WS-3667_11700_GW_CME_20190906

AECOM 919-461-1100 tel
1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 400 919-461-1415 fax
Morrisville, NC 27560

September 6, 2019

Mr. Patrick Watters
NCDEQ – Division of Waste Management
Superfund Section
217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603

Subject: Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report – 2019, Burlington Operations Center MGP Site
Dear Mr. Watters,
On behalf of Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy), AECOM is pleased to submit a copy of the
most recent annual groundwater monitoring report for the Burlington Operations Center MGP Site.
The report includes details and results of the monitoring event, as well as recommendations for
optimizing the groundwater monitoring network based on historical data trends and monitoring well
usage.
A copy of the letter report being sent to the property owner of offsite/downgradient bedrock
monitoring well PMWP-BR is also provided for your records.
If you have any questions or require further information regarding this request, please call me at
[phone] or Richard Powell ([e-mail]) with Duke Energy at
[phone].
Yours sincerely,

Carlin Slusher
Project Manager
[e-mail]

Enclosures:

One CD and one bound copy of:
-Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report – 2019, Burlington Operations MGP Site
-Sampling Results Letter to Offsite Property Owner (1204 N. Church Street, Burlington, NC)

ANNUAL GROUNDWATER
MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center
Burlington, North Carolina

Prepared for:

September 2019

Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM
Quality information
Prepared by Checked by Approved by

Charlie Slone

Carlin Slusher

Richard Powell
AECOM

AECOM Duke Energy

Revision History
Revision Revision date Details Authorized Name Position
0

Distribution List
Copies/Type Delivery Method Recipient / Association
1 CD FedEx Patrick Watters, NCDEQ
1 PDF Email Patrick Watters, NCDEQ
1 PDF Email Rick Powell, Duke Energy

Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 5
2. Background .......................................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Location and Description ............................................................................................ 6
2.2 Setting and Geology ................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Conceptual Hydrogeologic Model .............................................................................. 7
2.4 Summary of Remedial Actions ................................................................................... 7
3. Groundwater Monitoring – 2019 Sampling Event ................................................................ 9
3.1 Soil Cap Inspection and Monitoring Well Inventory .................................................... 9
3.2 Liquid Level Gauging .................................................................................................. 9
3.3 Summary of Groundwater Sampling Procedures ....................................................... 9
3.4 Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results ........................................................... 10
4. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................. 12

Figures
Figure 1 Location Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3 Residuum/Fill Potentiometric Surface Contour Map
Figure 4 Saprolite Potentiometric Surface Contour Map
Figure 5 Shallow Bedrock Potentiometric Surface Contour Map
Figure 6 Residuum/Fill Groundwater COC Concentrations
Figure 7 Saprolite Groundwater COC Concentrations
Figure 8 Shallow Bedrock Groundwater COC Concentrations

Tables
Table 1 Monitoring Well Network Summary
Table 2 Groundwater Level Data – 2019
Table 3 Field Monitoring Data Summary - 2019
Table 4 Laboratory Analytical Results Summary – 2019
Appendices
Appendix A COC Concentration Time-trend Graphs
Appendix B Laboratory Analytical Report
Appendix C Mann-Kendall Trend Analyses
Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 5/12
1. Introduction
This report has been prepared by AECOM Technical Services of North Carolina, Inc. (AECOM)
on behalf of Duke Energy Corporation (Duke) to present the results of annual groundwater
monitoring at the former Burlington Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP) conducted June 27-28, 2019.
Regulatory authority has been assigned to the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) – Division of Waste Management, Superfund Section. The current NCDEQ-
approved remedial program consists of annual groundwater sampling for target constituents of
concerns (COC), which include benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes (BTEX) and
naphthalene at 16 site wells.

Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 6/12
2. Background
2.1 Location and Description
The former Burlington MGP site is located at 1205 North Church Street, Burlington, North Carolina
(the Site) in a mixed commercial and residential area. MGP operations began onsite in 1925 and
continued until the 1950s. The property, consisting of approximately 11.5 acres, is currently
occupied by Duke’s Burlington Operations Center building (including storage areas and parking
lots), a Piedmont Natural Gas (PNG) operations center, and an electrical substation. The Site
location and surrounding features are shown on Figure 1.
2.2 Setting and Geology
The Site encompasses approximately 10 acres of land, which are situated on property currently
owned by Duke and PNG. The Site elevation ranges from approximately 610 feet mean sea level
(msl) along the western border of the Site to approximately 575 feet msl along the channel of Dry
Creek flowing from southwest to northeast between the Operations Center building and the
electrical substation. The ground surface slopes from the eastern and western portions of the Site
towards Dry Creek and thus, the creek intercepts surface water runoff from the Site. Creek flow
is directed underground through three 6.25-foot diameter culverts at the north central portion of
the site and continues offsite below North Church Street. The creek eventually discharges to the
Haw River, a regional groundwater discharge point, located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of
the site (Figure 1). Both surface water bodies are classified as Water Supply V (upstream of
industrial, recreational, or drinking water bodies), Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW), by the
NCDEQ. Relevant site features, including the creek, the Operation’s Center building, the
substation, and the monitoring well network, are provided as Figure 2.
Based upon data collected during historical subsurface investigations at the Site, surficial soils
consist of a combination of residuum and fill. The western portion of the Site (the area west of the
Operations Center) is interpreted to be underlain by residuum consisting predominantly of fine
silty sand and sandy silt, which in some areas is underlain by saprolite. The saprolite consists of
fine to coarse sand-sized particles derived from the complete weathering of in-situ rock and has
retained the structure of the original parent bedrock. In contrast, surficial soils in the eastern
portion of the site (the area of a former cooling pond) consist primarily of soil fill. The fill is
characterized by alternating layers of silty fine to coarse sand and silts containing varying amounts
of clay and demolition debris (e.g., wood, concrete, and brick). The fill material ranges from a few
feet to more than 20 feet in thickness. Saprolite (completely weathered bedrock), typically ranging
from approximately 1 to 4 feet in thickness and was encountered below the fill at most locations
drilled through the fill.
Residuum and saprolite, where present, are underlain by competent bedrock, which is described
as biotite and granitic gneiss that has been intruded by diorite (and locally by diabase). Based on
rock core drilling performed during historical site investigations, the shallow (upper five to ten feet)
bedrock on site east of the Operations Center exhibits moderate to high fracturing that diminishes
quickly with depth. The bedrock structure beneath the site is characterized by two ridges along
the east and west sides of the site which slope downward to a bedrock depression (trough) located
adjacent to the west side of Dry Creek.
As indicated in the Monitoring Well Network Optimization Summary letter dated December 8,
2017, AECOM oversaw the abandonment of 25 monitoring wells, and reinstallation of monitoring
wells PS-1R, PMWM-SR and PMW-BRR in September 2017. The locations of monitoring wells
Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 7/12
are shown on Figure 2. Construction details for the monitoring wells and the geologic unit
penetrated by each monitoring well is summarized in Table 1.
2.3 Conceptual Hydrogeologic Model
Key components of the conceptual hydrogeologic model are as follows:
 Groundwater at the site is present under unconfined conditions at depths generally ranging
from approximately 3 feet to 16 feet below ground surface (bgs).

 The groundwater regime is classified into three units matching the geostratigraphy: residuum,
saprolite/weathered bedrock, and shallow bedrock flow systems. These units are hydraulically
connected to varying degrees across the site.

 Hydraulic conductivities (geometric mean) for shallow overburden, saprolite/weathered rock,
and bedrock were calculated to be 6.8 x 10-4 cm/sec, 3.0 x 10-4 cm/sec, and 1.2 x 10-4 cm/sec,
respectively. The hydraulic conductivity of deeper bedrock is significantly lower (nearly an
order of magnitude) than shallow bedrock.

 Shallow groundwater flows toward and converges on Dry Creek. Similarly, groundwater within
the saprolite/weathered bedrock unit flows toward the creek. Surface water sampling indicates
few contaminants of concern (COCs), when present, are at concentrations below the surface
water quality standards established in North Carolina Administrative Code Title 15A
Subchapter 2B (NC 2B standards).

 Groundwater in shallow bedrock flows from southwest towards the northeast, along the
orientation of a bedrock trough, indicating that bedrock topography influences (to some extent)
groundwater flow in bedrock and the distribution of COCs in the bedrock groundwater system.
Based upon the distribution of COCs, it appears that tar residues have migrated downward
until encountering bedrock. Upon reaching bedrock, the residues migrated downslope along
the bedrock surface to the bedrock trough located at well cluster PMWC. Observations of tar
residue at the bottom of bedrock monitoring well PMWC-BR indicate some residual MGP-
related byproducts have penetrated into fractures within the shallow bedrock. Due to
increasing rock competency (assessed by rock quality designation measurements during
coring) and decreasing permeability with depth (assessed by hydraulic conductivity testing),
tar residue is believed to be confined to fractures in the shallow bedrock, predominantly near
horizontal fracture patterns.

 The nature and extent of groundwater impacts are well characterized and appear to be
confined onsite. Dissolved-phase constituents of concern, primarily naphthalene and
benzene, have migrated and dispersed on site in regolith and bedrock groundwater by
advective transport through soils in the historical MGP operation areas and around tar
residues.
2.4 Summary of Remedial Actions
Substantial investigation activities and remedial actions have been performed to characterize
potential environmental impacts and help maintain conditions that are protective of human health
and the environment. Investigations or reports submitted to the NCDEQ documenting remedial
actions include:
Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 8/12
 Remedial Investigation Plan (9/28/98);
 Site Investigation and Site Assessment Report (10/19/99);
 Remedial Action Plan (1/9/02);
 Phase II Supplemental Site Characterization (8/14/03);
 Baseline Risk Assessment and Risk Evaluation of Remedial Options (separate reports for
Duke and Piedmont Properties) (12/03);
 Interim Remedial Measures (6/9/04);
 Proposal for Monitoring Natural Attenuation (6/10/04);
 Final Interim Remedial Measures Summary Report (1/6/06);
 Remedial Action Plan (11/14/07); and
 Groundwater Monitoring Reports (2005 to present).

The results of the remedial investigations and activities demonstrate soil and groundwater COCs
at the Site do not present unacceptable risk to human health. The risk of exposure to COCs is
administratively mitigated through a Declaration of Perpetual Land Use Restrictions prohibiting
the installation of water supply wells and restricting property use from residential, agricultural,
recreational, child and elderly care facilities and schools. The areas where impacted soils reside
have been capped by asphalt and are situated within a security fence, further diminishing the
potential for human receptors to come in contact with COCs. At such time that operations cease
at the Site, soil remedial options to address remaining COCs will be submitted to NCDEQ.
As documented in correspondence, dated June 4, 2012, from NCDEQ to Duke, the current
approved remedial program consists of annual groundwater monitoring for target COCs (BTEX
and naphthalene) at 16 monitoring wells to monitor plume stability. Historical benzene and
naphthalene concentrations in groundwater are presented in Appendix A on time-trend graphs.
Constituent concentrations display relatively stable or decreasing trends over the record of
monitoring, as indicated by Mann-Kendall trend analyses, in Appendix C.

Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 9/12
3. Groundwater Monitoring – 2019 Sampling Event
The annual groundwater monitoring event was performed on June 27-28, 2019. The monitoring
event included an inspection of the soil cap, a well network inventory, liquid level gauging in select
site wells to obtain groundwater potentiometric surface data and perform a non-aqueous phase
product assessment, and groundwater sampling of the prescribed program monitoring wells. The
procedures and results for these activities are provided below.
3.1 Soil Cap Inspection and Monitoring Well Inventory
During the monitoring event inspections of the soil cap and the well network were performed. The
soil cap, which consists of asphalt pavement adjacent to the Operations Building, was observed
to be in good condition.
Of the 30 existing monitoring wells associated with the site, all wells were found to be in good
condition or required only minor repairs, with the exception of monitoring wells located within the
sub-station. Wells located within the secured electrical substation were not assessed.
A summary of the general construction specifications, intended or current use, disposition, and
observed condition for each monitoring well is provided in Table 1.
3.2 Liquid Level Gauging
Depth to liquid measurements were collected on June 27, 2019, for a subset of the monitoring
well network, prior to sampling to assess the groundwater potentiometric surface and check wells
for indications of non-aqueous phase petroleum product. An electronic meter with a probe capable
of distinguishing between water and light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) or dense non-
aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) was used for liquid level gauging. The probe was cleaned prior to
use at each well with a solution of distilled water and Liquinox® soap. Table 2 provides a summary
of the results of the measurements collected for the 24 wells gauged.
The water level measurements were converted to relative elevations using survey data, which
were then used to create an interpretation of the groundwater potentiometric surface.
Groundwater elevations and the interpreted potentiometric surface contours for the residuum/fill
unit, saprolite unit, and shallow fractured bedrock unit are provided as Figure 3, Figure 4, and
Figure 5, respectively.
For the 24 wells gauged, no LNAPL or DNAPL was encountered. Historically, DNAPL has been
detected in trace amounts in wells DMW-2 and PMWC-BR. Due to the minor amounts
encountered at the bottoms of the two wells and the density interface probe’s design, the DNAPL
thickness is considered an estimate based on residue adhering to the tip of the gauging probe.
Wells DMW-2 and PMWC-BR are screened within shallow fractured bedrock in the central portion
of the groundwater plume. The historical detection of tar residue in these wells is consistent with
the site’s conceptual model and detections in these locations during previous remedial activities.
The historical monitoring record indicates the nature of the residue observed in these wells is
ephemeral and the residue is not migrating offsite.
3.3 Summary of Groundwater Sampling Procedures
Sampling was conducted in general accordance with the 2017 USEPA Region 4 Groundwater
Sampling Standard Operating Procedures (SESDPROC-301-R3). Low flow well purging was
performed with a peristaltic pump, except for PMWP-BR, where a stainless-steel submersible
Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 10/12
pump with a low-flow controller was used due to the depth of groundwater from ground surface.
Dedicated tubing was used at each well. Pump flow rates were adjusted to stabilize drawdown
and the purge water was passed through a flow cell attached to a YSI-556 water quality meter to
measure temperature, pH, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen (DO), and
specific conductance. Turbidity was measured with a HACH 2100Q turbidity meter. Purging was
deemed complete when three consecutive parameter measurements, taken at approximately
three to five-minute intervals, were found to be within the following criteria (parameter
stabilization):
a. Temperature did not vary more than one degree Celsius between readings;
b. pH did not vary by more than 0.1 standard pH units between readings; and
c. Specific conductance did not vary more than 10 percent between readings.
When field parameters stabilized, the pump discharge line was disconnected from the flow
through cell and the pumping rate was reduced to approximately 75-milliliters per minute to
minimize the loss of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by aeration. Samples were collected
directly from the pump discharge line into the appropriate laboratory prepared sample containers.
Immediately after collection, samples were logged on a chain-of-custody form and stored in a
cooler on wet ice. The samples were shipped to SGS North America, Inc. laboratory and were
received by the lab properly preserved and intact. The samples were analyzed for target
compounds (BTEX and naphthalene) by SW-846 EPA Method 8260B. All samples were analyzed
within the recommended method holding time, and method blanks for each sample batch
analyzed met the method-specific criteria.
Quality control (QC) samples included a laboratory-blind duplicate sample (labeled “QC
Duplicate”) collected at well DMW-2, and a field-collected equipment blank sample (labeled
“Equipment Blank”). QC samples were also analyzed for the target compounds by SW-846 EPA
Method 8260B. The equipment blank sample was collected by capturing laboratory-supplied
water that had been passed over the decontaminated water level meter. No target compounds
were detected in the equipment blank. Trip blank samples and the duplicate sample results were
within an acceptable range. The results of the QC samples and the laboratory internal QC
measures (verifying equipment calibration and matrix spike recoveries) indicate the sampling
results from the groundwater monitoring event are valid and usable for the intended purpose.
3.4 Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results
Field measured parameters and data collected during groundwater purging and sampling are
presented in Table 3. Laboratory analytical results for the samples collected are summarized on
Table 4, and a copy of the laboratory report is provided in Appendix B. Benzene and naphthalene
were the only COCs detected above the NC 2L groundwater quality standards. The highest
concentration of benzene was detected in saprolite well PMWB-D at 98.3 micrograms per liter
(μg/l), and the highest concentration of naphthalene was detected in saprolite well PMWB-D at
1,720 μg/l. No COCs were detected in the offsite bedrock well PMWP-BR. Sampling results for
the shallow residuum unit, saprolite unit and shallow fractured bedrock unit are also shown on
Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8, respectively.
As provided in Appendix C, Mann-Kendall trend analyses were performed on select site wells,
which indicate the following:
 Onsite monitoring wells (P1-S, PMWB-S, and PMWC-S), which were advanced in
residuum, indicated stable to decreasing trends for BTEX and naphthalene.
Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 11/12
 Saprolite monitoring wells PMWB-D and PMWC-D indicated decreasing trends for BTEX
and naphthalene. Additionally, saprolite monitoring well PMWF-D indicated decreasing
trends for benzene, toluene, xylenes, and naphthalene and a stable trend for ethylbenzene.
 Stable to decreasing trends were apparent for all COCs in bedrock monitoring wells DMW-
2, PMWC-BR, PMWH-BR and PMWI-BR.
It should be noted that confidence factors (CF) for the Mann-Kendall trend analyses discussed
above are near or equal to 90 percent (%) with most of the CFs greater than 99%.

Former MGP Site
Burlington Operations Center Burlington, North Carolina ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
Duke Energy Corporation

Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation AECOM 12/12
4. Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on the observations and data collected during the June 2019 annual groundwater
monitoring event, the following conclusions are made:
 The groundwater elevation, gradient, and flow direction in each hydrogeologic unit
(fill/residuum, saprolite, and bedrock) are consistent with historical data.
 Groundwater samples were collected from 16 program monitoring wells and analyzed for
Site-specific COCs (BTEX and naphthalene).
 Benzene and naphthalene were the only COCs detected above the NC 2L standards. The
highest concentration of benzene was detected in saprolite well PMWB-D (98.3 μg/l), and
the highest concentration of naphthalene was detected in saprolite well PMWB-D
(1,720 μg/l).
 Tar residue was not observed in shallow bedrock wells DMW-2 and PMWC-BR, which have
historically contained tar residue.
 No COCs were detected in the offsite bedrock well PMWP-BR. The nature and extent of
groundwater impacts are well characterized and appear to be confined onsite.
 Groundwater data from the annual monitoring event are consistent with historical data,
which demonstrate plume stability with a general decreasing trend in COC concentrations
over time.
 Groundwater conditions at the Site are well understood, and the NCDEQ-approved
program, which includes sampling 16 wells annually, is sufficient for monitoring plume
stability in the three groundwater horizons.
 The asphalt soil cap was observed to be in good condition.

Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are offered:
 Annual groundwater monitoring of the approved program wells should continue.
 Routine maintenance of the monitoring well network should continue.

