NC0001422_Modification_20210329

L. V. Sutton Energy Complex
•.
4i74.
-�- _ " ,.
•
• �
3
1,114
•
•
Duke Energy Progress, LLC.
L. V. Sutton Energy Complex
Wilmington, NC
NPDES permit NC0001422
RECEIVED
Request to Modify Permit
MAR 292021
March, 2021 NCDEQ/DWR/NPDES
DUKE
ENERGY®
__

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Request to Modify Permit
Contents
Contents
Cover Letter and check
1 Attachment 1
316(a) Study Report
2 Attachment 2
Sutton Outfall 008 Downstream Buoy Temperatures
Sutton Outfall 008 Grab Temperatures
3 Attachment 3
Copper Water-Effect Ratio (WER)
WER Test Reports
4 Attachment 4
Reasonable Potential Analysis(RPA) Calculation for Outfall 008 Copper

fs DUKE L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
801 Sutton Steam Plant Rd
ENERGY® Wilmington,NC 28401
PROGRESS 0.910.341.4750
f 910.341.4790
March 12, 2021
Dr. Sergei Chemikov
NC Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
NC Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621
Subject: Duke Energy Progress,LLC.
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex
NPDES Permit NC0001422
Dear Dr. Chemikov:
This letter and the attached materials are provided in support of Duke Energy Progress,LLC's
(Duke Energy)request to modify the L.V. Sutton NPDES permit as required by condition A(12.)
Duke Energy requests the following modifications be made to the permit to reflect updated
operating conditions and/or align the terms with other Duke Energy permits for similar activities:
1. Duke Energy requests a thermal variance at outfall 008 based on the enclosed comprehensive
316(a)studies undertaken in accordance with permit condition A(12).
Sutton Lake was constructed for the express purpose of providing cooling water for the
Sutton Steam Electric Plant. In accordance with direction issued by the NC Utilities
Commission,CP&L constructed and brought on-line Unit 3 at the Sutton Plant in 1972.
As part of this project,CP&L was granted an easement to construct,operate,and
maintain "a cooling water reservoir" that has become known as Sutton Lake. In 2014,the
Department changed interpretation and provided notice that, while it had historically
considered Sutton Lake to be a wastewater treatment unit,it would begin considering
Sutton Lake to be waters of the State subject to all water quality standards including
temperature. This led to a modified permit directing_Duke Energy to undertake a study
to obtain a 316(a)thermal variance.
Condition A.(12)of the subject permit provides that"In order to obtain thermal variance/
mixing zone for Lake Sutton/Cape Fear the facility shall develop and conduct
comprehensive 316(a)studies. The 316(a)studies shall be performed in accordance with
the Division of Water Resources approved plan. The temperature analysis and the
balance and indigenous study plan shall conform to the specification outlined in 40 CFR

L.V.Sutton Electric Plant
NPDES Permit NC0001422
Modification Request
125 Subpart H and the EPA's Draft 316(a)Guidance Manual, date 1977, and the Region
4 letter to NCDENR, dated June 3, 2010."
Duke Energy conducted two years of monitoring as outlined in the approved Study Plan
and thus,is submitting the report within 270 days of completion of the study. Results
from the study found Sutton Lake to be well mixed with minimal annual stratification.
Portions of the lake closest to the discharge frequently exceeded the state's thermal
standard of 32 °C during the summer months. Despite warm water temperatures, the lake
was found to have a balanced indigenous community of fishes with the absence of prior
appreciable harm. The detailed report is included with this submittal as Attachment 1.
The conversion from coal-fired generation to natural gas fired generation has
significantly reduced the thermal heat load sent to the lake. Additional consideration
should be based on the shallow depth of Sutton Lake, as the majority depth does not
exceed 6 ft. Based on operating history and need associated with this critical electrical
infrastructure, Duke Energy requests a monthly average temperature limit of 43°C at
location identified as outfall "008 downstream". Temperature data collected at the
effluent channel discharge, in addition to the 316(a)Report,support this request.
Effluent channel discharge temperature data is included with this submittal as
Attachment 2.
2. Duke Energy requests that the copper limit and monitoring at Outfall 008 be removed based
on data from the water effects ratio(WER)study and demonstration by reasonable potential
analysis(RPM.
Condition A.(21.)of the subject permit provides a compliance schedule for copper at
outfall 008, including conducting a Water Effect Ratio study. Duke Energy requests
removal of the limit and monitoring based on demonstration of the WER study, RPA, and
the retirement of the coal units.
Evaluations undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the permit failed to find
q
any current source of copper from the plant. However, the former coal generating units
which operated at the Sutton Plant from the 1950s until 2013 utilized condenser tubes
made in part from copper. These tubes were in contact with the recirculated cooling water
and were the primary source of copper in the wastewater. The natural gas combined cycle
plant,brought online with the retirement of the coal units, uses titanium condenser tubes.
It is likely that existing copper in the cooling pond is due to legacy coal-fired generation
operations making short term reductions challenging.
With no current sources of copper identified,Duke Energy contracted Hazen and Sawyer
to conduct a WER study. Results demonstrate that the site-specific allowable discharge
copper concentration is significantly higher than the condition-specific allowable
discharge concentration. The study developed a site-specific copper ratio of 7.315. The
detailed report and supporting data are included with this submittal as Attachment 3.

