00076 u 3.97 <0.03 <0.02 <0.400 0.0047 u 1.33 <0.01 <0.02 0.0015 u <1 <0.04 0.0021 u 0.0046 0.241 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/20/2014 0.0053 u 0.151 0.0547 0.00067 u 0.125 0.00076 u 3.55 <0.03 <0.02 0.546 0.0047 u 1.17 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <1 <0.04 0.0021 u 0.0056 0.175 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/21/2014 0.0053 u <0.04 0.0366 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 1.88 <0.03 0.0027 u <0.400 0.0047 u 0.536 <0.01 <0.02 0.0015 u <1 0.0084 u 0.0021 u 0.0066 0.0323 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/21/2014 0.0053 u <0.04 0.0327 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 1.23 0.0016 u 0.0027 u 0.552 0.0047 u 0.487 <0.01 0.0017 u 0.0015 u <1 0.0084 u 0.0021 u 0.0034 0.0255 0.0054 u NA <0.04 0.00006 uNorth of 1984 Pond5/13/2014 0.0053 u 0.0068 u <0.01 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u <0.4 0.0016 u 0.0027 u 0.043 u 0.0047 u <0.2 <0.01 0.0017 u 0.0015 u 0.098 u 0.0084 u 0.0021 u <0.002 <0.01 0.0054 u <0.01 <0.04 0.00006 uSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/13/2014 0.0053 u 0.0068 u 0.0164 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 0.496 <0.03 0.0027 u 3.87 0.0047 u <0.2 <0.01 0.0017 u 0.0015 u <1 0.0084 u 0.0021 u 0.0052 <0.01 0.0054 u 0.0106 <0.04 0.00006 u1971 Pond5/9/2014 0.0053 u 0.0068 u 0.0642 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 1.87 0.0016 u 0.0027 u <0.400 0.0047 u 0.582 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <1 <0.04 0.0021 u 0.0026 0.0811 0.0054 u NA 0.002 u 0.00006 uNortheast of 1971 Pond5/7/2014 0.0053 u 0.0734 0.0727 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 6.38 <0.03 0.0027 u 0.043 u 0.0047 u 1.46 0.00083 u <0.02 0.0015 u 0.098 u 0.0428 0.0021 u <0.002 0.224 0.0054 u NA 0.002 u 0.00006 u2006 Interior Containment Area 5/7/2014 0.0053 u 0.0699 0.143 0.00067 u <0.1 0.00076 u 4.87 <0.03 <0.02 <0.400 0.0047 u 0.531 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <1 0.0084 u 0.0021 u <0.002 0.265 0.0054 u NA 0.002 u 0.00006 uPrepared by: BER/RBI Checked by: HJFNotes:1.Units:2.NE = Not established3.NA = Not available4.5.Constituent ConcentrationsGP-2 (72-76)GP-3 (24-28)GP-2 (52-56)Sample data was obtained from the Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report, Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, June 2014.GP-5 (20-24)GP-3 (80-84)GP-3 (76-80)GP-3 (72-76)mg/l = milligrams per literAnalytical results with "<" preceeding the result indicate that the parameter was not detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit.u - indicates results below the method detection limit (MDL) and < indicates results below the practical quantitation limit (PQL)GP-6 (24-28)SPT-9 (12-14)Analytical ParameterAnalytical MethodUnitsSample Name and Depth (ft-bls)SPT-7 3-7)SPT-3 (10-12)SB-2 (2.5-3)SB-1 (2.5-3)P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx1 of 1
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateIntermediate-Upper Voluntary5/23/2014NA5.91 19.6 51.8 4.14 158.8 2.610NA 5.3 <0.0053 <0.0068 <0.01 <0.00067 <0.1 <2.0 <0.00076 2.87 4.2 <0.0016 <0.0027 <0.400 <0.0047 0.574Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19909.36 5.63 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 100NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19909.91 4.96 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 78.6NANA 0.13 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 9.92 5.58 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 60NANA 0.05 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/199110.4 6.30 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 37NANA 0.13 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19919.56 6.35 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 44.5NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/19919.69 5.90 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 56.1NANA2.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19929.52 6.43 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 40.5NANA1 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992 10.81 6.24 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 42NANA0.9 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 10.74 6.20 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 39.5NANA1.7 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993 11.63 6.12 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 52.6NANA2.3 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993 10.49 6.17 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 52.6NANA1.8 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993 10.74 6.27 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 44NANA0.9 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199411.86 6.30 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 48.1NANA 0.93 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994 10.23 6.29 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 53.1NANA 0.77 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994 10.86 6.17 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 50NANA 0.73 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995146.47 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 47NANA1.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/199613.96 6.52 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 53NANA 0.43 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997 12.75 6.40 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0055 NANANA NANANA 51NANA1.5 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/199812.4 6.42 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.055NANANA NANANA 35.3NANA 3.36 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999 13.93 6.91 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.066NANANA NANANA 38.5NANA 3.97 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200013.14 6.48 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.035NANANA NANANA 16.7NANA 1.87 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/200114.8 6.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 37.2NANA 2.81 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200214.66 6.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.104NANANA NANANA 33.5NANA 3.23 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003 14.42 6.47 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.102NANANA NANANA 51NANA 5.31 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/200412.35 6.40 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.047NANANA NANANA 106NANA 3.33 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/200514.45 6.39 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.104NANANA NANANA 55.6NANA4.6 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/200611.87 6.68 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.126NANANA NANANA 58.4NANA 3.22 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES12/12/2006 12.18 6.75 19.8 481NA NA NANA NA NA 0.00075 0.28 0.0419NA2.1 NA 0.000068 NA 23.1 0.00018 0.0000038 4.75 0.00033 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200713.66 6.67 19.5NANA NA NANA NA NA <0.003 0.29 0.042NA 2.69 NA <0.001 NA 26.6 <0.005 0.000006 3.42 <0.003 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/2007 15.34 6.41 NA567NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 0.239 0.05NA 2.16 NA <0.001 NA 31 <0.005 <0.000005 3.46 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008 15.12 6.34 20582NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 0.134 0.046NA2.2 NA0.023NA 32 <0.005 <0.000005 3.06 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/2008 15.25 6.79 20.3 603NA NA NANA NA NA <0.002 0.186 0.044NA 2.16 NA <0.001 NA 29 <0.005 <0.000005 3.32 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 14.71 6.81 20.4 591NA NA NANA NA NA <0.04 0.193 <0.1NA1.6 NA<0.01NA 34 0.011 <0.00001 2.88 <0.010 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/2009 13.44 6.75 20.3 592NA NA NANA NA NA <0.005 0.114 0.045NA 1.67 NA <0.005 NA 36 <0.005 <0.000005 3.91 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010 13.21 6.84 19.3 618NA NA NANA NA NA <0.001 0.148 0.041NA 1.91 NA <0.001 NA 37 0.003 0.000001 2.55 <0.001 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/11/2010 12.33 6.85 19.8 631NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0005 0.196 0.045NA 2.15 NA <0.00008 NA 30.7 <0.005 <0.000005 3.75 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/201113.94 6.70 18.58 573NA NA 9.9NA NA NA <0.0005 0.267 0.0481 BNA 1.99 NA <0.00008 NA 31.1 b <0.005 <0.000005 5.74 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary10/4/2011 13.69 6.44 21.06 607NA NA 5.73 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.0856 0.0337NA 2.27 NA <0.00008 NA 33.3 <0.005 <0.000005 3.14 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/201215.48 6.50 18.91 679NA NA 7.89 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.232 0.0746NA 2.79 NA <0.00008 NA 36.3 <0.005 <0.000005 7.17 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/201215.09 6.60 20.54 855NA NA 6.97 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.26 0.0767NA 2.64 NA <0.00008 NA 55.4 <0.005 <0.000005 8.05 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary5/23/2014NA6.66 22.08 807 0.5 4 28.7 0.02 NA 269 <0.0053 0.278 0.0806 <0.00067 3.02 <2.0 <0.00076 109 42.1 <0.0016 <0.0027 9.51 <0.0047 28.5Intermediate-Upper Voluntary5/27/2014NA5.61 19.24 91 0.95 161.4 0.71 0.01 NA 273 <0.0053 <0.006.8 <0.1 <0.00067 0.446 <2.0 <0.00076 12 3.9 <0.0016 <0.0027 <0.043 <0.0047 2.27Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/1/19907.03 7.00 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.007NANANA NANANA 4.91NANA6.5 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES7/1/19906.82 6.76 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.007NANANA NANANA 3.7NANA4.8 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/13/1990 6.37 6.77 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.8NANA 0.81 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/19918.01 6.80 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA5NANA0.7 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES7/22/19916.26 5.97 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.6NANA 0.89 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/6/19917.17 6.58 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 4.1NANA 0.72 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/25/19926.01 7.10 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.9NANA 0.84 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES7/15/19927.59 6.70 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.9NANA 0.65 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/24/1992 7.62 6.74 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 3.7NANA 0.05 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/22/19938.57 6.30 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.8NANA 0.61 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES7/19/19936.69 6.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.8NANA 0.62 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/4/19937.86 6.57 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.55NANA 0.61 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/7/19949.18 6.66 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.75NANA 0.55 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES7/11/19945.93 6.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 3.55NANA0.5 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/2/199486.33 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 3.3NANA0.6 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/8/19958.29 7.06 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0098 NANANA NANANA 3.2NANA9.7 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/19969.76 7.42 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0042 NANANA NANANA 4.5NANA5.7 NA NAMW-2B**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C***MW-3B***MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**Constituent ConcentrationsMW-2C**MW-2C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-2C**MW-2C**Field ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodMW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx1 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/17/19977.98 6.40 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0034 NANANA NANANA 3.8NANA3.2 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/16/19986.93 6.79 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 4.42NANA 0.907 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/17/19999.75 6.70 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 7.6NANA 1.47 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/20008.77 6.55 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 6.75NANA 1.07 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/16/20019.73 6.70 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 11.8NANA 0.536 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/200210.78 7.22 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 6.65NANA 0.755 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/18/200310.2 6.19 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 8.68NANA 0.989 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/9/20048.15 6.80 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 4.8NANA 0.627 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/7/200510.06 6.91 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 5.2NANA 0.741 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/2/200686.08 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 5.7NANA 0.588 NA NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES12/12/20068.1 7.07 18.3 124NA NA NANA NA NA 0.00014 0.00028 0.0287NA 0.0125 NA <0.00024 NA 3.28 0.00061 0.0000276 0.597 0.00024 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/20078.59 6.68 18.9NANA NA NANA NA NA <0.003 0.002 0.03NA 0.01 NA <0.001 NA5 <0.005 <0.000005 0.607 <0.003 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/7/2007 11.32 6.36 NA108NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 <0.001 0.034NA 0.017 NA <0.001 NA7 <0.005 <0.000005 0.623 <0.005 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/11/200810.8 6.44 19.5 117NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 0.002 z 0.024NA 0.019 NA <0.001 NA7 <0.005 <0.000005 0.486 <0.005 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/6/2008 10.16 6.74 19.6 115NA NA NANA NA NA <0.002 <0.002 0.026NA <0.005 NA <0.001 NA5 <0.005 <0.000005 0.405 <0.005 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/10/2009 10.35 6.70 19.2 120NA NA NANA NA NA <0.04 <0.002 <0.1NA 0.03 NA<0.01NA5 <0.01 <0.00001 0.751 <0.010 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES10/6/20099.05 6.63 19.7 122NA NA NANA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 0.032NA <0.02 NA <0.005 NA5 <0.005 <0.000005 0.517 <0.005 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/10/20108.54 6.79 19.5 131.7 NA NA NANA NA NA <0.001 <0.001 0.025NA 0.01 NA <0.001 NA60.003 <0.000001 0.516 <0.001 NAIntermediate-UpperNPDES11/11/2010 7.93 6.74 19.5 129.1 NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0277NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 6.2 <0.005 <0.000005 0.417 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance3/2/20119.1 7.01 14.99 197 0.3 NA 1.64 NA -67.7 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0354 BNA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 29.6 b <0.005 <0.000005 0.763 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/4/2011 10.81 6.94 19224 0.51 NA 2.21 NA -90.4 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0427NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 8.8 <0.005 <0.000005 1.25 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance3/6/201213.96 6.80 17.66 246 1.43 NA 0.55 NA -113.1 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0518NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 12.7 <0.005 <0.000005 1.46 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance6/5/201212.33 6.80 18.8 274 1.16 NA 3.97 NA -74.5 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0442NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 11.8 <0.005 <0.000005 1.1 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/201211.4 7.20 21.1 286 0.6 NA 0.94 NA -105.1 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0474NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 10.8 <0.005 <0.000005 1.47 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/2013 10.74 7.00 17.9 235.6 0.36 NA 4.9NA -89.7 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.047NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 8.7 <0.005 <0.000005 1.65 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/2013 10.23 6.90 20.4 244.3 1 NA 2.6NA 40.4 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.047NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA9 <0.005 <0.000005 0.57 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/20139.72 7.40 20.6 323.1 0.33 NA 1NA -147.6 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.053NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 11 <0.005 <0.000005 1.72 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance3/4/201410.42 7.10 15 250.9 0.39 26.3 1.2NM 231.3 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.061NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 11 <0.005 <0.005 2.02 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance6/2/20149.62 7.30 22309NM 12.1 6NM 217.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.059NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 10 <0.005 <0.005 0.891 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary5/23/2014NA3.94 20.42 324.4 162.9 7.51 0.01 NA <0.7 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0445 <0.00067 <0.1 <2.0 <0.00076 0.948 3.7 <0.0016 <0.0027 0.7 <0.0047 0.444Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19908.69 5.64 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 295NANA 0.63 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19909.29 5.44 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 270NANA 0.43 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 9.03 5.56 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 205NANA 0.11 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19919.23 5.70 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 190NANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19918.64 5.37 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 176.7 NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/19918.53 5.44 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 184.2 NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19928.23 5.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 170.2 NANA 0.05 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19929.53 5.30 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 175NANA 0.11 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 9.49 5.36 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 169.7 NANA 0.05 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993 10.35 5.42 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 141.7 NANA 0.07 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/19939.66 5.35 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 116.6 NANA 0.11 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/19939.77 5.51 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 114.1 NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199410.34 5.47 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 124.1 NANA 0.07 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/19949.26 5.50 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 120.6 NANA 0.06 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994 10.08 5.46 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 130NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/19954.36 5.65 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 140NANA1.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19965.05 5.74 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 130NANA <0.100 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19974.1 5.82 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 93NANA 0.035 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/19984.83 5.73 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 82NANA 0.011 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19994.6 5.75 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 81.7NANA 0.159 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20004.39 5.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 40.2NANA 0.046 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/20015.43 5.90 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 47.3NANA 0.285 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20025.54 5.82 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 39.7NANA 0.127 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/20034.96 5.83 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 34.9NANA 0.014 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/20043.74 5.76 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 22.3NANA 0.373 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/20054.25 5.65 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 16.2NANA 0.122 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/20063.62 5.73 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 29.9NANA 0.115 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20073.94 5.57 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 32NANA 0.129 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/20084.45 5.08 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA 24NANA 2.21 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20094.24 5.44 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA 21NANA <0.100 NA NAMW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B*MW-4B*MW-5B***MW-5C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-4B**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx2 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20106.25 5.67 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 23NANA 0.012 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/20113.99 5.13 17.75 88 1.28 NA 1.47 NA 189 NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 23 bNANA 0.072 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/7/20124.19 5.40 19156 0.96 NA 2.03 NA -91.8 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0398NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 16.2 <0.005 <0.000005 0.057 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/6/20124.23 5.50 19.55 102 1.66 NA 1.13 NA -71.9 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0343NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 14.2 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/20124.43 5.70 22.4 158 0.63 NA 0.77 NA 169.3 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0421NA <0.05 NA 0.0001 NA 22.4 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/20134.42 5.50 16.7 80.1 0.87 NA 1.18 NA 195 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.028NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 12 <0.005 <0.000005 0.026 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/20134.16 4.90 21.9 85.3 0.74 NA 0.8NA 252.6 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.032NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 74 <0.005 <0.000005 0.028 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/20133.91 5.70 22.5 127 0.31 NA 0.72 NA 251 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.033NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 18 <0.005 <0.000005 0.026 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/20144.62 6.00 1585.2 6.06 236 1.08 NM 441 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.017NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 12 <0.005 <0.005 0.021 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/20144.4 5.80 21 114.7 NA 211.2 3NM 416.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.028NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 16 <0.005 <0.005 0.034 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Voluntary5/21/2014NA6.66 22.35 629 0.39 80.1 2.53 1.03 NA 105 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0349 <0.00067 1.13 <2.0 <0.00076 53.9 71.5 <0.0016 <0.0027 <0.400 <0.030 13.4Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/199010.13 4.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 115NANA 7.14 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/199010.09 4.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 103.6 NANA 0.61 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 10.11 5.04 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 90NANA 0.17 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/199110.65 5.64 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 77NANA 0.15 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19919.76 5.49 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 70.1NANA 0.13 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991 10.42 4.82 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 65.1NANA 0.17 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992105.14 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 57.6NANA 0.16 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19929.83 4.76 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 68.6NANA0.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 10.48 4.82 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 54.6NANA0.3 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993 11.98 4.72 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 69.6NANA 0.18 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993 10.16 4.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 73.6NANA 0.19 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/199310.6 4.69 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 91.6NANA 0.21 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199411.66 4.77 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 86.1NANA 0.18 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994 10.08 4.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 86.1NANA 0.18 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994 10.84 4.67 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 90NANA 0.23 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/19955.72 4.79 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 79NANA1.5 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19965.12 4.92 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 83NANA2.5 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19973.72 5.53 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 47NANA1.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/19982.74 4.70 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 57.4NANA 0.102 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19994.66 4.61 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 43.2NANA 0.193 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20004.74 4.77 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 23NANA 0.106 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/20015.74 4.73 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 31.6NANA 0.15 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20024.95 4.95 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 38.7NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/20034.84 4.81 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 74.7NANA 0.489 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/20041.11 4.74 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 42.3NANA 1.34 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/20055.17 4.64 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 64.6NANA 0.284 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/20062.25 4.07 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 67.9NANA 0.195 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES12/12/2006 2.51 7.12 19.5 534NA NA NANA NA NA 0.003 0.00022 0.0455NA 0.739 NA 0.00046 NA 83 0.00018 0.002 0.157 0.00054 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20073.68 4.87 19.5NANA NA NANA NA NA <0.003 <0.001 0.037NA 0.77 NA <0.001 NA 72.2 <0.005 <0.005 0.331 <0.003 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/20076.28 4.62 NA591NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 <0.001 0.041NA 1.14 NA <0.001 NA 78 <0.005 <0.005 1.04 0.006 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/20086.1 4.33 19.6 591NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 <0.002 0.034NA 0.9250001 NA <0.001 NA 86 0.007 <0.005 0.275 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/20085.62 4.65 20.2 651NA NA NANA NA NA <0.002 <0.002 0.035NA 0.9400001 NA <0.001 NA 95 <0.005 <0.005 0.236 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20095.13 4.57 19.4 561NA NA NANA NA NA <0.04 <0.002 <0.1NA 0.896 NA<0.01NA 72 <0.01 <0.01 0.138 <0.010 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/20093.39 4.67 20.3 659NA NA NANA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 0.047NA 1.51 NA <0.005 NA 102 <0.005 <0.005 0.153 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20103.48 4.65 18.9 682NA NA NANA NA NA <0.001 <0.001 0.035NA 1.49 NA <0.001 NA 113 0.003 0.002 0.424 <0.001 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/11/20102.3 4.66 20.2 640NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0334NA 1.35 NA 0.00026 NA 105 <0.005 <0.000005 0.219 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/20113.91 5.00 18.4 492NA NA 4.76 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.03 BNA 0.943 NA 0.00017 NA 6.5 b <0.005 <0.000005 0.636 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary10/4/20113.91 4.57 22.16 798NA NA 2.79 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0416NA 1.69 NA 0.0003 NA 153 <0.005 <0.000005 0.78 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/20125.82 4.90 17.08 703NA NA 2.05 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0424NA 1.68 NA 0.00023 NA 163 <0.005 <0.000005 0.407 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/20125.49 4.60 21.17 799NA NA 5.71 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0411NA 1.32 NA 0.0002 NA 146 <0.005 <0.000005 0.591 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary5/21/2014NA4.82 21.93 577 0.6 100.3 4.92 0.05 NA 2.8 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0282 <0.00067 1.27 <2.0 <0.00076 30.1 85.10001 <0.0016 <0.0027 0.514 <0.0047 8.92Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19908.49 5.02 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 210NANA3.4 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19908.84 5.78 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 175NANA1.6 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 8.68 5.37 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 150NANA 0.25 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19919.33 6.29 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 94NANA 0.16 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19918.24 5.78 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 98.6NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/19918.64 5.67 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 82.6NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19928.45 5.73 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 91.1NANA 0.06 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19929.44 5.47 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 112NANA 0.11 NA NAMW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C***MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C*MW-5C*MW-6B***MW-6C**MW-6C**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx3 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/19928.1 4.59 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 110.5 NANA 0.11 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993 10.04 5.47 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 151.7 NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/19938.35 5.51 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001 z NANANA NANANA 105.1 NANA 0.17 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/19939.47 5.54 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 79.1NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199410.32 5.74 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 46.6NANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/19948.42 5.55 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 55.1NANA 0.07 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/19949.63 5.54 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 65NANA 0.06 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/19957.34 6.07 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0014 NANANA NANANA 30NANA2.8 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19968.19 5.51 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0025 NANANA NANANA 85NANA4.9 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19976.78 5.81 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.002 z NANANA NANANA 61NANA5.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/19986.21 5.97 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 75.1NANA 0.117 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19997.71 6.18 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 87.4NANA 0.696 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20007.12 5.27 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 39.5NANA 0.464 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/20018.31 5.19 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 61.4NANA 0.914 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20028.44 5.54 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 48.2NANA 1.33 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/20038.07 5.82 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 45.8NANA 0.861 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/20046.54 5.15 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 20.4NANA 0.502 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/20057.73 5.03 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 43.7NANA 0.103 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/20066.4 4.96 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 10.9NANA <0.005 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20076.83 4.97 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 26.5NANA 0.072 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/20087.95 4.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA 16NANA 0.123 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20097.78 4.84 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA 446NANA <0.100 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20106.58 5.06 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 163NANA 0.045 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/20117.23 4.92 17.17 144 3.11 NA 1.63 NA 239.5 NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 22.3 b NANA 0.19 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/6/201210.56 5.10 19.01 391 0.75 NA 3.97 NA -88 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.134NA 0.7090001 NA 0.000083 NA 49.2 <0.005 <0.000005 0.561 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/5/20129.11 4.90 19.56 518 2.31 NA 8.06 NA -51.3 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.126NA 0.767 NA 0.0001 NA 78.6 <0.005 <0.000005 0.707 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/20129.69 4.90 22.27 457 1.53 NA 6.81 NA 194.9 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0977NA 0.157 NA <0.00008 NA 77.7 <0.005 <0.000005 0.273 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/20138.2 5.00 19 408.7 0.27 NA 4.05 NA 239 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.068NA 0.164 NA <0.001 NA 68 <0.005 <0.000005 0.222 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/20137.72 5.00 22 422.1 0.58 NA 4.33 NA 244.4 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.067NA 0.185 NA 0.00334 NA 14 <0.005 <0.000005 0.282 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/20137.51 5.30 25.7 455 0.34 NA 5.29 NA 271.8 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.103NA 0.312 NA <0.001 NA 71 <0.005 <0.000005 0.266 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/20148.24 5.60 17 387.4 0.29 147.7 1.68 NM 352.7 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.07NA 0.33 NA <0.001 NA 83 <0.005 <0.005 0.128 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/2/20147.71 5.50 22420NM 214 4.3NM 419 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.084NA 0.391 NA <0.001 NA 71 <0.005 <0.005 0.316 <0.001 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19908.06 6.09 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 260NANA4.8 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19908.37 6.05 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 255NANA3.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 7.98 5.53 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 225NANA0.3 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19918.64 6.18 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 181NANA 0.15 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19917.32 5.40 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 164.7 NANA 0.32 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/19917.92 5.57 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 153.7 NANA 0.18 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19927.5 5.87 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 120.1 NANA 0.08 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19928.7 5.58 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 130NANA 0.38 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 9.51 5.57 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 117.6 NANA 0.05 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993 10.82 5.59 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 117.6 NANA 0.62 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/19939.41 5.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 119.1 NANA0.5 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/19939.91 5.69 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 127.6 NANA 0.36 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199410.93 5.64 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 127.6 NANA 0.28 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/19948.93 5.61 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 134.1 NANA0.1 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994 10.21 5.69 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 130NANA 0.51 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/19957.35 5.92 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0024 NANANA NANANA 120NANA1.3 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19968.45 5.80 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 130NANA 0.25 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19977.47 5.91 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 60NANA 0.19 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/19985.97 5.45 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 102NANA 0.06 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19998.06 5.50 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 65.5NANA 0.175 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20007.36 5.85 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 39.2NANA 0.147 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/20018.67 5.83 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 51.3NANA 0.298 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20029.22 5.85 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 35.9NANA 0.081 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/20036.76 5.80 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 45.7NANA 0.064 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/20046.42 5.63 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 24.7NANA 0.671 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/20057.7 5.