TABLES 
Table 1
Monitoring Well Network Summary and Groundwater Level Data
Duke Energy
Burlington Operations Center - MGP Site
Burlington, North Carolina
UNIT WELL ID
TOTAL
DEPTH
(ft bgs)
TOP OF PVC WELL
REFERENCE
ELEVATION
(ft msl)
WELL SCREEN
LENGTH
(feet)
ELEVATION TOP
OF SCREEN
INTERVAL
(ft msl)
ELEVATION
BOTTOM OF
SCREEN
INTERVAL
(ft msl)
PROGRAM
MONITORING
WELL
GROUNDWATER
ELEVATION
6/27/2019
(ft btoc)
MW-2 15.4 606.77 10.0 601.49 591.49 --595.93
MW-3 22.6 607.48 10.0 595.65 585.65 --594.97
MW-4 17.6 598.30 10.0 590.83 580.83 --585.02
MW-5 13.9 585.91 10.0 582.24 572.24 ü 579.70
MW-6 13 586.60 10.0 583.79 573.79 --576.47
MW-9 N/A 576.64 N/A N/A N/A --569.51
PMWB-S 14 589.14 10.0 585.19 575.19 ü 581.99
PMWC-S 21.5 590.96 15.0 584.50 569.50 ü 578.66
PMWL-S 10 576.24 5.0 574.04 569.04 --NM
PMWM-SR(1)12.5 587.49 10.0 584.99 574.99 ü 577.29
P1-SR(1)12.2 590.14 8.0 585.94 577.94 ü 582.91
PMWB-D 18.70 589.31 1.5 572.35 570.85 ü 582.41
PMWC-D 25.5 591.41 1.5 567.46 565.96 ü 578.64
PMWE-D(2)8.1 590.90 5.0 587.80 582.80 --NM
PMWF-D 17.6 586.99 2.0 571.91 569.91 ü 578.90
PMWG-D 20 590.32 2.7 573.82 571.16 ü 581.39
PMWI 17.3 586.06 2.0 571.60 569.60 ü 575.36
P1-D 16.2 590.96 2.0 577.76 575.76 --583.78
PMWL-D 10 575.93 1.0 567.23 566.23 --NM
DMW-1 29.8 591.24 12.3 574.46 562.16 --585.89
DMW-2 32.3 588.28 10.0 567.72 557.72 ü 582.00
DMW-3 39.9 594.17 10.0 564.39 554.39 --584.55
PMWC-BR 36 591.61 9.0 564.69 555.69 ü 579.31
PMWE-BR(2)17.7 590.07 5.0 577.37 572.37 --NM
PMWE-BRD(2)54 589.82 10.0 545.82 535.82 --NM
PMWH-BR 22.5 584.49 1.0 564.47 563.47 ü 576.62
PMWI-BR 38.5 586.03 9.0 556.63 547.63 ü 576.16
PMWL-BR 39.5 576.27 10.0 561.67 551.67 --NM
PMWM-BRR(1)25 587.75 5.0 567.75 562.75 ü 577.20
PMWP-BR 43 594.95 N/A N/A N/A ü 569.61
Notes:
(2)Located within the substation; inaccessible.
ft bgs = depth in feet below ground surface
ft btoc = depth in feet below top of well casing
ft msl = elevation in feet referenced to mean sea level
NM - Not Measured
25.34
NM
NM
7.87
9.87
NM
10.55
7.18
NM
5.35
6.28
9.62
12.30
6.90
12.77
NM
8.09
8.93
10.70
7.13
7.15
12.30
NM
10.20
7.23FILL/RESIDUUMHYDROSTRATIGRAPHIC UNITSAPROLITEHYDROSTRATIGRAPHIC UNITSHALLOW FRACTURED BEDROCKHYDROSTRATIGRAPHIC UNITDEPTH TO
GROUNDWATER
6/27/2019
(ft btoc)
(1) Replacement Well Installed on 9/6/2017
10.84
12.51
13.28
6.21
10.13
GROUNDWATER LEVEL DATA - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER - MGP SITE
Groundwater Free Adjusted
Well Reference Product Depth to Groundwater
No.Elevation Thickness Groundwater Elevation
(ft)1 (inches)(ft btoc)(ft)1
RESIDUUM WELLS:
MW-2 606.77 NONE 10.84 595.93
MW-3 607.48 NONE 12.51 594.97
MW-4 598.30 NONE 13.28 585.02
MW-5 585.91 NONE 6.21 579.70
MW-6 586.60 NONE 10.13 576.47
MW-9 576.64 NONE 7.13 569.51
PMWB-S 589.14 NONE 7.15 581.99
PMWC-S 590.96 NONE 12.30 578.66
PMWL-S 576.24 NONE NM NM
PMWM-SR(2)587.49 NONE 10.20 577.29
P1-SR(2)590.14 NONE 7.23 582.91
SAPROLITE WELLS:
PMWB-D 589.31 NONE 6.90 582.41
PMWC-D 591.41 NONE 12.77 578.64
PMWF-D 586.99 NONE 8.09 578.90
PMWG-D 590.32 NONE 8.93 581.39
PMWI 586.06 NONE 10.70 575.36
P1-D 590.96 NONE 7.18 583.78
PMWL-D 575.93 NONE NM NM
SHALLOW FRACTURED BEDROCK WELLS:
DMW-1 591.24 NONE 5.35 585.89
DMW-2 588.28 NONE 6.28 582.00
DMW-3 594.17 NONE 9.62 584.55
PMWC-BR 591.61 NONE 12.30 579.31
PMWH-BR 584.49 NONE 7.87 576.62
PMWI-BR 586.03 NONE 9.87 576.16
PMWL-BR 576.27 NONE NM NM
PMWM-BRR(2)587.75 NONE 10.55 577.20
PMWP-BR 594.95 NONE 25.34 569.61
NOTES:
(1) Referenced to Mean Sea Level
(2) Replacement Well Installed on 9/6/2017
ft - feet
ft btoc - feet below top of casing
TABLE 2
NM - Not measured (well covered, obstructed, or could not be located)
RESIDUUM WELLS
WELL DEPTH TO WATER FREE AVG VOL EVAC SPECIFIC DISSOLVED
WELL DEPTH WATER2 ELEV3 PRODUCT4 RATE5 PURGED DRY? pH TEMP CONDUCTANCE OXYGEN TURBIDITY ORP
DATE1 NO. (feet) (feet) (feet) (inch) (ml/min) (gal) (yes/no) (units) (deg C) (µS/cm) (mg/l) (NTU) (mV)
6/28/2019 MW-5 13.90 6.21 579.70 ND 300 1.7 no 7.01 20.61 680 0.24 9.2 -51.1
6/27/2019 PMWB-S 14.00 7.15 581.99 ND 100 0.7 no 6.48 22.60 510 0.08 1.7 -89.3
6/27/2019 PMWC-S 21.50 12.30 578.66 ND 100 0.7 no 6.09 23.60 727 0.17 4.4 -2.0
6/28/2019 PMWM-SR 12.50 10.20 577.29 ND 100 0.9 no 5.36 20.85 317 1.30 8 153.0
6/27/2019 P1-SR 12.20 7.23 582.91 ND 100 0.5 no 6.61 24.08 1579 0.11 3.6 -38.3
SAPROLITE WELLS
WELL DEPTH TO WATER FREE AVG VOL EVAC SPECIFIC DISSOLVED
WELL DEPTH WATER2 ELEV3 PRODUCT4 RATE5 PURGED DRY? pH TEMP CONDUCTANCE OXYGEN TURBIDITY ORP
DATE1 NO.(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(ml/min)(gal)(yes/no)(units)(deg C)(µS/cm)(mg/l)(NTU)(mV)
6/27/2019 PMWB-D 18.70 6.90 582.41 ND 300 1.4 no 6.72 25.76 1280 0.12 4.5 -117.8
6/27/2019 PMWC-D 25.50 12.77 578.64 ND 100 0.5 no 6.43 21.84 825 0.14 2.8 -48.0
6/28/2019 PMWF-D 17.60 8.09 578.90 ND 300 1.4 no 6.84 20.79 697 0.21 2.7 -100.1
6/28/2019 PMWG-D 20.00 8.93 581.39 ND 300 1.4 no 5.83 20.55 361 0.39 4.8 144.4
6/28/2019 PMWI 17.30 10.70 575.36 ND 100 0.6 no 6.49 20.73 234 0.42 17.9 75.00.10
SHALLOW FRACTURED BEDROCK WELLS
WELL DEPTH TO WATER FREE AVG VOL PURGED SPECIFIC DISSOLVED
WELL DEPTH WATER2 ELEV3 PRODUCT4 RATE5 PURGED DRY? pH TEMP CONDUCTANCE OXYGEN TURBIDITY ORP
DATE1 NO. (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (ml/min) (gal) (yes/no) (units) (deg C) (µS/cm) (mg/l) (NTU) (mV)
6/27/2019 DMW-2 32.30 6.28 582.00 ND 300 1.4 no 6.42 24.24 429 0.29 9.1 -63.1
6/27/2019 PMWC-BR 36.00 12.30 579.31 ND 100 0.5 no 6.46 22.55 1098 0.25 0.3 -63.9
6/28/2019 PMWH-BR 22.50 7.87 576.62 ND 300 3.3 no 6.77 18.89 577 0.38 2.9 -80.9
6/28/2019 PMWI-BR 38.50 9.87 576.16 ND 100 0.5 no 6.95 20.40 363 0.20 2.0 13.2
6/28/2019 PMWM-BRR 25.00 10.55 577.20 ND 100 0.8 no 6.90 21.51 629 0.81 2.6 106.6
6/27/2019 PMWP-BR 43.00 25.34 569.61 ND 500 4.8 no 5.75 20.75 298 0.40 17.9 144.1
NOTES:
1 Date well sampled
(NTU) = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(mg/l) = milligrams per liter
(deg C) = degrees Celsius(gal) = gallon(ml/min) = milliliters per minute(mV) = millivolts
(µS/cm) = microSiemens per centimeter
TABLE 3
FIELD MONITORING DATA SUMMARY - 2019
4 Estimated thickness of tar-like material detected in well bottom
5 Average pumping rate used to minimize or stabilize drawdown while removing one well volume and stabilizing indicator parameters.
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER - MGP SITE
3 Elevations referenced to mean sea level (msl)
2Water levels measured 6/27/2019. Water levels and well depths are referenced to top of PVC casing.
ND = Not detected
Benzene Ethylbenzene Naphthalene Toluene Xylenes (Total)
Well Sampled RL Result Flag RL Result Flag RL Result Flag RL Result Flag RL Result Flag
Number:Date:µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l
RESIDUUM WELLS:
MW-5 6/28/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
P1-SR 6/27/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 0.66 J 5.0 1.0 J 1.0 ND 3.0 0.81 J
PMWB-S 6/27/2019 1.0 20.7 1.0 0.86 J 25 282.0 1.0 0.40 J 3.0 4.0
PMWC-S 6/27/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
PMWM-SR 6/28/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
SAPROLITE WELLS:
PMWB-D 6/27/2019 10 98.3 10 77.7 100 1720 10 ND 30 29.4 J
PMWC-D 6/27/2019 1.0 4.4 1.0 1.0 50 81.9 1.0 0.46 J 3.0 2.7 J
PMWF-D 6/28/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
PMWG-D 6/28/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
PMWI 6/28/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
SHALLOW BEDROCK WELLS:
DMW-2 6/27/2019 20 30.5 20 25.2 100 1050 20 ND 60 18.3 J
PMWC-BR 6/27/2019 5.0 7.7 5.0 12.5 25 442 5.0 ND 15 15.9
PMWH-BR 6/28/2019 1.0 5.0 1.0 18.0 100 1150 1.0 1.8 3.0 23.4
PMWI-BR 6/28/2019 1.0 0.51 J 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
PMWM-BRR 6/28/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
PMWP-BR 6/27/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
QC SAMPLES:
EQ BLANK 6/28/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
TRIP BLANK 6/27/2019 1.0 ND 1.0 ND 5.0 ND 1.0 ND 3.0 ND
QC Duplicate* 6/27/2019 1.0 46.7 1.0 42.6 100 1660 1.0 2.7 3.0 33.5
Title 15 NCAC 2L Standard 1 600 6 600 500
NOTES:
Samples analyzed by EPA Method 8260B QC = Quality control *QC Duplicate (Lab-blind sample) collected at well DMW-2 ND = Not detected at the reporting limit or the method detection limit J = Estimated concentration RL = Reporting limit µg/l = micrograms per liter
Concentrations exceeding Title 15A NCAC 2L Standards indicated in BOLD text
TABLE 4
1330-20-7100-41-471-43-2
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER - MGP SITELABORATORY ANALYTICAL RESULTS SUMMARY - 2019
108-88-3CAS Number:
Compound:
91-20-3

FIGURES 
N.C.
QUADRANGLE LOCATION
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PF
Filename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP
SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 1 - LOCATION MAP.DWG
LOCATION MAP
Figure: 1
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PFFilename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 2 - SITE MAP.DWG
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23 SITE MAP Figure: 2
LEGEND
APPROXIMATE FORMER MGP
SITE BOUNDARIES
APPROXIMATE DUKE/PIEDMONT
NATURAL GAS SITE BOUNDARIES
EXISTING SHALLOW MONITORING WELL
EXISTING SAPROLITE MONITORING WELL
EXISTING BEDROCK MONITORING WELL
ABANDONED MONITORING WELL
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PFFilename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 3 - SHALLOW GW MAP.DWG
SHALLOW OVERBURDEN POTENTIOMETRIC
SURFACE CONTOUR MAP
Figure: 3
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PFFilename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 4 - SAPROLITE GW MAP.DWG
SAPROLITE POTENTIOMETRIC
SURFACE CONTOUR MAP
Figure: 4
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PFFilename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 5 - SHALLOW BEDROCK GW MAP.DWG
SHALLOW BEDROCK POTENTIOMETRIC
SURFACE CONTOUR MAP
Figure: 5
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PFFilename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 6 - SHALLOW RESULTS.DWG
SHALLOW OVERBURDEN BTEX AND
NAPHTHALENE CONCENTRATIONS
Figure: 6
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PFFilename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 7 - SAPROLITE RESULTS.DWG
SAPROLITE BTEX AND NAPHTHALENE
CONCENTRATIONS
Figure: 7
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23
Project Management Initials: Designer: TSH Checked: SWH Approved: PFFilename: M:\DCS\PROJECTS\L-URS\COMMON_PROJECTS\DUKE ENERGY\NC MGP SITES\2019\BURLINGTON\500_DELIVERABLES\501_ANNUAL GWMR\FIGURES\SCOTT\FIGURE 8 - SHALLOW BEDROCK RESULTS.DWG
SHALLOW BEDROCK BTEX AND
NAPHTHALENE CONCENTRATIONS
Figure: 8
ANNUAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - 2019
BURLINGTON OPERATIONS CENTER MGP SITE
BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No.: 60607301 Date: 2019-07-23