L.V.Sutton Electric Plant
NPDES Permit NC0001422
Modification Request
Duke Energy staff performed a Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)using the last 4
years of copper data from outfall 008. The results of the RPA demonstrate there is no
reasonable potential to exceed the site-specific copper value supported by the WER.
Therefore, Duke Energy requests the limit and monitoring requirement for copper at
outfall 008 be removed from the permit. The RPA calculations are included as
Attachment 4.
Thank you for your consideration of the above-requested items. A check in the amount of
$1,030 is included for the permit modification fee.
If there are any questions,please contact:
• Ms.Elizabeth Glenn,Environmental Specialist, at(980)373-0530 or email
[e-mail].
I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or
persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief true,accurate,
and complete.lam aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Sincerely,
James Corrihe
General Manager II
Enclosures

ATTACHMENT 1
316(a) Study Report

L. V. Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial
316(a) Study Report
.4
yr r. . 3
40,
rt »f ,.so. s wNA.•
• •
L. V. Sutton Energy Complex
Wilmington, NC
NPDES permit NC0001422
Duke Energy Environmental Sciences
Water Resources
Harris Energy Center
3932 New Hill Holleman Rd
New Hill, NC 27562
December, 2020
Jr DUKE
ENERGY®

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Contents
Executive Summary
1 Introduction and Background 1
2 Study Objectives 3
2.1 Sutton Lake Map and Sampling Locations. 3
3 Methods 4
3.1 Limnology,Thermal Analysis,and Migration Barriers 4
3.2 Habitat Formers 5
3.3 Plankton, Periphyton,and Benthic Macroinvertebrates 5
3.4 Fish Community Assessment 6
3.5 Other Vertebrate Wildlife 7
3.6 Threatened and Endangered Species 8
4 Results and Discussion 8
4.1 Limnology,Thermal Analysis,and Migration Barriers 8
4.2 Habitat Formers 12
4.3 Plankton, Periphyton,and Benthic Macroinvertebrates 13
4.4 Fish Community Assessment 15
4.5 Other Vertebrate Wildlife 21
4.6 Threatened and Endangered Species 21
5 Summary 23
6 References 25
Tables
Table 4-1 Mean and range of hourly water temperature collected within each area and at the
Discharge and Intake collected during the summer months of 2018 and 2019. 10
Table 4-2 Number and percent of hourly temperature measurements exceeding the thermal standard
by location in circulation order from discharge to intake. 10
Table 4-3 Distance(m)and percent(%)of shoreline that each of the nine documented habitat formers
occupy within and around Sutton Lake 12
Table 4-4 Data collected during the mussel surveys on Sutton Lake 14
Table 4-5 Total quantity and biomass(g)of each fish species collected during the demonstration as
well as species tolerance rating, indigenous determination,trophic guild,and percent
composition. 17
Table 4-6 Total number and biomass of all fish species collected by geartype during the
demonstration 17
Table 4-7 Catch per Unit Effort of all species collected with high voltage boat electrofishing by station.
18

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Table 4-8 Number of each RIS species collected boat electrofishing in each bay during the combined
2018 and 2019 sample seasons 19
Table 4-9 Total number and CPUE of each catfish species collected during the two annual catfish
targeted low volt electrofishing surveys. 19
Table 4-10 Species distribution list of other vertebrate wildlife observed during the natural resource
survey. 21
Table 4-11 Federal threatened and endangered species list generated using the USFWS IPaC tool. 22
Table 4-12 Federal threatened and endangered species list generated using the NCNHP database. 23
Figures
Figure 2-1 Map of Sutton Lake sample areas and the proximity of the lake to the Cape Fear River and
Sutton Plant. 4
Figure 4-1 Depth gradients throughout the lake based on previously collected bathymetric data and
location of each HOBO data logger. 9
Figure 4-2 Daily average temperature collected within each sample area of Sutton Lake compared to
the daily variance between temperature collected at each area for 2018 11
Figure 4-3 Daily average temperature collected within each sample area of Sutton Lake compared to
the daily variance between temperature collected at each area for 2019 11
Figure 4-4 Distribution of each habitat former type documented within Sutton Lake 13
Figure 4-5 Mussel sample sites within areas B, D, F, and H of Sutton Lake. 15
Appendices
Appendix A. L.V. Sutton Energy Complex 316(a) Demonstration Study Plan, 2018-2019.
Appendix B. Sutton Lake 316(a) Demonstration Study Plan Decision Matrix.
Appendix C. Sutton Lake water quality and water chemistry monitoring variables.
Appendix D. Bimonthly depth profiles of water temperature(°C), pH, dissolved oxygen (mg/L), specific
conductance (µS/cm), and Secchi depth (m)at Sutton Lake 2018 and 2019.
Appendix E. Water quality data collected during each fisheries survey.
Appendix F. Annual mean and range of the bimonthly water chemistry and water quality variables
collected throughout the demonstration.
Appendix G. Length frequency distributions of RIS species collected each year of the demonstration.
Appendix H. Individual relative weights of RIS Species large enough to calculate a Wr.
Appendix I. Proportional size distribution (PSD)of RIS species collected during the demonstration.
Appendix J. Graphs 1 through 4 of the Bray-Curtis similarities and non-metric multidimensional scaling
analysis generated using Primer-E version 7.
ii