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 32.3NANA 0.45 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/20066.37 5.45 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 24.2NANA 0.097 NA NAMW-7C**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-8**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx4 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20076.62 5.44 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 30.5NANA 0.103 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/20088.19 5.41 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA 39NANA 0.064 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20097.78 5.70 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA 31NANA 0.196 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20106.25 5.66 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 20NANA <0.010 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/20116.89 5.13 17.59 79NA NA 0.38 NA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 7.2 b NANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/7/20127.72 5.70 18.8 299NA NA 0.52 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0604NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 23.6 <0.005 <0.000005 0.064 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary6/6/20127.79 5.60 19.19 170NA NA 0.65 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0681NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 28.3 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19906.91 5.52 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 11.5NANA 0.36 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19907.01 6.68 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA9NANA 0.32 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 6.15 5.49 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 10NANA 0.22 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19917.16 5.65 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 22NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19915.93 5.26 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 22.5NANA 0.15 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/19916.46 5.45 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 12.5NANA0.1 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19926.06 5.78 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA5NANA 0.06 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19927.3 5.51 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 6.51NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 8.29 5.33 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA6NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/19939.76 5.30 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 7.11NANA 0.14 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/19938.01 5.29 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 11.6NANA 0.28 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/19938.46 5.25 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 16.3NANA 0.18 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199410.28 5.17 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 26NANA 0.11 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/19947.93 5.13 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 39.5NANA 0.06 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/19949.67 5.23 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 29NANA 0.16 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/199517.97 5.49 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 32NANA1.4 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/199619.44 5.57 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.003NANANA NANANA 28NANA4.3 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997 17.73 5.36 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 34NANA0.6 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998 15.54 5.05 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 30.3NANA 0.035 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999 17.64 5.27 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 22.3NANA 0.489 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200016.96 5.18 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 10.5NANA 0.203 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/200118.6 5.28 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 23.1NANA 0.586 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200219.35 5.83 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 8.99NANA 0.316 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003 18.26 5.59 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 22.7NANA 0.471 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/200415.64 5.10 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 5.7NANA 0.398 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/200517.32 5.16 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 11.4NANA 0.127 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/200615.58 4.85 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 5.9NANA 0.058 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200715.84 4.76 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 6.5NANA 0.088 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/200817.8 4.66 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA9NANA 0.039 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 17.15 5.08 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA9NANA 0.207 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010 15.28 4.95 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA5NANA 0.016 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/201115.9 4.94 18.06 52NA NA 1.3NA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA <5NANA 0.133 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/7/201217.46 5.10 19.07 105NA NA 0.34 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0202NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA <5 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary6/6/201217.41 5.10 19.14 59NA NA 0.61 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0212NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 5.2 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19908.65 6.24 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.002NANANA NANANA 8.51NANA3.8 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19908.77 5.26 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 7.01NANA 0.77 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 8.75 5.28 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 6.5NANA 0.21 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19919.33 6.02 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 11NANA 0.08 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19918.63 5.10 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 11.5NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/19919.16 5.10 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 16.5NANA 0.08 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19927.83 5.31 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 17NANA 0.09 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19929.33 4.98 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 17.5NANA 0.08 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 9.76 5.01 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 15NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993 11.08 4.97 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 20NANA 0.15 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/19939.7 4.75 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 47.6NANA 0.49 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/19939.95 5.01 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 12.5NANA 0.12 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199411.18 5.09 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 7.01NANA0.1 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/19949.47 4.99 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 31.2NANA0.1 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994 10.54 5.08 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 6.6NANA 0.14 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/199516.18 5.36 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 5.4NANA1.3 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19968.45 5.13 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 42NANA 0.23 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997 15.66 5.18 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 61NANA0.2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998 14.62 4.98 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 51.1NANA 0.063 NA NAMW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-8**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-10**MW-10**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx5 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999 16.11 4.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 34.7NANA 0.556 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200015.53 4.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 25.7NANA 0.075 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001 16.65 4.78 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 22.5NANA 0.222 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200217.09 5.04 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 18.2NANA 0.168 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003 16.61 5.22 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 20.9NANA 0.234 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/200414.16 4.80 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 13.3NANA 0.485 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/200517.13 4.81 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 13.8NANA 0.188 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/200615.96 5.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 11.9NANA 0.123 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200714.88 4.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 14NANA 0.106 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008 17.53 4.54 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.002NANANA NANANA9NANA 0.174 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 16.82 4.90 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA6NANA <0.100 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010 15.58 4.77 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 11NANA 0.041 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/201115.96 4.78 19.42 86NA NA 0.35 NA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 12 bNANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/7/201216.8 5.00 19.8 177NA NA 0.53 NA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0652NA 0.0533 NA <0.00008 NA 12.2 <0.005 <0.000005 0.105 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/201216.98 5.20 20.11 103NM NM 1.19 NM NM NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0535NA 0.073 NA <0.00008 NA 11.6 <0.005 <0.000005 0.156 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19908.51 5.15 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 170NANA4.9 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19908.33 5.15 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 150NANA3.4 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 8.13 4.88 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 110NANA4.8 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/19919.02 5.00 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 99NANA1.8 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/199184.71 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 94.6NANA1.4 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/19919.26 4.77 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 85.1NANA 0.89 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19928.82 5.07 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 70.1NANA1 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19928.13 4.68 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 45.6NANA 0.64 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 9.69 4.76 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 70.1NANA 0.11 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993 10.95 4.68 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 74.1NANA 0.25 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/19938.84 4.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 79.6NANA 0.49 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/19939.09 4.63 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 79.6NANA 0.44 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199410.89 4.69 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 44.1NANA 0.21 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/19948.87 4.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 50.6NANA 0.23 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994 10.02 4.61 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 27NANA 0.23 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/199515.15 4.78 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 32NANA 0.15 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/199614.64 5.07 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 21NANA 0.25 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997 12.92 5.02 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 12NANA <0.100 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998 12.11 5.09 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 11.9NANA 0.017 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999 14.02 4.94 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 11.4NANA 0.379 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200013.11 5.02 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA9NANA 0.138 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001 14.81 5.03 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 14.7NANA 0.106 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200216.19 5.06 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 6.9NANA 0.107 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003 15.41 5.00 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 13.3NANA 1.01 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/200411.76 4.75 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 5.7NANA 0.138 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/200515.1 4.75 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA9NANA <0.005 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/200612.45 4.31 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 6.9NANA <0.005 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200712.95 4.49 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA8NANA 0.05 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008164.35 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA8NANA 0.33 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 14.82 4.57 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA5NANA <.100 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010 12.69 4.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA5NANA <0.010 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/201113.11 4.50 18.04 49 5.16 NA 3.36 NA 226 NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA <5NANA 0.42 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/7/201215.41 5.00 17.58 126 2.87 NA 3.13 NA -63.1 NANA <0.005 0.0796NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 7.3 <0.005 <0.000005 0.174 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/6/201215.46 4.60 19.09 65 2.27 NA 2.97 NA -55.9 NANA <0.005 0.0788NA <0.05 NA 0.000081 NA 7.1 <0.005 <0.000005 0.245 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012 14.26 4.50 22.09 70 1.86 NA 3.5NA 296.7 NANA <0.005 0.0758NA <0.05 NA 0.00011 NA8 <0.005 <0.000005 0.181 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/2013 14.69 4.60 17.4 70.7 1.38 NA 2.33 NA 322.7 NANA <0.001 0.085NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA9 <0.005 <0.000005 0.142 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/2013 14.81 4.00 21.7 82.2 1.79 NA 2.61 NA 281.1 NANA <0.001 0.083NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 10 <0.005 <0.000005 0.219 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2013 13.04 4.50 22.3 85.6 1.5 NA 2.15 NA 371.9 NANA <0.001 0.096NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 11 <0.005 <0.000005 0.13 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/201415.04 4.70 1476.4 2.36 322.6 5.04 NM 527.6 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.082NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 9.4 <0.005 <0.005 0.295 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/201414.19 4.70 2363.1 NM 334.8 2NM 539.8 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.093NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 6.8 <0.005 <0.005 0.14 <0.001 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/19909.76 5.84 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 185NANA8 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/19909.55 5.59 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.004NANANA NANANA 170NANA4 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990 9.55 5.06 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 160NANA1.4 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/199110.32 5.04 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 161NANA 0.37 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/19919.11 4.99 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 164.2 NANA 0.44 NA NAMW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11*MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11*MW-12**MW-12**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx6 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991 10.16 4.89 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 158.2 NANA 0.29 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/19929.84 5.33 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 134.7 NANA 0.24 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/19929.47 4.81 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 150NANA 0.38 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992 10.22 4.83 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 120.1 NANA 0.28 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/199311.3 4.87 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 95.1NANA 0.44 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/19939.37 4.87 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 83.1NANA 0.42 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993 10.07 4.87 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 84.6NANA 0.41 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/199411.85 4.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 90NANA 0.34 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/19949.42 4.87 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 82.1NANA 0.31 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994 10.61 4.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 88NANA 0.37 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/199510.76 4.89 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 82NANA1.3 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/199610.5 5.04 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.0026 NANANA NANANA 82NANA3.9 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/19978.74 5.05 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.001 NANANA NANANA 69NANA1 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/19987.36 5.12 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 56.2NANA 0.896 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999 10.16 4.86 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 57.5NANA 0.988 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20008.64 5.01 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 48.2NANA 1.02 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001 10.79 5.19 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 58.6NANA 0.552 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200211.56 5.07 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 46.5NANA 1.57 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003 10.87 4.91 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 52.1NANA 1.48 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/20047.88 5.14 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 14.7NANA 0.649 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/200510.31 5.14 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 36.6NANA 0.581 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/20067.19 4.72 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 46.6NANA 0.733 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/20078.22 4.99 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.001NANANA NANANA 59.2NANA 3.56 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008 11.04 4.65 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 82NANA 0.078 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 10.37 4.99 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.002 NANANA NANANA 74NANA 0.194 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/20108.09 5.39 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 47NANA 0.047 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/20118.73 5.36 16.25 400 1.07 NA 1.09 NA 176.5 NANA <0.005 NANANA NANANA 36.6 b NANA 0.316 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/7/201211.29 6.30 15.37 693 0.86 NA 8.96 NA -73.7 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0396NA 1.45 NA 0.000092 NA 26.9 <0.005 <0.000005 1.49 0.0173 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/6/201211.1 6.60 19.23 306 4.07 NA 2.07 NA -52.3 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0531NA 1.26 NA <0.00008 NA 33.7 <0.005 <0.000005 0.317 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012 10.16 5.60 23.4 447 0.72 NA 8.26 NA 99.4 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0548NA 1.29 NA <0.00008 NA 26.2 <0.005 <0.000005 0.753 0.0053 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/2013 10.47 5.60 17.5 414.7 0.39 NA 2.79 NA 220.9 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.03NA 1.51 NA <0.001 NA 24 <0.005 <0.000005 0.255 0.00317 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/201310.5 5.20 22.9 360 0.29 NA 3.76 NA NA NA <0.001 <0.001 0.027NA 1.36 NA <0.001 NA 18 <0.005 <0.000005 0.411 0.00482 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/20138.79 5.90 20.6 428.3 0.42 NA 1.35 NA 213.8 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.026NA 1.56 NA <0.001 NA 24 <0.005 <0.000005 0.11 0.00132 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/201410.79 6.50 15 322.5 3.85 291.5 2.11 NM 496.5 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.019NA 0.928 NA <0.001 NA 17 <0.005 <0.005 0.097 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/201410.08 6.10 24276NM 181.5 1.4NM 386.5 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.021NA 1.05 NA <0.001 NA 16 <0.005 <0.005 0.079 <0.001 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/200619.03 6.09 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.041NANANA NANANA 48NANA 2.45 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200719.96 6.30 19.5NANA NA NANA NA NA 0.004 0.022 0.161NA2.9 NA <0.001 NA 35.6 0.006 0.000009 2.84 <0.003 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/2007 20.42 6.25 NA610NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 0.025 0.143NA 2.72 NA <0.001 NA 34 <0.005 <0.000005 1.22 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008 20.44 6.23 20622NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 0.02 0.119NA 2.44 NA <0.001 NA 37 <0.005 <0.000005 0.886 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/2008 21.16 6.53 20.4 630NA NA NANA NA NA <0.002 0.029 0.087NA 3.06 NA <0.001 NA 31 <0.005 <0.000005 0.982 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 20.31 6.52 20.3 614NA NA NANA NA NA <0.04 0.027 0.12NA2NA<0.01NA 38 <0.01 <0.00001 1.11 <0.010 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/2009 19.59 6.59 20.2 796NA NA NANA NA NA <0.005 0.034 0.14NA 2.11 NA <0.005 NA 84 <0.005 <0.000005 1.2 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/201019.5 6.59 19.5 645NA NA NANA NA NA <0.001 0.029 0.112NA 2.14 NA <0.001 NA 44 0.003 <0.000001 1.56 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/201120.12 6.20 18.38 585NA NA 2.18 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.0071 0.126NA 2.22 NA <0.00008 NA 77.3 <0.005 <0.000005 0.386 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary10/4/2011 20.01 6.32 22.49 594NA NA 2.44 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.0071 0.135NA 2.09 NA <0.00008 NA 51.3 <0.005 <0.000005 0.636 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/201220.82 6.30 19.24 686NA NA 1.74 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.017 0.153NA 2.23 NA <0.00008 NA 101 <0.005 <0.000005 2.04 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/201220.53 6.30 19.5 983NA NA 3.47 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.0161 0.162NA 2.12 NA <0.00008 NA 134 <0.005 <0.000005 1.89 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary11/11/2010 19.23 6.58 19.7 581NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0005 0.0352 0.102NA 2.14 NA <0.00008 NA 37.7 <0.005 <0.000005 1.57 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES12/12/2006 20.08 6.38 19.7 570NA NA NANA NA NA 0.00033 0.0188 0.162NA 2.18 NA 0.000046 NA 37.4 0.00019 0.0000018 2.24 0.0002 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/20069.94 6.47 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.039NANANA NANANA 35.2NANA 2.94 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200710.58 6.53 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.113NANANA NANANA 53NANA2 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008 11.48 6.47 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.067NANANA NANANA 48NANA 4.14 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 11.23 6.62 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.11NANANA NANANA 73NANA 6.16 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010 10.08 6.69 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.08NANANA NANANA 407NANA 6.91 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/201110.83 6.69 18.43 705NA NA 1.06 NA NA NANA 0.0269 NANANA NANANA 162NANA 0.42 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/201211.89 6.70 17.88 753NA NA 9.69 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.169 0.126NA 1.55 NA <0.00008 NA 88.6 <0.005 <0.000005 6.51 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/201211.45 6.70 20.33 738NA NA 8.73 NA NA NA <0.0005 0.159 0.0883NA 1.15 NA <0.00008 NA 77.3 <0.005 <0.000005 4.92 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/200619.38 6.26 NANANA NA NANA NA NANA 0.01NANANA NANANA 105NANA 0.15 NA NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/200720.24 6.24 20.1NANA NA NANA NA NA <0.003 0.001 0.087NA 1.18 NA <0.001 NA 54.6 <0.005 0.000006 0.084 <0.003 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/2007 21.48 6.17 NA583NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 <0.001 0.096NA 1.28 NA <0.001 NA 46 <0.005 <0.000005 0.074 <0.005 NAMW-17**MW-18**MW-18**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-18**MW-18**MW-18**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-18**MW-18**MW-18**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12*MW-12*MW-12**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx7 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008 21.37 6.25 20.9 566NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0025 <0.002 0.099NA 1.62 NA <0.001 NA 36 <0.005 <0.000005 0.121 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/200821.7 6.50 20.8 581NA NA NANA NA NA <0.002 <0.002 0.06NA 1.76 NA <0.001 NA 32 <0.005 <0.000005 0.142 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009 21.14 6.43 20.8 585NA NA NANA NA NA <0.04 0.002 <0.1NA 2.02 NA<0.01NA 35 <0.01 <0.00001 0.2 <0.010 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/2009 19.91 6.50 20.8 582NA NA NANA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 0.087NA 1.96 NA <0.005 NA 36 <0.005 <0.000005 0.215 <0.005 NAIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010 19.88 6.56 20.2 542NA NA NANA NA NA <0.001 <0.001 0.061NA 1.92 NA <0.001 NA 33 0.005 0.000001 0.322 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/201120.54 6.26 17.93 520 0.54 NA 0.7NA 124.8 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0716 BNA 1.96 NA <0.00008 NA 39.2 b <0.005 <0.000005 0.061 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/4/2011 20.45 6.34 22.55 488 0.57 NA 0.6NA -18.4 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0696NA 1.71 NA <0.00008 NA 28.3 <0.005 <0.000005 0.113 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/6/201222.07 6.70 18.87 454 1.1 NA 0.28 NA -118 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0646NA 1.92 NA <0.00008 NA 28.8 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/5/201221.66 6.30 20.11 646 1.94 NA 1.34 NA -43.9 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0771NA 1.94 NA <0.00008 NA 52.2 <0.005 <0.000005 0.074 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012 21.61 6.70 21.9 540 3.81 NA 1.06 NA 132.2 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0551NA 1.68 NA <0.00008 NA 30.5 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013 21.54 6.50 19.8 684 0.34 NA 1.22 NA 52.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.098NA 1.83 NA <0.001 NA 73 <0.005 <0.000005 0.117 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/201321.2 6.20 23819 0.46 NA 1.64 NA NA NA <0.001 <0.001 0.098NA 1.71 NA <0.001 NA 69 <0.005 <0.000005 0.504 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2013 20.51 6.40 22.7 845 0.43 NA 1.5NA 30.9 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.103NA 1.99 NA <0.001 NA 51 <0.005 <0.000005 0.528 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 11/11/2010 19.28 6.47 20.6 504NA NA NANA NA NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.061NA 1.83 NA <0.00008 NA 28.8 <0.005 <0.000005 0.296 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 12/12/2006 20.43 6.34 20685NA NA NANA NA NA 0.00049 0.00063 0.101NA 0.85 NA 0.00019 NA 71.6 0.0002 0.0000046 0.025 0.00018 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/201422.7 6.60 17677 0.31 215.6 1NM 420.6 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.094NA 2.02 NA <0.001 NA 53 <0.005 <0.005 0.646 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/201421.18 6.50 20781NM 43.6 0.97 NM 248.6 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.094NA 2.11 NA <0.001 NA 43 <0.005 <0.005 0.725 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/201120.2 6.98 21.3 610NA NA 0.2NA -10.2 NANA 0.0062 NANA 1.64 NANANA NANANA 0.947 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012 21.42 6.60 22.63 796 1.38 NA 9.38 NA -59.3 NA <0.0005 0.0058 0.0532NA 1.72 NA <0.00008 NA 76.2 <0.005 <0.000005 6.43 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013 21.18 6.50 19.9 803 0.43 NA 3.24 NA -26.2 NA <0.001 0.015 0.065NA 1.66 NA <0.001 NA 79 <0.005 <0.000005 7.68 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013 20.96 6.40 21.4 746 1.57 NA 7.29 NA NA NA <0.001 <0.00125 0.051NA 1.73 NA <0.001 NA 67 <0.005 <0.000005 0.727 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 1/18/2012 21.63 6.70 17.99 452 0.2 NA 1.4NA -34.8 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.49 NANANA NANANA 1.73 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance10/2201320.35 6.50 23.9 873 0.46 NA 9.39 NA -42 NA <0.001 0.0228 0.067NA 1.51 NA <0.001 NA 68 <0.005 <0.000005 4.91 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/201421.47 6.80 16691 0.39 9.4 9.92 NM 214.4 NA <0.001 0.0276 0.066NA 1.83 NA <0.001 NA 63 <0.005 <0.005 6.6 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/2014216.60 20804NM -25.4 7.24 NM 179.6 NA <0.001 0.0285 0.069NA2NA <0.001 NA 60 <0.005 <0.005 5.31 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/20118.52 7.26 22.04 113NA NA 0.42 NA 98.8 NANA <0.005 NANA <0.05 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/20129.93 6.20 24.37 82 2.57 NA 1.88 NA 115.8 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0441NA 0.18 z NA <0.00008 NA 5.5 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/20139.94 6.00 18.2 85.5 4.71 NA 0.57 NA 150.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.036NA 0.106 z NA <0.001 NA 3.2 <0.005 <0.000005 0.013 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/20139.71 6.00 22.3 188.1 0.78 NA 0.52 NA 91.7 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.057NA 0.532 z NA <0.001 NA 8.4 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.010 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/20138.74 5.10 24.6 39.3 3.24 NA 0.31 NA 251.8 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.022NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 2.6 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.010 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/2012 10.48 5.77 20.38 93 1.78 NA 1.1NA 160.6 NANA <0.005 NANA 0.175 z NANANA NANANA 0.46 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance3/4/201410.28 7.10 1632 5.39 111.4 0.94 NM 316.4 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.024NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 2.4 <0.005 <0.005 0.068 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance6/2/20149.63 5.90 2132NM 161.3 0.66 NM 366.3 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.017NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 1.8 <0.005 <0.005 <0.010 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/20118.58 6.90 23.88 641 6.3 NA 0.41 NA -52.9 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.68 NANANA NANANA 0.171 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012 10.02 6.30 23.61 652 0.78 NA 1.2NA 13.9 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0862NA2.1 NA <0.00008 NA 36 <0.005 <0.000005 0.286 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/20139.99 6.40 18.5 602 0.43 NA 1NA 66.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.071 zNA 1.84 NA <0.001 NA 34 <0.005 <0.000005 0.431 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/20139.81 6.20 23.3 763 0.3 NA 1.86 NA 86 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.102 zNA 2.25 NA <0.001 NA 39 <0.005 <0.000005 0.262 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/20138.82 6.30 24.5 764 0.42 NA 2.16 NA 95.8 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.098 zNA 2.29 NA <0.001 NA 32 <0.005 <0.000005 0.23 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/2012 10.56 6.77 20.26 516 11.83 NA 1.4NA 37.9 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.65 NANANA NANANA 0.256 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/201410.37 7.00 15 526.4 5.55 197.3 0.65 NM 402.3 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.063NA 1.95 NA <0.001 NA 35 <0.005 <0.005<0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/2/20149.73 6.50 22755NM 45.1 4.1NM 250.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.108NA2.5 NA <0.001 NA 37 <0.005 <0.005 0.628 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/201156.92 22.47 247NA NA 0.4NA 54.7 NANA <0.005 NANA 0.394 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/20126.44 6.20 23.45 339 0.59 NA 2.07 NA 39.6 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0352NA 1.33 NA <0.0004 NA 18.7 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/20136.65 6.60 18.1 297.3 4.57 NA 1.1NA 120.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.035NA1.1 NA <0.001 NA 17 <0.005 <0.000005 0.016 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/20136.5 6.20 22.8 497.5 0.69 NA 0.63 NA 81.4 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.049NA 1.83 NA <0.001 NA 28 <0.005 <0.000005 0.015 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/20135.23 6.10 23.1 331.7 1.09 NA 0.63 NA 167.5 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.036NA 1.14 NA <0.001 NA 17 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.010 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 1/16/20127.37 6.92 17.48 216 5.86 NA 1.6NA 23.5 NANA <0.005 NANA 0.468 NANANA NANANA 0.168 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance3/4/20147.1 6.90 15 231.5 4.73 186.1 5.69 NM 391.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.032NA 1.02 NA <0.001 NA 18 <0.005 <0.005 0.133 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance6/2/20146.4 6.50 21237NM 127 1.4NM 332 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.028NA 0.758 NA <0.001 NA 11 <0.005 <0.005 0.013 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/20115.46 6.56 22.66 618 6.8 NA 1.41 NA -50.3 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.64 NANANA NANANA 0.311 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/20126.93 6.10 23.3 766 0.67 NA 1.37 NA 44 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0451NA 2.58 NA <0.00008 NA 71.1 <0.005 <0.000005 0.176 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/20137.14 6.20 18.6 758 0.28 NA 0.92 NA 85.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.042NA2.4 NA <0.001 NA 76 <0.005 <0.000005 0.187 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/201376.00 23.1 842 0.31 NA 1.58 NA 65 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.049NA 2.71 NA <0.001 NA 90 <0.005 <0.000005 0.37 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/20135.72 6.10 24.7 878 0.41 NA 1.66 NA 94.4 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.052NA3NA <0.001 NA 74 <0.005 <0.000005 0.395 <0.001NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 1/16/20127.67 6.44 18.92 413 0.24 NA 0.9NA 136.4 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.78 NANANA NANANA 0.053 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/20147.58 6.60 15677 0.51 206.2 3.46 NM 411.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.053NA3NA <0.001 NA 98 <0.005 0.01 0.364 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/2/20147.76 6.30 22850NM 82.7 2.8NM 287.7 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.05NA 2.97 NA <0.001 NA 89 <0.005 <0.005 0.34 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/4/20113.83 6.82 20.42 561 12.7 NA 0.2NA -10.4 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.35 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAMW-23B**MW-23B**MW-23B*MW-23B*MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C*MW-23C*MW-24B**MW-23C**MW-23B**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-23B**MW-23B**MW-23B**MW-22B**MW-22B*MW-22B*MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-22B**MW-22B**MW-22B**MW-19**MW-19**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-22B**MW-22B**MW-21C**P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx8 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/20125.9 6.28 19.26 506 0.55 NA 1.1NA 123.9 NANA <0.005 NANA1.5 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/20125.01 6.20 23.76 727 0.72 NA 5.57 NA 39.4 NA 0.0011 <0.005 0.0434NA 1.42 NA <0.00008 NA 73.6 <0.005 <0.000005 0.117 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/20135.41 6.30 22.2 638 0.31 NA 2.58 NA 96.9 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.042NA 1.19 NA <0.001 NA 69 <0.005 <0.000005 0.055 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/20133.93 6.30 22.2 668 0.28 NA 1.43 NA 126.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.04NA 1.13 NA <0.001 NA 65 <0.005 <0.000005 0.038 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 3/13/20135.49 6.50 16.9 610 3.67 NA 0.59 NA 100.7 NA 0.00107 <0.001 0.054NA 1.27 NA <0.001 NA 62 <0.005 <0.000005 0.011 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance3/5/20145.94 6.80 14680 4.02 166.9 1.01 NM 371.9 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.041NA 1.18 NA <0.001 NA 64 <0.005 <0.005 0.011 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance6/3/20145.3 6.60 22604NM 150.1 0.92 NM 355.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.041NA 1.14 NA <0.001 NA 56 <0.005 <0.005 0.012 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/4/20113.52 5.75 20.07 1003 NA NA 3.84 NA 77.6 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.24 NANANA NANANA 0.583 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/20124.69 5.90 25.25 1027 0.87 NA 4.62 NA 31.8 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0502NA 1.16 NA 0.000083 NA 164 <0.005 <0.000005 2.86 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/20135.07 5.80 22.3 951 1.22 NA 4.63 NA 83.9 NA <0.001 0.00333 0.047NA 0.999 NA <0.001 NA 170 <0.005 <0.000005 2.58 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/20133.44 5.60 23.7 967 0.34 NA 4.07 NA 134.9 NA <0.001 0.00281 0.046NA 0.988 NA <0.001 NA 170 <0.005 <0.000005 2.29 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/20125.71 5.99 19.02 909 13.03 NA 2.1NA 66 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.24 NANANA NANANA 0.515 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/20135.15 5.80 17.3 919 0.29 NA 3.11 NA 67.1 NA <0.001 0.00737 0.046NA 1.03 NA <0.001 NA 160 <0.005 <0.000005 6.23 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/20145.59 6.10 141070 0.56 196.2 5.83 NM 401.2 NA <0.001 0.00581 0.047NA 1.03 NA <0.001 NA 190 <0.005 <0.005 7.45 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/20144.97 5.80 26943NM 138 8.1NM 343 NA <0.001 0.00302 0.042NA 1.09 NA <0.001 NA 170 <0.005 <0.005 3.6 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/20114.3 6.52 19.95 579NA NA 0.8NA 95.2 NANA <0.005 NANA 0.404 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/20124.6 5.60 22.33 459 1.07 NA 2.32 NA 112.4 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0493NA 0.466 NA 0.00016 NA 58.7 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 6/13/20134.45 5.00 21.9 432.4 0.5 NA 2.74 NA 184.5 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.049NA 0.403 NA <0.001 NA 56 <0.005 <0.000005 0.038 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/20134.11 4.50 21.3 427.1 1.16 NA 1.48 NA 355.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.053NA 0.401 NA <0.001 NA 50 <0.005 <0.000005 0.021 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 1/18/20124.86 6.25 17.48 424 2.84 NA 1.4NA 137.7 NANA <0.005 NANA 0.412 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 3/13/20134.88 5.50 15.5 443.7 2.79 NA 0.67 NA 245.