APPENDIX A
COC CONCENTRATION TIME-TREND GRAPHS
Dashed red line indicates installation of surface cap.
Values in parentheses indicate the analyte was not detected. The concentration is presented as 1/2 the reprting limit for graphing purposes.
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Concentration (µg/L)Appendix A: Historical Benzene Concentrations in Groundwater
Residuum/Fill
PMWB-S
P1-S
P1-SR (Installed Sep. 2017
PMWC-S
Dashed red line indicates installation of surface cap.
Values in parentheses indicate the analyte was not detected. The concentration is presented as 1/2 the reprting limit for graphing purposes.
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Concentration (µg/L)Appendix A: Historical Benzene Concentrations in Groundwater
Saprolite
PMWB-D
PMWC-D
Dashed red line indicates installation of surface cap.
Values in parentheses indicate the analyte was not detected. The concentration is presented as 1/2 the reporting limit for graphing purposes.
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Appendix A: Historical Benzene Concentrations in Groundwater
Shallow Bedrock
DMW-2
PMWC-BR
PMWH-BR
PMWI-BR
Dashed red line indicates installation of surface cap.
Values in parentheses indicate the analyte was not detected. The concentration is presented as 1/2 the reporting limit for graphing purposes.
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
Appendix A: Historical Naphthalene Concentrations in Groundwater
Residuum/Fill
PMWB-S
P1-S
P1-SR (Installed Sep. 2017
PMWC-S
MW-5
Dashed red line indicates installation of surface cap.
Values in parentheses indicate the analyte was not detected. The concentration is presented as 1/2 the reporting limit for graphing purposes.
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
Concentration (µg/L)Appendix A: Historical Naphthalene Concentrations in Groundwater
Saprolite
PMWB-D
PMWC-D
PMWF-D
PMWG-D
PMWI
Dashed red line indicates installation of surface cap.
Values in parentheses indicate the analyte was not detected. The concentration is presented as 1/2 the reporting limit for graphing purposes.
0.25
2.5
25
250
2500
Concentration (µg/L)Appendix A: Historical Naphthalene Concentrations in Groundwater
Shallow Bedrock
DMW-2
PMWC-BR
PMWH-BR
PMWI-BR
PMWM-BR
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT - 2019
07/30/19
Technical Report for
AECOM, INC.
Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
60607301
SGS Job Number: FA65632
Sampling Dates: 06/27/19 - 06/28/19
Report to:
AECOM, INC.
1600 Perimeter Park Dr Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
ATTN: Carlin Slusher
Total number of pages in report:
Certifications: FL(E83510), LA(03051), KS(E-10327), IL(200063), NC(573), NJ(FL002), NY(12022), SC(96038001)
DoD ELAP(ANAB L2229), AZ(AZ0806), CA(2937), TX(T104704404), PA(68-03573), VA(460177),
AK, AR, IA, KY, MA, MS, ND, NH, NV, OK, OR, UT, WA, WV
This report shall not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of SGS.
Test results relate only to samples analyzed.
SGS North America Inc. • 4405 Vineland Road • Suite C-15 • Orlando, FL 32811 • tel: [phone] • fax: [phone]
Test results contained within this data package meet the requirements
of the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program
and/or state specific certification programs as applicable.
Client Service contact: Heather Wandrey 407-425-6700
Caitlin Brice, M.S.
General Manager
Orlando, FL 07/30/19
Reissue #1
e-Hardcopy 2.0
Automated Report
49
SGS is the sole authority for authorizing edits or modifications to this document.
Unauthorized modification of this report is strictly prohibited.
Review standard terms at: http://www.sgs.com/en/terms-and-conditions
The results set forth herein are provided by SGS North America Inc.
Please share your ideas about
how we can serve you better at:
[e-mail]
1 of 49
FA65632
Florida 4405 Vineland Road Suite C-15 Orlando, FL 32811 tel: [phone] fax: [phone]

July 30, 2019

Ms. Martha Meyers-Lee
AECOM
1600 Perimeter Park Dr.
Morrisville, NC 27560

RE: SGS North America Inc. - Orlando job FA65632 Reissue

Dear Ms. Meyers-Lee,

The final report for job number FA65632 has been edited to reflect requested corrections.
These edits have been incorporated into the revised report.

Sample ID for samples -2,-7 have been revised per your request .

SGS North America Inc. - Orlando apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused.
Please feel free to contact us if we can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

SGS North America, Inc. - Orlando

2 of 49
FA65632
Table of Contents
-1-
Sections:
Section 1: Sample Summary ................................................................................................... 4
Section 2: Case Narrative/Conformance Summary .............................................................. 6
Section 3: Summary of Hits .................................................................................................... 9
Section 4: Sample Results ........................................................................................................12
4.1: FA65632-1: DMW-2 ..................................................................................................... 13
4.2: FA65632-2: P1-SR ........................................................................................................ 14
4.3: FA65632-3: PMWB-S .................................................................................................. 15
4.4: FA65632-4: PMWB-D .................................................................................................. 16
4.5: FA65632-5: PMWC-S .................................................................................................. 17
4.6: FA65632-6: PMWC-D .................................................................................................. 18
4.7: FA65632-7: PMWC-BR ............................................................................................... 19
4.8: FA65632-8: PMWF-D .................................................................................................. 20
4.9: FA65632-9: PMWG-D ................................................................................................. 21
4.10: FA65632-10: PMWH-BR ........................................................................................... 22
4.11: FA65632-11: PMWI .................................................................................................... 23
4.12: FA65632-12: PMWI-BR ............................................................................................. 24
4.13: FA65632-13: PMWM-BR .......................................................................................... 25
4.14: FA65632-14: PMWM-SR ........................................................................................... 26
4.15: FA65632-15: PMWP-BR ............................................................................................ 27
4.16: FA65632-16: MW-5 .................................................................................................... 28
4.17: FA65632-17: QC DUPLICATE .................................................................................. 29
4.18: FA65632-18: EQUIPMENT BLANK ........................................................................ 30
4.19: FA65632-19: TRIP BLANK ....................................................................................... 31
Section 5: Misc. Forms ............................................................................................................32
5.1: Chain of Custody ........................................................................................................... 33
5.2: Analyst Legend .............................................................................................................. 36
Section 6: MS Volatiles - QC Data Summaries ..................................................................... 37
6.1: Method Blank Summary ................................................................................................ 38
6.2: Blank Spike Summary ................................................................................................... 42
6.3: Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Summary ........................................................... 46 1234563 of 49
FA65632
SGS North America Inc.
Sample Summary
AECOM, INC.
Job No:FA65632
Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Project No: 60607301
Sample Collected Matrix Client
Number Date Time By Received Code Type Sample ID
FA65632-1 06/27/19 15:42 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water DMW-2
FA65632-2 06/27/19 15:20 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water P1-SR
FA65632-3 06/27/19 16:15 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWB-S
FA65632-4 06/27/19 16:14 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWB-D
FA65632-5 06/27/19 13:40 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWC-S
FA65632-6 06/27/19 14:15 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWC-D
FA65632-7 06/27/19 12:55 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWC-BR
FA65632-8 06/28/19 09:59 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWF-D
FA65632-9 06/28/19 10:25 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWG-D
FA65632-10 06/28/19 08:53 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWH-BR
FA65632-11 06/28/19 11:10 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWI
FA65632-12 06/28/19 10:30 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWI-BR
FA65632-13 06/28/19 09:50 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWM-BR
4 of 49
FA656321
SGS North America Inc.
Sample Summary
(continued)
AECOM, INC.
Job No:FA65632
Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Project No: 60607301
Sample Collected Matrix Client
Number Date Time By Received Code Type Sample ID
FA65632-14 06/28/19 09:05 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWM-SR
FA65632-15 06/27/19 14:56 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water PMWP-BR
FA65632-16 06/28/19 09:27 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water MW-5
FA65632-17 06/27/19 15:31 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Ground Water QC DUPLICATE
FA65632-18 06/28/19 11:15 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Equipment Blank EQUIPMENT BLANK
FA65632-19 06/27/19 00:00 DBCS 06/29/19 AQ Trip Blank Water TRIP BLANK
5 of 49
FA656321
SAMPLE DELIVERY GROUP CASE NARRATIVE
Client: AECOM, INC. Job No: FA65632
Site: Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC Report Date: 7/11/2019 4:23:48 PM

18 Samples and 1 Trip Blank were collected on between 06/27/2019 and 06/28/2019 and were received at SGS North America Inc -
Orlando on 06/29/2019 properly preserved, at 3.9 Deg. C and intact. These Samples received an SGS Orlando job number of FA65632. A
listing of the Laboratory Sample ID, Client Sample ID and dates of collection are presented in the Results Summary Section. Except as
noted below, all method specified calibrations and quality control performance criteria were met for this job. For more information, please
refer to QC summary pages.
MS Volatiles By Method SW846 8260B Matrix: AQ Batch ID: V5E713
All samples were analyzed within the recommended method holding time. Sample(s) FA65796-2MS, FA65796-2MSD were used as the QC samples indicated.
All method blanks for this batch meet method specific criteria. Matrix Spike Duplicate Recovery(s) for Ethylbenzene are outside control limits. Probable cause is due to matrix interference.
FA65632-10: Sample vial(s) contained significant headspace; reported results are considered minimum values.
V5E713-MB for Toluene-D8: Outside control limits.
Matrix: AQ Batch ID: VM4737
All samples were analyzed within the recommended method holding time.
Sample(s) FA65641-1MS, FA65641-1MSD were used as the QC samples indicated.
All method blanks for this batch meet method specific criteria.
Matrix: AQ Batch ID: VM4741
All samples were analyzed within the recommended method holding time.
Sample(s) FA65694-1MS, FA65694-1MSD were used as the QC samples indicated.
All method blanks for this batch meet method specific criteria.
Matrix: AQ Batch ID: VN6105
All samples were analyzed within the recommended method holding time.
Sample(s) FA65632-7MS, FA65632-7MSD were used as the QC samples indicated.
All method blanks for this batch meet method specific criteria.
SGS Orlando certifies that this report meets the project requirements for analytical data produced for the samples as received at SGS
Orlando and as stated on the COC. SGS Orlando certifies that the data meets the Data Quality Objectives for precision, accuracy and
completeness as specified in the SGS Orlando Quality Manual except as noted above. This report is to be used in its entirety. SGS
Orlando is not responsible for any assumptions of data quality if partial data packages are used.

Narrative prepared by:

______________________________________
Jenna Kravitz, Client Services (Signature on File)

6 of 49
FA656322
Laboratory Report Glossary

Client Sample ID: Normally refers to a point of collection – a monitoring well, discharge outfall, treatment
facility intake, soil core grid location and depth, or any other identification client assigns to a sample.
Lab Sample ID: Letter prefix identifies one of the SGS laboratories and the rest is a consecutive number of
the job (or SDG) received. Number after dash is a sample number and it is unequivocally linked in the LIMS
to the Client Sample ID (see above).
Matrix (Matrix Code):
 AQ- Water Samples
 SO- Soil/Solid Samples
 LIQ- Non-Water Liquid Samples
 OIL- Oil Samples
Matrix Type:
 SW for Surface Water
 SO for Soil/Sediment
 GW for Ground Water
 DW for Drinking Water
All available definitions are found on Chain of Custody form.