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Executive Summary
As required by the Sutton National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit NC0001422,
effective October 1, 2017, Duke Energy Progress, LLC. conducted an initial demonstration under Section
316(a) of the Clean Water Act to support the issuance of an alternative temperature limitation for Outfall
008 based on the protection of a balanced, indigenous community in and on Sutton Lake. The
demonstration was completed over a 2-year study period as specified in the NPDES permit and this report
will be submitted with the subsequent permit renewal application.
Components of the 316(a)demonstration were addressed by narrative assessments, field surveys,
observations,sample collections, data analysis, or a combination of these methods. Demonstration
results found Sutton Lake to be well mixed with minimal annual stratification. Portions of the lake
closest to the discharge frequently exceeded the state's thermal standard of 32 °C during the summer
months. Despite warm water temperatures,the lake was found to have a balanced indigenous
community of fishes with the absence of prior appreciable harm.

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
1 Introduction and Background
Duke Energy Progress's (DEP) L.V. Sutton Energy Complex (hereafter Sutton Plant) is located
approximately five miles northwest of Wilmington, NC. The Sutton Plant operated as a three-unit 575-
megawatt(MW) coal-fired facility from 1972 to 2013. Sutton Lake (lake)was constructed
simultaneously with the coal-fired Unit 3 and permitted as an isolated, off-stream,wastewater cooling
pond not subject to water quality standards for over 40 years. The lake covers 445-ha (4.4-km2) and is
bisected by a 3.8-km central main dike and six wing dikes which maximize circulation of water and
promote cooling efficiency. The cooling pond has a volume of 8.64 x 106 m3, a mean depth of 1.9 m,
and a normal elevation of 2.9 m to 3.1 m NGVD (National Geodetic Vertical Datum). The land
surrounding the approximately 22 km shoreline is either undeveloped forest or cleared with ongoing
earth-moving activity. In November 2013,the coal-fired plant was retired, and a newly constructed 625-
MW combined-cycle natural gas-fired power plant began operations. The newly constructed combined-
cycle natural gas-fired plant also utilizes the lake as an off-stream wastewater cooling pond.
The original desi n of the lake was for a thermal coolingcapacity of the 575 MW coal-fired Sutton
g p Y
facility. The new replacement plant consists of two dual-fuel Siemens combustion turbines plus two
Vogt triple-pressure reheat heat recovery steam generators. The steam generators heat rejection
potential for the new plant is approximately 265 MWs thermal, which is less than half of the original
plant's design capacity, and therefore, less than half of the thermal exposure to the aquatic community
under the current plant configuration. Heated effluent from the plant enters the lake from an effluent
channel creating a counterclockwise flow from the effluent channel to the intake allowing the water to
cool before being used again. Since construction,the lake has been open to the public for fishing and
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) has managed the fishery by agreement
under a legislative easement,though the purpose of the lake was to provide condenser cooling-water
for operation of the Sutton Plant.
On November 5, 2014,the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality(NCDEQ)declared
Sutton Lake to be Waters of the State,thus it became subject to North Carolina water quality standards,
including temperature. On October 1, 2017,the Sutton Plant NPDES permit was renewed requiring a
section 316(a) demonstration and temperature analysis to be conducted in accordance with the
"specifications outlined in 40 CFR 125 Subpart H and the EPA's Draft 316(a) Guidance Manual, dated
1977, and the Region 4 letter to NCDEQ, dated June 3, 2010". North Carolina protects freshwater
against thermal effects primarily under 15A NCAC 02B .0208(b) and 15A NCAC 02B .0211(18). However,
under the regulatory authority of 40 CFR 125.73 -Criteria and standards for the determination of
alternative effluent limitations under section 316(a) and 15A NCAC 02B .0208(b),alternative effluent
limitations may be granted based on the demonstration.
40 CFR 125.73 holds that:
"(a)Thermal discharge effluent limitations or standards established in permits may be less stringent
than those required by applicable standards and limitations if the discharger demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the director that such effluent limitations are more stringent than necessary to assure the
protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous community(BIC) of shellfish, fish, and wildlife in
and on the body of water into which the discharge is made.This demonstration must show that the
alternative effluent limitation desired by the discharger, considering the cumulative impact of its
thermal discharge together with all other significant impacts on the species affected, will assure the
1