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.052NA 0.395 NA <0.001 NA 63 <0.005 <0.000005 0.01 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance3/5/20144.95 5.20 13 455.4 1.97 227.6 1.17 NM 432.6 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.048NA 0.414 NA <0.001 NA 50 <0.005 <0.005 0.014 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance6/2/20144.82 4.70 20419NM 320 0.39 NM 525 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.047NA 0.403 NA <0.001 NA 51 <0.005 <0.005 0.023 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 5/22/2014NA5.38 19.79 358 1.06 104.3 37.9 0.12 NA 8.1 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0456 <0.00067 0.517 <2.0 <0.00076 25.2 52.3 <0.03 <0.0027 1.09 <0.0047 5.05Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/201122.5 7.56 22.1 254NA NA 0.62 NA 87.9 NANA <0.005 NANA <0.05 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/201122.5 7.60 22254NM 87.9 0.62 NM 292.9 NANA <0.005 NANA <0.05 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/2012 24.03 7.20 20175 2.95 104.2 1.3NM 309.2 NANA <0.005 NANA <0.05 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/2012 24.03 7.21 19.53 175 2.95 NA 1.3NA 104.2 NANA <0.005 NANA <0.05 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2012 23.66 7.20 23.71 191 1.47 NA 1.29 NA 51.6 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0352NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 3.3 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2012 23.66 7.20 24191 1.47 51.6 1.29 NM 256.6 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0352NA <0.05 NA <0.00008 NA 3.3 <0.005 <0.005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/2013 23.21 7.20 19.4 142.3 5.02 NA 0.57 NA 83.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.041NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 2.8 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.010 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/2013 22.96 6.60 24.5 130.4 3.42 NA 1.54 NA 94.3 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.039NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 2.8 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.010 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2013 22.42 6.80 23.7 113.3 3.36 NA 0.47 NA 140.9 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.035NA <0.05 NA <0.001 NA 2.2 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.010 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2011 21.69 6.34 22.28 121 11.1 NA 1.58 NA -26.3 NANA <0.005 NANA 0.0949 NANANA NANANA 0.059 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012 22.84 6.20 22.85 370 0.93 NA 2.1NA 96.1 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0751NA 0.652 NA <0.00008 NA 37.7 <0.005 <0.000005 <0.050 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013 22.39 6.20 19.8 342 0.28 NA 1.01 NA 96.1 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.0910NA 1.03 NA <0.001 NA 18 <0.005 <0.000005 0.02 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013 22.23 6.00 22.6 430.8 0.34 NA 1.29 NA 55.9 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.102NA 1.26 NA <0.001 NA 30 <0.005 <0.000005 0.032 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2013 21.58 6.00 22 131.7 3.49 NA 0.88 NA 194.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.037NA 0.263 NA <0.001 NA 9.5 <0.005 <0.000005 0.011 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/2012 23.22 5.97 19.45 106 2.43 NA 1.9NA 160.1 NANA <0.005 NANA 0.193 NANANA NANANA <0.050 NA NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/201422.58 6.20 16 210.9 0.33 202.5 0.75 NM 407.5 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.07NA 0.711 NA <0.001 NA 17 <0.005 <0.005 0.021 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/2/201422.09 6.50 23143NM 145.3 1.3NM 350.3 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.048NA 0.33 NA <0.001 NA 9.1 <0.005 <0.005 0.026 <0.001NAIntermediate-Upper Compliance 5/27/2014NA5.65 21.17 109 0.44 74.3 9.95 0.05 NA 15.9 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0336 <0.00067 0.268 <2.0 <0.00076 11.8 15.6 <0.0016 <0.0027 1.39 <0.0047 2.35Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/4/20116.55 5.46 21.78 620 7.6 NA 0.72 NA -3.7 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.02 NANANA NANANA 1.22NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/20127.64 5.10 22.7 737 0.69 NA 9.78 NA 69.8 NA <0.0005 <0.005 0.0486NA 1.12 NA <0.00008 NA 114 <0.005 <0.000005 2.7 <0.005 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/20136.27 5.20 22.7 828 0.34 NA 1.5NA 167.3 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.054NA 1.02 NA <0.001 NA 140 <0.005 <0.000005 2.55 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/20128.63 5.28 18.17 518 0.26 NA 0.9NA 149.5 NANA <0.005 NANA 1.13 NANANA NANANA 2.33NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/20138.06 5.30 16.4 679 0.4 NA 6.15 NA 131.4 NA <0.001 0.00155 0.045NA 1.03 NA <0.001 NA 110 <0.005 <0.000005 2.82 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/20138.2 5.10 22.6 691 0.35 NA 4.09 NA 147.4 NA <0.001 0.00125 0.048NA 0.985 NA <0.001 NA 110 <0.005 <0.000005 2.76 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/20148.42 5.80 15690 2.56 312 3.23 NM 517 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.04NA 1.03 NA <0.001 NA 150 <0.005 <0.005 0.232 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/20147.68 5.20 24941NM 141.5 2.8NM 346.5 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.075NA 1.41 NA <0.001 NA 170 <0.005 <0.005 3.42 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary11/20/2013 26.16 9.20 19.5 236 2.21 NA <10 NA 102.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.041NA 0.381 NA <0.001 NA 7.9 <0.005 <0.000005 0.089 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Lower Voluntary11/20/2013 16.32 9.70 18.3 156 2.97 NA <10 NA 124.2 NA <0.001 <0.001 0.032NA 0.06 z NA <0.001 NA 5.3 <0.005 <0.000005 0.099 <0.001 NAIntermediate-Upper Voluntary5/27/2014NA5.33 21.1 324.4 0.34 115.6 9.20NA 24.3 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0173 <0.00067 0.223 <2.0 <0.00076 25.9 34.7 <0.0016 <0.0027 <0.400 <0.0047 2.94Intermediate-Lower Voluntary5/28/2014NA5.91 22.07 465 0.15 75.4 7.85 0.03 NA 28.8 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0471 <0.00067 0.491 <2.0 <0.00076 29.4 61.3 <0.0016 <0.0027 0.613 <0.0047 5.34Intermediate-Upper Voluntary5/28/2014NA5.47 20.16 112 4.16 87.6 5.78 0.02 NA 5.7 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.042 <0.00067 <0.1 <2.0 <0.00076 4.11 6.4 <0.0016 <0.0027 2.81 <0.0047 0.45Intermediate-Lower Voluntary5/28/2014NA6.91 23.4 620 0.54 66.2 81.3 0.09 NA 57.3 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0317 <0.00067 0.412 <2.0 <0.00076 35.9 58.4 <0.03 <0.02 0.877 <0.0047 4.5MW-34B***MW-34C***MW-35B***MW-35C***MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-33C**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B*MW-24B*MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-27B*MW-27C***MW-28C*MW-28C*MW-31B***MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C*MW-31C**MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-31C*MW-32C**MW-24C*MW-24C*MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B*P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx9 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINADepth to WaterpH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Turbidity Drawdown Eh Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesiumft (TOC) S.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV NTUs ft mV mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lmg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNE 6.5 - 8.5 NENENE NE NENE NE NE 0.001 0.010.70.004 0.7 NE0.002NE 250 0.0110.3 0.015 NENA 200.8 200.8 200.7NA 200.7 NA200.8NA 300 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.8 200.8Hydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateConstituent ConcentrationsField ParametersSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-Upper Voluntary5/21/2014NA6.52 19.8 513 81.2 0.61 5.86 0.02 NA 72.4 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.153 <0.00067 0.528 <2.0 <0.00076 44.1 51.9 <0.0016 NA 0.521 <0.0047 6.83Intermediate-Lower Voluntary5/21/2014NA6.35 20.77 5.32 0.23 71.1 9.44 NA NA 41 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0337 <0.00067 0.522 <2.0 <0.00076 32.1 54.8 <0.03NA 1.74 <0.0047 5.82Intermediate-Upper Voluntary 5/27/2014 NA 4.58 19.33 22 8.6 131.1 6.44 0.03 NA <0.7 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0115 <0.00067 <0.1 <2.0 <0.00076 1.18 3.2 <0.0016 NA 2.76 <0.0047 0.324ShallowVoluntary5/5/2014NANA NANANA NA NANA NA 173 <0.0053 <0.040 0.0635 <0.00067 0.396 <2.0 <0.00076 67.8 23.1NA <0.0027 1.55 <0.0047 6.28ShallowVoluntary5/5/2014NANA NANANA NA NANA NA 134 <0.0053 <0.040 0.0387 <0.00067 0.231 <2.0 <0.00076 54.4 15.1 <0.03 <0.0027 11.9 <0.0047 4.77ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014NANA NANANA NA NANA NA 175 <0.0053 <0.0068 0.0998 <0.00067 0.378 <2.0 <0.00076 63.7 20.7 <0.03 <0.0027 4.09 <0.0047 6.28ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014NANA NANANA NA NANA NA 67 <0.0053 <0.040 0.0983 <0.00067 0.122 <2.0 <0.00076 29.8 7.3NA <0.0027 7.84 <0.0047 2.89ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014NANA NANANA NA NANA NA 180 <0.0053 <0.040 0.204 <0.00067 0.496 <2.0 <0.00076 64 28.2 <0.03 <0.0027 11.9 <0.0047 9.69ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014NANA NANANA NA NANA NA 232 <0.0053 <0.040 0.163 <0.00067 0.176 <2.0 <0.00076 98.2 8.1 <0.03 <0.0027 4.09 <0.0047 12.5ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014NANA NANANA NA NANA NA 181 <0.0053 <0.040 0.276 <0.00067 0.471 <2.0 <0.00076 57.2 13.2 <0.03 <0.0027 7.84 <0.0047 8.08Prepared by: BER/RBI Checked by: HJFNotes:1. Analytical parameter abbreviations:Temp. = TemperatureDO = Dissolved oxygenCond. = Specific conductanceORP = Oxidation reduction potentialTDS = Total dissolved solidsTSS = Total suspended solidsTOC = Total organic carbon2. Units:˚C = Degrees CelciusSU = Standard UnitsmV = millivoltsµS/cm = microsiemens per centimeter/micromhos per centimeterNTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unitmg/L = milligrams per literug/L = micrograms per liter3. NE = Not established4. NA = Not available5. ND = Not detected6. NM = Not measured7.8.9.******Analytical results with "<" preceeding the result indicate that the parameter was not detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit.Sample data was obtained from the Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report, Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, June 2014.MW-36B***MW-36C***Sample data provided by DukeV-DPT-5***V-DPT-6***V-DPT-7***Highlighted values indicate values that exceed the 15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) StandardV-DPT-1***V-DPT-2***V-DPT-3***V-DPT-4***PZ-25***Sample data by SynTerraShallow = Shallow Water Table Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (10-15 feet telow land surface).Intermediate-Upper = Upper Portion of the Intermediate Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (20-25' below land surface).Intermediate-Lower = Lower Portion of the Intermediate Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (40-45' below land surface).Deep - Deep Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (60+ feet below land surface).P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx10 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateIntermediate-Upper Voluntary5/23/2014Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES12/12/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/11/2010Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary10/4/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary5/23/2014Intermediate-Upper Voluntary5/27/2014Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-UpperNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-UpperNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-UpperNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-UpperNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-UpperNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/1996MW-2B**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C***MW-3B***MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-2C**MW-2C**Sample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodMW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-2C**MW-2C**MW-2C**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7<0.01 <0.00006 <0.02 <0.0015 NA <0.500 NA <0.0004 <1 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.00258 0.0526 <5 <0.0054 <30 NA <0.002 <0.04NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 368 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.002 NA NA NA NA NA 336 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 336 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 88 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 160 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.018 NA NA NA NA NA 296 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.002 NA NA NA NA NA 200 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 184 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 200 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.01 NA NA NA NA NA 384 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 448 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 184 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.002 NA NA NA NA NA 316 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 440 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 337 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.003 NA NA NA NA NA 340 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 438 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.003 NA NA NA NA NA 412 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 399 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.035 NA NA NA NA NA 355 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 178 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 392 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 397 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 427 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 511 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 443 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA 439 NA NA NA0.159 <0.0001 NA 0.00058 0.05 NA 0.05 NA NA 0.00058 <0.000017 NA NA 146 0.00071 320 2.99 NA 0.0000360.146 <0.0002 NA <0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 178 <0.001 325 4.3 NA 0.0000150.255 <0.0002 NA <0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 184 <0.001 328 2.7 NA 0.0000090.154 <0.0002 NA <0.005 <0.04 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 132 <0.001 357 2.9 NA 0.0000060.065 <0.0002 NA <0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 141 <0.001 359 3.4 NA 0.0000440.09 <0.0002 NA 0.039 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.02 <0.01 NA NA 148 <0.01 348 3 NA 0.0000380.153 <0.0002 NA <0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 140 <0.005 359 2.9 NA 0.0000060.141 <0.0002 NA 0.003 0.04 NA NA NA NA 0.004 <0.001 NA NA 162 <0.001 413 3.2 NA 0.0000030.12 <0.0002 NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 <0.005 NA NA 142 0.00058 376 6.1 NA <0.000010.203 <0.0002 NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NA NA NA 148 0.00056 390 b NA NA <0.000010.259 <0.0002 NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NA NA NA 144 0.00057 352 NA NA 0.00001430.35 <0.0002 NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NA NA NA 142 0.0006 457 NA NA <0.000010.265 <0.0002 NA <0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NA NA NA 143 0.00011 526 NA NA <0.000010.375 <0.00006 0.294 <0.0015 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 19.5 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.0366 3.1 130 <0.0054 542 NA <0.002 <0.040.0185 <0.00006 0.329 <0.0015 NA 0.77 NA <0.0004 3.58 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.0036 0.346 16 <0.0054 61 NA <0.002 <0.002NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.003 NA NA NA NA NA 140 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.002 NA NA NA NA NA 76 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 128 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 8 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 82 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 86 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 172 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 78 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 68 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 70 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 80 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 46 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 80 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 64 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 65 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.008 NA NA NA NA NA 86 NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA 115 NA NA NAConstituent ConcentrationsP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx11 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-UpperNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-UpperNPDES12/12/2006Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/7/2007Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/6/2008Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-UpperNPDES10/6/2009Intermediate-UpperNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-UpperNPDES11/11/2010Intermediate-Upper Compliance3/2/2011Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/4/2011Intermediate-Upper Compliance3/6/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance6/5/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance6/2/2014Intermediate-Lower Voluntary5/23/2014Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B*MW-4B*MW-5B***MW-5C**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-4B**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-4B**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent ConcentrationsNANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.002 NANA NA NA NA 94 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 70 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.017 NANA NA NA NA 81.5 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 78 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 75 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 67 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 70 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 77 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 72 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 74 NA NANA0.023 <0.0001NA0.0013 0.05 NA 0.05 NA NA <0.00014 <0.000017 NA NA 7.75 <0.000014 53 5NA 0.00000330.022 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 8 <0.001 80 2NA 0.0000070.018 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 12 <0.001 62 <0.5 NA 0.0000110.016 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 7 <0.001 93 <0.5 NA <0.0000050.014 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA <10 <0.001 74 <0.5 NA 0.0000190.029 <0.0002NA<0.01 NA NA NA NA NA <0.02 <0.01 NA NA 8 <0.01 61 <0.5 NA <0.000020.02 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 9 <0.005 72 <0.5 NA 0.0000080.018 0.0002NA0.002 NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 0.004 NA NA 9 <0.001 87 <0.5 NA 0.0000020.0256 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 <0.005 NA NA 9.3 <0.0001 68 1.3 NA <0.000010.033 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 7.9 b <0.0001 116 b NA NA <0.000010.0425 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 7.1 <0.0001 105 NA NA <0.000010.0443 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 6.9 <0.0001 168 NA NA <0.000010.0523 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 8.9 <0.0001 153 NA NA <0.000010.0491 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 8.5 <0.0001 145 NA NA <0.000010.046 <0.00005 NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 8.1 <0.0002 140 NA NA <0.0000050.016 <0.00005 NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 8.8 <0.0002 130 NA NA 0.0000060.062 <0.00005 NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 8.1 <0.0002 180 NA NA <0.0000050.062 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 8.8 <0.0002 180 NA NA 0.0050.029 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 8.6 <0.0002 170 NA NA <0.0050.032 <0.00006 <0.0017 <0.0015 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 1.02 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.00202 <0.01 5.4 <0.0054 <30 NA <0.002 <0.04NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 500 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 464 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 472 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 336 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 308 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 340 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 384 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 332 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 328 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 252 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 260 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 120 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 272 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 284 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 249 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 297 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 267 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 162 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 198 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 224 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 114 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 111 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 253 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 81 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 70 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 52 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 105 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 88 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 74 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 78 NA NANAP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx12 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/7/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/2014Intermediate-Upper Voluntary5/21/2014Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES12/12/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/11/2010Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary10/4/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary5/21/2014Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C***MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-6C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C**MW-5C*MW-5C*MW-6B***MW-6C**MW-6C**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent ConcentrationsNANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 93 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 78 b NA NANA0.336 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 7.8 <0.0001 59 NA NA <0.000010.193 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.1 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 8.8 <0.0001 52 NA NA <0.000010.447 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.037 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 11.9 <0.0001 59 NA NA <0.000010.222 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.11 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 9.6 <0.0002 47 NA NA <0.0000050.13 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 74 <0.0002 56 NA NA <0.0000050.602 <0.00005 NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 13 <0.0002 72 NA NA <0.0000050.111 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.17 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 8.8 <0.0002 50 NA NA 0.010.441 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.05 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 11 <0.0002 65 NA NA <0.0050.0682 <0.00006 0.256 <0.0015 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 11.7 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.0523 1.93 91.8 <0.0054 374 NA <0.002 <0.04NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 228 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 228 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 240 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 116 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 136 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 140 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 176 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 156 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 152 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 212 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 208 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 132 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 208 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 260 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 274 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 202 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 260 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 311 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 321 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.025 NANA NA NA NA 270 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 138 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 150 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 239 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 323 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 220 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 332 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 340 NA NANA0.93 <0.0001NA0.0013 0.05 NA 0.05 NA NA 0.0012 <0.000017 NA NA 142 0.0001 311 5NA 0.00000980.711 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 177 <0.001 340 3.7 NA 0.0000131.09 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.04 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 190 <0.001 330 0.6 NA 0.0000440.889 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.04 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 136 <0.001 345 0.6 NA 0.0000450.644 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 142 <0.001 381 0.6 NA 0.0000420.929 <0.0002NA<0.01 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.02 <0.01 NA NA 130 <0.01 332 NA NA 0.0000261.26 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 139 <0.005 382 NA NA 0.0000141.13 <0.0002NA0.003 <0.02 NA NA NA NA 0.005 <0.001 NA NA 141 <0.001 429 NA NA 0.0000141.06 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.1 NA NA NA NA <0.01 <0.005 NA NA 132 <0.0001 360 3.2 NA <0.000010.301 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.24 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 103 <0.0001 304 b NA NA 0.0000154 B1.18 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 130 <0.0001 456 NA NA 0.0000161.28 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 121 <0.0001 798 NA NA 0.00001931.15 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 135 0.0001 437 NA NA 0.00001690.857 <0.00006 <0.0017 <0.0015 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 6.16 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.0672 0.431 112 <0.0054 338 NA <0.002 <0.04NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 468 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 384 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 380 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 152 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 236 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 196 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 272 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 292 NA NANAP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx13 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/5/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/2/2014Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006MW-7C**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-7C**MW-8**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent ConcentrationsNANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 268 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 352 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 328 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 148 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.002 NANA NA NA NA 144 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 176 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 212 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.002 NANA NA NA NA 106 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 299 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 186 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 265 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.027 NANA NA NA NA 283 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 136 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 191 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 527 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 191 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 104 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 211 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 64 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 132 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 112 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 897 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 421 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 118 b NA NANA0.32 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.28 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 92 <0.0001 228 NA NA <0.000010.458 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.15 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 94.5 <0.0001 298 NA NA <0.000010.06 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.26 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 85.8 <0.0001 225 NA NA <0.000010.108 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 68 <0.0002 230 NA NA 0.0000060.148 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.06 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 9.1 <0.0002 230 NA NA <0.0000050.101 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.04 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 75 <0.0002 250 NA NA <0.0000050.142 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.18 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 73 <0.0002 250 NA NA 0.0080.131 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.31 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 67 <0.0002 240 NA NA 0.006NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 444 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 488 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 476 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 360 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 304 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 296 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 236 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 276 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 260 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 260 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 312 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 184 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 296 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 288 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 290 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 280 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 324 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 139 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 275 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.019 NANA NA NA NA 172 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 63 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 115 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 79 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 103 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 85 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 116 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 99 NA NANAP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx14 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/7/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary6/6/2012Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/7/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary6/6/2012Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-8**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-10**MW-10**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-9**MW-8**MW-8**MW-8**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent ConcentrationsNANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 94 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 127 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 105 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 108 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 62 b NA NANA0.376 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 19.2 <0.0001 102 NA NA <0.000010.344 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 21.5 <0.0001 101 NA NA <0.00001NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 20 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 0 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 46 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 76 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 32 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 28 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 60 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 24 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 30 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 24 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 50 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 10 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 88 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 100 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 68 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 78 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 185 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 60 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 77.5 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.01 NANA NA NA NA 50 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 25 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 69 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 35 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 73 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 35 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 50 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 30 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 24 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 41 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 37 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 55 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 50 b NA NANA0.0068 <0.0002NANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 9.8 <0.0001 44 NA NA <0.000010.0066 <0.0002NANA0.33 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 9.3 <0.0001 33 NA NA <0.00001NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 156 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 0 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 62 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 34 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 26 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 40 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 36 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 56 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 32 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 54 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 124 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 6 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 72 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 92 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 25 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 34 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 117 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 153 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 140 NA NANAP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx15 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/7/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/2012Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/7/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/2014Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/1/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/13/1990Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/22/1991MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11*MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11*MW-12**MW-12**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-10**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**MW-11**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent ConcentrationsNANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.011 NANA NA NA NA 130 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 17 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 63 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 73 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 71 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 68 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 61 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 57 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 44 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 33 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 37 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 52 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 64 b NA NANA0.0867 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 16.2 <0.0001 72 NA NA <0.000010.084 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.083 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 19.3 <0.0001 53 NA NA <0.00001NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 400 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 408 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 424 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 344 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 320 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 300 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 308 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 220 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 252 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 272 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 348 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 168 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 200 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 228 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 110 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 142 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 126 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 57 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 58 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.011 NANA NA NA NA 51.5 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 31 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 4 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 41 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 33 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 38 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 30 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 29 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 14 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 29 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 31 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 46 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA <50 NA NANA0.0914 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.49 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 8.8 <0.0001 48 NA NA <0.000010.0883 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.5 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 10.6 <0.0001 39 NA NA <0.000010.0996 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.47 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 10.7 <0.0001 <25 NA NA <0.000010.09 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.42 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 13 <0.0002 37 NA NA <0.0000050.115 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.42 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 13 <0.0002 46 NA NA <0.0000050.117 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.39 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 14 <0.0002 58 NA NA <0.0000050.086 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.47 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 12 <0.0002 42 NA NA <0.0050.06 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.52 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 10 <0.0002 41 NA NA <0.005NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 428 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 436 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 524 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 476 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 448 NA NANAP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx16 