Deg. C: Degrees Celsius, measurement of temperature.
Method: Analytical and preparation methods used for the analysis, with the version or revision identified.
Date Sampled: This information is entered from Chain of Custody at the time of login for every sample.
Date Received: When the job was received by one of the SGS Laboratories.
Percent Solids: Applicable only to SO matrix. For other matrices this field defaults to “n/a”.
Run #: Provides information how many attempts were made in the analysis of the sample. LIMS can merge
information from several attempts and lists all of them, including dilution, confirmation, etc. #1 designation is
assigned to the analytical run with majority of analytes reported from it, not necessarily in chronological
order.
File ID: Actual instrument data acquisition file that produced the result. Letter prefix identifies the
instrument; the rest is a consecutive injection number for that instrument.
DF (Dilution Factor): Most common reasons are either to fit into the range of the calibration or alleviate
matrix interference. DF other than 1 are accompanied with a comment at the end of the sample report.
Analyzed: Date of analysis.
By: Field Technician or Analyst uniquely identified by initials.
Prep Date: Date of sample preparation. If hold time is 72 hours or less, time of preparation is also
indicated.
Prep Batch: Letter prefix OP followed by a consecutive number. For VOC analysis preparation happens at
the time of analysis, therefore analytical batch and preparation batch are the same. Size of prep batch is
limited to 20 field samples of similar matrix and the entire batch should be completed within 12-hour time.
Analytical Batch: Letter prefix identifies the instrument and is followed by a consecutive number. Not
limited by a number of samples.
Initial Weight or Initial Volume: Raw sample size used for preparation.
Final Volume: Final volume of extract. If different from method-prescribed volume, reasons are reflected in
the comments at the end of the report form.
CAS Number: Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS), a division of the American Chemical Society.
Compound: Most commonly used names of chemical compounds.
Result: Depending on project requirements, this field could be set up as text, such as ND (for
Non-Detected) or a number. The number may be reported with a qualifier.
MDL (Method Detection Limit): This value is defined as 99% probability that analyte above this
concentration is positively (qualitatively) identified.
RL (Reporting Limit): This value is supported by the low calibration standard and defines lowest point of
quantitative identification of analyte.
DL (Detection Limit): The smallest analyte concentration that can be demonstrated to be different from
zero or a blank concentration with 99% confidence. At the DL, the false positive rate (Type I error) is 1%.
LOD (Limit of Detection): The smallest concentration of a substance that must be present in a sample to
be detected at the DL with 99% confidence. At the LOD, the false negative rate (Type II error) is 1%.
7 of 49
FA656322
LOQ (Limit of Quantitation): The smallest concentration that produces a quantitative result with known
and recorded precision and bias.

Units: ug/l (micrograms per liter) for aqueous samples and ug/kg (micrograms per kilogram) for solids (or
ppb – parts per billion). The units could be set according to project or state-specific requirements, such as
mg/l (milligrams per liter), or mg/kg (milligrams per kilogram).
Qualifiers (Q): Definitions of most often used qualifiers are found at the bottom of each result page.
Applied depending on the program – state-specific (Florida A.C. 62-160), CLP-like, AFCEE, DOD QSM, etc.
Tentatively Identified Compound (TIC): Used when client requests a search for analytes that are not part
of instrument calibration. Unknown peaks are compared with published spectral libraries and best match is
reported as TIC.
Surrogate (S1, S2, S3 etc.): are positive controls that are used in most organics methods to ascertain
preparation efficiency and matrix effect in individual samples. These chemicals mimic common method
constituents but are unlikely to be found in real samples. Recoveries can be reported for every analytical run
used in the analysis.
IS (Internal Standard IS1, IS2, IS3, etc): quantitative reference used to adjust for instrument performance
fluctuations.
Area (of chromatographic peak): signal intensity directly related to compound concentration.
RT (Retention Time): time required for analyte to traverse the length of analytical column. Used for
compound identification.
ICAL (Initial Calibration): Must pass calibration criteria established by method.
ICV (Independent Calibration Verification): Used to verify ICAL preparation and concentration of
calibration points.
CCV (Continuing Calibration Verification): Used to assess calibration status of the instrument and must
recover within established acceptance criteria.
MB (Method Blank): is a negative batch control. MB is an aliquot of matrix free of analyte of interest
(either ASTM Type II water or appropriate solid substance) that is put through all the preparation and
possible clean-up steps alongside investigative (field) samples. MB should be free of interferences above a set
level.
BS (Blank Spike, Laboratory Fortified Blank - LFB, Laboratory Control Sample - LCS): is a positive
control used to determine method accuracy - in clean matrix, i.e. matrix free of analytes of interest.
BSD (Blank Spike Duplicate): Used to assess recovery reproducibility - method precision – per analytical
method requirement. %Recovery and Relative Percent Difference (%RPD) are compared with the established
acceptance criteria.
MS and/or MSD (Matrix Spike and Matrix Spike Duplicate): positive batch controls which indicate
matrix effect on the precision and accuracy of the method in given sample matrix. Results are expressed in
%Recovery and Relative Percent Difference (%RPD) and compared with the established acceptance criteria.
DUP (Matrix Duplicate): Positive batch control, a way of assessing laboratory’s precision; however, the
composition of the samples is unknown and may not yield meaningful results.
REC (Recovery in Percent): expresses method accuracy.
RPD (Relative Percent Difference): expresses method precision.
Limits: Recovery limits for surrogates and spikes