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
protection and propagation of a balanced indigenous community of shellfish,fish and wildlife in and on
the body of water into which the discharge is to be made.
(b) In determining whether or not the protection and propagation of the affected species will be
assured,the Director may consider any information contained or referenced in any applicable thermal
water quality criteria and thermal water quality information published by the Administrator under
section 304(a)of the Act, or any other information he deems relevant.
(c) (1) Existing dischargers may base their demonstration upon the absence of prior appreciable harm in
lieu of predictive studies. Any such demonstrations shall show:
(i)That no appreciable harm has resulted from the normal component of the discharge (taking into
account the interaction of such thermal component with other pollutants and the additive effect of
other thermal sources to a balanced, indigenous community of shellfish,fish and wildlife in and on the
body of water into which the discharge has been made; or
(ii)That despite the occurrence of such previous harm,the desired alternative effluent limitations (or
appropriate modifications thereof)will nevertheless assure the protection and propagation of a
balanced, indigenous community of shellfish,fish and wildlife in and on the body of water into which the
discharge is made.
(2) In determining whether or not prior appreciable harm has occurred,the Director shall consider the
length of time in which the applicant has been discharging and the nature of the discharge"
and
15A NCAC 02B .0208(b) holds that:
"(b)Temperature:the Commission may establish a water quality standard for temperature for specific
water bodies other than the standards specified in Rules .0211 and .0220 of this Section, upon a case-
by-case determination that thermal discharges to these waters,that serve or may serve as a source or
receptor of industrial cooling water provide for the maintenance of the designated best use throughout
a reasonable portion of the water body. Such revisions of the temperature standard must be consistent
with the provisions of Section 316(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended.A listing of
existing thermal revisions shall be maintained and made available to the public by the Division. History
Note:Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-215.3(a)(1); Eff. February 1, 1976;"
With the issuance of the new NPDES permit,the Sutton Plant was required to demonstrate that a BIC
would be protected according to section 316(a) as described above. The new permit required that a
316(a) demonstration and temperature analysis be completed within the term of a compliance schedule
in the permit and a final report to be submitted within the term of the permit.
Two options for granting an alternative thermal limitation or standard are possible in North Carolina.
For a facility(generally a new facility)without an operating history with a thermal discharge,the
pathway to being granted an alternative thermal limitation would be based on predictive methods
including scientific literature surveys, laboratory studies, and/or modeling. Existing facilities with an
operating history and that have been discharging heated effluent to waterbody do not need to use such
predictive methods. These dischargers may conduct section 316(a) demonstrations based upon
"absence of prior appreciable harm" and the existence of a Balanced Indigenous Community(BIC) within
2

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
the receiving waters. It is the intention of DEP to seek an alternative effluent thermal limitation for
Outfall 008 for the Sutton Plant. The aquatic community in Sutton Lake is well understood because of
DEP's long-term environmental monitoring program, which has focused primarily on limnology and
fisheries. These discretionary studies have documented that the water chemistry and aquatic
community within Sutton Lake are significantly and frequently affected by tidal waters being pumped
into the lake. Also,occasional drought conditions have caused elevated chloride concentrations and
conductivity levels. While the fishery is dominated by freshwater fish, a number of resident
marine/estuarine species are present in the system and their numbers tend to fluctuate with salinity.
To the extent possible,fieldwork, data management, and analysis conducted during the 316(a)
demonstration were carried out using Standard Operating Procedures under Duke Energy's Certified
Biological Laboratory(#006). Some activities conducted may not be a part of an existing laboratory
certification program as these components do not exist within North Carolina for such work. The
natural resources surveys for wildlife are an example of work not carried out under a laboratory
certification. However,this work will be conducted under the oversight and direction of Certified
Wildlife Biologists on the Duke Energy staff.
2 Study Objectives
The purpose of this study was to provide information and data that will support a "thermal
variance/mixing zone for Sutton Lake/Cape Fear River" as outlined in Part I. A. (20.) of NC0001422
(updated July 12,2020 to Part I.A. (12.)),and consistent with Section 316(a)of the Clean Water Act.
The study results were used to demonstrate that Sutton Lake supports a BIC when the Sutton Plant is
operating and discharges heated effluent. Balanced, indigenous communities are those communities
that:
1) are not dominated by pollution tolerant species,
2) are self-sustaining through successful reproduction and recruitment,
3) have adequate food items,
4) have diversity and representative trophic levels within expectations.
The information collected during this demonstration was evaluated against these four primary criteria,
which are defined in 40 CFR 125.71. Sutton Lake is a unique system that is subject to both freshwater
(from Cape Fear River flows) and marine (tidal intrusion) conditions that change through time,therefore
Representative Important Species (RIS)will be part of the assessment, as agreed to by the NCDEQ,the
NCWRC, and DEP. The RIS will be used to indicate that a self-sustaining BIC exists within Sutton Lake.
2.1 Sutton Lake Map and Sampling Locations.
Corresponding to the areas created by the wing dikes are eight sampling areas designated for the
routine Sutton Lake environmental monitoring program (Figure 2-1). These same area designations will
be retained for the 316(a) demonstration areas and sampling.
3