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/1991Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/25/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/15/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/24/1992Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/22/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/19/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/4/1993Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES7/11/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/2/1994Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/8/1995Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/1996Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1997Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/1998Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/17/1999Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2000Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/16/2001Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2002Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/18/2003Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/9/2004Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/7/2005Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/7/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/5/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/2014Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary10/4/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary11/11/2010Intermediate-LowerNPDES12/12/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Voluntary3/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Voluntary6/5/2012Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/2/2006Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/6/2007Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/7/2007MW-17**MW-18**MW-18**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-18**MW-18**MW-18**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-18**MW-18**MW-18**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12*MW-12*MW-12**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-17**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**MW-12**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent ConcentrationsNANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 460 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 464 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 488 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 468 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 432 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 448 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 248 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.001 NANA NA NA NA 408 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 384 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 361 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 367 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 369 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA NA NA 341 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 366 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.034 NANA NA NA NA 364 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 326 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 337 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 313 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 335 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 177 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 304 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 315 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 302 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 330 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 365 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 327 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 286 b NA NANA0.281 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 98 <0.0001 274 NA NA <0.000010.221 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.04 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 130 <0.0001 312 NA NA <0.000010.204 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.18 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 159 <0.0001 260 NA NA <0.000010.28 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.05 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 130 <0.0002 260 NA NA <0.0000050.211 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.03 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 110 <0.0002 220 NA NA <0.0000050.236 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.07 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 110 <0.0002 270 NA NA <0.0000050.055 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.17 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 78 <0.0002 200 NA NA <0.0050.142 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.13 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 64 <0.0002 170 NA NA <0.005NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 398 NA NANA0.441 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA <0.02 NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 188 <0.001 387 6.6 NA 0.0000220.353 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA <0.02 NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 234 <0.001 367 3NA 0.0000230.276 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA <0.02 NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 172 <0.001 396 3.1 NA 0.000020.162 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA <0.02 NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 163 <0.001 393 3.1 NA 0.0000250.274 <0.0002NA<0.01 NA NA <0.02 NA NA <0.02 <0.01 NA NA 152 <0.01 373 3NA 0.000030.259 0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA <0.02 NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 149 <0.005 471 3.3 NA 0.0000190.262 <0.0002NA0.004 NA NA <0.02 NA NA 0.004 <0.001 NA NA 155 <0.001 412 3.1 NA 0.0000090.386 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 146 0.00011 368 NA NA 0.0000102 B0.305 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 134 0.00014 360 NA NA <0.000010.401 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 130 <0.0001 377 NA NA 0.0000120.382 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 148 0.00038 574 NA NA 0.0000120.284 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA <0.1 NA NA <0.01 <0.005 NA NA 144 <0.0001 342 4.8 NA <0.000010.455 <0.0001NA0.0037 0.05 NA 0.05 NA NA 0.000680 <0.000017 NA NA 195 0.00021 377 2.24 NA 0.0000133NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 389 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 398 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 358 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.02 NANA NA NA NA 447 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.01 NANA NA NA NA 1040 NA NANANANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA NA NA 570 NA NANA0.266 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 81.6 <0.0001 505 NA NA <0.000010.215 <0.0002NA<0.005 NA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 69.4 <0.0001 415 NA NA <0.00001NANANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.005 NANA NA NA NA 440 NA NANA0.358 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 160 <0.001 294 4.2 NA 0.0000310.339 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 156 <0.001 336 2.3 NA 0.000022P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx17 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-LowerNPDES3/11/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES11/6/2008Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES10/6/2009Intermediate-LowerNPDES3/10/2010Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/2/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/4/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/6/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/5/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 11/11/2010Intermediate-Lower Compliance 12/12/2006Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 1/18/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance10/22013Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/3/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance6/2/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/2/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 1/16/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance6/2/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 1/16/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance3/4/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance6/2/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/4/2011MW-23B**MW-23B**MW-23B*MW-23B*MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C**MW-23C*MW-23C*MW-24B**MW-23C**MW-23B**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-22C**MW-23B**MW-23B**MW-23B**MW-22B**MW-22B*MW-22B*MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-22B**MW-22B**MW-22B**MW-19**MW-19**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-21C**MW-19**MW-19**MW-19**MW-22B**MW-22B**MW-21C**Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent Concentrations0.354 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.04 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 141 <0.001 360 2.6 NA 0.0000250.182 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 148 <0.001 314 2.7 NA 0.0000360.311 <0.0002NA<0.01 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.02 <0.01 NA NA 161 0.011 354 2.2 NA 0.0000230.337 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.005 <0.005 NA NA 155 <0.005 359 2.4 NA 0.0000150.267 <0.0002NA0.004 <0.02 NA NA NA NA 0.003 <0.001 NA NA 142 <0.001 361 2.4 NA 0.0000130.347 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.14 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 126 0.0003 334 b NA NA 0.00001590.366 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.2 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 111 0.00028 311 NA NA 0.00001140.0146 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.2 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 109 0.00023 329 NA NA <0.000010.436 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 151 0.00038 404 NA NA 0.00001110.0143 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.2 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 148 <0.0001 304 NA NA <0.000010.508 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.03 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 130 0.00062 470 NA NA 0.0000220.539 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 110 0.000311 480 NA NA 0.0000130.531 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 120 0.00043 500 NA NA 0.0000130.249 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.1 NA NA NA NA <0.01 <0.005 NA NA 124 0.00031 293 4.5 NA <0.000010.356 <0.0001NA0.0036 0.05 NA 0.05 NA NA 0.001 <0.000017 NA NA 126 0.00033 334 2.08 NA 0.00005410.475 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 130 0.00032 490 NA NA 0.0130.497 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 130 0.000299 480 NA NA 0.0151.2NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 117 NA 511 NA NANA1.46 <0.0002NA0.0146 0.027 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 814 <0.0001 447 NA NA <0.000011.35 <0.00005 NA0.02 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 120 <0.0002 500 NA NA 0.0000080.764 <0.00005 NA0.016 0.48 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 140 <0.0002 450 NA NA <0.0000051.52NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 138 NA 404 NA NANA0.874 <0.00005 NA0.013 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 96 <0.0002 500 NA NA <0.0000050.808 <0.00005 NA0.013 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 120 <0.0002 480 NA NA 0.0070.805 <0.00005 NA0.018 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 110 <0.0002 490 NA NA 0.0060.0887NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 13.6 NA 54 NA NANA0.116 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.55 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 12.6 <0.0001 40 NA NA <0.000010.029 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.27 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 7.4 <0.0002 34 NA NA <0.0000050.048 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.35 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 32 <0.0002 110 NA NA <0.0000050.016 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.08 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 4.2 <0.0002 <25 NA NA 0.000010.0855NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 15 NA 35 NA NANA0.016 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.27 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 6.2 <0.0002 27 NA NA 0.009<0.005 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.11 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 4.5 <0.0002 <25 NA NA <0.0050.737NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 122 NA 400 NA NANA0.78 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 172 0.00035 380 NA NA <0.000010.798 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 160 0.000296 390 NA NA <0.0000050.828 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 160 0.000251 480 NA NA <0.0000051.33 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 0.00025 460 NA NA 0.0000170.814NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 125 NA 341 NA NANA0.018 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.46 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 160 <0.0002 390 NA NA <0.0051.36 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.05 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 160 0.000226 490 NA NA 0.0070.277NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 29.1 NA 1990 NA NANA0.348 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.2 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 74.9 <0.0001 186 NA NA <0.000010.157 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.35 NA NA NA NA 0.00236 NANA NA 78 <0.0002 210 NA NA <0.0000050.133 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.22 NA NA NA NA 0.0019 NANA NA 160 <0.0002 330 NA NA <0.0000050.059 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.37 NA NA NA NA 0.00313 NANA NA 90 <0.0002 220 NA NA <0.0000050.349NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 34.8 NA 148 NA NANA0.049 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.43 NA NA NA NA 0.00584 NANA NA 69 <0.0002 170 NA NA <0.0050.013 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.44 NA NA NA NA 0.00798 NANA NA 45 <0.0002 140 NA NA <0.0050.97NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 131 NA 460 NA NANA1.05 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.024 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 200 <0.0001 456 NA NA <0.000011.15 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 180 <0.0002 470 NA NA <0.0000051.3 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.03 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 200 <0.0002 530 NA NA <0.0000051.5 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 210 <0.0002 540 NA NA <0.0000051.19NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 134 NA 335 NA NANA1.59 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 190 <0.0002 540 NA NA 0.0081.63 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.06 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 190 <0.0002 540 NA NA <0.0050.377NANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.0433 NANA NA 74.2 NA 328 NA NANAP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx18 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/13/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/5/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/3/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/4/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/5/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/3/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/13/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 1/18/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/13/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/5/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/2/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 5/22/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Upper Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Upper Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/12/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/4/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/2/2014Intermediate-Upper Compliance 5/27/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/4/2011Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/2/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 10/3/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 1/17/2012Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/13/2013Intermediate-Lower Compliance 3/5/2014Intermediate-Lower Compliance 6/3/2014Intermediate-Lower Voluntary 11/20/2013Intermediate-Lower Voluntary 11/20/2013Intermediate-Upper Voluntary 5/27/2014Intermediate-Lower Voluntary 5/28/2014Intermediate-Upper Voluntary 5/28/2014Intermediate-Lower Voluntary 5/28/2014MW-34B***MW-34C***MW-35B***MW-35C***MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28B**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-28C**MW-33C**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B**MW-24B*MW-24B*MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-27B*MW-27C***MW-28C*MW-28C*MW-31B***MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C**MW-31C*MW-31C**MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-24C**MW-31C*MW-32C**MW-24C*MW-24C*MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B**MW-27B*Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent Concentrations0.725NANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.0216 NANA NA 68.7 NA 331 NA NANA0.805 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.021 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 124 0.00042 391 NA NA <0.000010.388 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 100 0.000468 380 NA NA 0.0000060.464 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 100 0.00057 380 NA NA <0.0000050.396 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 99 0.000586 360 NA NA 0.0000050.055 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 100 0.00023 370 NA NA <0.0050.019 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 94 <0.0002 350 NA NA <0.0050.852NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 137 NA 560 NA NANA2.36 <0.0002NA<0.005 <0.02 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 163 <0.0001 579 NA NA 0.00003992.28 <0.00005 NA0.006 0.03 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 550 NA NA 0.0000462.15 <0.00005 NA0.007 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 0.00023 560 NA NA 0.0000580.891NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 145 NA 597 NA NANA2.25 <0.00005 NA0.006 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 530 NA NA 0.0000492.06 <0.00005 NA0.008 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 160 <0.0002 610 NA NA 0.0751.11 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 550 NA NA 0.0510.391NANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.0227 NANA NA 83 NA 309 NA NANA0.229 <0.0002NA<0.005 1.6 NA NA NA NA 0.0273 NANA NA 92.7 <0.0001 240 NA NA 0.00001010.168 <0.00005 NA<0.005 2.1 NA NA NA NA 0.0346 NANA NA 91 <0.0002 250 NA NA 0.0000130.261 <0.00005 NA<0.005 1.5 NA NA NA NA 0.0482 NANA NA 96 <0.0002 240 NA NA 0.0000370.406NANANANA NA NA NA NA 0.0253 NANA NA 77.9 NA 292 NA NANA0.219 <0.00005 NA<0.005 1.9 NA NA NA NA 0.0371 NANA NA 90 <0.0002 250 NA NA 0.0000110.237 <0.00005 NA<0.005 1.5 NA NA NA NA 0.0617 NANA NA 97 <0.0002 260 NA NA 0.0150.153 <0.00005 NA<0.005 1.2 NA NA NA NA 0.0567 NANA NA 96 <0.0002 250 NA NA 0.010.342 <0.00006 <0.0017 <0.02 NA 0.74 NA <0.0004 8.44 0.055 <0.0021 0.0502 0.294 96.9 <0.0054 258 NA <0.01 <0.040.0732NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 27.5 NA 236 NA NANA0.0732NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 27.5 NA 236 NA NANA0.0894NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 16.5 NA 112 NA NANA0.0894NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 16.5 NA 112 NA NANA0.0407 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.56 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 11.7 <0.0001 94 NA NA <0.000010.0407 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.56 NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 11.7 <0.0001 94 NA NA <0.010.018 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.39 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 13 <0.0002 88 NA NA <0.0000050.016 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.41 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 12 <0.0002 78 NA NA 0.00001<0.005 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.26 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 11 <0.0002 67 NA NA <0.0000050.0581NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 17.6 NA 1240 NA NANA0.245 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.18 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 47.2 <0.0001 177 NA NA 0.0000820.367 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.11 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 78 <0.0002 210 NA NA <0.0000050.409 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.07 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 100 <0.0002 250 NA NA <0.0000050.046 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.45 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 30 <0.0002 89 NA NA <0.0000050.0599NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 18 NA 69 NA NANA0.166 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.16 NA NA NA NA 0.00151 NANA NA 57 <0.0002 150 NA NA 0.0070.017 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.34 NA NA NA NA 0.00167 NANA NA 28 <0.0002 85 NA NA <0.0050.0461 <0.00006 <0.02 <0.0015 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 2.5 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.00884 0.243 19.5 <0.0054 81.5 NA <0.002 <0.041.47NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 131 NA 349 NA NANA1.79 <0.0002NA<0.005 0.14 b NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 174 <0.0001 407 NA NA 0.00004111.91 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 490 NA NA 0.0000462NANANANA NA NA NA NA <0.01 NANA NA 136 NA 386 NA NANA1.8 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 400 NA NA 0.0000441.76 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 420 NA NA 0.0000520.22 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.11 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 490 NA NA 0.0162.39 <0.00005 NA<0.005 <0.023 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 150 <0.0002 570 NA NA 0.0530.028 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.14 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 35 <0.0002 120 NA NA <0.0000050.029 <0.00005 NA<0.005 0.76 NA NA NA NA <0.001 NANA NA 21 <0.0002 83 NA NA <0.000005<0.01 <0.00006 0.0376 <0.0015 NA 1.1 NA <0.0004 5.25 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0281 0.23 62.3 <0.0054 164 NA <0.002 <0.040.303 <0.00006 <0.02<0.02 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 8.160001 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0722 0.311 122 <0.0054 339 NA <0.002 <0.040.0247 <0.00006 <0.0017 <0.0015 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 1.03 <0.0084 <0.0021 0.0175 0.0152 31.8 <0.0054 88.5 NA <0.002 <0.040.345 <0.00006 <0.02<0.02 NA <0.500 NA <0.0004 4.53 0.055 <0.0021 0.0894 0.299 131 <0.0054 419 NA <0.01 <0.04P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx19 of 20
TABLE 4GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAHydrostratigraphic UnitWell Type Sample DateSample IDAnalytical ParameterUnits15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) Groundwater Quality StandardAnalytical MethodIntermediate-Upper Voluntary5/21/2014Intermediate-Lower Voluntary5/21/2014Intermediate-Upper Voluntary5/27/2014ShallowVoluntary5/5/2014ShallowVoluntary5/5/2014ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014ShallowVoluntary6/5/2014Notes:1. Analytical parameter abbreviations:Temp. = TemperatureDO = Dissolved oxygenCond. = Specific conductanceORP = Oxidation reduction potentialTDS = Total dissolved solidsTSS = Total suspended solidsTOC = Total organic carbon2. Units:˚C = Degrees CelciusSU = Standard UnitsmV = millivoltsµS/cm = microsiemens per centimeter/micromhos per centimeterNTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unitmg/L = milligrams per literug/L = micrograms per liter3. NE = Not established4. NA = Not available5. ND = Not detected6. NM = Not measured7.8.9.******Analytical results with "<" preceeding the result indicate that the parameter was not detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit.Sample data was obtained from the Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report, Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, June 2014.MW-36B***MW-36C***Sample data provided by DukeV-DPT-5***V-DPT-6***V-DPT-7***Highlighted values indicate values that exceed the 15 NCAC .02L .0202(g) StandardV-DPT-1***V-DPT-2***V-DPT-3***V-DPT-4***PZ-25***Sample data by SynTerraShallow = Shallow Water Table Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (10-15 feet telow land surface).Intermediate-Upper = Upper Portion of the Intermediate Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (20-25' below land surface).Intermediate-Lower = Lower Portion of the Intermediate Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (40-45' below land surface).Deep - Deep Zone of the Coastal Plain Aquifer (60+ feet below land surface).Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel NitrateNitrate (as N)NitriteNitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium TDS TOC Vanadium Zincmg/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 mg/l0.05 0.001 NE 0.1 10 10 NE NE NE 0.02 0.02 NE NE 250 0.0002 500 NE 0.0003 1NA 245.1 NA 200.7 300.0 NA NA NA NA 200.8 NA NA NA 300 200.8 SM2540C NA NA 200.7Constituent ConcentrationsNA <0.00006 0.132 <0.0015 NA 0.63 NA <0.0004 10.9 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0463 0.546 90.4 <0.0054 316 NA <0.01 <0.040.558 <0.00006 <0.02 <0.0015 NA <0.500 NA <0.0004 10.8 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0616 0.324 117 <0.0054 327 NA <0.01 <0.040.0112 <0.00006 <0.0017 <0.0015 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 <1 <0.0084 <0.0021 <0.002 <0.01 5.9 <0.0054 <30 NA <0.002 <0.040.0154 <0.00006 <0.02 <0.02 NA <0.500 NA <0.0004 7.53 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0223 0.575 34 <0.0054 290 NA 0.314 0.3020.0276 <0.00006 0.0205 0.0217 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 4.91 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0124 0.672 23.6 <0.0054 218 NA 0.588 0.3790.0415 <0.00006 0.0316 0.0405 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 7.17 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0236 0.479 34.5 <0.0054 279 NA 0.475 0.1260.0391 <0.00006 <0.02 0.102 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 4.28 0.0465 <0.0021 0.0084 0.399 26.1 <0.0054 145 NA 1.19 <0.040.259 <0.00006 <0.02 <0.02 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 10.9 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0427 1.59 62.2 <0.0054 361 NA 0.018 <0.040.0913 <0.00006 0.0211 <0.02 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 7.2 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0136 0.983 72.4 <0.0054 383 NA 0.356 <0.040.157 <0.00006 <0.02 <0.02 NA <0.250 NA <0.0004 11.2 0.0441 <0.0021 0.0348 1.22 49.7 <0.0054 325 NA 0.562 <0.04Prepared by: BER/RBI Checked by: HJFP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx20 of 20
TABLE 5SOIL AND ASH ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAAnalytical Parameter pH Moisture Arsenic Antimony Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate Thallium Vanadium ZincS.U. % 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 mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kgNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NANA NANA NA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NASourceLocationSample DateAsh/Soil1971 Pond5/16/2014 8.23 28.7 119 <5.45 954 6.99 54.3 5.5 U 0.103 U 3710 27.7 54.2 72.7 33900 34.9 2890127 <0.267 <2.72 40.8 7690 7.99 0.231 U 920 493 41.5 <8.17 NA 57.9Ash/Soil1971 Pond5/19/2014 7.56 29.4 136 <5.5 632 5.28 66.4 5.6 U 0.105 U 5210 18.4 62.5 74.9 36300 32.2 2580126 <0.282 27.3 85.2 5720 6.44 0.234 U 822 564 85.5 0.715 U NA 66.3Ash1971 Pond5/20/2014 7.81 27.9 60.4 <5.49 384 7.55 36.4 5.6 U 0.104 U 2890 <13.9 41.3 74.7 15300 32.4 170064.7 <0.261 5.92 39.7 3610 14.6 0.233 U 551 327 39.1 0.714 U NA 51.9Ash/Soil1971 Pond5/20/2014 8.5 29.8 104 <5.64 785 5.68 58.5 5.7 U 0.107 U 3670 <14.3 44.3 68.5 23700 28.4 2350103 <0.272 <2.82 49.1 6410 8.73 0.24 U 765 426 34.5 <8.46 NA 48.2Ash/Soil1971 Pond5/20/2014 8.58 31.2 115 <5.64 599 5.28 57.1 5.8 U 0.107 U 3270 15.4 49.9 76.4 23500 32.8 2260107 <0.285 <2.82 46 5720 7.34 0.24 U 699 418 53.4 <8.47 NA 55.9Ash/Soil1971 Pond5/20/2014 8.49 20 58.9 <4.9 477 3.62 41.1 5 U 0.0931 U 3000 <12.6 38.7 49.6 30800 20.1 1650105 <0.235 <2.45 33.1 3860 <4.9 0.208 U 475 317 22.3 <7.35 NA 35.9Soil1971 Pond5/21/2014 7.58 15.6 50.2 0.868 U 18 2.97 25.1 4.8 U <1.17 242 35.6 24.6 27.7 216 14.1 129056.1 0.0113 U <2.35 17.3 <117 0.938 U <1.17 415 11.3 <17.8 <7.04 NA 25.8Soil1971 Pond5/21/2014 7.87 13.3 4.52 U 0.837 U 1.92 0.0758 U <11.3 4.7 U 0.0859 U 65 17 <3.39 0.328 U 424 NE 37.12.45 0.0115 U 0.192 U <2.26 <113 0.905 U 0.192 U 18.9 U 2.12 18.2 0.588 U NA <4.52SoilNortheast of 1984 Pond 5/13/2014 6.27 3.2 0.709 U 0.749 U 1.29 0.0679 U 0.851 U 4.1 U 0.077 U <40.5 <10.2 <3.04 <2.03 342 <3.04 <20.3 2.42 0.0099 U <2.03 <2.03 <101 0.81 U 0.172 U 16.9 U <1.01 74.4 0.527 U NA <4.05SoilNorth of 1984 Pond5/9/2014 7.9 6.8 0.736 U 0.778 U 1.42 0.0705 U 0.884 U 4.3 U 0.0799 U 224 5.3 U <3.16 <2.1 835 <3.16 365.05 0.0106 U 0.179 U <2.1 <105 0.842 U 0.179 U 17.6 U 1.26 5.3 U 0.547 U NA <4.21Ash/Soil1984 Pond5/7/2014 8.02 42.1 38.1 1.27 U 304 4.15 31 6.8 U <1.71 2390 32.5 19.3 70.7 7610 21.2 80940.8 <0.337 <3.42 28.5 1890 <6.84 0.291 U <342 290 74.8 0.889 U NA 29.2SoilNorth of 1984 Pond 5/13/2014 4.68 8.2 0.74 U 0.783 U <1.06 0.0709 U 0.888 U 4.3 U 0.0804 U <42.3 5.4 U <3.17 0.307 U <42.3 0.529 U 1.77 U 1.22 0.0106 U 0.18 U <2.12 8.82 U 0.846 U 0.18 U 17.7 U <1.06 <16.1 0.55 U <1.06 <4.23SoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/13/2014 4.55 2.4 0.69 U 0.729 U 1.5 0.066 U 0.828 U 4 U 0.0749 U <39.4 5 U <2.96 <1.97 1620 <2.96 32.21.93 0.0099 U 0.167 U <1.97 <98.5 0.788 U 0.167 U 16.5 U <0.985 <15.1 0.512 U 3.95 <3.94Ash/Soil1971 Pond5/9/2014 6.53 23.3 19.6 0.955 U 214 2.71 <12.9 5.2 U <1.29 1700 6.5 U 27.4 38.8 20100 16.8 84288.3 <0.247 <2.58 26.4 1370 14.9 0.219 U <258 148 <19.6 0.671 U NA 24.1Ash/SoilNorth of 1971 Pond5/7/2014 8.35 26.5 49.1 0.955 U 430 5.81 31.3 5.4 U <1.3 3560 6.8 U 42.3 58.1 13900 28.6 151067.4 <0.266 <2.59 30.5 2820 5.39 0.22 U 499 420 24.6 <7.77 NA 58SoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/5/2014 7.89 9.1 0.733 U 0.775 U 1.34 0.0702 U 0.88 U 4.3 U 0.0796 U 44.6 <10.8 <3.14 <2.1 549 <3.14 29.51.64 <2.1 <2.1 <105 0.838 U 0.178 U 17.5 U 1.28 0.545 U <16.2 7.82 <4.19 0.0108 USoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/5/2014 7.52 3.9 <4.16 0.77 U 3.37 0.0697 U <10.4 4.1 U 0.0791 U 152 5.2 U <3.12 <2.08 1780 <3.12 87.15.7 <2.08 <2.08 <104 0.832 U 0.177 U 17.4 U 2.22 0.541 U <15.5 52.6 <4.16 0.0099 USoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/5/2014 8.39 4.5 0.712 U 0.752 U 9.62 0.0681 U 0.854 U 4.2 U 0.0773 U 1500 5.2 U 3.33 2.08 1060 <3.05 71.710.5 <2.03 6.29 <102 0.813 U 0.173 U 17 U 5.27 0.529 U 5.2 U 34.8 11.2 0.0104 USoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/6/2014 7.81 6.3 0.732 U 0.774 U 5.65 0.0701 U 0.879 U 4.2 U 0.0795 U 119 5.3 U 4.46 <2.09 1120 <3.14 46.94.9 <2.09 <2.09 <105 0.837 U 0.178 U 17.5 U 2.04 0.544 U <15.8 13.7 10.3 0.01 USoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/6/2014 10.9 4.9 <4.04 0.748 U 13.6 0.0677 U <10.1 4.2 U 0.0768 U 7360 <10.4 5.35 6.38 2610 <3.03 20315.3 <2.02 18.6 112 0.809 U 0.172 U <202 17.6 0.526 U 80.6 72.3 4.12 0.01 USoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/6/2014 8.3 5.7 <4.2 0.777 U 18.9 <1.05 <10.5 4.2 U 0.0798 U 27300 5.3 U 3.37 2.38 1330 <3.15 50711.2 <2.1 2.6 173 0.84 U 0.178 U <210 74.2 0.546 U <15.9 13.2 <4.2 0.0106 USoilSoutheast of 1971 Pond 5/6/2014 7.92 4.7 <4 0.74 U 11.2 0.067 U 0.839 U 4.1 U 0.076 U 226 5.2 U <3 <2 1390 <3 60.14.56 <2<2 <99.9 0.799 U 0.17 U 16.7 U 2.94 0.52 U <15.6 22.8 <4 <0.201Prepared by: BER/RBI Checked by: HJFNotes:1.Units:mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram2.NE = Not established3.NA = Not available4.5.GP-3 (72-76)Sample data was obtained from the Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report, Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, June 2014.SB-1 (2.5-3)SB-2 (2.5-3)SPT-3 (10-12)SPT-7 (4-6)V-DPT-1 (13-15)V-DPT-2 (11-15)Analytical results with "<" preceeding the result indicate that the parameter was not detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit.U indicates results below the method detection limit (MDL) and < indicates results below the practical quantitation limit (PQL)V-DPT-3 (11-13)V-DPT-4 (11-13)V-DPT-5 (13-15)V-DPT-6 (12-14)Field ParametersConstituent ConcentrationsUnitsAnalytical MethodV-DPT-7 (13-15)GP-3 (80-84)GP-5 (20-24)GP-6 (24-28)MW-34C (4-6)MW-36C (4-6)PZ-INT (12-14)GP-3 (76-80)Sample Name and Depth (ft-bls)GP-2 (52-56)GP-2 (72-76)GP-3 (24-28)P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx1 of 1
TABLE 6SURFACE WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAAluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Boron Cadmium Chloride Chromium Copper Fluoride Hardness Iron Lead Manganese Molybdenum Nickel Selenium Sulfate TDS Zincmg/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 mg/l mg/lNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NALocation Sample DateIntake Canal 3/10/2014 0.132 0.001 0.0026 0.041 0.142 <0.001 29 <0.005 0.01 <1 35.1 0.211 <0.001 0.013 0.0102 <0.005 0.00198 36 130 <0.005Discharge Canal 3/10/2014 0.096 0.00127 0.00246 0.04 0.143 <0.001 29 <0.005 0.009 <1 35 0.192 <0.001 0.012 0.0103 <0.005 0.00189 36 120 <0.005Prepared by: BER/RBI Checked by: HJFNotes:1. Analytical parameter abbreviations:TDS = Total dissolved solids2. Units:mg/L = milligrams per liter3. NE = Not established4. NA = Not available5.6. Sample data provided by DukeIntakeDischargeAnalytical results with "<" preceeding the result indicate that the parameter was not detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit.Constituent ConcentrationsAnalytical ParameterUnitsAnalytical MethodSample IDP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx1 of 1
TABLE 7ASH BASIN PORE WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINApH Temp.Specific ConductanceDO ORP Drawdown Turbidity Alkalinity Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Bromide Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum NickelNitrate (as N)Nitrite (as N)Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Strontium Sulfate TDS Thallium Vanadium ZincS.U. Deg C uS/cm mg/l mV ft NTUs 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 mg/l ug/l ug/l mg/l mg/l ppm mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/lNA NANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NANANANANANA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NALocationSample Date1984 Pond5/20/2014 7.43 19.84 997 0.07 -267.1 0.18 >1000 335 <0.0053 0.275 0.925 <0.01 4.26 <2.0 <0.01 122 83.4 <0.03 0.0913 9.57 <0.030 38.60.184 <0.00006 0.0703 0.0637 <250 <0.4 18.6 <0.04 <0.0021 0.0411 7.24 73.2 631 <0.0054 0.129 0.0723Notes:Prepared by: BER/RBI Checked by: HJF1. Analytical parameter abbreviations:Temp. = TemperatureDO = Dissolved oxygenCond. = Specific conductanceORP = Oxidation reduction potentialTDS = Total dissolved solidsTSS = Total suspended solidsTOC = Total organic carbon2. Units:˚C = Degrees CelciusSU = Standard UnitsmV = millivoltsµS/cm = microsiemens per centimeter/micromhos per centimeterNTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unitmg/L = milligrams per liter3.NE = Not established4.NA = Not available5.6.Constituent ConcentrationsAnalytical results with "<" preceeding the result indicate that the parameter was not detected at a concentration which attains or exceeds the laboratory reporting limit.Sample data was obtained from the Geosyntec Consultants, (DRAFT) Preliminary Site Investigation Data Report, Conceptual Closure Plan, L.V. Sutton Plant, Project Number GC5592, June 2014.Sample IDPZ-INTField ParametersAnalytical ParameterUnitsAnalytical MethodP:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Tables 3 - 7.xlsx1 of 1
TABLE 8ENVIRONMENTAL EXPLORATION AND SAMPLING PLANL.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAExploration AreaBoring IDQuantityEstimated Boring Depth(ft bgs)Well IDs QuantityEstimated Well Depth(ft bgs)Screen Length (ft)Well IDs QuantityEstimated Well Depth(ft bgs)Screen Length (ft)Well IDs QuantityEstimated Well Depth(ft bgs)Screen Length (ft)Sample IDsQuantity of LocationsQuantity of SamplesSample IDsQuantity of LocationsQuantity of SamplesWell IDsQuantity of LocationsQuantity of SamplesAsh BasinAB-1andAB-2240ABMW-1SandABMW-2S22510ABMW-1DandABMW-2D2 25 5 N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ABeyond Waste BoundaryN/A 0 N/AAW-1BThroughAW-9BandSW-1BThroughSW-6B15 25 10AW-1CAW-2CAW-3CAW-4CAW-5CAW-8CAW-9CandSW-1CThroughSW-6C13 45 5AW-7DandAW-6D2 120 5SW-004,SW-1C,SW-6A,SW-8A,SW-CFP,andSW-CF00166SW-004,SW-1C,SW-6A,SW-8A,SW-CFP,andSW-CF00166MW-27B *,MW-15 cluster,MW-16 cluster,MW-20 cluster, MW-12 *,MW-31C *, MW-7 * cluster,PZ-10S/D, others TBDandProduct WellsPE-SW2, PE-SW4,PE-SW5, PE-SW6A,PE-SW6B, PE-SW6D,PE-SW6E21 21BackgroundN/A 0 N/A MW-37B 1 25 10 MW-37C 1 45 5 N/A 0 N/A N/A SW-CFUP 1 1 SW-CFUP 1 1 MW-5 * cluster 3 3Notes: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. * = Compliance monitoring well will be sampled during routing compliance montoring event in March 2015.Existing Monitoring WellsShallow Intermediate Monitoring Wells ("B" Series)20-25'(Single Cased)Soil BoringsSedimentWater Qulity SampleDeep Monitoring Wells("D" Series)>60'(Single Cased)Deep Intermediate Monitoring Wells("C" Series)40-45'(Single Cased)P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Table 8‐Exploration and Sampling Plan.xlsx
TABLE 9
SOIL AND ASH PARAMETERS AND ANALYTICAL METHODS
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
INORGANIC COMPOUNDS UNITS METHOD
Aluminum mg/kg EPA 6010C
Antimony mg/kg EPA 6020A
Arsenic mg/kg EPA 6020A
Barium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Beryllium mg/kg EPA 6020A
Boron mg/kg EPA 6010C
Cadmium mg/kg EPA 6020A
Calcium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Chloride mg/kg EPA 9056A
Chromium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Cobalt mg/kg EPA 6020A
Copper mg/kg EPA 6010C
Iron mg/kg EPA 6010C
Lead mg/kg EPA 6020A
Magnesium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Manganese mg/kg EPA 6010C
Mercury mg/kg EPA Method 7470A/7471B
Molybdenum mg/kg EPA 6010C
Nickel mg/kg EPA 6010C
Nitrate as Nitrogen mg/kg EPA 9056A
pH SU EPA 9045D
Potassium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Selenium mg/kg EPA 6020A
Sodium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Strontium mg/kg EPA 6010C
Sulfate mg/kg EPA 9056A
Thallium (low level) (SPLP Extract only)mg/kg EPA 6020A
Vanadium mg/kg EPA 6020A
Zinc mg/kg EPA 6010C
Sediment Specific Samples
Cation exchange capacity meg/100g EPA 9081
Particle size distribution %
Percent solids %
Percent organic matter %EPA/600/R-02/069
Redox potential mV Faulkner et al. 1898
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.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Table 9-Soil and
Ash Parameters.xlsx
TABLE 10
ASH PORE WATER, GROUNDWATER, SURFACE WATER, AND SEEP PARAMETERS AND
ANALYTICAL METHODS
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
PARAMETER RL UNITS METHOD
pH NA SU Field Water Quality Meter
Specific Conductance NA µS/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
Aluminum 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Antimony 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Arsenic 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Barium 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Beryllium 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Boron 0.05 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Cadmium 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Chromium 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Cobalt 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Copper 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Iron 0.01 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Lead 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Manganese 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Mercury (low level)0.000012 mg/L EPA 245.7 or 1631
Molybdenum 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Nickel 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Selenium 0.001 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Strontium 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Thallium (low level)0.0002 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Vanadium (low level)0.0003 mg/L EPA 200.8 or 6020A
Zinc 0.005 mg/L EPA 200.7 or 6010C
Total Combined Radium 5 pCi/L EPA 903.0
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
Methane 0.1 mg/L RSK 175
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
Sulfide 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
Iron Speciation Vendor Specific mg/L IC-ICP-CRC-MS
Manganese Speciation Vendor Specific mg/L IC-ICP-CRC-MS
Notes:
INORGANICS
FIELD PARAMETERS
NA indicates not applicable.
ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CONSTITUENTS
1. Select constituents will be analyzed for total and dissolved concentrations.
ANIONS/CATIONS
RADIONUCLIDES
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\DENR Letter Deliverables\GW Assessment Plans\Sutton\Tables\Table 10‐Groundwater_Surface 
Water_Seep Parameters.xlsx