8 of 49
FA656322
Summary of Hits Page 1 of 3
Job Number:FA65632
Account:AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Collected:06/27/19 thru 06/28/19
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Result/
Analyte Qual RL MDL Units Method
FA65632-1 DMW-2
Benzene 30.5 20 6.2 ug/l SW846 8260B
Ethylbenzene 25.2 20 7.1 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)18.3 J 60 14 ug/l SW846 8260B
Naphthalene 1050 100 20 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-2 P1-SR
Ethylbenzene 0.66 J 1.0 0.36 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)0.81 J 3.0 0.72 ug/l SW846 8260B
Naphthalene 1.0 J 5.0 1.0 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-3 PMWB-S
Benzene 20.7 1.0 0.31 ug/l SW846 8260B
Toluene 0.40 J 1.0 0.30 ug/l SW846 8260B
Ethylbenzene 0.86 J 1.0 0.36 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)4.0 3.0 0.72 ug/l SW846 8260B
Naphthalene 282 25 5.0 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-4 PMWB-D
Benzene 98.3 10 3.1 ug/l SW846 8260B
Ethylbenzene 77.7 10 3.6 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)29.4 J 30 7.2 ug/l SW846 8260B
Naphthalene 1720 100 20 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-5 PMWC-S
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-6 PMWC-D
Benzene 4.4 1.0 0.31 ug/l SW846 8260B
Toluene 0.46 J 1.0 0.30 ug/l SW846 8260B
Ethylbenzene 1.0 1.0 0.36 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)2.7 J 3.0 0.72 ug/l SW846 8260B
Naphthalene 81.9 50 10 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-7 PMWC-BR
Benzene 7.7 5.0 1.6 ug/l SW846 8260B
Ethylbenzene 12.5 5.0 1.8 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)15.9 15 3.6 ug/l SW846 8260B
9 of 49
FA656323
Summary of Hits Page 2 of 3
Job Number:FA65632
Account:AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Collected:06/27/19 thru 06/28/19
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Result/
Analyte Qual RL MDL Units Method
Naphthalene 442 25 5.0 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-8 PMWF-D
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-9 PMWG-D
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-10 PMWH-BR
Benzene 5.0 1.0 0.31 ug/l SW846 8260B
Toluene 1.8 1.0 0.30 ug/l SW846 8260B
Ethylbenzene 18.0 1.0 0.36 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)23.4 3.0 0.72 ug/l SW846 8260B
Naphthalene a 1150 100 20 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-11 PMWI
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-12 PMWI-BR
Benzene 0.51 J 1.0 0.31 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-13 PMWM-BR
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-14 PMWM-SR
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-15 PMWP-BR
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-16 MW-5
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-17 QC DUPLICATE
Benzene 46.7 1.0 0.31 ug/l SW846 8260B
10 of 49
FA656323
Summary of Hits Page 3 of 3
Job Number:FA65632
Account:AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Collected:06/27/19 thru 06/28/19
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Result/
Analyte Qual RL MDL Units Method
Toluene 2.7 1.0 0.30 ug/l SW846 8260B
Ethylbenzene 42.6 1.0 0.36 ug/l SW846 8260B
Xylene (total)33.5 3.0 0.72 ug/l SW846 8260B
Naphthalene 1660 100 20 ug/l SW846 8260B
FA65632-18 EQUIPMENT BLANK
No hits reported in this sample.
FA65632-19 TRIP BLANK
No hits reported in this sample.
(a) Sample vial(s) contained significant headspace; reported results are considered minimum values.
11 of 49
FA656323
SGS North America Inc.
Sample Results
Report of Analysis
Orlando, FL
Section 4
12 of 49
FA656324
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:DMW-2
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-1 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 M0109598.D 20 07/09/19 18:06 SP n/a n/a VM4741
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 30.5 20 6.2 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 20 6.0 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 25.2 20 7.1 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)18.3 60 14 ug/l J
91-20-3 Naphthalene 1050 100 20 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 100%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 99%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 95%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
13 of 49
FA6563244.1
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:P1-SR
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-2 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 M0109530.D 1 07/03/19 16:35 SP n/a n/a VM4737
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.66 1.0 0.36 ug/l J
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)0.81 3.0 0.72 ug/l J
91-20-3 Naphthalene 1.0 5.0 1.0 ug/l J
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 103%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 101%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 95%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
14 of 49
FA6563244.2
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWB-S
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-3 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 M0109531.D 1 07/03/19 17:01 SP n/a n/a VM4737
Run #2 N0116780.D 5 07/04/19 19:01 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2 5.0 ml
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 20.7 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene 0.40 1.0 0.30 ug/l J
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.86 1.0 0.36 ug/l J
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)4.0 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene 282 a 25 5.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 101%110% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 99%109% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 96%96% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 94%100% 83-118%
(a) Result is from Run# 2
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
15 of 49
FA6563244.3
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWB-D
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-4 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 M0109532.D 10 07/03/19 17:27 SP n/a n/a VM4737
Run #2 N0116781.D 20 07/04/19 19:27 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2 5.0 ml
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 98.3 10 3.1 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 10 3.0 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 77.7 10 3.6 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)29.4 30 7.2 ug/l J
91-20-3 Naphthalene 1720 a 100 20 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 100%106% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 101%109% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 98%98% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 96%102% 83-118%
(a) Result is from Run# 2
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
16 of 49
FA6563244.4
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWC-S
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-5 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116765.D 1 07/04/19 12:25 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 110%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 109%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 99%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 102%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
17 of 49
FA6563244.5
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWC-D
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-6 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116766.D 1 07/04/19 12:51 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2 M0109534.D 10 07/03/19 18:19 SP n/a n/a VM4737
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2 5.0 ml
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 4.4 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene 0.46 1.0 0.30 ug/l J
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 1.0 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)2.7 3.0 0.72 ug/l J
91-20-3 Naphthalene 81.9 a 50 10 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 111%99% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 111%99% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%97% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 101%95% 83-118%
(a) Result is from Run# 2
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
18 of 49
FA6563244.6
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWC-BR
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-7 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116782.D 5 07/04/19 19:53 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 7.7 5.0 1.6 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 5.0 1.5 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 12.5 5.0 1.8 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)15.9 15 3.6 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene 442 25 5.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 111%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 116%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 98%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 100%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
19 of 49
FA6563244.7
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWF-D
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-8 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 5E16565.D 1 07/10/19 10:52 SO n/a n/a V5E713
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 112%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 107%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 112%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 103%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
20 of 49
FA6563244.8
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWG-D
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-9 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116770.D 1 07/04/19 14:39 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 115%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 109%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 96%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 103%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
21 of 49
FA6563244.9
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWH-BR
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-10 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116771.D 1 07/04/19 15:06 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2 a 5E16568.D 20 07/10/19 12:00 SO n/a n/a V5E713
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2 5.0 ml
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 5.0 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene 1.8 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 18.0 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)23.4 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene 1150 b 100 20 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 114%108% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 116%109% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 95%110% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 99%100% 83-118%
(a) Sample vial(s) contained significant headspace; reported results are considered minimum values.
(b) Result is from Run# 2
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
22 of 49
FA6563244.10
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWI
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-11 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 M0109602.D 1 07/09/19 19:44 SP n/a n/a VM4741
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 101%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 99%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 98%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 96%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
23 of 49
FA6563244.11
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWI-BR
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-12 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 M0109603.D 1 07/09/19 20:08 SP n/a n/a VM4741
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 0.51 1.0 0.31 ug/l J
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 102%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 98%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 96%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
24 of 49
FA6563244.12
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWM-BR
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-13 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116774.D 1 07/04/19 16:26 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 112%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 115%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 105%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
25 of 49
FA6563244.13
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWM-SR
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-14 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116775.D 1 07/04/19 16:53 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 112%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 117%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 100%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
26 of 49
FA6563244.14
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:PMWP-BR
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-15 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116776.D 1 07/04/19 17:18 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 113%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 113%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 102%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
27 of 49
FA6563244.15
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:MW-5
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-16 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116777.D 1 07/04/19 17:45 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 111%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 115%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 96%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 104%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
28 of 49
FA6563244.16
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:QC DUPLICATE
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-17 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Ground Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116778.D 1 07/04/19 18:10 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2 5E16567.D 20 07/10/19 11:36 SO n/a n/a V5E713
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2 5.0 ml
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene 46.7 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene 2.7 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 42.6 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)33.5 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene 1660 a 100 20 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 113%110% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 119%109% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 95%110% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 101%101% 83-118%
(a) Result is from Run# 2
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
29 of 49
FA6563244.17
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:EQUIPMENT BLANK
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-18 Date Sampled:06/28/19
Matrix:AQ - Equipment Blank Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 M0109604.D 1 07/09/19 20:32 SP n/a n/a VM4741
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 99%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 99%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 95%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
30 of 49
FA6563244.18
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:TRIP BLANK
Lab Sample ID:FA65632-19 Date Sampled:06/27/19
Matrix:AQ - Trip Blank Water Date Received:06/29/19
Method:SW846 8260B Percent Solids:n/a
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 N0116768.D 1 07/04/19 13:45 SP n/a n/a VN6105
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
Purgeable Aromatics, Naphthalene
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 106%83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 106%79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 96%85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 103%83-118%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
31 of 49
FA6563244.19
SGS North America Inc.
Misc. Forms
Custody Documents and Other Forms
Includes the following where applicable:
• Chain of Custody
• Analyst Legend
Orlando, FL
Section 5
32 of 49
FA656325
FA65632: Chain of Custody
Page 1 of 3
33 of 49
FA6563255.1
FA65632: Chain of Custody
Page 2 of 3
34 of 49
FA6563255.1
Job Number:FA65632 Client:AECOM
Date / Time Received:6/29/2019 9:30:00 AM Delivery Method:FX
Project:DUKE E MGP
Airbill #'s:
Cooler Information
1. Custody Seals Present
2. Custody Seals Intact
4. Cooler temp verification
3. Temp criteria achieved
5. Cooler media
IR Gun
Ice (Bag)
Trip Blank Information
1. Trip Blank present / cooler
2. Trip Blank listed on COC
2. Samples preserved properly
Sample Information
1. Sample labels present on bottles
5. Sample recvd within HT
4. Condition of sample
3. Sufficient volume/containers recvd for analysis:
Intact
Comments
SM001Rev. Date 05/24/17
SGS Sample Receipt Summary
Cooler Temps (Raw Measured) °C:
Cooler Temps (Corrected) °C:
Cooler 1: (3.5);
Cooler 1: (3.9);
3. Type Of TB Received
W or S N/A
6. Dates/Times/IDs on COC match Sample Label
7. VOCs have headspace
8. Bottles received for unspecified tests
9. Compositing instructions clear
10. Voa Soil Kits/Jars received past 48hrs?
11. % Solids Jar received?
Misc. Information
25-Gram 5-GramNumber of Encores:Number of 5035 Field Kits:Number of Lab Filtered Metals:
Test Strip Lot #s:pH 0-3 230315 pH 10-12 219813A Other: (Specify)
Y or N N/A
Y or N
Therm ID:IR 1; Therm CF:0.4; # of Coolers:1
Y or N N/A
12. Residual Chlorine Present?
Residual Chlorine Test Strip Lot #:
Technician:Reviewer:PETERH Date:Date: 6/29/2019 9:30:00 AM
FA65632: Chain of Custody
Page 3 of 3
35 of 49
FA6563255.1
Analyst Legend Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Initials Full Name Analysis Type
SO Shanica O'Connor MS Volatiles
SP Stuti Patel MS Volatiles
36 of 49
FA6563255.2
SGS North America Inc.
MS Volatiles
QC Data Summaries
Includes the following where applicable:
• Method Blank Summaries
• Blank Spike Summaries
• Matrix Spike and Duplicate Summaries
Orlando, FL
Section 6
37 of 49
FA656326
Method Blank Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
VM4737-MB M0109515.D 1 07/03/19 SP n/a n/a VM4737
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-2, FA65632-3, FA65632-4, FA65632-6
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 100% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 99% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 98% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 97% 83-118%
38 of 49
FA6563266.1.1
Method Blank Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
VN6105-MB N0116764.D 1 07/04/19 SP n/a n/a VN6105
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-3, FA65632-4, FA65632-5, FA65632-6, FA65632-7, FA65632-9, FA65632-10, FA65632-13, FA65632-14,
FA65632-15, FA65632-16, FA65632-17, FA65632-19
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 110% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 104% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 97% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 106% 83-118%
39 of 49
FA6563266.1.2
Method Blank Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
VM4741-MB M0109582.D 1 07/09/19 SP n/a n/a VM4741
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-1, FA65632-11, FA65632-12, FA65632-18
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 102% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 98% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 98% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 95% 83-118%
40 of 49
FA6563266.1.3
Method Blank Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
V5E713-MB 5E16564.D 1 07/10/19 SO n/a n/a V5E713
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-8, FA65632-10, FA65632-17
CAS No. Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.31 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.36 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 5.0 1.0 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.30 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 3.0 0.72 ug/l
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 111% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 110% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 113%* a 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 108% 83-118%
(a) Outside control limits.
41 of 49
FA6563266.1.4
Blank Spike Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
VM4737-BS M0109514.D 1 07/03/19 SP n/a n/a VM4737
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-2, FA65632-3, FA65632-4, FA65632-6
Spike BSP BSP
CAS No. Compound ug/l ug/l % Limits
71-43-2 Benzene 25 21.6 86 81-122
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 25 21.5 86 81-121
91-20-3 Naphthalene 25 19.8 79 63-132
108-88-3 Toluene 25 21.9 88 80-120
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)75 66.6 89 80-126
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries BSP Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 99% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 100% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 99% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 99% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
42 of 49
FA6563266.2.1
Blank Spike Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
VN6105-BS N0116763.D 1 07/04/19 SP n/a n/a VN6105
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-3, FA65632-4, FA65632-5, FA65632-6, FA65632-7, FA65632-9, FA65632-10, FA65632-13, FA65632-14,
FA65632-15, FA65632-16, FA65632-17, FA65632-19
Spike BSP BSP
CAS No. Compound ug/l ug/l % Limits
71-43-2 Benzene 25 26.4 106 81-122
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 25 27.4 110 81-121
91-20-3 Naphthalene 25 24.5 98 63-132
108-88-3 Toluene 25 26.4 106 80-120
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)75 85.7 114 80-126
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries BSP Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 111% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 118% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 103% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 99% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
43 of 49
FA6563266.2.2
Blank Spike Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
VM4741-BS M0109581.D 1 07/09/19 SP n/a n/a VM4741
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-1, FA65632-11, FA65632-12, FA65632-18
Spike BSP BSP
CAS No. Compound ug/l ug/l % Limits
71-43-2 Benzene 25 25.7 103 81-122
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 25 26.4 106 81-121
91-20-3 Naphthalene 25 22.7 91 63-132
108-88-3 Toluene 25 25.7 103 80-120
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)75 77.6 103 80-126
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries BSP Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 100% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 97% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 99% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 97% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
44 of 49
FA6563266.2.3
Blank Spike Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
V5E713-BS 5E16562.D 1 07/10/19 SO n/a n/a V5E713
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-8, FA65632-10, FA65632-17
Spike BSP BSP
CAS No. Compound ug/l ug/l % Limits
71-43-2 Benzene 25 24.7 99 81-122
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 25 24.9 100 81-121
91-20-3 Naphthalene 25 24.8 99 63-132
108-88-3 Toluene 25 22.9 92 80-120
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)75 71.1 95 80-126
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries BSP Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 98% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 103% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 98% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 107% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
45 of 49
FA6563266.2.4
Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
FA65641-1MS M0109536.D 1 07/03/19 SP n/a n/a VM4737
FA65641-1MSD M0109537.D 1 07/03/19 SP n/a n/a VM4737
FA65641-1 M0109516.D 1 07/03/19 SP n/a n/a VM4737
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-2, FA65632-3, FA65632-4, FA65632-6
FA65641-1 Spike MS MS Spike MSD MSD Limits
CAS No. Compound ug/l Q ug/l ug/l % ug/l ug/l % RPD Rec/RPD
71-43-2 Benzene 1.0 U 25 23.7 95 25 21.0 84 12 81-122/14
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 1.0 U 25 23.4 94 25 21.7 87 8 81-121/14
91-20-3 Naphthalene 5.0 U 25 22.4 90 25 19.4 78 14 63-132/25
108-88-3 Toluene 1.0 U 25 23.6 94 25 20.9 84 12 80-120/14
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)3.0 U 75 71.4 95 75 63.1 84 12 80-126/15
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries MS MSD FA65641-1 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 100%101%98% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 99%99%96% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 99%99%100% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 96%95%97% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
46 of 49
FA6563266.3.1
Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
FA65632-7MS N0116783.D 5 07/04/19 SP n/a n/a VN6105
FA65632-7MSD N0116784.D 5 07/04/19 SP n/a n/a VN6105
FA65632-7 N0116782.D 5 07/04/19 SP n/a n/a VN6105
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-3, FA65632-4, FA65632-5, FA65632-6, FA65632-7, FA65632-9, FA65632-10, FA65632-13, FA65632-14,
FA65632-15, FA65632-16, FA65632-17, FA65632-19
FA65632-7 Spike MS MS Spike MSD MSD Limits
CAS No. Compound ug/l Q ug/l ug/l % ug/l ug/l % RPD Rec/RPD
71-43-2 Benzene 7.7 125 138 104 125 136 103 1 81-122/14
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 12.5 125 155 114 125 150 110 3 81-121/14
91-20-3 Naphthalene 442 125 564 98 125 539 78 5 63-132/25
108-88-3 Toluene ND 125 135 108 125 133 106 1 80-120/14
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)15.9 375 452 116 375 439 113 3 80-126/15
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries MS MSD FA65632-7 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 110%107%111% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 120%111%116% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 103%104%98% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 101%104%100% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
47 of 49
FA6563266.3.2
Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
FA65694-1MS M0109585.D 20 07/09/19 SP n/a n/a VM4741
FA65694-1MSD M0109586.D 20 07/09/19 SP n/a n/a VM4741
FA65694-1 M0109587.D 20 07/09/19 SP n/a n/a VM4741
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-1, FA65632-11, FA65632-12, FA65632-18
FA65694-1 Spike MS MS Spike MSD MSD Limits
CAS No. Compound ug/l Q ug/l ug/l % ug/l ug/l % RPD Rec/RPD
71-43-2 Benzene 263 500 739 95 500 755 98 2 81-122/14
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 587 500 1070 97 500 1070 97 0 81-121/14
91-20-3 Naphthalene 198 500 642 89 500 644 89 0 63-132/25
108-88-3 Toluene 123 500 603 96 500 602 96 0 80-120/14
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)2350 1500 3720 91 1500 3730 92 0 80-126/15
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries MS MSD FA65694-1 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 101%101%99% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 98%99%97% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 100%97%99% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 99%97%95% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
48 of 49
FA6563266.3.3
Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Summary Page 1 of 1
Job Number:FA65632
Account:URSNCM AECOM, INC.
Project:Duke Energy MGP; 1205 N Church St, Burlington, NC
Sample File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
FA65796-2MS 5E16584.D 10 07/10/19 SO n/a n/a V5E713
FA65796-2MSD 5E16585.D 10 07/10/19 SO n/a n/a V5E713
FA65796-2 5E16572.D 10 07/10/19 SO n/a n/a V5E713
The QC reported here applies to the following samples:Method: SW846 8260B
FA65632-8, FA65632-10, FA65632-17
FA65796-2 Spike MS MS Spike MSD MSD Limits
CAS No. Compound ug/l Q ug/l ug/l % ug/l ug/l % RPD Rec/RPD
71-43-2 Benzene 315 250 606 116 250 603 115 0 81-122/14
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 283 250 562 112 250 595 125*6 81-121/14
91-20-3 Naphthalene 94.9 250 366 108 250 409 126 11 63-132/25
108-88-3 Toluene 5.5 J 250 211 82 250 234 91 10 80-120/14
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)153 750 825 90 750 912 101 10 80-126/15
CAS No. Surrogate Recoveries MS MSD FA65796-2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 107%100%104% 83-118%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 105%104%105% 79-125%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 92%96%98% 85-112%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 99%102%100% 83-118%
* = Outside of Control Limits.
49 of 49
FA6563266.3.4