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
N �) E
A 0• \\,_
rr \ F70 650 13r.• * Area G3 0 115 350 1.
K Dl
a
V •
t En
W ./
1 u
/Dike
/ ,
d
Area H Public
i�
Boat
H3 .
New
Ash P o It
na
b
Outfa11008 as
Aeh Pond _
•(N.\
Discharge Area B Cana
���\N✓, Area A
Intake
B3 Canal
Indn Creak
Jj / lent
:, / ,
,L.V.Soften Energy Complex / /
Figure 2-1 Map of Sutton Lake sample areas and the proximity of the lake to the Cape Fear River and
Sutton Plant.
3 Methods
Duke Energy evaluated Sutton Lake and its aquatic community and constructed a Sutton Lake 316(a)
Demonstration Decision Matrix to help guide how each study component would be addressed during
the demonstration (DEP 2017). Several components were determined to be best addressed by a
narrative assessment using scientific literature and previous 316(a)guidance documents. Other
components were addressed by field surveys,observations, sample collections,and data analysis. This
Decision Matrix and the proposed study approaches were discussed with representatives of NCDEQ and
NCWRC during the development of this initial 316(a) demonstration plan (DEP 2017).
3.1 Limnology, Thermal Analysis, and Migration Barriers
Limnology(in situ monitoring and water chemistry) has been part of the ongoing Sutton Lake monitoring
program. Data and results from the ongoing monitoring may be utilized as needed to augment the
Sutton Lake 316(a) Demonstration. A list of variables from the program is found in Appendix C. Since
the 2014 NCDEQ declaration of Sutton Lake as Waters of the State,the lake has been classified as Class
C; Sw(NCDEQ 2020) and as such is subject to water quality standards (NCDEQ 2019). The temperature
4

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
water quality standard states, "Temperature: not to exceed 2.8°C(5.04° F) above the natural water
temperature, and in no case to exceed 29 °C(84.2 °F)for mountain and upper piedmont waters and 32
°C(89.6°F)for lower piedmont and coastal plain waters". To describe the cooling rate of the thermal
effluent as it circulates from the effluent channel through the lake to the intake canal, an Onset HOBO
U22-001 underwater data logger was deployed at mid-water column within each area of the lake and
one at both the intake and discharge at mid-water column (10 HOBOs total; Figure 4-1). Before
deployment, data loggers were lab tested for functionality and accuracy, programed to collect hourly
water temperatures, and then placed at each sample location during spring 2018. Data was periodically
offloaded to verify that loggers were still in place and working properly. Lost or malfunctioning loggers
were replaced to minimize gaps in data collections. Data loggers were installed to collect water
temperature data at each location during the summer months when there was the greatest chance of
temperatures above the temperature standard (i.e.,32 °C). All relevant data went through a quality
assurance/quality control process removing any erroneous data due to lag time between logger
launching/downloading and time until they were replaced in the lake (BPJ,Jason Brown). Results
analyzed within this study correspond to the summer months of June 1, 2018 through September 30,
2018, and June 1, 2019 through September 23, 2019. To assess the possibility of migratory barriers
related to the thermal discharge,the temperature monitoring data were used along with bathymetric
data and shoreline topographic information to assess the potential for thermal barriers(avoidance areas
based on species thermal tolerances)to form.
3.2 Habitat Formers
A qualitative one-time habitat former(primarily aquatic vegetation) survey was performed during the
growing season of the first year(i.e., 2018) of the study. Geographic Information System (GIS)
techniques were employed to characterize habitat formers in Sutton Lake. Habitat former species
presence, spatial distribution, and relative abundance were documented. Similarly,this information was
used to assess spatial distribution, relative abundance, biomass, and diversity considerations of the BIC.
3.3 Plankton, Periphyton, and Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Narrative assessments for plankton, periphyton, and benthic macroinvertebrates were made and
considered within the framework of the overall BIC of Sutton Lake. Following discussions with NCDEQ
and the application 316(a) Demonstration Decision Matrix,the phytoplankton, zooplankton, periphyton,
and benthic macroinvertebrate (excluding mussels) components were evaluated as part of the Sutton
Lake BIC in narrative form. A scientific literature survey was conducted to assess these components in
combination with previous guidance regarding their contribution integral to the existence of a BIC. An
overview of the validity of this approach can be found in the most recent 316(a) review by Coutant
(2013).
Timed mussel surveys were performed once during the first year(2018) of the demonstration under
Duke Energy procedure (FSH-867.0) in areas B, D, F, and H of Sutton Lake (Figure 2-1). A copy of the
procedure can be found in the Duke Energy Biological Laboratory certification for 2018, on file with
NCDEQ. One timed survey within each of the designated areas (i.e., B, D, F, and H) was completed for a
minimum time of 4.0 person-hours (i.e.,4 surveyors for a total of 1 hour each). A surface air supplied
underwater breathing apparatus and dive mask were used by up-to three surveyors at a time to search
for mussels,while other surveyors stayed in shallower depths tactilely searching for mussels. Catch-Per-
5