APPENDIX A
NCDENR LETTER OF AUGUST 13, 2014

APPENDIX B

EXCERPTS FROM
CATLIN ENGINEERING & SCIENTISTS PHASE I
AND II REPORTS
AND
GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS, PRELIMINARY SITE
INVESTIGATION DATA REPORTS, CONCEPTUAL
CLOSURE PLAN, (DRAFT)

N0TESSCALE: 1”=900’IIIBoundaryinformationpriorboundarysurveymapsprovidedbyProgressEnergy.0900’1800’Thismopisnotpreporedforrecording.CooIIngWellcoordinatesinElectionTableoreNCGSGridcoordinatesbasedonNAD‘83.PondNCWildlifeWellelevationsorebasedonBenchmarkLakeAccesNCGS“Queensboro”,NCVD29.250’reviewboundaryand500’complianceboundaryaredelineatedusing4green,M1J5(’f3MW5tsteel,fencepostsCoonapproximatelakeshorMV5F3roadondikDrawingbasedansurveybyHomes&AssociatescompletedonDecember23,2008.PondECM&providedbyProgressEnergy—TMWO7BCP2—#monitoringwellswereinstalledaspartofpreviousTMWO7ClandfillinvestigationECM\L10COMW107-4NestedtemporarywellsinstalledMay/June 2010byCATLINroadteredge-.P7—2MW13AdaptedfromfigurecreatedbyISHInc.dated2/25/09_____,,___,eTMWO7AM\N8MW2OMwiOLDASHPZ—1OSp77fencePONDAREAwater edgeP7—iPZ—3MW.ECMCo00MW2AMW20PZ—15PZ—8PZ2road-”MW2BTMWO6AC/LRRtracksMW2C1TMWO6B—P13PZ—12PZ—6D_____________TMWO6CPZ24PZ-18€)PZ—14L325PZ—2ceM”V15PlanttoeçooEEPZ—iSAreaMW14‘.______M’15D0MWlAMW1\\\0PZ-21E3MW11MW17PZ—26MW6APZ—23ASTPZ—28MW6BECMNCGRIDNORTH(NAD83)MW16NCW18MW6CNortherncontrolM16DTMWO3A3/,5Pz—27PZ—25NORTHrotated90fromverticalTMWO3BTMWO5ACanalTMWO3C.V3BTMWO5B-L4NCGSFINA(NAD83)MW19TMWOSoutherncontrolLiMw7CTMWQ4BTMWO5CN=204042.5313MW7RSTMWO4CMW12E=2307566,6490MW7A5TMWO2AECMEl=21,86’(NGvD29)TMWO2BC/LRRtracksPE--SW2TMWO1ATMWO2CPZ-29ECML5ECMSOLARTMWO1BIFIELDTMWO1CL6LEGENDIECMECMPE—5w4llL7EECM—ExistingConcreteMarker(found)0PE—SW3ECM\L80EIP—ExistingIronPipe1”(found)©NCGSMonumentEIPL9ExistingSW—WaterSupplyWello0PE—SWS1/NHC—SWeExistingMonitoringWell5ExistingMonitoringWellsampledMW4AL10fortargetmetalsC,MW4EECMNHC—SW45NestedTemporaryMonitoringWelllocationsampledfortargetmetalsECMPEW6AHC—SI’J3PE—SW60CDPE—SW6C\ZEIIFIGURE0)‘‘ISUTTONELECTRICPLANT_______ATLINPROGRESSENERGYSITEPLANWILMINGTONNC2/cEngineeand____________________________________________________________________/‘JOBNO.209-100tATE:AUG2010SCALE:1=900THWCHECKEDHY:BJA1______‘‘S(I)209100—PROCRESSENERGY—ACIG2O1O—FICURE2
NOTES:BoundoryinformationpriorboundorysurveymopsprovidedbyProgressEnergy.Thismopisnotpreparedforrecording.250’reviewboundaryand500’complianceboundoryoredelineatedusing4green,steel,fence posts.DrawingbasedensurveybyHomes&AssociatescompletedonDecember23,2008.AdoptedfromfigurecreatedbySNInc.dated2/25/09&providedbyProgressEnergy.PZ—l/monitoringwellswereinstalledaspartofpreviouslandfillinvestigation.NestedtemporarywellsinstalledMay/June2010byCATLIN.MonitoringwelllocationandelevationsbasedonsurveybyParamounteEngineering,Inc.dotedMarch5,2012.NortherncontrollBECMNCGRIDNORTH(NAD8,3)NORTHrotated90.fromyerticelECMNCGSFINA(NAD83)N=204042,5313E=2307566.6490El=21.86’(NGVD29)LbHC—SW40©SECM-ExistingConcreteMarker(found)EIP-ExistingIronPipe1”(found)NCGSMonumentExistingSW-WaterSupplyWellExistingMonitoringWell(NotGauged/Sampled)ExistingMonitoringWell(UtilizedforAshPondSampling)NewMonitoringWellInstalledbyCATLIN(UtilizedforAshPondSampling)NewTemporaryLeachateCollectionPointsinstalledbyCATLIN(UtilizedforAshPondsampling)SCATLINEngineersandScientistsSUTtONELECTRICPLANTPROGRESSENERGYWILMINGTON,NCCoolingPondCoolingPondSCALE:“=900’0approximatelakeshol900’MW2OB1800’MW1.c/LPlantAreaA’MW5AMW1OSouthernECMklW8C/LRRtracksECM—60L311L5—SW6BHC—SW3PE—SW6CLEGEND209-100DATOAPR2012
AA’PortlandCementNativeBackfillBentonitePelletsMW-28BMW-28TMW-28CMW-22CMW-22BMW-04BMW-07AMW-21CPZ-27PZ-26PZ-22PZ-20MW-bPZ-4MW-05CMW-04AMW-07CMW-23BMW-24B.:.MWO5BMW-07BMW-23CMW-24C:..P11ODMW-05A6040200-200>0)ILl40-60-80-100Finetomed.SANDw/someareaswithtr.tosomecse.sandandsilts.Mod.towellsortedoverall.APPROXIMATELANDSURFACEFinetomed.SANDw/someareaswithtr.tosomecsesandandsilts.Mod.towellsortedoverall.--i---——z———6040200-20-40-60-80-10Silty,f.SAND.Poorlysorted.Very
darkgreen.—LeanCLAYw/littTef.sand.Verydarkgreengray.—-Silty,fSANDPoorlysortedVerydarkgreenishgrayLeanCLAYw/littlefsand—ModplastVerydarkgreengraySOILSLEGENDTopsoil(SP)Poorly-gradedrA(CH)HighPlasticity(SW)Well-gradedClayoSand(CL)Lowto Med.PlasticityInorganicClay(SP-SM)ffEJPoorly-gradedSand(SC)ClayeySandwithSiltUI1IF1(SM)SiltySandOrganicgranularsoils01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,000.7,00Q.8,0009,00010,00011,00012,00013,00014,000DistanceAlongI3aseline(ft)WELLBACKFILLPROJEcT‘tiTLEFIGURECATLINSUTTONELECTRICPLANTCROSSSECTIONPROGRESSENERGYEngineersandScientistsWILMINGTON,NCA-A’4B220Old DairyRoadWilmington,NC28405JOBNp.:IDATE:SCALE:VERT:1=20’IDWNBY:SVHIBY:BJACo,porotrL,onnnoroNo.to,Engnon,ingSorvi000 C.0585209—100IAPR2012HORZ:1.=1.000,I
BB’E::(SP)Poorly-gradedFEP’7’1(SP-CL)LZSandInterbeddedSandandClay.(SC)ClayeySand(GW)Well-graded.PortlandCementBentonitePelletsEl#2 MediumSandMW-13DPZ-28PZ-27MW-12MW-23BMW-23C403020100-10-20OLDASHPONDAREAESTIMATEDASHEXTENT—Clayey,t.SAND0Ce>C)UiAPPROXIMATE
SURFACE•llFinetomed.SANDw/someareaswithtr.tosomecse.sandandsilts.Mod.towellsortedoverall.ClayeySANDLowplastclayCoarsematerialnotedinsands.-30403020100-10-20-30CLAY.Notsampled;notedondrillstring.5000SOILSLEGEND(SM)SiltySand(GP)Poorly-graded::0..Gravel(CL)LowtoMed.PlasticityInorganicClayE(SW)Well-gradedSandPOORLYGRADEDSANDFILL1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000DistanceAlongBaseline(if)WELLBACKFILLPROJECT11TLEFIGURE—CATLINSUTTONELECTRICPLANTCROSSSECTIONEngineers andScientistsPROGRESSENERGYB-B’220OldDairyRoadWilmrngton,NC28405OBNO:DATE:SCALE:VERTi-lODRAWNBY:CHECKEDBY:Co,porafoLioarrorroNo.forEngineeringSe’enenC.0585209—100IAPR2012i-iczioo:SVHBJA
TABLE1MONITORINGWELLCONSTRUCTIONANDGAUGINGDATAL.V.SuttonElectricPlantWELLTOTALCASINGSCREENRISERDATEDATEDTWDTWIDENTIFICATIONDEPTHDEPTHINTERVALHEIGHTINSTALLEDMEASURED(FtBLS)(FtBLS)(FtBLS)(FtBLS)(FtALS)NewWells6/10/10TMWO1A6/9/1021.316.316.3-21.32.4Dry6/29/10Dry6/10/10TMWO1B6/9/10302525.0-30.02.5Dry6/29/10DryTMWO1C6/9/10464141.0-46.06/29/102.530.15TMWO2A6/4/10181313.0-18.06/7/10211.94TMWO2B6/7/10272722.0-27.06/7/1030.71TMWO2C6/7/1043.538.538.5-43.56/8/10316.72TMWO3A6/8/1019.514.514.5-19.5 6/8/100.517.90TMWO3B6/8/10282323.0-28.06/8/1024.36TMWO3C6/8/10454040.0-45.06/8/1030.006/3/106.78TMWO4A6/3/10171212.0-17.036/29/107.03TMWO4B6/3/1027.522.522.5-27.56/3/102.50.00TMWO4C6/3/10443939.0-44.06/4/102.77.40TMWO5A6/2/10171212.0-17.06/2/1033.62TMWO5B6/2/10272222.0-27.06/2/1031.76TMWO5C6/3/1044.539.539.5-44.56/3/102.80.00TMWO6A5/27/10171212.0-17.05/27/1031.90TMWO6B5/27/10 272222.0-27.05/28/1030TMWO6C5/28/10454040.0-45.05/28/10305/26/101.9TMWO7A5/26/10171212.0-17.036/29/102.16TMWO7B5/26/10 272222.0-27.05/26/1037.64TMWO7C5/27/1046.541.541.5-46.55/27/102.50Existing_WellsPZ-1511/20/081999.0-19.06/28/101.7010.84PZ-1911/20/081777.0-17.06/28/102.655.30PZ-2011/20/08201010.0-20.06/25/102.2111.346/25/1013.63PZ-24 11/19/08231313.0-23.02.336/28/1013.55PZ-2611/19/081444.0-14.06/24/102.584.866/24/1023.24PZ-2711/19/08302020.0-30.02.906/27/1023.23PZ-2811/18/081777.0-17.06/24/102.596.97FtBLS=FeetBelowLandSurfaceTOC=TopofCasingFt ALS=FeetAboveLandSurfaceDTW=DepthToWaterProgressEnergy;WellConSummary.xlsCATLINEngineersandScientistsCATLINProjectNo.209-100February2011
Page1of2TABLE1MONITORINGWELLCONSTRUCTIONANDGAUGINGDATAL.V.SuttonElectricPlantINREENGROUNDTOPOFRISERGROUNDWELLDATENORTHING EASTINGTOTALGASGCRVALSURFACECASINGDATE DTWHEIGHTDTWWATERIDENTIFICATION INSTALLED(Y)(X)IELEVATIONELEVATION*MEASURED(FtALS)(FtBTOC)ELEVATIONMW-102/8/90203192.17 2304857.6750 4040.0-50.0NM26.25--9----NM----MW-135/25/04 197946.822305021.781333.0-13.014.116.34--------2.24----MW-13D2004197963.952305018.7842 3333.0-42.014.116.97-------2.87----iMW-162005196974.532306754.581555.0-15.0 13.0 15.65---19----2.65----;:iMW-i6D2004196961.332306759.71 474242.0-47.013.015.33•------2.33-----9/17/1122.787.39MW-21C9/16/11197773.532306913.7345 4040.0-45.027.7 30.1710/3/11-2.4709.971/18/1221.638.549/16/118.6710.37MW-22B9/15/11198349.052307016.9627 2222.0-27.016.519.0410/3/112.548.5210.521/17/1210.488.569/16/119.999.11MW-22C9/15/il198349.482307023.2944.539.5 39.5-44.516.719.1010/3/112.48.5810.52i1{Th210.568.54MW-23B 9/6/11198967.442306901.7626.521.5 21.5-26.514.016.20.-------2.2---1.29/8/117.00 9.64MW-23C9/7/11198972.102306903.52454040.0-45.014.216.6410/3/112.445A611.181/16/127.67 8.979/14/il4.5910.78MW-24B 9/9/11200712.122306251.09272222.0-27.012.615.3710/4/112.77_3311.541/17/125.90 9.479/14/113.6611.36MW-24C 9/13/11200716.552306263.9045 4040.0-45.012.415.0210/4/112.62a5211.501/17/125.71 9.31FtBLS=FeetBelowLandSurfaceTOG=TopofCasingFtALS=FeetAboveLandSurfaceDTW=DepthToWaterFTBTOC=FeetBelowTopOfCasing*=HorizontalDatumisNAD83(NSRS2007). ElevationsarebasedonNAVD88.ToadjustNAVD88toNGVD29add1.30toNAVD88elevations.ProgressEnergy;2012WeliConSumFinalCATLINEngineersandScientistsCATLINProjectNo.209100July2012
Page2of2TABLE1MONITORINGWELLCONSTRUCTIONANDGAUGINGDATAL.V.SuttonElectricPlantTTALCASINGSCREENGROUNDTOPOFRISERGROUNDWELLDATENORTHING EASTINGDEPTHINTERVALSURFACECASINGDATE DTWHEIGHTDTWWATER-IDENTIFICATIONINSTALLED(Y)(X)(FtBLS)(FtBLS)(FtBLS)ELEVATIONELEVATION*MEASURED(FtALS)(FtBTOC)ELEVATION9/19/114.489.81MW27B9/8/10202585272304679452722 220270114 142910/3/112894309991/18/124.86 9.439/29/1122.349.43MW-28B9/28/11197368.432307359.9730 2525.0-30.028.931.7710/3/112.8722.509.271/17/1224.03 7.749/22/1114.1516.78MW-28C 9/21/11197356.572307354.09454040.0-45.028.530.93•-------.2.43--j-.--.1/17/1223.227.719/28/1122.589.569/29/1122.719.43MW28T9/27/1119737011230735285 6055550600297321410/3/11244222710/4/1122.909.241/17/1224.387.769/14/118.409.10MW31B9/13/112010451023068514227 22220 270149175010/4/1126:J11051/17/128.558.959/15/117.659.92MW-31C9/14/11201046.822306858.17454040.0-45.014.917.57!O/4/ii2.676.5511.021/17/128.638.94FtBLS=FeetBelowLandSurfaceTOC=TopofCasingFtALS=FeetAboveLandSurfaceDTW=DepthToWaterFTBTOC=FeetBelowTopOfCasing*=HorizontalDatumisNAD83(NSRS2007).ElevationsarebasedonNAVD88.ToadjustNAVD88to NGVD29add1.30toNAVD88elevations.ProgressEnergy;2012WeliConSumFinalCATLINEngineersandScientistsCATLINProjectNo.209100July2012
NOTES:SCALE:1”=900’BoundaryinformationpriorboundarysurveymopsprovidedbyProgressEnergy.Thismopisnotpreparedforrecording.250’reviewboundaryand500’cornplionceboundaryoredelineatedusing4green,steel,fenceposts.DrawingbasedonsurveybyHomes&AssociatescompletedonDecember23.2008.AdaptedfromfigurecreatedbyISHInc.doted2/25/09&providedbyProgressEnergy.PZ—lmonitoringwellswereinstalledaspartofpreviouslandfillinvestigation.NestedtemporarywellsinstalledMay/June2010byCATLIN.MonitoringwelllocationandelevationsbasedonsurveybyParomounteEngineering,Inc.dotedMarch5,2012.PZ—4PZ—2Pz—lPZ’-7eNortherncontrolECMNCGRIDNORTH(NAD8)NORTHretoted90IromverticolSouthernC/LRRtracks[5ECMNCGSFINA(NAD83)N=204042.5313E=2307566.6490El=21.86’(NGVD29)00©eeECM-ExistingConcreteMarker(found)EIP-ExistingIronPipe1”(found)NCGSMonumentExistingSW-WaterSupplyWellExistingMonitoringWell(NotGauged)ExistingMonitoringWell(Gaugedon9/30/11)ExistingMonitoringWell(Gaugedon10/3/11)ExistingMonitoringWell(Gaugedon10/4/11)GroundwaterContour(0.5ftinterval)NewTemporaryLeachateCollectionPointsbyCATLIN(UtilizedforAshPondsampling)I°°POTENTIOMETRICSURFACEFIGURESUTTONELECTRICPLANTPROGRESSENERGYELEVATIONSANDCONTOURSAS OFIWILMINGTON,NCSEPTEMBERIOCTOBER2011FOREngineersandScientistsIWELLS30ft.DEEPORLESS54AijJOBNO209-100DATE:APR20121=900’DRABY:THWJCHEOfEDBY:BJA209100—PROGRESSENERGY—APR2O12—FIGURE_SACoolingPondCoolingPond0900’shorMW2O1800MW1c/LPlantAreaMW5BMW5CMW5AMW10e—losECMMW8ECML311M,.W4MW4AMW4BLiDNHC—SW4PE—SW6A/PE:—SW6BHO—SW3LEGENDS
NOTES:SCALE;1”=900’BoundaryinformationpriorboundarysurveymapsprovidedbyProgressEnergy.Thismapisnotpreparedforrecording.250’reviewboundaryand500’complianceboundaryoredelineatedusing4’green,steel,fenceposts.DrawingbasedonsurveybyHomes&AssociatescompletedanDecember23,2008.AdoptedfromfigurecreotedbyISHInc.doted2/25/09&providedbyProgressEnergy.PZ—lmonitoringwellswereinstalledaspartofpreviouslandfillinvestigation.NestedtemporarywellsinstalledMay/June2010byCATLIN.MonitoringwelllocationandelevationsbasedonsurveybyPoromounteEngineering,Inc.dotedMarch5,2012.NOGSFINA(NAD83)N=204042.5313E=2307566.6490El=21.86’(NGVD29)NCGRIDNORTH(NAD83)NORTHrototed90FromverUcel0©eeECM-ExistingConcreteMarker(found)EIP-ExistingIronPipe1(found)NCGSMonumentExistingSW-WaterSupplyWellExistingMonitoringWell(NotGauged)ExistingMonitoringWell(Gaugedon9/30/11)ExistingMonitoringWell(Gaugedon10/3/11)ExistingMonitoringWell(Gaugedon10/4/11)GroundwaterContour(0.5ftinterval)NewTemporaryLeachateCollectionPointsinstalledbyCATLIN(UtilizedforAshPondsampling)S-5-CATLINEngineersandScientistsPRSSCTSUTTONELECTRICPLANTPROGRESSENERGYWILMINGTON,NC209-100DATE:APR2012JSCALE:POTENTIOMETRICSURFACEELEVATIONSANDCONTOURSASOFSEPTEMBER/OCTOBER2011FORWELLS>30ft.DEEP[‘DY:THWCHED(EDDY:BJAI=900’CoolingPondCoolingPond0900’shorMW2Q1800’MW13D(9.02c/LPlantAreaMW5BMW5CIW5AMW10(9.35)NortherncontrolSouthern—losPZ—4t1PZ—27eECMMW8PZ—IC/LRRtracksECML3ECMlB\L4MW4MW4AMW4BECM\L5[10NHC—SW4HC—SW3SW6CLEGEND
PZ-5B
PZ-4B
PZ-3B
PZ-2B
CPT-1
CPT-2
CPT-3
CPT-4
CPT-5 CPT-6A
CPT-7A
CPT-8
GP-1
GP-2
GP-3
GP-4
GP-5
GP-6
SCPT-1
SCPT-2
SCPT-3A
SCPT-4
SCPT-5A
SCPT-6
SPT-1
SPT-2
SPT-3
SPT-4
SPT-5
SPT-6
SPT-7
SPT-8
SPT-10
SPT-11
PZ-1B
PZ-6B
B-1
B-2
B-3
HA-1-1
HA-1-2
HA-2-2 HA-2-1
HA-3-1
HA-3-2
L.V. SUTTON PLANT
HISTORICAL AND CONCEPTUAL
CLOSURE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROJECT NO:
FIGURE
JUNE 2014
3.F1
GC5592
0 600'1200'
SCALE IN FEET
N
LEGEND
GEOSYNTEC CONE PENETRATION TEST
GEOSYNTEC GEOPROBE
GEOSYNTEC PIEZOMETER
GEOSYNTEC SEISMIC CONE PENETRATION TEST
GEOSYNTEC STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
HISTORICAL HAND-AUGER
HISTORICAL PIEZOMETER
HISTORICAL STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
NOTES:
1. B-SERIES, HA-SERIES, AND PZ-B-SERIES POINTS ARE
SHOWN AT APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS.
2. POST-FIX 'A' INDICATES A POINT ON THE DIKE OF 2006
INTERIOR CONTAINMENT AREA.
3. THE LOCATIONS OF THE GEOSYNTEC BORINGS WERE
SURVEYED BY WSP SELLS, INC., IN MAY 2014.
COOLING
POND
CANAL
CPT-1
GP-1
SPT-1
SCPT-1
2006 INTERIOR
CONTAINMENT AREA
1971
ASH POND AREA
1984 ASH
POND AREA
HA-1-1
B-1
PZ-1
PZ-1971
Table 2.T1. Historical Monitoring Well and Piezometer Construction Details
L.V. Sutton Hydrogeologic Site Assessment
June 2014 1 of 3 Geosyntec
Location ID Date Installed Northing (ft)Easting (ft)
Well
Diameter
(inches)
Screened
Interval
(ft BGS)
TOC (inner)
Elevation (ft)**
TOC (inner)
Elevation
Corrected to
NAVD88 (ft)
Total
Depth
(ft BGS)
Constructed By
MW-1A**12/4/1984 198312.98 2306558.21 2 12-17 20.88~20.88 17 Unknown
MW-1B 12/12/1984 --2 22-27 --27 Unknown
MW-2A 12/5/1984 --2 12-17 --17 Unknown
MW-2BG 12/12/1984 --2 22-27 --27 Unknown
MW-2CG 12/15/1986 --2 40-45 10.38*9.08 45 Unknown
MW-3A 12/10/1984 --2 12-17 --17 Unknown
MW-3B 12/11/1984 --2 22-27 --27 Unknown
MW-4 12/13/1984 --2 22-27 --27 Unknown
MW-4AG 12/16/1986 --2 12-17 --17 Unknown
MW-4BN 12/12/1986 --2 40-45 --45 Unknown
MW-5AT 12/16/1986 --2 12-17 --17 Unknown
MW-5BG 12/15/1986 --2 22-27 --27 Unknown
MW-5CN 12/15/1986 --2 40-45 --45 Unknown
MW-6A**12/16/1986 200371.81 2306083.31 2 12-17 15.69~15.69 17 Unknown
MW-6BG 12/16/1986 --2 22-27 --27 Unknown
MW-6CG 12/16/1986 --2 40-45 16.62*15.32 45 Unknown
MW-7A 12/14/1986 --2 12-17 --17 Unknown
MW-7B 12/14/1986 --2 22-27 --27 Unknown
MW-7CN,T 12/14/1986 --2 40-45 16.98*15.68 45 Unknown
MW-8T 2/8/1990 --2 40-50 17.49*16.19 50 Unknown
MW-9 2/7/1990 --2 40-50 27.46*26.16 50 Unknown
MW-10 2/8/1990 203192.17 2304857.67 2 40-50 26.25*24.95 50 Unknown
MW-11N 2/6/1990 --2 40-50 25.37*24.07 50 Unknown
MW-12N 2/6/1990 --2 40-50 20.83*19.53 50 Unknown
MW-13 5/25/2004 197946.82 2305021.78 2 3-13 18.21*16.91 13 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-13D 1/28/2005 197963.95 2305018.78 2 33.5-38.5 18.16*16.86 39 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-14**5/25/2004 197250.99 2306180.303 2 1-11 12.97~12.97 11 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-15 5/25/2004 196475.65 2306044.01 2 1-11 11.47*10.17 11 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-15D 1/31/2005 196476.98 2306061.06 2 40-45 11.21*9.91 45 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-16 6/7/2004 196974.53 2306754.58 2 2-12 16.91*15.61 12 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-16D 6/7/2004 196961.33 2306759.71 2 42-47 16.43*15.13 47 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-17 6/14/2004 --2 45-50 30.61*29.31 50 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-18 6/10/2004 --2 45-50 21.85*20.55 50 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-19N 6/15/2004 --2 45-50 31.38*30.08 50 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-20 2/2/2005 196257.98 2305318.1 2 4-14 13.7*12.4 14 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-20D 2/1/2005 196256.89 2305326.09 2 43-48 13.66*12.14 48 Blasland, Bolick & Lee
MW-21CN 9/16/2011 197773.53 2306913.73 2 40-45 30.17~30.17 45 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-22BN 9/15/2011 198349.05 2307016.96 2 23-27 19.04~19.04 27 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-22CN 9/15/2011 198349.48 2307023.29 2 39.5-44.5 19.1~19.1 45 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-23BN 9/6/2011 198967.44 2306901.76 2 21.5-26.5 16.2~16.2 27 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
Table 2.T1. Historical Monitoring Well and Piezometer Construction Details
L.V. Sutton Hydrogeologic Site Assessment
June 2014 2 of 3 Geosyntec
Location ID Date Installed Northing (ft)Easting (ft)
Well
Diameter
(inches)
Screened
Interval
(ft BGS)
TOC (inner)
Elevation (ft)**
TOC (inner)
Elevation
Corrected to
NAVD88 (ft)
Total
Depth
(ft BGS)
Constructed By
MW-23CN 9/7/2011 198972.1 2306903.52 2 40-45 16.64~16.64 45 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-24BN 9/9/2011 200712.12 2306251.09 2 23-27 15.37~15.37 27 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-24CN 9/12/2011 200716.55 2306263.9 2 40-45 15.02~15.02 45 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-27BN 9/8/2011 202585.563 2304679.809 2 22-27 14.34 14.34 27 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-28BN 9/28/2011 197368.43 2307359.97 2 25-30 31.77~31.77 30 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-28CN 9/21/2011 197356.57 2307354.09 2 40-45 30.93~30.93 45 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-28T 9/22/2011 197370.11 2307352.85 2 55-60 32.14~32.14 60 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-31BG 9/13/2011 201045.1 2306851.42 2 22-27 17.5~17.5 27 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-31CG,T 9/14/2011 201046.82 2306858.17 2 40-45 17.57~17.51 45 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
OAP-1 9/26/2011 --2 5-15 --15 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
OAP-2 9/26/2011 --2 4-14 --14 Catlin Engineers and Scientists
MW-32CG 11/14/2013 197686.22 2307879.04 2 45-50 34.60 -50 Synterra
MW-33C**G,T 11/13/2013 197598.4735 2308274.915 2 40-45 24.66~24.66 45 Synterra
PZ-1**11/24/2008 201341.194 2305414.875 2 10-20 32.72~32.72 20 Golder Associates
PZ-1A**-201335.81 2305416.92 --32.97~32.97 -Unknown
PZ-1B --------Unknown
PZ-2**11/24/2008 201705.613 2305277.862 2 10-20 32.55~32.55 20 Golder Associates
PZ-2A**-201700.70 2305280.10 --32.54~32.54 -Unknown
PZ-2B --------Unknown
PZ-3**11/25/2008 202048.086 2304944.55 2 6-16 32.44~32.44 16 Golder Associates
PZ-3A**-202050.72 2304950.36 --32.24~32.24 -Unknown
PZ-3B --------Unknown
PZ-4**11/24/2008 201880.058 2304528.287 2 11-21 32.94~32.94 21 Golder Associates
PZ-4A**-201882.28 2304533.10 --32.78~32.78 -Unknown
PZ-4B --------Unknown
PZ-5**11/24/2008 201592.953 2304324.075 2 15-25 32.5~32.50 25 Golder Associates
PZ-5A**-201598.93 2304324.89 --32.82~32.82 -Unknown
PZ-5B --------Unknown
PZ-6**-200985.53 2304343.62 --33.03~33.03 -Unknown
PZ-6A**-200991.36 2304343.40 --33.25~33.25 -Unknown
PZ-6B --------Unknown
PZ-6D 12/6/2008 204200 2305620.4 2 80-100 30.50 -102 Golder Associates
PZ-6S 11/25/2008 204191.3 2305618.6 2 16-26 30.80 -26 Golder Associates
PZ-7 11/21/2008 203633.6 2305138.6 2 9-19 23.00 -19 Golder Associates
PZ-8 11/25/2008 203942.5 2305532.2 2 20-30 36.00 -30 Golder Associates
PZ-9 11/21/2008 203533.8 2305359.5 2 15-25 35.10 -25 Golder Associates
PZ-10 5/25/2004 --2 1-11 12.82*11.52 -Unknown
PZ-10D 12/2/2008 203124.8 2305120.6 2 80-100 26.20 -102 Golder Associates
PZ-10S 11/21/2008 203140.1 2305116.4 2 13-23 26.40 -23 Golder Associates
PZ-11 11/20/2008 203258.9 2305266 2 9-19 23.70 -19 Golder Associates
PZ-12 11/25/2008 203476.9 2305691.6 2 15-25 31.40 -25 Golder Associates
PZ-13 11/20/2008 202946 2305558.8 2 15-25 29.50 -25 Golder Associates
Table 2.T1. Historical Monitoring Well and Piezometer Construction Details
L.V. Sutton Hydrogeologic Site Assessment
June 2014 3 of 3 Geosyntec
Location ID Date Installed Northing (ft)Easting (ft)
Well
Diameter
(inches)
Screened
Interval
(ft BGS)
TOC (inner)
Elevation (ft)**
TOC (inner)
Elevation
Corrected to
NAVD88 (ft)
Total
Depth
(ft BGS)
Constructed By
PZ-14 11/25/2008 203358.7 2305963.3 2 8-18 20.50 -18 Golder Associates
PZ-15 11/20/2008 202702.7 2305482.1 2 9-19 21.90 -19 Golder Associates
PZ-16 11/25/2008 202898 2305907.6 2 7-17 18.00 -17 Golder Associates
PZ-17 11/20/2008 202570.2 2305697.4 2 4-14 18.20 -14 Golder Associates
PZ-18 11/25/2008 202605.9 2306030.8 2 8-18 19.50 -18 Golder Associates
PZ-19 11/20/2008 202207.8 2305730 2 7-17 17.50 -17 Golder Associates
PZ-20 11/20/2008 201925 2305525.4 2 10-20 23.40 -20 Golder Associates
PZ-21 12/1/2008 202152.6 2306342.4 2 14-24 28.60 -24 Golder Associates
PZ-22 11/19/2008 201073.4 2305978 2 4-14 19.10 -14 Golder Associates
PZ-23 11/26/2008 201410.8 2306536.9 2 3-13 15.10 -13 Golder Associates
PZ-24 11/19/2008 200735.4 2305940.7 2 13-23 26.40 -23 Golder Associates
PZ-25 11/26/2008 200416.5 2306852.9 2 17-27 31.10 -27 Golder Associates
PZ-26 11/19/2008 199799.6 2306415.2 2 4-14 17.90 -14 Golder Associates
PZ-27 11/19/2008 199451.7 2306844.8 2 20-30 36.20 -30 Golder Associates
PZ-28 11/18/2008 199049.4 2306560.4 2 7-17 20.00 -17 Golder Associates
PZ-29 11/18/2008 198828.8 2307625.6 2 12-22 25.80 -22 Golder Associates
Notes:
1. ft BGS indicates below ground surface.
7. ** indicates no datum specified for elevation except as otherwise indicated
3. * indicates elevation referenced to Mean Sea Level (MSL).
4. NM indicates not measured.
5. ft indicates feet.
6. TOC indicates top of casing.
3. ~ indicates elevations referenced to a North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) unless indicated otherwise.
8. '+ RAP 2006 indicates these PZs have been abandoned
9. Table does not include wells installed around White Liquor Storage Tank (2001 SAR): MW1-MW10
10. N indicates NPDES well
11. G indicates Geosyntec sampled location in May 2014
12. T indicates Geosyntec installed a transducer in the well for short period prior to Synterra groundwater sampling event.
13. Elevations were converted from MSL to NAVD88 by subtracting 1.3. A comparison of locations at the site that were referenced to both dataums were compared
to deterimine that MSL at the site was 1.3 ft higher than NAVD88.
Table 2.T6. Newly Installed Monitoring Well and Piezometer Construction Details
L.V. Sutton Hydrogeologic Site Assessment
June 2014 1 of 1 Geosyntec
Location ID Date
Installed Northing (ft)Easting (ft)
Well
Diameter
(inches)
Screed
Interval
(ft BGS)
TOC (inner)
Elevation (ft)
Total
Depth
(ft BGS)
Constructed By
MW-27B 5/12/2014 202585.56 2304679.81 2 40-45 14.72 45 GEOSYNTEC
MW-34B 5/12/2014 201807.69 2305582.38 2 22-27 20.37 27 GEOSYNTEC
MW-34C 5/13/2014 201803.29 2305586.97 2 40-45 20.19 45 GEOSYNTEC
MW-35B 5/13/2014 202056.99 2305706.36 2 22-27 27.37 27 GEOSYNTEC
MW-35C 5/13/2014 202052.29 2305708.97 2 40-45 27.37 45 GEOSYNTEC
MW-36B 5/8/2014 202215.88 2304716.78 2 22-27 18.47 27 GEOSYNTEC
MW-36C 5/8/2014 202214.01 2304711.30 2 40-45 18.18 45 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-1A 5/8/2014 202183.51 2304953.21 1 10-15 16.89 15 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-1B 5/8/2014 202181.71 2304948.23 1 22-27 16.64 27 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-2A 5/8/2014 201760.44 2305335.14 1 10-15 18.33 15 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-2B 5/8/2014 201755.59 2305337.34 1 22-27 18.44 27 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-3A 5/7/2014 200404.04 2305825.52 1 10-15 22.00 15 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-3B 5/7/2014 200405.32 2305829.62 1 22-27 21.99 27 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-4A 5/7/2014 199057.58 2306398.82 1 10-15 21.24 15 GEOSYNTEC
GWPZ-4B 5/7/2014 199058.85 2306403.64 1 22-27 21.20 27 GEOSYNTEC
PZ-INT 5/7/2014 200420.50 2304536.30 2 13-18 42.58 18 GEOSYNTEC
PZ-1971 5/9/2014 198492.38 2305987.63 2 17-22 47.98 22 GEOSYNTEC
Notes:
1. ft BGS indicates feet below ground surface.
2. Elevations referenced to a North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88).
3. Northing and Easting values are referenced to a North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83).
4. ft indicates feet.
5. TOC indicates top of casing.
MONITORING WELLS
PIEZOMETERS
SG-4
SG-3
SG-2
SG-1
PZ1971
PZ-INT
MW-36CMW-36B
MW-35CMW-35B
MW-34CMW-34B
MW-27C
GWPZ-4BGWPZ-4A
GWPZ-3BGWPZ-3A
GWPZ-2B
GWPZ-2A
GWPZ-1BGWPZ-1A
Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS
User Community, Copyright:© 2012 Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom
Newly Installed Monitoring Wells, Piezometers, and Staff Gauges
L.V. Sutton Plant
Figure
2.F3Raleigh, NC June 2014
C:\Users\jgallegos\Desktop\GIS\MXDs\Report No. 1\Figure 2.F3 -Newly Installed Points.mxd; JGallegos; 6/25/2014Legend
New Monitoring Well (7)
New Piezometer (10)
New Staff Gauge (4)
Existing Monitoring Well (49)
Existing Piezometer
Pond Boundary
500 ft Compliance Boundary
Property Boundary
0 0.6
Miles
Notes
1. Property boundary information provided by New Hanover County Online
GIS Resources. Accessed 17 June, 2014.
2. Existing monitoring well locations provided by Synterra.
3. New Monitoring Well Locations installed by Geosyntec Consultants and
surveyed by WSP Sells fllowing installation in May 2014.
4. Horizontal coordinate system US State Plane 1983 North Carolina, US
survey feet.
5. 2011 World Imagery - Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed,
USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the
Cooling Pond
1984 Pond
1971 Pond
@@@@@@@@@@@@?301020-50-20-30-40-10-1020100-50-20030-30-40Path: (Raleigh Data) M:\GIS\Duke Sutton\MXDs\Report No. 2\Figure 2.F4 - AA_East-West Cross Section.mxd 23 July 2014 RDonahue &>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&>&<&<&<&<&<&<&<$1$1&<&<PZ-6PZ-22MW-11PZ-6AMW-11MW-36CMW-35CSG-3GWPZ-1BSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed,Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP,swisstopo, and the GIS User Community³AA'Lithologic Cross Section A to A'L.V. Sutton PlantFigure2.F4Raleigh, NCJuly 2014Vertical Exaggeration = 151,0000 1,000500FeetNotes:1. New monitoring well and piezometer locations were installed by Geosyntec in May 2014.2. New staff gauge locations were installed by Geosyntec in May 2014.3. Existing monitoring well and piezometer locations were determined from northings and eastings reported on boring logs by Blasland, Bolick & Lee, Synterra, Golder Associates and Catlin Engineers and Scientists. 4. Horizontal coordinate system US State Plane 1983 North Carolina, US survey feet.5. 2011 World Imagery - Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community.Notes:1. Water levels collected 19 May 2014 sampling event. 2. Geology between SG-3 and MW-36C is assumed based on a professional estimate.3. Location of the Peedee formation is inferred from Geology and Ground-water Resources of New Hanover County, North Carolina (USGS, 1970). No borings in this area reached the Peedee formation. 4. NAVD88 indicates North American Vertical Datum of 1988.Monitoring Well/PiezometerLocationScreen#*#*NAVD88 FeetNAVD88 Feet
SG-3MW-36CGWPZ-1BMW-35CMW-110200400600800100FeetLegendWater Elevation (NAVD88)@@Estimated Location (See Note 3)Peedee FormationWaterClayey Silt (ML)Clean Sands (SP)A'ALegend&>Existing Piezometer$1Staff Gauge&<New Monitoring Well&>New Piezometer&<Existing Monitoring WellTransectPond LocationsProperty BoundaryAA'Peedee Formation
@@@@ @@ @@@@40102030-50-20-30-40-1030-1020-20010-50040-30-40Path: (Raleigh Data) M:\GIS\Duke Sutton\MXDs\Report No. 2\Figure 2.F5 - BB_EastWest Cross Section.mxd 23 July 2014 RDonahue&>&>&>&>&>&>&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<&<MW-15MW-7CASH POND 2MW-19MW-18MW-13MW-33CMW-32CSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed,Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP,swisstopo, and the GIS User Community³BB'Lithologic Cross Section B to B'L.V. Sutton PlantFigure2.F5Raleigh, NCJuly 2014Vertical Exaggeration = 181,00001,000500FeetNotes:1. Existing monitoring well and piezometer locations determined from northings and eastings reported on boring logs by Blasland, Bolick & Lee, Synterra, Golder Associates and Catlin Engineers and Scientists. 2. Horizontal coordinate system US State Plane 1983 North Carolina, US survey feet.3. 2011 World Imagery - Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community.Notes:1. CCR designates coal combustion residual.2. Water levels collected during the May 2014 sampling event. 3. Location of the Peedee formation is infered from Geology and Ground-water Resources of New Hanover County, North Carolina (USGS, 1970). No borings in this area reached the Peedee formation. 4. NAVD88 indicates North American Vertical Datum of 1988.Monitoring Well LocationScreen#*#*NAVD88 FeetNAVD88 Feet
MW-13DMW-18MW-19MW-32CMW-33C02505007501,000125FeetLegendWater Elevation (NAVD88)@@Estimated Location (See Note 3)Clean Sands (SP)CCRSand and CCR MixtureClayey Sand (SC)Clay (CH)Sand and Gravel (SP/GP)Silt (ML)WaterB'BLegend&>Existing Piezometer&>New Piezometer&<Existing Monitoring WellTransectPond LocationsProperty BoundaryBB'?Peedee FormationDischarge Canal1971 PondFADA
@@ @@ @@ @@ @@ @@ @@ @@-100-201-30-40-503020105040-100-20-30-40-504050102030Path: (ARO-1\PRJ1) M:\GIS\Duke Sutton\MXDs\Report No. 2\Figure 2.F6 - CC_NorthSouth Cross Section.mxd 23 July 2014 RDonahue