APPENDIX C
MANN-KENDALL TREND ANALYSES
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 10/3/01 140 56 170 1700
2 6/12/02 140 100 290 440
3 5/1/03 100 100 300 3600
4 7/24/03 190 130 340 2600
5 10/21/03 140 93 290 2500
6 1/21/04 120 83 250 1700
7 4/27/04 140 98 250 2700
8 7/13/04 190 140 330 4400
9 10/5/04 240 180 550 6700
10 2/9/05 50 170 390 4000
11 8/3/05 130 57 140 3000
12 2/21/06 15 2.6 12 280
13 8/15/06 23 3.4 22 11.9 290
14 2/13/07 93 47 140 1500
15 8/7/07 160 71 320 5200
16 2/12/08 187 66.9 484 372 4980
17 8/6/08 240 137 519 394 8100
18 2/3/09 194 104 406 334 4260
19 8/12/09 97.2 18.8 162 158 3630
20 2/16/10 130 14.6 418 268 4470
21 8/4/10 150 58.7 443 372 7760
22 2/9/11 156 46.8 272 256 2690
23 8/2/11 194 66.8 251 252 6220
24 2/8/12 135 24.8 252 250 3490
25 2/11/13 147 30.3 490 274 6960
26 2/18/14 143 19.4 246 176 3030
27 3/25/15 104 16.2 196 112 2540
28 2/25/16 0.21 0.5 0.3 1.5 3.1
29 3/1/17 82.8 5 76.8 62.2 948
30 4/26/18 27.5 0.35 1.1 7.5 229
31 6/27/19 20.7 0.4 0.86 4 282
32
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:0.51 0.83 0.62 0.72 0.71Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-75 -232 -86 -75 -6
Confidence Factor:89.5%>99.9%92.6%99.9%53.4%
Concentration Trend:Stable Decreasing Prob. Decreasing Decreasing Stable
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWB-S CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWB-S
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 10/2/01 1 2.1 190
2 6/12/02 4.4 2.8 120
3 5/1/03 2.8 2 130
4 7/22/03 2.7 2 57
5 10/21/03 3.4 2.1 90
6 1/20/04 3.3 2 110
7 4/26/04 4.8 2.6 120
8 7/12/04 5.1 2.9 150
9 10/4/04 3.9 2.3 160
10 2/7/05 4.4 1 160
11 8/2/05 4 0.73 170
12 2/20/06 5 0.55 160
13 8/14/06 4.4 0.5 0.5 2.33 160
14 2/12/07 4.7 0.69 160
15 8/7/07 5.2 1 97
16 2/13/08 4.89 0.5 0.5 1.5 94.2
17 8/6/08 3.69 0.5 0.5 1.5 69.3
18 2/3/09 5.58 0.5 0.5 1.5 141
19 8/12/09 3.25 0.5 0.5 1.5 168
20 2/16/10 2.77 0.5 0.5 1.5 156
21 8/4/10 3.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 111
22 2/8/11 2.43 0.5 0.5 1.5 65.7
23 8/2/11 2.24 0.5 0.5 1.5 45.6
24 2/9/12 2.14 0.5 0.5 1.5 71.3
25 2/8/12 14.1 13.9 19.2 1050
26 2/11/13 1.87 0.5 0.5 1.5 84.1
27 2/17/14 1.06 0.5 0.5 1.5 35
28 3/25/15 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 20.9
29 2/25/16 0.22 0.5 0.5 1.5 3.6
30 2/28/17 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
31 4/25/18 1.1 0.5 0.5 1.5 27.2
32 6/27/19 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:0.74 0.00 1.64 1.67 1.35Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-166 0 -255 -20 -202
Confidence Factor:99.7%48.4%>99.9%76.2%>99.9%
Concentration Trend:Decreasing Stable Decreasing No Trend Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWC-S CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWC-S
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling Sampling
Event Date
1 Jun-02 55 16 130 1900
2 Apr-03 2.9 2 2 120
3 Jul-03 0.53 1 1 10
4 Oct-03 2.1 1 2.8 17
5 Jan-04 18 2.3 41 70
6 Apr-04 30 8.8 110 820
7 Jul-04 35 20 86 980
8 Oct-04 45 6 75 1000
9 Feb-05 50 100 68 1300
10 Aug-05 29 14 110 3700
11 Feb-06 25 16 180 2600
12 Aug-06 19 9.2 140 134 2800
13 Feb-07 16 11 170 2700
14 Aug-07 11 5.5 97 2500
15 Feb-08 10.3 4.95 130 99.1 1900
16 Aug-08 7.08 3.67 92.5 69 807
17 Feb-09 1.32 0.5 1.21 17.5 16.8
18 Aug-09 4.86 1.17 42.8 40.6 581
19 Feb-10 0.5 0.5 0.5 7.32 66
20 Aug-10 2.96 1.23 22.6 28 84.6
21 Feb-11 7.21 6.19 75.2 95.7 768
22 Aug-11 7.78 3.53 67.5 64.2 574
23 Feb-12 9.53 5.67 92.4 98.2 1670
24 Feb-13 16.5 3.84 61.3 63.9 1000
25 Feb-14 3.54 0.5 32.6 22.8 71.5
26 Mar-15 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 2.5
27 Feb-16 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
28 Apr-18 2.5 0.7 14 11.1 17.1
29 Jun-19 0.5 0.5 0.66 0.81 1
30
Coefficient of Variation:1.11 2.17 0.86 0.91 1.10
Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-174 -153 -103 -62 -101
Confidence Factor:100.0%99.8%97.3%99.8%97.0%
Concentration Trend:Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water , 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
P1-S CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy P1-S
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
10/95 07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20 03/23Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 10/2/01 71 <10 40 1100
2 6/12/02 54 <5 25 980
3 4/29/03 5 <2 2 950
4 7/24/03 52 2 24 270
5 10/21/03 20 <10 <10 230
6 1/21/04 35 1.4 9 300
7 4/28/04 50 <25 <25 720
8 7/13/04 63 <20 24 930
9 10/5/04 57 <5 20 990
10 2/9/05 <20 <40 <40 580
11 8/3/05 64 1.6 20 950
12 2/21/06 54 <10 18 700
13 8/15/06 53 1.5 18 20.6 880
14 2/13/07 38 1.1 12 620
15 8/7/07 39 1.1 13 870
16 2/12/08 42.4 0.5 10.8 13.1 670
17 8/6/08 39.8 1.05 11.8 14.5 500
18 2/3/09 26.1 1.02 7.8 11.9 494
19 8/12/09 31.9 0.5 8.46 10.8 695
20 2/16/10 28.2 0.5 7.87 10 917
21 8/4/10 28.5 0.5 7.39 10.1 552
22 2/9/11 29.6 0.5 6.53 9.6 725
23 8/2/11 39.6 0.5 7.34 9.88 435
24 2/8/12 28.3 0.5 5.22 8.45 402
25 2/11/13 27.6 0.5 4.81 7.59 461
26 2/18/14 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
27 3/25/15 20.4 0.5 1.58 2.58 243
28 2/25/16 24.4 0.39 1.6 4.7 336
29 3/1/17 21.5 0.5 1.42 1.5 171
30 4/26/18 96.1 2.5 46.7 17.8 886
31 6/27/19 98.3 5 77.7 29.4 1720
32
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:0.55 0.95 1.07 0.66 0.53Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-122 -83 -195 -63 -132
Confidence Factor:98.5%99.0%>99.9%99.6%98.8%
Concentration Trend:Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWB-D CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWB-D
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 10/3/01 30 18 210 7600
2 6/12/02 11 10 87 3100
3 8/27/02 13 12 84 1500
4 4/29/03 11 10 93 3300
5 7/24/03 11 20 69 1100
6 10/21/03 5 10 37 530
7 1/20/04 10 9.8 86 1500
8 4/26/04 13 25 54 1800
9 7/12/04 20 40 74 2000
10 10/4/04 13 8.1 76 2900
11 2/7/05 50 100 100 2200
12 8/2/05 13 5.3 62 2700
13 2/20/06 16 10 56 1800
14 8/14/06 20 4 52 52 2200
15 2/12/07 20 3.4 45 2000
16 8/7/07 20 2.8 35 1700
17 2/13/08 22.2 2.34 33.8 33.6 1840
18 8/6/08 20.2 1.93 26.5 29.6 1160
19 2/3/09 16.4 1.32 17.7 20.8 972
20 8/12/09 17.1 1.45 21.3 24.7 1450
21 2/16/10 2.76 0.5 8.8 6.13 776
22 8/4/10 11.4 0.5 14.3 14.9 740
23 2/8/11 10.9 2.5 12.5 7.5 646
24 8/2/11 14.4 1.01 15.9 18.9 713
25 2/8/12 14.1 1.3 13.9 19.2 1050
26 2/11/13 10.9 0.5 14.4 16.5 1190
27 2/17/14 9.61 0.5 9.28 13 863
28 3/25/15 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 53.7
29 2/25/16 4.5 0.43 3.7 6 844
30 2/28/17 4.39 0.5 4.01 6.05 322
31 4/25/18 6.7 5 6.3 15 629
32 6/27/19 4.4 0.46 1 2.7 81.9
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:0.66 1.93 0.98 0.76 0.86Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-136 -347 -400 -84 -286
Confidence Factor:98.6%>99.9%>99.9%>99.9%>99.9%
Concentration Trend:Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWC-D CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWC-D
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 2/1/02 13 13 30 2100
2 6/14/02 5 10 16 1300
3 8/27/02 1 4 19 1300
4 4/29/03 2 5 29 2500
5 7/22/03 1 6 30 1200
6 10/21/03 1 5 26 320
7 1/20/04 0.71 5.7 27 1100
8 4/28/04 13 25 27 1200
9 7/13/04 20 40 36 1400
10 10/5/04 50 50 50 1600
11 2/8/05 50 100 100 1500
12 8/3/05 5 41 45 3400
13 2/21/06 1.3 17 50 2200
14 8/15/06 1.2 16 48 54 4200
15 2/12/07 0.88 17 57 1800
16 8/7/07 19 53 1600
17 2/13/08 0.5 0.5 1.24 1.5 123
18 8/6/08 0.5 20.6 68.5 64.5 1420
19 2/4/09 0.5 23.2 81.8 81 2440
20 8/12/09 0.5 18.1 66.5 66.1 2140
21 2/17/10 0.5 6.49 37 31.2 895
22 8/4/10 0.5 7.46 35.1 34.1 1200
23 2/8/11 0.5 10.9 47.6 47.5 1430
24 8/3/11 0.5 4.69 18.7 16.9 611
25 2/12/13 0.5 9.25 39.4 40.1 1050
26 2/8/12 0.5 8.57 32.4 33.7 898
27 2/17/14 19.2 0.5 2.41 5.23 274
28 3/25/15 0.5 0.5 2.47 3.7 101
29 2/25/16 0.5 0.5 0.33 1.5 1.6
30 2/28/17 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
31 4/26/18 0.5 4.4 24.8 13.3 437
32 6/28/19 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:2.08 1.29 0.71 0.90 0.75Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-216 -147 -62 -72 -190