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Unit-Effort(CPUE), survey techniques, specimen identifications, individual length measurements, habitat
descriptions (dominant and subdominant substrate), and survey site locations (using GPS)were
recorded for each survey site.
3.4 Fish Community Assessment
Fish community assessments were performed during the two-year study(i.e., 2018 and 2019)to
evaluate whether fish communities in Sutton Lake met expectations for species composition, exhibited
good fish health,were not dominated by pollution tolerant species, reproduced and recruited well, and
were in balance with respect to predator and prey species despite the presence of a thermal discharge
to the lake. Standard fisheries sampling methods included boat electrofishing(Procedure NR-00080;
Zale et al. 2012) and was conducted four times (i.e., quarterly/seasonally) annually at four areas (i.e.,
areas B, D, F, and H) during daylight hours on Sutton Lake (Figure 2-1 and Appendix A). At each area,
two stations were sampled using a Smith Root equipped, Wisconsin design electrofishing boat with
pulsed DC current for 15 minutes during March,June, September, and December of 2018 and 2019.
Time was recorded for CPUE metric calculations at each station. Catch per Unit Effort was calculated as
the total number of each species of fish that was captured at a station during the eight sample occasions
of the demonstration (i.e.,#fish collected/2 hrs. per station). To ensure that fish which were sampled
and released were not re-captured, station locations in each area were at shoreline portions of the lake
that ensured no overlapping interactions occurred between stations. During the summer sampling
periods, additional fishery gear types and locations were utilized to capture species of fish less
susceptible to capture by electrofishing alone. These other gear types were flat seines,three wing fyke
nets,gill nets, and dip nets.
Fish were identified, measured for total length to nearest millimeter, weighed to nearest gram,
enumerated, and qualitatively examined for presence of external parasites, disease, and
anomalies/deformities. Adult fish were examined for spawning condition and qualitatively noted based
on whether eggs or milt were readily stripped from the fish with pressure on the abdominal and
urogenital pore region. Small fish not readily identifiable in the field were preserved and returned to
the laboratory for identification. Water quality data (i.e.,temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and
conductivity)were collected to evaluate environmental conditions during each fishery sampling trip.
Because of the shifting nature of the aquatic community due to changing environmental conditions, DEP
proposed a list of indigenous Representative Important Species(RIS)for the Sutton Lake 316(a)
Demonstration. These RIS species included American Eel, Bluegill,Gizzard Shad, Largemouth Bass,
Redbreast Sunfish, Redear Sunfish, and Warmouth. The NCWRC recommended adding the non-
indigenous Flathead Catfish as the apex predator of the system which was agreed upon by all
stakeholders.
To assess the RIS Flathead Catfish, a special targeted sampling was conducted once annually during the
two study years. The sampling involved electrofishing with multiple boat electrofishers and using chase
boats to net the catfish. The technique uses low level amperage (typically 1.0-2.0 amps) and volts
(typically 500 volts DC) using 15 pulses per seconds (Quinn 1988; Heyer et al. 1994; Rachels and Ashley
2002; Bodine 2013). Netted fish were processed using the same techniques as all other fish collected
during the fish community assessment.
6