APPENDIX C

HISTORICAL NPDES SURFACE WATER
ANALYTICAL DATA

APPENDIX D

HISTORICAL NPDES FISH TISSUE
ANALYTICAL DATA

L. V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape Fear River,
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Environmental Services Section
February 2005

1
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 1

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 1

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 1

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis ................................................................. 1

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 2

7.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 2

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, January 1999 ......................................................................... 4

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, November 2004 .................................................................... 5

List of Figures
Page
Figure 1 Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations ......................................................... 3

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and
operates the L. V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear
River in New Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of
Wilmington, North Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, selenium monitoring of fish in the Cape Fear
River was conducted after meeting the stipulated minimum discharge days (120 days) from Outfall
004 to the river. This report fulfills the monitoring requirements under Part I, Section A. (12) Fish
Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected according to the
previously approved study plan submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality in
1998 (CP&L 1998). The sampling locations were from the lower Cape Fear River adjacent to
the Sutton Plant. The upstream sampling station (UP) was approximately two miles above the
Sutton Plant discharge and was characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging
trees. This station receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. The station near
the plant discharge (DI) was a transition zone between riverine and estuarine habitat. This
station can be primarily freshwater or brackish water depending upon the tide cycle. The
downstream sampling location (DW) approximately two miles from the discharge was estuarine
with banks dominated by salt marsh vegetation.

3.0 Target Species
The primary target species in the study plan for both the baseline and post operational discharge
sampling is the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. Other species were to be collected based upon
availability. Due to limited fish availability during the 2004 sampling, considerable effort was
expended to collect fish from the designated locations. Therefore all target species collected
were processed regardless of size, if enough tissue was available for analysis.

4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current), D-hoop nets, and trotlines. Nets and trotlines were checked at

3
approximately 24 hour intervals during the sampling period. Ancillary fisheries data including
species, numbers, total lengths (mm), and total weights (g), were recorded. Each day fish
collected for selenium analysis were placed in a labeled (date, transect, station, etc.) bag and
placed on ice until frozen. The fish were moved to an on-site freezer at the end of each day.
Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for selenium analysis
according to procedure EVC-TSDC-00107 Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure,
approved by NCDWQ (on file) as part of the Progress Energy Carolinas Certified Biological
Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Processed samples (lyophilized left axial
muscle) were analyzed in-house according to procedure CHE-NGG-0044 Energy Dispersive
Polarized X-ray Fluorescence Procedure. The remaining fish carcasses were archived and will be
kept up to two years in the event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the original baseline selenium concentrations (g/g dry weight) in fish
are shown in Table 1. The 2004 selenium concentrations are shown in Table 2. In addition to
the lengths and weight of each fish, the dry-to-fresh weight ratios are presented for conversion
the selenium concentrations to a fresh weight value if desired. No pattern of selenium
bioaccumulation were apparent either between fish from different sampling locations or when
compared to the pre-operational baseline data.

7.0 References
CP&L. 1998. Selenium monitoring of fish in the Cape Fear River, New Hanover County, North
Carolina, Study Plan. New Hill, North Carolina.

4

Figure 1. Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations.
Meters
Feet
0 500 1000
0 1000 2000 3000
N
NORTH CAROLINA
Sutton Steam
Electric Plant
Plant
Site
Intake
Canal
Discharge
Canal
Cooling Pond
Discharge
(Outfall #001)
New
Ash
Pond
Old
Ash
Pond
Dike
Cape Fear RiverMakeup
Pump
UP
DI
Seaboard Coast Line
~ 1.5 miles
DW
= Selenium Monitoring Stations
{
Meters
Feet
0 500 1000
0 1000 2000 3000
N
NORTH CAROLINA
Sutton Steam
Electric Plant
Plant
Site
Intake
Canal
Discharge
Canal
Cooling Pond
Discharge
(Outfall #001)
New
Ash
Pond
Old
Ash
Pond
Dike
Cape Fear RiverMakeup
Pump
UP
DI
Seaboard Coast Line
~ 1.5 miles
DW
= Selenium Monitoring Stations
{

5
Table 1. Baseline (prior to outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations in axial muscle
of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, January, 1999.

Fish Species Locations Selenium
(g/g)
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio

Bluegill UP 1.5 142 49 0.1829
Bluegill UP 0.9 153 66 0.1919
Bluegill UP 2.3 153 66 0.1915
Blue catfish UP 0.9 427 618 0.1762
Blue catfish UP 1.4 310 242 0.1673
Blue catfish UP 0.8 421 572 0.1824

Bluegill DI 1.6 141 52 0.1912
Bluegill DI 1.3 145 48 0.1845
Bluegill DI 3.2 146 51 0.2071
Blue catfish DI 1.3 131 35 0.1700

Bluegill DW 2.2 130 33 0.1828
Bluegill DW 0.9 195 152 0.2024

* To convert to a fresh weight, multiply the dry weight concentrations by the dry-to-fresh
weight ratio.

6
Table 2. Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River,
November, 2004.

Fish Species Locations Selenium
(g/g)
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio

Bluegill UP 1.8 181 128 0.2013
Bluegill UP 1.6 186 128 0.2062
Largemouth bass UP 2.9 211 130 0.2042
Largemouth bass UP 1.5 290 305 0.2037
Largemouth bass UP 1.8 272 250 0.2104
Largemouth bass UP 1.6 316 470 0.2009
Largemouth bass UP 2.2 266 265 0.2064
Largemouth bass UP 1.8 290 340 0.2063
Blue catfish UP 1.0 482 400 0.1763
Blue catfish UP 1.4 400 440 0.1773
Blue catfish UP 1.0 333 280 0.1673
Blue catfish UP 1.3 364 325 0.2098

Bluegill DI 1.7 167 85 0.2019
Bluegill DI 1.7 218 205 0.2127
Bluegill DI 5.3 225 232 0.1982
Bluegill DI 1.9 230 237 0.1950
Bluegill DI 1.7 196 145 0.1996
Largemouth bass DI 2.5 385 910 0.2128
Blue catfish DI 1.3 402 540 0.1738
Blue catfish DI 1.1 723 4500 0.1717

Bluegill DW 3.6 151 60 0.2025
Pumpkinseed DW 1.3 164 85 0.2045
Largemouth bass DW 1.7 384 896 0.2086
Largemouth bass DW 0.8 301 372 0.1162
Largemouth bass DW 1.7 306 402 0.2119
Channel catfish DW 1.0 412 482 0.1800
Blue catfish DW 1.0 747 5000 0.1529
Blue catfish DW 1.0 413 610 0.1805
Blue catfish DW 0.9 482 972 0.1655
Blue catfish DW 0.8 530 1500 0.1736
Blue catfish DW 1.2 572 1750 0.1807

* To convert to a fresh weight, multiply the dry weight concentrations by the dry-to-fresh weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape Fear River,
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Environmental Services Section
January 2006

1
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 1

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 1

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 1

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis ................................................................. 1

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 2

7.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 2

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, January 1999 ......................................................................... 4

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, September 2005 .................................................................... 5

List of Figures
Page
Figure 1 Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations ......................................................... 3

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and
operates the L. V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear
River in New Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of
Wilmington, North Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, selenium monitoring of fish in the Cape Fear
River was conducted after meeting the annual stipulation of a minimum discharge of 120 days from
Outfall 004 to the river. This report fulfills the monitoring requirements under Part I, Section A. (12)
Fish Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected according to the
previously approved study plan submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality in
1998 (CP&L 1998). The sampling locations were from the lower Cape Fear River adjacent to
the Sutton Plant. The upstream sampling station (UP) was approximately two miles above the
Sutton Plant discharge and was characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging
trees. This station receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. The station near
the plant discharge (DI) was a transition zone between riverine and estuarine habitat. This
station can be primarily freshwater or brackish water depending upon the tide cycle. The
downstream sampling location (DW) approximately two miles from the discharge was estuarine
with banks dominated by salt marsh vegetation.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for the baseline pre-operational sampling
was the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. For the 2005 sampling, in addition to blue catfish,
bluegill and largemouth bass also were considered primary target species. Other species collected
incidentally were processed along with the target species. An attempt was made to collect fish of
similar size, however; due to limited availability, most target fish were retained and processed
regardless of size if enough tissue was available for analysis.

3
4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Fish were collected during September 27-29, 2005. Standard fishery gear types were used during
the collection effort including a boat electrofisher (pulsed DC current), D-hoop nets, and
trotlines. Nets and trotlines were checked at approximately 24 hour intervals during the sampling
period. Ancillary fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths (mm), and total weights
(g), were recorded. Each day fish collected for selenium analysis were placed in a labeled (date,
transect, station, etc.) bag and placed on ice until frozen. The fish were moved to an on-site
freezer at the end of each day. Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were
retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for selenium analysis
according to procedure EVC-TSDC-00107 Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure,
approved by NCDWQ (on file) as part of the Progress Energy Certified Biological Laboratory
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Processed samples (lyophilized) were analyzed in-
house according to procedure CHE-NGG-0044 Energy Dispersive Polarized X-ray Fluorescence
Procedure. Generally, fillets of left axial muscle was used for the analyses, however, left and
right filets had to used from some of the fish due to their small size. The fish carcasses with
sufficient tissue remaining were archived and will be kept up to two years in the event that re-
analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the original baseline selenium concentrations (g/g dry weight) in fish
are shown in Table 1. The 2005 selenium concentrations are shown in Table 2. In addition to
the lengths and weight of each fish, the dry-to-fresh weight ratios are presented for conversion
the selenium concentrations to a fresh weight value if desired. No pattern of selenium
bioaccumulation were apparent either between fish from different sampling locations or when
compared to the pre-operational baseline data.

7.0 References

CP&L. 1998. Selenium monitoring of fish in the Cape Fear River, New Hanover County, North
Carolina, Study Plan. New Hill, North Carolina.

4

Figure 1. Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations.
Meters
Feet
0 500 1000
0 1000 2000 3000
N
NORTH CAROLINA
Sutton Steam
Electric Plant
Plant
Site
Intake
Canal
Discharge
Canal
Cooling Pond
Discharge
(Outfall #001)
New
Ash
Pond
Old
Ash
Pond
Dike
Cape Fear RiverMakeup
Pump
UP
DI
Seaboard Coast Line
~ 1.5 miles
DW
= Selenium Monitoring Stations
{
Meters
Feet
0 500 1000
0 1000 2000 3000
N
NORTH CAROLINA
Sutton Steam
Electric Plant
Plant
Site
Intake
Canal
Discharge
Canal
Cooling Pond
Discharge
(Outfall #001)
New
Ash
Pond
Old
Ash
Pond
Dike
Cape Fear RiverMakeup
Pump
UP
DI
Seaboard Coast Line
~ 1.5 miles
DW
= Selenium Monitoring Stations
{

5
Table 1. Baseline (prior to outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations in axial muscle
of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, January, 1999.

Fish Species Locations Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(dry wt. g/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio

Bluegill UP 142 49 1.5 0.1829
Bluegill UP 153 66 0.9 0.1919
Bluegill UP 153 66 2.3 0.1915
Blue catfish UP 427 618 0.9 0.1762
Blue catfish UP 310 242 1.4 0.1673
Blue catfish UP 421 572 0.8 0.1824

Bluegill DI 141 52 1.6 0.1912
Bluegill DI 145 48 1.3 0.1845
Bluegill DI 146 51 3.2 0.2071
Blue catfish DI 131 35 1.3 0.1700

Bluegill DW 130 33 2.2 0.1828
Bluegill DW 195 152 0.9 0.2024

* To convert to a fresh weight, multiply the dry weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-
to-fresh weight ratio.

6
Table 2. Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River,
September, 2005.

Fish Species Locations Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(dry wt. g/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio

Bluegill UP 197 161 1.8 0.2009
Bluegill UP 203 176 1.9 0.1984
Bluegill UP 201 170 1.8 0.2023
Bluegill UP 190 160 1.6 0.2121
Bluegill UP 168 106 1.9 0.2018
Bluegill UP 158 82 1.0 0.1993
Bluegill UP 167 91 18 0.1984
Bluegill UP 157 70 2.5 0.2026
Bluegill UP 169 86 1.9 0.1811
Bluegill UP 207 186 1.3 0.1980
Largemouth bass UP 308 440 3.4 0.2092
Largemouth bass UP 318 468 2.5 0.2121
Largemouth bass UP 293 362 2.0 0.2136
Largemouth bass UP 313 473 1.4 0.2080
Largemouth bass UP 344 540 2.3 0.2109
Largemouth bass UP 338 546 2.6 0.2082
Largemouth bass UP 292 348 1.7 0.2124
Largemouth bass UP 288 346 1.6 0.2120
Largemouth bass UP 284 318 2.3 0.2068
Largemouth bass UP 287 308 1.8 0.2095
Blue catfish UP 427 624 0.9 0.1916
Blue catfish UP 473 928 1.2 0.1838
Blue catfish UP 420 614 1.1 0.1751
Blue catfish UP 423 600 1.1 0.1717
Blue catfish UP 400 540 1.1 0.1802
Blue catfish UP 502 974 1.1 0.1836
Blue catfish UP 500 1050 1.0 0.1790
Blue catfish UP 460 840 1.0 0.1835
Blue catfish UP 377 435 0.9 0.1857
Blue catfish UP 366 390 1.2 0.1815

Bluegill DI 157 70 2.0 0.1718
Bluegill DI 141 48 0.6 0.1992
Bluegill DI 159 77 1.8 0.2008
Bluegill DI 162 58 2.0 0.2197
Bluegill DI 138 46 1.9 0.1944
Bluegill DI 247 302 17 0.1732
Bluegill DI 169 89 3.3 0.1991
Bluegill DI 178 112 9.2 0.2115
Bluegill DI 187 118 1.2 0.2077
Bluegill DI 138 52 5.0 0.1956
Largemouth bass DI 348 604 3.1 0.2172
Largemouth bass DI 296 312 2.3 0.2074
Largemouth bass DI 303 380 2.9 0.2142

7
Table 2 (Continued)

Fish Species Locations Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(dry wt. g/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio

Largemouth bass DI 302 382 2.6 0.2069
Largemouth bass DI 339 564 3.1 0.2103
Largemouth bass DI 405 742 11 0.2089
Largemouth bass DI 313 420 2.1 0.2177
Blue catfish DI 388 480 1.5 0.1844
Blue catfish DI 273 160 1.9 0.1543
Blue catfish DI 285 178 1.2 0.1701
Blue catfish DI 258 120 1.8 0.1687
Blue catfish DI 490 970 1.0 0.1848
Blue catfish DI 405 502 1.0 0.1757
Flathead catfish DI 397 618 2.1 0.1783
Flathead catfish DI 417 610 2.6 0.1798
Flathead catfish DI 564 2000 1.7 0.1836
Flathead catfish DI 358 410 2.0 0.1782
Flathead catfish DI 365 430 2.4 0.1759
Channel catfish DI 315 222 1.3 0.1868
Warmouth DI 165 95 1.8 0.1019

Bluegill DW 185 124 2.2 0.2024
Largemouth bass DW 328 498 1.6 0.2110
Largemouth bass DW 315 458 1.5 0.2190
Largemouth bass DW 355 704 1.8 0.2122
Largemouth bass DW 358 742 2.1 0.2098
Largemouth bass DW 292 345 1.6 0.2153
Largemouth bass DW 382 725 1.4 0.2102
Largemouth bass DW 325 602 1.4 0.2146
Largemouth bass DW 315 526 1.9 0.2115
Largemouth bass DW 275 312 1.6 0.2091
Largemouth bass DW 256 258 1.7 0.1887
Blue catfish DW 395 498 0.9 0.1821
Blue catfish DW 530 1,250 0.6 0.1821
Blue catfish DW 485 886 1.5 0.1787
Blue catfish DW 510 1,050 0.9 0.1911
Blue catfish DW 437 690 1.2 0.1866
Blue catfish DW 340 308 1.3 0.1783
Blue catfish DW 423 617 1.5 0.1767
Blue catfish DW 360 360 1.4 0.1764
Channel catfish DW 485 922 0.7 0.1852
Flathead catfish DW 316 272 1.8 0.1810
Flathead catfish DW 543 1,700 1.5 0.1952

* To convert to a fresh weight, multiply the dry weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-
to-fresh weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Steam Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape Fear River,
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Environmental Services Section
January 2008

1
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 2

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis ................................................................. 3

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 3

7.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 4

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 1999 ...................................................................................... 6

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 2007 ...................................................................................... 7

List of Figures
Page
Figure 1 Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations ......................................................... 5

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and
operates the L. V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear
River in New Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of
Wilmington, North Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, selenium monitoring of fish in the Cape Fear
River was conducted after meeting the annual stipulation of a minimum discharge of 120 days from
Outfall 004 to the river. This report fulfills the monitoring requirements under Part I, Section A. (12)
Fish Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected during summer
of 2007. Sampling Station UP is located approximately 1.5 miles upstream the Sutton Plant
discharge and is characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging trees. This station
typically receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. However, due to the drought
conditions prevalent in 2007, all of the sampling stations were substantially affected by saltwater
tidal influences. Station DI is located near the plant discharge and Station DW is located
approximately 1.5 miles downstream of the discharge.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for the baseline pre-operational sampling
was the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. For the 2007 sampling, in addition to blue catfish,
bluegill and largemouth bass also were considered primary target species. Other species collected
incidentally were processed along with the target species. An attempt was made to collect fish of
similar size, however, due to limited availability, most target fish were retained and processed
regardless of size if enough tissue was available for analysis.