Confidence Factor:>99.9%99.2%83.7%99.9%99.9%
Concentration Trend:Decreasing Decreasing Stable Decreasing Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWF-D CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWF-D
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 Feb-02 85 50 110 2600
2 Jun-02 76 6.5 91 1800
3 Apr-03 77 20 110 2700
4 Jul-03 85 9.7 130 900
5 Oct-03 43 10 61 580
6 Jan-04 79 10 93 1100
7 Apr-04 580 59 710 2600
8 Jul-04 130 14 160 3900
9 Oct-04 130 14 180 3400
10 Feb-05 50 100 110 2200
11 Aug-05 110 12 130 5500
12 Feb-06 110 11 160 2300
13 Aug-06 78 0.7 140 91 2100
14 Feb-07 91 11 140 3200
15 Aug-07 75 6.7 96 3000
16 Feb-08 105 5.36 122 74.3 2660
17 Aug-08 86.8 5.66 104 61.7 1710
18 Feb-09 79 4.59 88.7 55.6 2010
19 Aug-09 76.4 4.89 103 65.4 2280
20 Feb-10 72.2 4.61 141 62.6 2560
21 Aug-10 79.3 3.5 94.7 53.6 1680
22 Feb-11 75.7 5 67.1 35.2 1180
23 Aug-11 97.6 4.75 133 68.6 1760
24 Feb-12 75.5 4 125 69.7 1890
25 Feb-13 67.7 2.82 105 55 2200
26 Feb-14 62.2 2.3 92.9 46.4 1730
27 Mar-15 70.3 2.08 85.3 43.5 1740
28 Feb-16 98.4 75.6 252 277 5040
29 Mar-17 51.5 2.5 74.6 40.4 1740
30 Apr-18 52.5 1.4 43.4 17.7 1160
31 Jun-19 30.5 10 25.2 18.3 1050
32
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:0.96 1.53 0.88 0.86 0.49
Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-157 -230 -121 -64 -98Confidence Factor:99.6%>99.9%98.0%99.6%95.0%
Concentration Trend:Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Prob. Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
DMW-2 CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy DMW-2
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 10/3/01 7.9 2.8 18 850
2 6/12/02 9.6 4.4 15 340
3 8/27/02 11 17 46 970
4 4/29/03 5 3.6 14 360
5 7/22/03 5.3 5 11 160
6 10/21/03 6.1 3.2 13 380
7 1/20/04 8.2 10 16 220
8 4/26/04 8 5 14 330
9 7/12/04 7.5 3.5 15 370
10 10/4/04 6.5 2.9 14 310
11 2/7/05 5 12 12 320
12 8/2/05 7.3 3.3 17 46
13 2/20/06 8.2 2.8 16 270
14 8/14/06 9.2 3.2 18 25.7 310
15 2/12/07 9 3.1 16 340
16 8/6/07 9.7 4.6 32 1400
17 2/13/08 6.9 1.25 8.47 11.7 559
18 8/6/08 10.1 1.79 11.9 16.5 188
19 2/4/09 9.51 2.21 11.9 16.2 282
20 8/12/09 8.49 2.14 13 17.2 512
21 2/16/10 3.24 0.5 6.46 9.06 401
22 8/4/10 5.99 1.24 9.84 13.4 334
23 2/8/11 5.65 1.66 11.3 15 298
24 8/2/11 11.8 4.3 20.6 26.8 443
25 2/8/12 7.65 2.57 12.6 17.6 364
26 2/11/13 4.26 1.12 10.1 12.4 336
27 2/17/14 4.94 1.24 11.2 12 287
28 3/25/15 5.77 0.5 11.5 13.7 389
29 2/25/16 2.2 0.4 5.5 6.8 125
30 2/28/17 1.32 0.5 4.49 6.29 121
31 4/25/18 8.6 2.5 10.9 11.6 607
32 6/27/19 7.7 2.5 12.5 15.9 442
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:0.34 0.99 0.53 0.38 0.66
Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-78 -272 -196 -42 -16
Confidence Factor:89.3%>99.9%99.9%95.4%59.5%
Concentration Trend:Stable Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Stable
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWC-BR CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWC-BR
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
07/98 04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 6/14/02 5 11 40 1600
2 8/27/02 1.8 13 53 1500
3 4/30/03 8 6 41 1200
4 7/22/03 4.5 6.1 38 980
5 10/22/03 4 5 26 730
6 1/20/04 5 10 19 730
7 4/27/04 54 29 220 1400
8 7/12/04 20 40 50 1400
9 10/4/04 9.2 5.7 44 1500
10 2/8/05 50 100 100 1000
11 8/2/05 0.5 4.2 29 3400
12 2/20/06 1.7 4.7 29 1900
13 8/14/06 2 2.7 21 30 1100
14 2/12/07 7.1 3.7 32 3500
15 8/6/07 7.5 4.1 32 1200
16 2/12/08 5.14 3.32 24.3 32.4 1350
17 8/6/08 3.95 3.4 25.1 32.9 2060
18 2/3/09 6.11 3.28 24 31.4 1070
19 8/12/09 5.04 2.87 22.6 28.4 1290
20 2/17/10 9.43 3.34 32.3 32.7 1480
21 8/4/10 8.48 2.67 25.8 29.5 1280
22 2/8/11 2.51 2.47 19 28 1630
23 8/3/11 2.23 2.61 16.8 22.1 1070
24 2/8/12 2.48 2.49 17.8 27 877
25 2/12/13 6.43 3.18 26.2 27.8 1030
26 2/17/14 1.82 1.89 15.4 21.7 870
27 3/25/15 0.5 1.97 14.8 21.9 842
28 2/25/16 0.5 0.2 1.6 5 195
29 2/28/17 2.5 2.5 6.26 7.5 642
30 4/26/18 2.5 2.5 6.3 15 473
31 6/28/19 5 1.8 18 23.4 1150
32
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:1.57 2.03 1.12 0.34 0.53Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-98 -342 -284 -92 -140
Confidence Factor:95.0%>99.9%>99.9%>99.9%99.2%
Concentration Trend:Prob. Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWH-BR CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWH-BR
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling SamplingEventDate
1 6/14/02 150 29 130 1600
2 8/27/02 150 28 160 2000
3 4/30/03 110 40 120 1200
4 7/21/03 150 5.2 180 1100
5 10/20/03 89 10 95 390
6 1/19/04 120 10 110 510
7 4/27/04 760 25 830 1400
8 7/12/04 180 8.5 210 1700
9 10/4/04 210 15 240 2000
10 2/7/05 130 40 130 970
11 8/2/05 130 15 150 1400
12 2/20/06 180 7.1 160 1200
13 8/14/06 150 12 150 107 380
14 2/12/07 100 4.1 110 790
15 8/6/07 110 6.5 130 1100
16 2/12/08 106 3.23 78.2 49.9 923
17 8/6/08 95.8 3.46 77.3 48.7 886
18 2/4/09 66.8 1.35 40.4 21.2 349
19 8/12/09 101 3.08 99.9 50.6 1070
20 2/17/10 97.8 1.44 63.8 25.7 2070
21 8/4/10 48 0.5 25.8 15.8 295
22 2/8/11 61.9 0.5 34 15.3 387
23 8/3/11 78.8 1.15 51.2 23 524
24 2/9/12 64.8 0.5 18.2 17 203
25 2/12/13 40.1 0.5 8.15 6.69 87.1
26 2/17/14 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
27 3/25/15 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 2.5
28 2/25/16 18.2 0.5 0.5 1.2 1.3
29 2/28/17 43.5 0.5 2.47 1.5 182
30 4/26/18 3.4 0.5 0.5 1.5 1.2
31 6/28/19 0.51 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
32
33
34
35
Coefficient of Variation:1.16 1.32 1.37 1.22 0.82Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-315 -343 -329 -98 -282
Confidence Factor:>99.9%>99.9%>99.9%>99.9%>99.9%
Concentration Trend:Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWI-BR CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWI-BR
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene
Evaluation Date:Job ID:
Facility Name:Constituent:
Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L
Sampling Point ID:Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene Naphthalene
Sampling Sampling
Event Date
1 4/30/03 300
2 7/21/03 170
3 10/20/03 200
4 1/19/04 130
5 4/26/04 180
6 7/12/04 220
7 10/4/04 290
8 2/7/05 130
9 8/2/05 170
10 2/20/06 140
11 8/14/06 0.25 0.5 0.5 4.2 120
12 2/12/07 190
13 8/6/07 96
14 2/12/08 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 129
15 8/6/08 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 104
16 2/3/09 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 98
17 8/12/09 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 75.8
18 2/16/10 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 82
19 8/4/10 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 67.5
20 2/8/11 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 110
21 8/3/11 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 100
22 2/9/12 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 63.7
23 2/11/13 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 62.6
24 2/17/14 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 40
25 3/25/15 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 23
26 2/25/16 0.5 0.23 0.68 1.1 25.5
27 4/25/18 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1.1
28 6/28/19 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5
29
30
Coefficient of Variation:0.13 0.14 0.09 0.46 0.65
Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):15 -11 11 -45 -294
Confidence Factor:73.3%67.1%67.1%97.7%>99.9%
Concentration Trend:No Trend Stable No Trend Decreasing Decreasing
Notes:
1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend.Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water , 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com
PMWM-BR CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
29-Jul-19
Duke Energy PMWM-BR
GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for Constituent Trend Analysis
Charlie Slone
MGP Burlington
0.1
1
10
100
1000
04/01 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Naphthalene