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
A variety of standard fishery data metrics including total number,total biomass, CPUE (fish/hr), relative
weight(Wr; overall indicator of fish health), percent by species, percent pollution-tolerant species,
percent intolerant species, proportional size distribution (for predator-prey balanced populations), and
others were tabulated and reported to relate to potential thermal impacts. Fish species were classified
according to Tracey et al. (2020) as Indigenous(I), non-indigenous(NI), or indigenous but not in the
basin (IB;Table 4-5). Trophic guild for fishes were also determined from NCDWR(2013). For fish
collected during quarterly electrofishing of the demonstration, a non-parametric multivariate analysis
was used to examine patterns and changes in the fish and RIS species community composition and
abundance. Bray-Curtis similarities and non-metric multi-dimensional scaling(nMDS)graphs were
constructed using Primer-E v7 (Clarke et al. 2014). The fish abundance data were square root
transformed to prevent high abundant species from dominating the community structure and
environmental pattern and to allow the lower abundant species to be accounted for when analyzing
differences in the fish community over time between samples. The transformed abundances were then
used to generate Bray-Curtis similarity matrices for all the stations,transects, seasons, and years and
were used as input for the nMDS analysis. The nMDS extracted spatiotemporal patterns in the fish
assemblage structure and abundance. Similarity rings of 60%and 80%were superimposed from a
cluster analysis onto the nMDS graphs to visually show reference similarity percentages between
samples. The closer the samples are to each other on the nMDS graph,the more similar the samples are
in regard to the kinds of species and their abundances(Appendix J). This powerful and insightful
technique has been used extensively to examine potential impacts to species assemblages (Clarke et al.
2014). Raw fisheries data are available to stakeholders upon request.
3.5 Other Vertebrate Wildlife
As part of an overall natural resources survey and observations, Duke Energy conducted observations
regarding"other vertebrate wildlife" (wildlife)that are associated with aquatic habitats and/or rely on
the waters for foraging, reproduction,and other life functions(e.g.,waterfowl, bald eagles, aquatic
mammals, amphibians).The 316(a) wildlife observations were conducted at sampling sites, similar in
general location,to those being conducted for the fisheries study component (Braun 2005; Heyer et. al.,
1994;Wilson et.al., 1996). Observations were also conducted in the same time period (i.e., month,
season) as the fisheries fieldwork. Observations were conducted for aquatic wildlife species or species
that use the Sutton aquatic system during activities such as foraging for fish or other life function
activities. During these 316(a) assessments, Duke Energy did not document wildlife species that do not
fit the criteria mentioned above (e.g.,white-tailed deer, most songbirds, and wild turkeys).
The observations were also augmented by literature reviews of pertinent information (e.g., United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed species county list, USFWS Information for Planning and
Construction (IPaC) database, facility-specific reports)which enabled Duke Energy to prepare rationale
regarding why the site should be considered one of low potential impact (LPI)or an exception to that.
According to the USEPA 1977 316(a)technical guidance document, most sites in the United States will
likely be considered ones of LPI for other vertebrate wildlife simply because thermal discharge plumes
should not generally impact large or unique populations of wildlife (e.g.,waterfowl concentrations,
eagle wintering areas, etc). Exceptions to sites classified as LPI would be those few sites where the
discharge might affect protected, RIS, or threatened and endangered wildlife. The RIS are those that are
7

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
representative in terms of their biological needs of a balanced, indigenous community of wildlife in the
body of water into which the thermal discharge is made.
3.6 Threatened and Endangered Species
As at other 316(a) assessment sites, Duke Energy completed observations to document any potential
federally listed or protected species that may inhabit or potentially use the area near the Sutton Plant
(e.g., wood stork, American alligator, and bald eagle). Information regarding the protected and federally
listed species was compared against the New Hanover County, NC county-wide list(USFWS 2014).
Included in the natural resources survey and observations of this report is an assessment of
presence/absence of threatened and endangered species at the Sutton site including Sutton Lake and
nearby surrounding lands. In addition,scientific literature,federal and state surveys and listings, and
Natural Heritage Program database element occurrences were reviewed or queried. Also, consultations
were made with the NCWRC and the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries.
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Limnology, Thermal Analysis, and Migration Barriers
Sutton Lake has recently been documented as well mixed, poorly buffered,and having moderate
nutrient concentrations(DEP 2020). Water quality and water chemistry results collected during this
demonstration continue to support this documentation. The lake continued to show little to no signs of
stratification as bi-monthly water quality collected at H1 did not typically show greater than a 1°C
change in temperature per meter change of depth during vertical profiles (Wetzel 2001). Also,typical
dissolved oxygen levels collected throughout the profiles varied slightly within the water column.
Excluding dissolved oxygen levels collected following Hurricane Florence, all surface water dissolved
oxygen levels were above the North Carolina water quality standard of 5.0 mg/liter(Appendix D).
During 2018, Cape Fear River flood waters from Hurricane Florence breeched the lake's dam causing the
drastic change in water quality compared to other sample periods(Appendix D). A consistently,well-
mixed lake provides maximum habitat availability for aquatic organisms.
Water quality and chemistry values exhibited more variability than usual during the demonstration
(Appendices D-F).The lake's pH ranged from 5.0-9.0 SU (standard units)during the demonstration,
though the average pH was circumneutral with a mean of 7.0 and 7.5 SU in 2018 and 2019, respectively.
Secchi depth varied between sample occasions. On average, Sutton Lake was relatively clear with 1.5 to
2-meter mean annual Secchi depths with low corresponding turbidity values ranging from 0.9 to 5.6
NTU. Hurricane Florence inundated the lake with turbid, low conductivity flood waters which increased
the ranges of water quality and chemistry variables collected during this demonstration. Typical
operation of makeup pumps to replenish lake waters lost due to evaporation have been documented to
alter the lake's pH, conductivity, and nutrients (DEP 2020). The drastic inflow of water due to Hurricane
Florence extreme flooding during 2018 caused an atypical variation in analytical results compared to
more recent environmental monitoring since 2013 when the plant switched to natural gas operations,
reducing makeup pump intake rates from the Cape Fear River(DEP 2020).
8