4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current) and trotlines. Trotlines were checked at approximately 24 hour intervals
during the sampling period. A significant factor affecting collection of fish during 2007 was the
onset of drought conditions. The efficiency of the electrofisher due to high water salinity and

3
scarcity of freshwater fish, particularly at Station DW, resulted in fewer target species being
collected despite significant sampling effort. Sampling at DW was conducted on two separated
sampling trips (June 19-20 and September 18) in an attempt to collect the desired target species.
No target fish were caught during the September sampling trip. In addition, flathead catfish were
substituted for blue catfish in order to complete the sampling complement based on permission
received in the field from Mr. Jeff DeBerardinis of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.

Ancillary fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths (mm), and total weights (g),
were recorded. Fish collected for selenium analysis were placed in a labeled (date, transect,
station, etc.) bag and placed on ice until they were transferred to an on-site freezer at the end of
each day. Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for selenium analysis
according to procedure NR-00107 Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure of the
Progress Energy Certified Biological Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Processed samples (lyophilized) were analyzed in-house according to procedure CHE-NGG-0044
Energy Dispersive Polarized X-ray Fluorescence Procedure. Generally, fillets of left axial
muscle was used for the analyses, however, left and right filets had to used from some of the fish
due to their small size. The fish carcasses with sufficient tissue remaining were archived and
will be kept up to two years in the event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the original baseline (1999) selenium concentrations (converted to g/g
wet weight) in fish are shown in Table 1. The 2007 selenium concentrations (wet weight) are
shown in Table 2. In addition to the lengths and weight of each fish, the dry-to-wet weight ratios
are presented for conversion the selenium concentrations between wet and dry weight values if
desired. Some of the selenium values in bluegill and largemouth bass in the vicinity of the
discharge were greater than range of concentrations from fish collected from the upstream and
downstream sampling stations during 2007. Similarly, several selenium concentrations reported
at the discharge area and upstream stations slightly above the range of values reported in the
baseline data. However, all values remained well below the US EPA and North Carolina (Health

4
Department) screening values (NCDNER 2006). Progress Energy believes this occurrence may
have been related to the on-going drought conditions that affected North Carolina most of 2007.

7.0 References

NCDENR. 2006. Standard operating procedures fish tissue assessments, Raleigh, North Carolina.

5

Figure 1. Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations.
Meters
Feet
0 500 1000
0 1000 2000 3000
N
NORTH CAROLINA
Sutton Steam
Electric Plant
Plant
Site
Intake
Canal
Discharge
Canal
Cooling Pond
Discharge
(Outfall #001)
New
Ash
Pond
Old
Ash
Pond
Dike C
a
p
e
F
e
ar
Ri
ve
r
Makeup
Pump
UP
D
I
Seaboard Coast
Line
~ 1.5
miles
D
W
= Selenium Monitoring Stations

{

6
Table 1. Baseline (prior to outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations in axial muscle
of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, 1999.

Fish Species Month Station Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. g/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill January UP 142 49 0.3 0.18
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.2 0.19
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.4 0.19
Blue catfish January UP 427 618 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish January UP 310 242 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish January UP 421 572 0.1 0.18
Bluegill January DI 141 52 0.3 0.19
Bluegill January DI 145 48 0.2 0.18
Bluegill January DI 146 51 0.7 0.21
Blue catfish January DI 131 35 0.2 0.17
Bluegill January DW 130 33 0.4 0.18
Bluegill January DW 195 152 0.2 0.20

* To convert to a wet weight, multiply the dry weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-
to-wet weight ratio.

7
Table 2. Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River,
2007.

Fish Species Month Station Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. g/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill June UP 196 137 0.3 0.20
Bluegill June UP 212 225 0.3 0.20
Bluegill June UP 206 206 0.3 0.20
Bluegill June UP 200 183 0.4 0.21
Bluegill June UP 181 118 0.3 0.20
Bluegill June UP 182 122 0.6 0.20
Bluegill June UP 167 88 0.6 0.20
Bluegill June UP 190 133 0.4 0.20
Bluegill June UP 191 154 0.3 0.21
Bluegill June UP 162 84 0.3 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 325 510 0.5 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 266 174 0.3 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 285 352 0.4 0.22
Largemouth bass June UP 267 300 0.5 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 238 218 0.4 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 248 215 0.4 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 257 247 0.4 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 237 217 0.5 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 266 298 0.4 0.21
Blue catfish June UP 360 390 0.2 0.24
Blue catfish June UP 806 5600 0.1 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 842 7350 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish June UP 498 1150 0.2 0.17
Flathead catfish June UP 577 2200 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 509 1400 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 541 1650 0.2 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 692 3925 0.2 0.19
Flathead catfish June UP 438 1000 0.2 0.17
Flathead catfish June UP 476 1100 0.3 0.19
Bluegill June DI 212 192 0.5 0.19
Bluegill June DI 237 321 0.4 0.21
Bluegill June DI 217 224 0.3 0.22
Bluegill June DI 198 150 0.3 0.20
Bluegill June DI 232 274 0.3 0.20
Bluegill June DI 175 106 0.2 0.21
Bluegill June DI 208 164 0.6 0.20
Bluegill June DI 176 119 0.4 0.18
Bluegill June DI 204 186 0.6 0.21
Bluegill June DI 179 106 0.8 0.19
Largemouth bass June DI 368 697 0.7 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 270 300 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 342 580 0.7 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 283 364 0.5 0.21

8
Table 2 (Continued)

Fish Species Month Station Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. g/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Largemouth bass June DI 385 776 0.6 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 293 398 0.5 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 258 223 0.6 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 277 351 0.5 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 299 398 0.5 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 261 242 0.4 0.20
Blue catfish June DI 422 607 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 367 385 0.2 0.18
Channel catfish June DI 516 1225 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 706 4700 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 632 3250 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 467 896 0.3 0.16
Blue catfish June DI 637 2600 0.1 0.20
Blue catfish June DI 700 4025 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 768 4950 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 788 6100 0.2 0.21
Blue catfish June DW 453 744 0.2 0.21
Blue catfish June DW 660 3650 0.2 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 879 9150 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 401 523 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 716 4250 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 709 3900 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 790 7250 0.1 0.21
Blue catfish June DW 785 6150 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 704 3750 0.3 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 443 758 0.2 0.18

* To convert to a wet weight, multiply the dry weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-
to-wet weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Steam Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape Fear River,
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Environmental, Health and Safety Services
November 2008

1
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 2

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis ................................................................. 3

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 3

7.0 Reference .......................................................................................................................... 3

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 1999 ...................................................................................... 5

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 2008 ...................................................................................... 6

List of Figures
Page
Figure 1 Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations ......................................................... 4

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and
operates the L. V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear
River in New Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of
Wilmington, North Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, monitoring selenium concentrations in fish
from the Cape Fear River was conducted in 2008 to fullfill the monitoring requirements under Part I,
Section A. (12) Fish Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected during summer
2008. Sampling Station UP is located approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the Sutton Plant
discharge and is characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging trees. This station
typically receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. Station DI is located near
the plant discharge to the river and Station DW is located approximately 1.5 miles downstream
of the discharge. The two stations are greatly affected by tidal saltwater intrusion.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for the baseline pre-operational sampling
was the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. For the 2008 sampling, in addition to blue catfish,
flathead catfish Pylodictus olivarus, bluegill Lepomis machrochirus, warmouth Lepomis gulosus,
and largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides were also collected as target species. An attempt
was made to collect fish of similar size; however, due to limited availability, most target fish
were retained and processed regardless of size if enough tissue was available for analysis.

4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current), angling, and trotlines. Trotlines were checked at approximately 24-hour
intervals during the sampling period. High salinity waters at Stations DI and DW affected the
availability of freshwater fish, particularly at Station DW, and resulted in fewer target species
being collected despite significant sampling effort. Sampling at Stations DI and DW was

3
conducted on two separated trips (June 25-27 and September 9) in an attempt to collect the full
complement of the desired target species.

Ancillary fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths, and total weights, were
recorded. Fish collected for selenium analysis were placed in a labeled (date, station, target
species, etc.) bag and placed on ice until they were transferred to an on-site freezer at the end of
each day. Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for selenium analysis
according to procedure NR-00107 Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure of the
Progress Energy Certified Biological Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Processed samples (lyophilized) were analyzed in-house according to procedure CHE-NGG-0044
Energy Dispersive Polarized X-ray Fluorescence Procedure. Generally, fillets of left axial
muscle was used for the analyses, however, left and right filets had to used from some of the fish
due to their small size. The fish carcasses with sufficient tissue remaining were archived and
will be kept up to two years in the event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the original baseline (1999) selenium concentrations (converted to
µg/g wet weight) in fish collected in 1999 are shown in Table 1. The selenium concentrations
(wet weight) collected in 2008 are shown in Table 2. In addition to the lengths and weight of
each fish, the dry-to-wet weight ratios are presented for conversion the selenium concentrations
between wet and dry weight values, if desired. Only one selenium value (2.8 µg/g) from a
largemouth bass in the vicinity of the discharge was greater than the range of concentrations from
fish collected from the upstream and downstream sampling stations during 2008. All other fish
had selenium concentrations similar to or slightly above the range of values reported in the
baseline data. All values remained well below the US EPA and North Carolina (Health
Department) screening values (NCDNER 2006).

7.0 References

NCDENR. 2006. Standard operating procedures fish tissue assessments, Raleigh, North Carolina.

4

Figure 1. Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations.
Meters
Feet
0 500 1000
0 1000 2000 3000
N
NORTH CAROLINA
Sutton Steam
Electric Plant
Plant
Site
Intake
Canal
Discharge
Canal
Cooling Pond
Discharge
(Outfall #001)
New
Ash
Pond
Old
Ash
Pond
Dike
Cape
Fear
River
Makeup
Pump
UP
DI
Seaboard Coast
Line
~ 1.5
miles
DW
= Selenium Monitoring Stations

{

5
Table 1. Baseline (prior to outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations in axial muscle
of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, 1999.

Fish Species Month Station Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill January UP 142 49 0.3 0.18
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.2 0.19
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.4 0.19
Blue catfish January UP 427 618 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish January UP 310 242 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish January UP 421 572 0.1 0.18
Bluegill January DI 141 52 0.3 0.19
Bluegill January DI 145 48 0.2 0.18
Bluegill January DI 146 51 0.7 0.21
Blue catfish January DI 131 35 0.2 0.17
Bluegill January DW 130 33 0.4 0.18
Bluegill January DW 195 152 0.2 0.20

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

6
Table 2. Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River,
2008.

Fish Species Month Station Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June UP 628 2650 0.3 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 724 4600 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 464 882 0.4 0.19
Flathead catfish June UP 580 2100 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 685 3650 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 636 2700 0.3 0.19
Flathead catfish June UP 556 1950 0.4 0.19
Flathead catfish June UP 542 1600 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 490 1100 0.4 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 491 1100 0.4 0.18
Warmouth June UP 209 210 0.3 0.18
Warmouth June UP 193 179 0.4 0.19
Bluegill June UP 162 71 0.3 0.19
Bluegill June UP 168 62 0.4 0.19
Bluegill June UP 189 123 0.4 0.19
Bluegill June UP 209 221 0.5 0.21
Bluegill June UP 173 92 0.4 0.19
Bluegill June UP 180 111 0.8 0.18
Bluegill June UP 171 100 0.4 0.20
Bluegill June UP 208 192 0.6 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 405 1000 0.5 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 299 432 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 336 478 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 446 1250 0.5 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 372 684 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 316 430 0.4 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 444 1250 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 349 560 0.4 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 285 339 0.7 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 337 580 0.6 0.21
Blue catfish June DI 665 3100 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 626 2550 0.3 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 648 2900 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 654 2900 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 769 4550 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 810 7150 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 520 1450 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 391 544 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 395 458 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June DI 465 912 0.4 0.18
Bluegill June DI 199 197 0.5 0.21
Bluegill June DI 209 219 0.3 0.21
Bluegill June DI 206 183 0.7 0.18

7
Table 2 (Continued)

Fish Species Month Station Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill June DI 219 228 0.7 0.20
Bluegill June DI 201 174 0.6 0.19
Bluegill June DI 170 105 0.8 0.17
Bluegill June DI 191 132 0.6 0.19
Bluegill June DI 158 80 0.3 0.15
Bluegill June DI 174 100 0.6 0.19
Largemouth bass June DI 268 270 0.7 0.19
Largemouth bass June DI 219 142 2.8 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 715 4150 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 545 1550 0.3 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 589 2100 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 648 2850 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish June DW 665 3200 0.2 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 723 4500 0.3 0.21
Blue catfish June DW 803 6050 0.3 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 873 8850 0.2 0.20
Blue catfish September DW 828 6200 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish September DW 840 7500 0.1 0.17

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Steam Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape Fear River, 2009
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Environmental, Health and Safety Services
January 2010

1
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations .............................................................. 2

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis................................................................. 3

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 3

7.0 Reference .......................................................................................................................... 3

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 1999 ...................................................................................... 5

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 2009 ...................................................................................... 6

List of Figures
Page
Figure 1 Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations ......................................................... 4

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and
operates the L. V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear
River in New Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of
Wilmington, North Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, monitoring selenium concentrations in fish
from the Cape Fear River was conducted in 2009 to fulfill the monitoring requirements under Part I,
Section A. (12) Fish Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected during summer
and fall of 2009. Sampling Station UP is located approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the Sutton
Plant discharge and is characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging trees. This
station typically receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. Station DI is located
near the plant discharge to the river and Station DW is located approximately 1.5 miles
downstream of the discharge. The two stations are greatly affected by tidal saltwater intrusion.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for the baseline pre-operational sampling
was the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. For the 2009 sampling, in addition to blue catfish,
flathead catfish Pylodictus olivarus, bluegill Lepomis machrochirus, pumpkinseed Lepomis
gibbosus, warmouth Lepomis gulosus, and largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides were also
collected as target species. An attempt was made to collect fish of similar size; however, due to
limited availability, most target fish were retained and processed regardless of size if enough
tissue was available for analysis.

4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current), angling, and trotlines. Trotlines were checked at approximately 24-hour
intervals during the sampling period. High salinity waters at Stations DI and DW affected the

3
availability of freshwater fish, particularly at Station DW, and resulted in fewer target species
being collected despite significant sampling effort during three separate sampling trips.

Ancillary fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths, and total weights, were
recorded. Fish collected for selenium analysis were placed in a labeled (date, station, target
species, etc.) bag and placed on ice until they were transferred to an on-site freezer at the end of
each day. Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for selenium analysis
according to procedure NR-00107 Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure of the
Progress Energy Certified Biological Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Processed samples (lyophilized) were analyzed in-house according to procedure CHE-NGG-
0044 Energy Dispersive Polarized X-ray Fluorescence Procedure. Generally, fillets of left axial
muscle was used for the analyses, however, left and right filets had to used from some of the fish
due to their small size. The fish carcasses with sufficient tissue remaining were archived and
will be kept up to two years in the event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the original baseline (1999) selenium concentrations (converted to
µg/g wet weight) in fish collected in 1999 are shown in Table 1. The selenium concentrations
(wet weight) collected in 2009 are shown in Table 2. In addition to the lengths and weight of
each fish, the dry-to-wet weight ratios are presented for conversion the selenium concentrations
between wet and dry weight values, if desired. Selenium values from the fish at all three stations
were similar to or slightly above the range of values reported in the baseline data. All values
remained well below the US EPA and North Carolina (Health Department) screening values
(NCDNER 2006).

7.0 References

NCDENR. 2006. Standard operating procedures fish tissue assessments, Raleigh, North Carolina.

4

Figure 1. Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations.
UP
DI
DW

5
Table 1. Baseline (prior to outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations in axial
muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, 1999.

Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill January UP 142 49 0.3 0.18
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.2 0.19
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.4 0.19
Blue catfish January UP 427 618 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish January UP 310 242 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish January UP 421 572 0.1 0.18
Bluegill January DI 141 52 0.3 0.19
Bluegill January DI 145 48 0.2 0.18
Bluegill January DI 146 51 0.7 0.21
Blue catfish January DI 131 35 0.2 0.17
Bluegill January DW 130 33 0.4 0.18
Bluegill January DW 195 152 0.2 0.20

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

6
Table 2. Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear
River, 2009.

Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June UP 838 8100 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 819 6800 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish June UP 733 5100 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 650 3250 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish June UP 524 1550 0.2 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 637 3050 0.3 0.19
Flathead catfish June UP 656 3450 0.3 0.18
Flathead catfish June UP 604 2150 0.2 0.19
Flathead catfish June UP 470 1050 0.3 0.19
Flathead catfish June UP 656 3550 0.3 0.18
Pumpkinseed June UP 168 107 2.2 0.19
Pumpkinseed June UP 167 93 2.8 0.19
Pumpkinseed June UP 168 96 2.1 0.20
Warmouth June UP 150 82 1.4 0.20
Warmouth June UP 160 94 1.5 0.19
Bluegill June UP 191 124 3.1 0.20
Bluegill June UP 177 113 2.4 0.19
Bluegill June UP 207 179 2.9 0.17
Bluegill June UP 191 144 1.6 0.19
Bluegill June UP 184 133 1.8 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 285 223 0.4 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 297 388 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 244 215 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 258 263 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 327 606 0.5 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 256 256 0.4 0.20

7
Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Largemouth bass June UP 333 508 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 278 324 0.5 0.21
Largemouth bass October UP 365 756 0.4 0.20
Largemouth bass October UP 362 740 0.5 0.21
Blue catfish June DI 713 4550 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 702 3500 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 604 2175 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 450 881 0.2 0.20
Flathead catfish June DI 891 7500 0.2 0.19
Flathead catfish June DI 685 3900 0.2 0.19
Flathead catfish June DI 595 2450 0.2 0.19
Flathead catfish June DI 756 4650 0.2 0.19
Flathead catfish June DI 566 1800 0.3 0.19
Flathead catfish June DI 340 362 0.4 0.18
Bluegill June DI 211 221 0.2 0.20
Bluegill June DI 197 152 0.2 0.19
Bluegill June DI 166 91 1.3 0.20
Bluegill June DI 215 237 0.5 0.20
Bluegill June DI 192 160 0.3 0.22
Bluegill June DI 173 102 0.3 0.19
Bluegill June DI 192 136 0.3 0.21
Bluegill June DI 198 179 0.3 0.22
Bluegill June DI 204 199 0.4 0.21
Bluegill June DI 225 274 0.3 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 285 355 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 383 1044 1.6 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 462 1500 0.8 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 292 380 2.1 0.21

8
Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Largemouth bass June DI 268 293 3.0 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 296 430 2.1 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 318 501 0.8 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 277 308 2.5 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 289 400 0.6 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 311 450 1.3 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 720 4250 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 635 3000 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 720 3550 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 703 4400 0.3 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 658 3150 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish June DW 718 4050 0.3 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 685 3500 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 640 2150 0.1 0.19
Flathead catfish July DW 662 3000 0.2 0.17
Flathead catfish July DW 726 3850 0.2 0.16
Bluegill October DW 172 106 0.2 0.16
Bluegill October DW 193 171 0.6 0.19
Bluegill October DW 193 162 0.6 0.20
Bluegill October DW 163 78 0.5 0.20
Bluegill October DW 152 70 0.4 0.17
Bluegill October DW 140 66 0.3 0.18
Bluegill October DW 133 51 0.4 0.19
Bluegill October DW 128 40 0.4 0.18
Bluegill October DW 120 32 0.7 0.18
Largemouth bass October DW 310 498 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass October DW 314 460 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass October DW 352 726 0.5 0.20

9
Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Largemouth bass October DW 317 472 0.4 0.21
Largemouth bass October DW 365 874 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass October DW 275 413 0.4 0.21
Largemouth bass October DW 268 302 0.4 0.20
Largemouth bass October DW 328 595 0.5 0.21
Largemouth bass October DW 195 98 0.5 0.20
Largemouth bass October DW 203 126 0.5 0.20

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Electric Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape Fear River, 2010
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Environmental Services Section
February 2011

1
Table of Contents
Page

1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 2

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis ................................................................. 3

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 3

7.0 Reference .......................................................................................................................... 3

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 1999 ...................................................................................... 5

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 2010 ...................................................................................... 6

List of Figures
Page

Figure 1 Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations ......................................................... 4

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and
operates the L. V. Sutton Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear River
in New Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of Wilmington,
North Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, monitoring selenium concentrations in fish from the Cape Fear
River was conducted during 2010 to fulfill the monitoring requirements under Part I, Section A. (12)
Fish Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected during four
separate sampling trips in 2010. Multiple sampling attempts were made due to limited
availability of some of the target species. As a result, some of the target species were not
collected during 2010. Sampling Station UP is located approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the
Sutton Plant discharge and is characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging trees.
This station typically receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. Station DI is
located near the plant discharge to the river and Station DW is located approximately 1.5 miles
downstream of the discharge. The two stations are greatly affected by tidal saltwater intrusion.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for the baseline pre-operational sampling
was the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. During 2010, in addition to blue catfish, channel catfish
Ictalurus punctatus, bluegill Lepomis machrochirus, pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus, redear
sunfish Lepomis auritus, and largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides were also collected as
target species. An attempt was made to collect fish of similar size; however, due to limited
availability, most target fish were retained and processed regardless of size if enough tissue was
available for analysis.

3
4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current), angling, and trotlines. Trotlines were checked at approximately 24-hour
intervals during the sampling period. High salinity waters at Stations DI and DW affected the
availability of freshwater fish, particularly at Station DW, and as in past sampling years resulted
in fewer target species being collected despite significant sampling effort during the four separate
sampling trips.

Ancillary fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths, and total weights, were
recorded. Fish collected for selenium analysis were placed in a labeled (date, station, target
species, etc.) bag and placed on ice until they were transferred to an on-site freezer at the end of
each day. Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Selenium Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for selenium analysis
according to procedure NR-00107 (Revision 1) Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure
of the Progress Energy Certified Biological Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Most of the processed samples (lyophilized) were analyzed in-house according to procedure
CHE-NGG-0044 Energy Dispersive Polarized X-ray Fluorescence Procedure. Eight fish were
analyzed at an external laboratory for selenium using hydride generation/atomic absorption
spectroscopy due to their small sample sizes. Fillets of left axial muscle were used for the
analyses. The fish carcasses with sufficient tissue remaining were archived and will be kept up
to two years in the event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the original baseline selenium concentrations (converted to µg/g wet
weight) in fish collected in 1999 are shown in Table 1. The selenium concentrations (wet
weight) collected in 2010 are shown in Table 2. In addition to the lengths and weight of each
fish, the dry-to-wet weight ratios are presented for conversion the selenium concentrations
between wet and dry weight values, if desired. Selenium values from the fish at all three stations

4
were similar to or slightly above the range of values reported in the baseline data. Four fish at
Station DI were slightly elevated above 1 ppm wet weight. However, all the results were below
the US EPA and North Carolina (Health Department) screening values (NCDNER 2006).

7.0 References

NCDENR. 2006. Standard operating procedures fish tissue assessments, Raleigh, North Carolina.

5

Figure 1. Cape Fear River selenium monitoring locations.
UP
DI
DW

6
Table 1. Baseline (prior to Outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations in axial
muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, 1999.

Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill January UP 142 49 0.3 0.18
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.2 0.19
Bluegill January UP 153 66 0.4 0.19
Blue catfish January UP 427 618 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish January UP 310 242 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish January UP 421 572 0.1 0.18
Bluegill January DI 141 52 0.3 0.19
Bluegill January DI 145 48 0.2 0.18
Bluegill January DI 146 51 0.7 0.21
Blue catfish January DI 131 35 0.2 0.17
Bluegill January DW 130 33 0.4 0.18
Bluegill January DW 195 152 0.2 0.20

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

7
Table 2. Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear
River, 2010.

Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill June UP 196 189 0.3 0.22
Bluegill June UP 201 194 0.4 0.21
Bluegill June UP 168 98 0.4 0.20
Pumpkinseed June UP 180 112 0.2 0.18
Pumpkinseed June UP 163 82 0.5 0.20
Pumpkinseed June UP 176 109 0.4 0.20
Pumpkinseed June UP 164 98 0.4 0.20
Pumpkinseed June UP 157 86 0.5 0.18
Pumpkinseed June UP 166 105 0.5 0.19
Pumpkinseed June UP 163 86 0.4 0.18
Largemouth bass June UP 279 344 0.4 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 279 314 0.4 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 267 256 0.4 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 282 284 0.4 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 257 230 0.4 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 267 276 0.5 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 291 355 0.4 0.18
Largemouth bass June UP 314 508 0.5 0.22
Largemouth bass June UP 305 391 0.3 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 267 291 0.2 0.19
Channel catfish June UP 475 1040 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish Sept UP 705 4075 0.4 0.26
Blue catfish Sept UP 490 975 0.2 0.14
Blue catfish Sept UP 728 4040 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish Sept UP 622 2450 0.1 0.17
Blue catfish Oct UP 710 4600 0.2 0.19

8
Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish Oct UP 631 2800 0.1 0.16
Blue catfish Oct UP 701 3600 0.1 0.19
Blue catfish Oct UP 517 5150 0.1 0.19
Bluegill June DI 201 205 0.5 0.18
Bluegill June DI 177 116 0.5 0.20
Bluegill June DI 169 100 0.4 0.20
Bluegill June DI 171 95 2.2 0.20
Bluegill Sept DI 190 138 1.7 0.19
Bluegill Sept DI 171 110 0.2 0.20
Bluegill Sept DI 176 111 1.2 0.20
Bluegill Oct DI 212 208 0.3 0.18
Bluegill Oct DI 198 170 0.3 0.18
Redear Sunfish Oct DI 219 192 0.4 0.18
Largemouth bass June DI 371 882 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 409 1100 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 352 707 0.6 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 349 697 0.6 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 345 676 0.7 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 350 654 0.4 0.16
Largemouth bass June DI 356 652 0.8 0.17
Largemouth bass June DI 308 438 1.3 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 395 960 0.3 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 336 526 0.7 0.21
Blue catfish Sept DI 784 5425 0.1 0.16
Blue catfish Sept DI 665 2900 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish Oct DI 725 5100 0.4 0.15
Blue catfish Oct DI 645 2800 0.2 0.17
Blue catfish Oct DI 548 1600 0.2 0.17

9
Fish Species Month Station
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Selenium
(wet wt. µg/g)
Dry-to-wet*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish Dec DI 725 4575 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish Dec DI 624 2700 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish Dec DI 644 3500 0.2 0.19
Largemouth bass Oct DW 296 448 0.3 0.20
Blue catfish Oct DW 663 3100 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish Oct DW 645 2800 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish Oct DW 830 5900 0.2 0.16
Blue catfish Oct DW 650 3150 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish Oct DW 720 4900 0.2 0.19
Blue catfish Oct DW 652 2850 0.1 0.17
Blue catfish Oct DW 650 3000 0.1 0.18
Blue catfish Oct DW 887 10500 0.2 0.18
Blue catfish Oct DW 678 3800 0.1 0.15
Blue catfish Oct DW 780 5800 0.2 0.15

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Electric Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Selenium Monitoring of Fish in the Cape Fear River, 2011
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Environmental Services Section
March 2012

1
Table of Contents
Page

1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 2

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Sample Analysis .................................................................... 3

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 3

7.0 Reference .......................................................................................................................... 3

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 1999 ...................................................................................... 5

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 2011 ...................................................................................... 6

List of Figures
Page

Figure 1 Cape Fear River monitoring locations ........................................................................ 4

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Co. d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and operates the
L. V. Sutton Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear River in New
Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of Wilmington, North
Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, monitoring selenium concentrations in fish from the Cape Fear
River was conducted during 2011 to fulfill the monitoring requirements under Part I, Section A. (12)
Fish Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected during three
separate sampling trips in 2011. Station UP is located approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the
Sutton Plant discharge and is characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging trees.
This station typically receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. Station DI is
located near the plant discharge to the river and Station DW is located approximately 1.5 miles
downstream of the discharge. These two stations are greatly affected by tidal saltwater intrusion.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for the baseline pre-operational sampling
was the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. During 2011, bluegill Lepomis machrochirus and
largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides were also collected as target species. As in past years,
multiple sampling trips were required due to limited availability of some of the target species. As
a result, a full complement some of the target species were not obtained during 2011. An
attempt was made to collect fish of similar size; however, due to limited availability, most target
fish were retained and processed regardless of size if enough tissue was available for analysis.

4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current), angling, and trotlines. Trotlines were checked at approximately 24-hour
intervals during the sampling period. High salinity waters at Stations DI and DW again affected

3
the availability of freshwater fish as in past sampling years resulting in fewer target species being
collected despite significant sampling effort during the four separate sampling trips.

Other fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths, and total weights, were also
recorded. Fish collected for analysis were placed in a labeled (date, station, target species, etc.)
bag and placed on ice until they were transferred to an on-site freezer at the end of each day.
Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Sample Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for analysis according to
Procedure NR-00107 (Revision 1) Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure of the
Progress Energy Certified Biological Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Most
of the processed samples (lyophilized) were analyzed in-house according to Procedure CHE-
NGG-0044 Energy Dispersive Polarized X-ray Fluorescence Procedure. Some smaller fish were
analyzed at an external laboratory for selenium using hydride generation/atomic absorption
spectroscopy due to sample size. Fillets of axial muscle were used for the analyses. The fish
carcasses with sufficient tissue remaining were archived and will be kept up to two years in the
event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the baseline selenium concentrations (converted to µg/g fresh weight)
in fish collected in 1999 are shown in Table 1. The fresh wet concentrations for 2011 are shown
in Table 2. In addition to the lengths and weight of each fish, the dry-to-wet weight ratios are
presented for conversion of the results between fresh weight and dry weight values, as desired.
Selenium concentrations from the fish collected during 2011 at all three stations were generally
similar to the range of values reported in the baseline data from 1999. All selenium values were
low and below both the US EPA and NCDHHS screening values for selenium (NCDNER 2006).

7.0 References

NCDENR. 2006. Standard operating procedures fish tissue assessments, Raleigh, North Carolina.

4

Figure 1. Cape Fear River monitoring locations.
UP
DI
DW

5
Table 1. Baseline (prior to Outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations (fresh
weight) in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, 1999.

Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill Jan UP 153 66 0.44 0.19
Bluegill Jan UP 153 66 0.18 0.19
Blue Catfish Jan UP 131 35 0.21 0.17
Blue Catfish Jan UP 427 618 0.16 0.18
Blue Catfish Jan UP 310 242 0.24 0.17
Blue Catfish Jan UP 421 572 0.14 0.18
Bluegill Jan DI 145 48 0.24 0.18
Bluegill Jan DI 141 52 0.30 0.19
Bluegill Jan DI 146 51 0.60 0.19
Bluegill Jan DI 130 33 0.40 0.18
Bluegill Jan DW 195 152 0.18 0.20
Bluegill Jan DW 142 49 0.27 0.18

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

6
Table 2. Selenium concentrations (fresh weight) in axial muscle of fish from the lower
Cape Fear River, 2011.

Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill June UP 166 79 1.26 0.20
Bluegill June UP 164 80 0.48 0.20
Bluegill June UP 205 204 0.46 0.22
Bluegill Sept UP 187 130 0.32 0.21
Bluegill Sept UP 192 157 0.60 0.21
Bluegill Sept UP 195 148 0.43 0.20
Bluegill Sept UP 206 200 0.41 0.21
Bluegill Sept UP 192 132 0.34 0.20
Bluegill Sept UP 190 126 0.29 0.19
Bluegill Sept UP 190 134 0.34 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 335 482 0.42 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 290 364 0.43 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept UP 325 440 0.39 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 347 605 0.53 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 216 175 0.46 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 341 570 0.48 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 343 581 0.34 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 412 944 0.44 0.20
Largemouth bass Dec UP 369 708 0.40 0.21
Largemouth bass Dec UP 412 1025 0.68 0.21
Blue catfish June UP 736 4350 0.12 0.17
Blue catfish June UP 610 2500 0.18 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 716 4750 0.20 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 708 3700 0.18 0.17
Blue catfish June UP 628 2750 0.21 0.16
Blue catfish June UP 586 2250 0.20 0.18

7
Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June UP 650 3700 0.16 0.16
Blue catfish June UP 721 4500 0.20 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 581 2250 0.14 0.20
Blue catfish June UP 657 3350 0.13 0.19
Bluegill June DI 171 98 1.54 0.20
Bluegill June DI 210 181 0.44 0.21
Bluegill June DI 180 117 0.58 0.19
Bluegill June DI 189 149 0.59 0.21
Bluegill June DI 190 164 0.67 0.22
Bluegill June DI 214 217 0.74 0.22
Bluegill June DI 221 269 0.82 0.22
Bluegill June DI 179 125 0.87 0.22
Bluegill June DI 191 143 0.58 0.21
Bluegill Sept DI 173 104 1.01 0.19
Largemouth bass Sept DI 397 921 2.12 0.22
Largemouth bass Sept DI 443 1325 0.60 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 352 620 0.51 0.21
Blue catfish June DI 782 5650 0.30 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 680 3475 0.30 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 781 4950 0.19 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 684 3450 0.22 0.20
Blue catfish June DI 625 3150 0.29 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 607 2550 0.41 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 652 3100 0.27 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 724 5000 0.31 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 640 2650 0.37 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 576 1725 0.14 0.17
Bluegill Dec DW 161 60 0.28 0.15

8
Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill Dec DW 162 68 0.28 0.19
Largemouth bass Sept DW 297 378 0.35 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept DW 282 327 0.45 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept DW 261 212 0.38 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept DW 286 313 0.51 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept DW 282 310 0.41 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept DW 304 395 0.41 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 480 1050 0.33 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 698 3700 0.19 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 728 3950 0.10 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 694 4000 0.21 0.21
Blue catfish June DW 782 5750 0.19 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 761 5200 0.26 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 431 750 0.23 0.17
Blue catfish Dec DW 690 3725 0.21 0.19
Blue catfish Dec DW 732 5025 0.15 0.19
Blue catfish Dec DW 741 4450 0.16 0.18
Blue catfish Dec DW 701 3700 0.22 0.17

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Electric Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Arsenic, Mercury and Selenium Monitoring
of Fish in the Cape Fear River, 2012
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Duke Energy Progress
Environmental Services Department
April 29, 2013

1
Table of Contents
Page

1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 2

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Sample Analysis .................................................................... 3

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 3

7.0 Reference .......................................................................................................................... 4

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 1999 ...................................................................................... 6

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 2012 ...................................................................................... 7

List of Figures
Page

Figure 1 Cape Fear River monitoring locations ........................................................................ 5

2
1.0 Introduction
Carolina Power & Light Co. d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Company) owns and operates the
L. V. Sutton Electric Plant (Sutton Plant) located on the east side of the Cape Fear River in New
Hanover County. Sutton Plant is approximately twelve river miles upstream of Wilmington, North
Carolina. As required by the Sutton Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422, monitoring selenium concentrations in fish from the Cape Fear
River was conducted during 2012 to fulfill the monitoring requirements under Part I, Section A. (12)
Fish Study and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected during three
separate sampling trips in 2012. Station UP is located approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the
Sutton Plant discharge and is characterized as riverine with woody debris and overhanging trees.
This station typically receives minimal influence of the tidal saltwater intrusion. Station DI is
located near the plant discharge to the river and Station DW is located approximately 1.5 miles
downstream of the discharge. These two stations are greatly affected by tidal saltwater intrusion.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for the baseline pre-operational sampling
was the blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. During 2012, bluegill Lepomis machrochirus,
pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus, warmouth Lepomis gulosus, and largemouth bass Micropterus
salmoides were also collected as target species. As in past years, multiple sampling trips were
required due to limited availability of some of the target species. As a result, a full complement
some of the target species were not obtained during 2012. An attempt was made to collect fish
of similar size; however, due to limited availability, most target fish were retained and processed
regardless of size if enough tissue was available for analysis.

4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current), angling, and trotlines. Trotlines were checked at approximately 24-hour

3
intervals during the sampling period. High salinity waters at Stations DI and DW again affected
the availability of freshwater fish as in past sampling years resulting in fewer target species being
collected despite significant sampling effort during the four separate sampling trips.

Other fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths, and total weights, were also
recorded. Fish collected for analysis were placed in a labeled (date, station, target species, etc.)
bag and placed on ice until they were transferred to an on-site freezer at the end of each day.
Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Sample Analysis
All fish were processed in the Company’s trace element laboratory for analysis according to
Procedure NR-00107 (Revision 1) Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure of the
Progress Energy Certified Biological Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Most
of the processed samples (lyophilized) were analyzed in-house according to Procedure CHE-
NGG-0044 Energy Dispersive Polarized X-ray Fluorescence Procedure. Some smaller fish were
analyzed at an external laboratory for selenium using hydride generation/atomic absorption
spectroscopy due to sample size. Fillets of axial muscle were used for the analyses. The fish
carcasses with sufficient tissue remaining were archived and will be kept up to two years in the
event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the baseline selenium concentrations (converted to µg/g fresh weight)
in fish collected in 1999 are shown in Table 1. However, for the 2012 dataset, arsenic and
mercury were also included. Since these new variables were not analyzed from the original
baseline samples in 1999, no comparison can be made to concentrations prior the operation of the
ash pond pipeline. The fresh wet concentrations for 2012 are shown in Table 2. In addition to the
lengths and weight of each fish, the dry-to-wet weight ratios are presented for conversion of the
results between fresh weight and dry weight values, as desired. Arsenic, mercury and selenium
concentrations from the fish collected during 2012 at all three stations were generally similar at
the three locations with the exception of one largemouth bass that was about twice in selenium

4
concentration at Station DI as the remainder of the fish analyzed from all stations. However, all
selenium values were low and below both the US EPA and NCDHHS screening values for
selenium (NCDNER 2006).

7.0 References

NCDENR. 2006. Standard operating procedures fish tissue assessments, Raleigh, North Carolina.

5

Figure 1. Cape Fear River monitoring locations.
UP
DI
DW

6
Table 1. Baseline (prior to Outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations (fresh
weight) in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, 1999.

Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill Jan UP 153 66 0.44 0.19
Bluegill Jan UP 153 66 0.18 0.19
Blue Catfish Jan UP 131 35 0.21 0.17
Blue Catfish Jan UP 427 618 0.16 0.18
Blue Catfish Jan UP 310 242 0.24 0.17
Blue Catfish Jan UP 421 572 0.14 0.18
Bluegill Jan DI 145 48 0.24 0.18
Bluegill Jan DI 141 52 0.30 0.19
Bluegill Jan DI 146 51 0.60 0.19
Bluegill Jan DI 130 33 0.40 0.18
Bluegill Jan DW 195 152 0.18 0.20
Bluegill Jan DW 142 49 0.27 0.18

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

7
Table 2. Selenium concentrations (fresh weight) in axial muscle of fish from the lower
Cape Fear River, 2012.

Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
As
(µg/g)
Hg
(µg/g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill June UP 182 131 0.14 < 0.13 1.20 0.18
Bluegill June UP 186 125 < 0.06 < 0.11 0.33 0.15
Bluegill June UP 193 134 0.13 < 0.13 0.55 0.19
Bluegill June UP 179 124 0.19 < 0.10 0.56 0.17
Bluegill June UP 209 200 0.17 < 0.15 0.41 0.21
Bluegill June UP 190 144 < 0.09 < 0.13 0.40 0.22
Bluegill June UP 181 123 < 0.09 < 0.15 0.38 0.21
Pumpkinseed June UP 184 124 0.07 0.18 0.35 0.15
Pumpkinseed June UP 179 128 < 0.08 < 0.14 0.30 0.20
Warmouth June UP 184 154 0.19 < 0.15 0.28 0.19
Largemouth bass June UP 280 330 0.16 < 0.14 0.45 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 380 736 < 0.08 < 0.16 0.33 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept UP 363 749 < 0.08 < 0.14 0.34 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept UP 352 679 < 0.08 < 0.16 0.37 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 361 758 < 0.09 < 0.15 0.36 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 290 384 < 0.09 0.23 0.45 0.21
Largemouth bass Dec UP 473 1400 0.09 0.39 0.18 0.18
Largemouth bass Dec UP 329 539 0.39 < 0.14 0.43 0.21
Largemouth bass Dec UP 458 1200 0.39 < 0.15 0.37 0.21
Blue catfish June UP 592 2400 < 0.07 0.13 0.18 0.15
Blue catfish June UP 693 3900 0.44 < 0.13 0.22 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 634 2950 < 0.07 < 0.12 < 0.05 0.17
Blue catfish June UP 711 4125 0.11 0.11 0.15 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 752 5725 0.82 0.15 0.15 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 754 4700 0.32 < 0.15 0.23 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 780 5450 < 0.09 0.21 0.19 0.19

8
Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
As
(µg/g)
Hg
(µg/g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June UP 640 2800 0.30 < 0.13 0.19 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 720 4550 0.45 < 0.14 0.16 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 606 2225 < 0.08 0.29 0.19 0.19
Bluegill June DI 184 137 < 0.10 < 0.17 0.80 0.25
Bluegill June DI 205 181 < 0.11 < 0.19 0.44 0.28
Bluegill June DI 191 159 < 0.11 < 0.19 0.33 0.28
Bluegill June DI 207 233 < 0.09 < 0.15 0.20 0.22
Bluegill June DI 205 196 < 0.11 < 0.19 0.46 0.27
Bluegill June DI 211 202 < 0.11 < 0.20 0.45 0.28
Bluegill June DI 190 156 < 0.10 < 0.17 0.41 0.24
Bluegill June DI 196 177 < 0.09 < 0.17 0.38 0.24
Bluegill June DI 211 225 < 0.10 < 0.18 0.35 0.25
Bluegill June DI 204 193 < 0.09 < 0.19 0.61 0.24
Largemouth bass June DI 396 858 0.23 0.13 2.37 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 397 770 0.20 0.16 0.24 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 368 734 0.48 < 0.14 0.84 0.23
Largemouth bass Sept DI 336 608 0.38 < 0.15 0.46 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept DI 291 447 0.36 < 0.13 0.59 0.21
Largemouth bass Dec DI 240 244 0.27 < 0.14 0.56 0.21
Largemouth bass Dec DI 262 298 0.34 < 0.14 0.52 0.20
Largemouth bass Dec DI 233 190 0.31 < 0.14 0.47 0.21
Blue catfish June DI 718 3650 0.50 0.13 0.15 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 750 5575 0.20 0.18 0.22 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 634 2775 0.76 0.27 0.21 0.20
Blue catfish June DI 736 5500 0.97 0.26 0.22 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 751 5200 < 0.07 0.20 0.20 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 681 3675 0.54 0.07 0.20 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 698 4300 0.29 0.25 0.23 0.20

9
Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
As
(µg/g)
Hg
(µg/g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June DI 562 1650 < 0.07 < 0.12 0.15 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 711 4125 < 0.08 < 0.15 0.17 0.21
Blue catfish June DI 621 2500 0.31 < 0.13 0.26 0.18
Warmouth Dec DW 171 110 0.20 < 0.14 0.36 0.20
Largemouth bass June DW 411 826 0.09 0.19 0.51 0.17
Largemouth bass Dec DW 193 114 0.30 < 0.16 0.42 0.20
Largemouth bass Dec DW 204 120 0.20 0.10 0.39 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 722 4425 0.51 < 0.15 0.22 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 709 4750 0.44 0.11 0.20 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 596 2125 0.42 0.07 0.19 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 631 2550 0.27 0.18 0.20 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 737 5275 0.30 < 0.12 0.14 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 527 1425 0.48 < 0.13 0.21 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 707 4375 0.62 0.14 0.18 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 696 4225 0.68 0.37 0.18 0.21
Blue catfish June DW 627 2900 0.19 < 0.13 0.17 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 774 5100 0.85 0.30 0.17 0.17

* To convert to a dry weight, divide the wet weight selenium concentrations by the tissue dry-to-
wet weight ratio.

L. V. Sutton Electric Plant

NPDES Permit No. NC0001422

Arsenic, Mercury, and Selenium Monitoring
of Fish in the Cape Fear River, 2013
New Hanover County, North Carolina

Duke Energy Progress
April, 2014

1
Table of Contents
Page

1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations ............................................................... 2

3.0 Target Species ................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 Field Sampling Methods ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Sample Analysis .................................................................... 3

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................ 3

7.0 Reference .......................................................................................................................... 4

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Baseline selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 1999 ...................................................................................... 6

Table 2 Selenium concentrations in axial muscle of fish from the
lower Cape Fear River, 2013 ...................................................................................... 7

List of Figures
Page

Figure 1 Cape Fear River monitoring locations ........................................................................ 5

2
1.0 Introduction
Duke Energy Progress. (Company) owns and operates the L. V. Sutton Electric Plant (Sutton Plant)
located on the east side of the Cape Fear River in New Hanover County. The Sutton Plant is located
approximately twelve river miles upstream of Wilmington, North Carolina. As required by the Sutton
Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. NC0001422,
monitoring of arsenic, mercury, and selenium concentrations in fish from the Cape Fear River was
conducted during 2013 to fulfill the monitoring requirements under Part I, Section A. (14) Fish Study
and Monitoring to Evaluate the Rerouting of Ash Pond Effluent.

2.0 Study Site Description and Sampling Locations
Fish from three locations of the lower Cape Fear River (Figure 1) were collected during 2013.
Station UP is located approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the Sutton Plant discharge and is
characterized as riverine with shoreline aquatic vegetation, woody debris, and overhanging trees.
This station typically receives less influence from the tidal saltwater intrusion than the other two
sampling stations. Station DI is located near the plant discharge to the river and Station DW is
located approximately 1.5 miles downstream of the discharge. These two stations are greatly
affected by tidal saltwater intrusion.

3.0 Target Species
The original primary target species in the study plan for baseline (prior to discharge of the ash
pond pipeline to the river) sampling was blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus. After operation of the
pipeline began in 1999, the target species list was expanded to include bluegill Lepomis
machrochirus, largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Secondary target fish, such as other
species of Lepomis or flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris have also been included over the years
when availability of the primary target species was limited. During 2013, bluegill, largemouth
bass , and blue catfish were collected as target species. Three separate sampling trips in June,
September, and December were made during 2013 due to limited availability of some target
species but appropriate fish were only collected during two of the trips in June and September.
Therefore a full complement of fish were not obtained during 2013. As recommended by the

3
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) an attempt was made to limit the smallest fish
to 75% of the largest fish total length by species depending on availability (USEPA 1995).

4.0 Field Sampling Methods
Standard fishery gear types were used during the collection effort including a boat electrofisher
(pulsed DC current) and trotlines. Trotlines were checked at approximately 24-hour intervals
during the sampling period. High salinity waters at Stations DI and DW again affected the
availability of freshwater fish as in past sampling years resulting in fewer target species being
collected despite significant sampling effort during the three separate sampling trips.

Other fisheries data including species, numbers, total lengths, and total weights, were also
recorded. Fish collected for analysis were placed in a labeled (date, station, target species, etc.)
bag and placed on ice until they were transferred to an on-site freezer at the end of each day.
Only live fish that showed little signs of deterioration were retained for analysis.

5.0 Laboratory Processing and Sample Analysis
All fish samples were processed in the trace element laboratory according to procedure NR-
00107 (Rev. 2 and Rev. 3) Trace Element Monitoring Laboratory Procedure. The processed
samples (lyophilized left axial muscle; right muscle occasionally included when needed) were
analyzed for mercury and selenium by x-ray spectrophotometry at the New Hill Trace Element
Laboratory. Quality control was achieved by analytical standards and replicates and certified
reference materials. The remaining fish carcasses were archived and will be kept at least two
years in the event that re-analysis is needed.

6.0 Data Analysis and Reporting
For comparison purposes, the baseline selenium concentrations (converted to µg/g fresh weight)
in fish collected in 1999 are shown in Table 1. For the 2013, arsenic and mercury were also
included. Since these new variables were not analyzed from the original baseline samples in
1999, no comparison can be made to concentrations prior the operation of the ash pond pipeline.
The fresh wet concentrations for 2013 are shown in Table 2. In addition to the lengths and

4
weight of each fish, the dry-to-wet weight ratios are presented for conversion of the results
between fresh weight and dry weight values, as desired. Arsenic, mercury, and selenium
concentrations from the fish collected during 2013 were generally similar at the three sampling
locations. All total arsenic values were below the USEPA recreational fisherman screening value
of 1.2 µg/g (fresh weight) for inorganic arsenic. However, all total arsenic concentrations
measured, as well as all the laboratory reporting limits, for 2013 analyses were above the USEPA
subsistence fisherman screening value of 0.00327 µg/g fresh weight for inorganic arsenic. Since
speciation for the fraction of arsenic as inorganic was not performed, the true percentage of
measurements that were above this screening value is not known. One largemouth bass and
one blue catfish collected at Station DI were slightly greater than the North Carolina Department
of Health and Human Services (NCDHHS) screening value (0.4 µg/g) for mercury. All other
total mercury measurements at the three sampling locations were below the human health
screening value. All total selenium concentrations measured in fish at the three sampling
locations were low and below both the US EPA and NCDHHS screening values for human
health (NCDNER 2006).

7.0 References

NCDHHS. 2006. Health effects of methylmercury and North Carolina’s advice on eating fish.
North Carolina Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch. Raleigh, NC.

USEPA. 1995. Guidance for assessing chemical contaminant data for use in fish advisories. Vol. 1.
Fish sampling and analysis. Second edition. EPA 823-R-95-007. United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.

5

Figure 1. Cape Fear River monitoring locations.
UP
DI
DW

6
Table 1. Baseline (prior to Outfall 004 operation) selenium concentrations (fresh
weight) in axial muscle of fish from the lower Cape Fear River, 1999.

Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill Jan UP 153 66 0.44 0.19
Bluegill Jan UP 153 66 0.18 0.19
Blue Catfish Jan UP 131 35 0.21 0.17
Blue Catfish Jan UP 427 618 0.16 0.18
Blue Catfish Jan UP 310 242 0.24 0.17
Blue Catfish Jan UP 421 572 0.14 0.18
Bluegill Jan DI 145 48 0.24 0.18
Bluegill Jan DI 141 52 0.30 0.19
Bluegill Jan DI 146 51 0.60 0.19
Bluegill Jan DI 130 33 0.40 0.18
Bluegill Jan DW 195 152 0.18 0.20
Bluegill Jan DW 142 49 0.27 0.18

* To convert to a dry weight value, divide the wet weight concentration by the tissue dry-to-wet
weight ratio.

7
Table 2. Selenium concentrations (fresh weight) in axial muscle of fish from the lower
Cape Fear River, 2013.

Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
As
(µg/g)
Hg
(µg/g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Bluegill June UP 227 278 0.09 < 0.16 0.52 0.23
Bluegill Sept UP 201 166 0.05 0.15 0.32 0.19
Bluegill Sept UP 165 63 < 0.59 0.20 1.95 0.18
Bluegill Sept UP 204 188 < 0.04 0.06 0.35 0.21
Bluegill Sept UP 202 190 < 0.04 0.23 0.33 0.21
Bluegill Sept UP 214 203 < 0.04 0.18 0.45 0.21
Bluegill Sept UP 208 212 < 0.08 0.18 0.28 0.20
Bluegill Sept UP 180 114 0.05 0.17 0.37 0.21
Bluegill Sept UP 182 114 < 0.04 0.04 0.56 0.20
Bluegill Sept UP 188 147 < 0.04 0.15 0.37 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 288 338 0.17 < 0.15 0.44 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 289 379 < 0.08 < 0.15 0.29 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 314 456 0.22 < 0.14 0.47 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 325 448 < 0.08 < 0.14 0.39 0.20
Largemouth bass June UP 280 322 < 0.08 0.17 0.36 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 275 315 < 0.08 < 0.15 0.23 0.21
Largemouth bass June UP 280 348 0.21 <0.17 0.46 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept UP 266 237 < 0.04 0.18 0.47 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept UP 341 620 0.19 0.13 0.56 0.22
Largemouth bass Sept UP 269 264 0.09 0.15 0.43 0.22
Blue catfish June UP 790 6400 0.19 0.13 0.21 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 712 4700 0.99 < 0.17 0.17 0.21
Blue catfish June UP 619 2525 < 0.08 0.16 0.20 0.20
Blue catfish June UP 725 3700 < 0.07 < 0.13 0.19 0.18
Blue catfish June UP 587 2175 0.47 < 0.15 0.21 0.19
Blue catfish June UP 741 5000 0.20 0.34 0.20 0.20

8
Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
As
(µg/g)
Hg
(µg/g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June UP 732 5700 0.84 < 0.13 0.15 0.20
Blue catfish June UP 702 3650 < 0.08 < 0.13 0.19 0.21
Blue catfish June UP 596 2700 < 0.08 0.26 0.24 0.20
Blue catfish Sept UP 596 2400 < 0.04 0.23 0.34 0.20
Bluegill June DI 211 176 < 0.1 <0.15 1.53 0.20
Bluegill June DI 215 210 < 0.11 0.11 0.53 0.21
Bluegill June DI 217 206 0.08 <0.15 0.55 0.20
Bluegill June DI 208 186 0.10 <0.15 0.75 0.20
Bluegill June DI 202 170 < 0.08 <0.15 0.39 0.21
Bluegill June DI 212 236 0.10 <0.15 0.45 0.20
Bluegill June DI 201 155 0.16 < 0.16 0.61 0.20
Bluegill June DI 211 198 < 0.08 0.34 0.46 0.20
Bluegill June DI 226 290 < 0.1 <0.15 0.40 0.20
Bluegill June DI 230 272 0.16 < 0.12 1.97 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 471 1350 0.23 <0.15 1.77 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 273 274 0.23 <0.15 0.75 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 441 1200 0.12 < 0.17 0.53 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 510 2000 < 0.08 <0.15 1.81 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 320 537 0.22 < 0.15 0.43 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 285 356 0.32 < 0.13 0.59 0.21
Largemouth bass June DI 462 1800 < 0.1 0.22 0.38 0.20
Largemouth bass June DI 450 1500 < 0.1 < 0,15 0.44 0.19
Largemouth bass June DI 289 381 0.13 < 0.13 0.59 0.22
Largemouth bass June DI 341 618 < 0.1 0.48 0.29 0.21
Blue catfish June DI 770 6000 0.55 < 0.14 0.15 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 681 3400 0.21 0.09 0.28 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 664 3575 0.22 0.47 0.29 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 648 3300 0.34 < 0.13 0.15 0.19

9
Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
As
(µg/g)
Hg
(µg/g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June DI 640 2975 0.09 < 0.16 0.28 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 705 4375 0.13 < 0.13 0.18 0.16
Blue catfish June DI 690 4275 0.30 < 0.13 0.13 0.19
Blue catfish June DI 606 2500 0.79 < 0.14 0.16 0.18
Blue catfish June DI 641 2800 < 0.09 0.25 0.23 0.17
Blue catfish June DI 713 4075 0.09 0.07 0.15 0.18
Bluegill June DW 190 162 < 0.11 <0.15 0.40 0.21
Bluegill June DW 160 90 < 0.09 <0.15 0.35 0.22
Bluegill Sept DW 178 139 < 0.09 0.12 0.50 0.20
Bluegill Sept DW 171 95 0.09 0.08 0.41 0.20
Bluegill Sept DW 156 83 0.09 0.15 0.28 0.18
Pumpkinseed Sept DW 171 121 0.13 0.12 0.38 0.20
Largemouth bass June DW 392 996 0.10 < 0.17 0.51 0.21
Largemouth bass June DW 295 436 0.11 0.25 0.38 0.21
Largemouth bass June DW 256 256 0.25 0.10 0.33 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept DW 399 873 0.70 0.12 0.47 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept DW 343 716 0.24 0.06 0.45 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept DW 317 500 0.18 0.10 0.36 0.20
Largemouth bass Sept DW 305 441 0.17 0.10 0.46 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept DW 278 345 0.25 < 0.17 0.47 0.21
Largemouth bass Sept DW 312 438 0.21 0.09 0.67 0.22
Largemouth bass Sept DW 247 236 0.09 0.16 0.40 0.20
Blue catfish June DW 840 7400 0.94 0.15 0.31 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 693 3825 0.40 0.07 0.14 0.17
Blue catfish June DW 754 4550 < 0.05 0.19 0.16 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 494 1100 0.23 0.15 0.08 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 467 920 0.09 < 0.14 0.24 0.17
Blue catfish June DW 492 1025 0.11 0.20 0.29 0.18

10
Fish Species Month Locations
Length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
As
(µg/g)
Hg
(µg/g)
Se
(µg/g)
Dry-to-Fresh*
Weight Ratio
Blue catfish June DW 687 4050 0.13 0.23 0.11 0.18
Blue catfish June DW 698 5400 0.38 0.17 0.13 0.19
Blue catfish June DW 523 1575 0.05 0.11 0.22 0.18
Blue catfish Sept DW 421 738 0.19 0.14 0.23 0.19

* To convert to a dry weight value, divide the wet weight concentration by the tissue dry-to-wet
weight ratio.