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Depth Range
-71111, and
i ',I„, HOBO Array
• . ' K.5
1 r+. ' V HO60
,.' ,„_ \ , • Shoreline ``
♦
-t - 14 01to3m
-% N',f • 3to6m
�,✓, •y= „‘ o •• 6 to 9 m
,r , • 9to12m ♦-
, ♦ 44 \' .�...'
�• a 4
, ,
. . k \\ , x ..
, ,
i
Y
7 F iti
* �f
41/4) ,..
�a + off, „
„.1115ic
I
0.250.50.75 14
�—~ - Kilometer ita
-
Figure 4-1 Depth gradients throughout the lake based on previously collected bathymetric data and
location of each HOBO data logger.
Sutton Lake water temperature was monitored using an array of data loggers placed throughout the
lake (Figure 4-1). Mean and range of hourly water temperatures collected throughout the summer
months during both demonstration years are shown in Table 4-1. Each summer the daily water
temperature was capable of exceeding 32 °C regardless of HOBO location,though only the discharge
each year, and area H during 2018, had a mean hourly temperature that exceeded 32 °C(Table 4-1 and
4-2). Minimum hourly water temperatures at the Intake, D, and H during 2018 were elevated when
compared to other locations due to abbreviated datasets from lost loggers following Hurricane Florence
as Sutton Lake was inundated with cooler flood waters (Table 4-1 and 4-2).
9

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Table 4-1 Mean and range of hourly water temperature collected within each bay and at the
Discharge and Intake collected during the summer months of 2018 and 2019.
2018 Mean 2019 Mean
2018 Hourly 2019 Hourly
Hourly Hourly
Temperature Temperature
Temperature RangeTemperature
°C
( ) Range °C
HOBO Location (°C) (°C) ( )
Intake 30.81 28.1-34.9 30.32 26.5-34.5
A 30.08 24.8-34.4 29.83 24.9-33.9
B 30.16 24.9-35.2 30.03 25.0-33.7
C 30.41 25.1-34.4 30.24 25.6-34.1
D 31.22 28.4-35.2 30.44 25.4-34.5
E 31.35 24.9-35.8 31.31 25.0-34.5
F 30.73 25.1-34.5 30.61 25.8-35.0
G 30.85 24.9- 34.7 30.69 25.4- 34.5
H 32.54 28.8-36.3 31.43 25.4-35.7
Discharge 32.04 24.9-37.2 32.10 25.0-36.0
Table 4-2 Number and percent of hourly temperature measurements exceeding the temperature
standard by location in circulation order from discharge to intake.
2018 Discharge H G F E D C B A Intake
(n=2928) (n=1935) (n=2928) (n=2928) (n=2928) (n=1937) (n=2928) (n=2766) (n=2928) (n=1935)
n>32°C 1983 1245 961 760 1500 529 483 368 302 394
%>32°C 68% 64% 33% 26% 51% 27% 16% 13% 10% 20%
Discharge H G F E D C B A Intake
2019
(n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2751) (n=2147)
n>32°C 1693 1153 745 663 1123 535 381 281 195 232
%>32°C 62% 42% 27% 24% 41% 19% 14% 10% 7% 11%
To show the daily variation in water temperatures as the cooling pond water circulated from the
effluent channel to the intake canal summer month hourly water temperatures collected at each logger
location and daily variance between each data logger were calculated and displayed as daily averages
for both years (Figures 4-2 and 4-3). On average the daily variance between temperatures collected
throughout the logger array was 0.73 °C(0.0-2.1 °C)for 2018 and 0.70°C(0.04-3.30°C)for 2019.
Temperatures collected both years illustrate the cooling effect of water as it circulated throughout the
lake. Temperature data showed areas D and E had slightly higher average water temperatures than
neighboring areas likely due to breeches in the central dike along these areas. However, regardless of
discharge or breeches,there was typically less than a 1 °C variance between water temperatures
throughout the lake during the summer months. Bimonthly water quality collected from the mainstem
Cape Fear River adjacent to the lake and upstream of any influence from lake discharges documented
ambient river surface water temperature greater than 30°C during July of 2019. Ambient river water
temperatures above 30°C in the nearby Cape Fear River revealed the naturally warm climate within this
region of the state.
10

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
2018
40 3.5
35 - 3.0 t
1-1
r 4P ,-: .-a:... ,.-
•
v 30 �.. ,�, ✓ ,` 2.5 u
v 25
• 2.0 ra
m 20 • • ((
C .. 1 v
a 15 Z •• • I. ; 1.5
E ;••• • t •••• • m
C) 10 .+• •• , • f. 1• .0 v
•• •• 1 •N••1 , N••• ••,;' • a
5
• : �.1. 'f: 0.5 a�i
• •`• I-
0 • • • 0.0
6/1 6/8 6/15 6/22 6/29 7/6 7/13 7/20 7/27 8/3 8/10 8/17 8/24 8/31 9/7 9/14 9/21 9/28
Date
----E F G H
-•Intake Discharge A • B
C ,.•-D Variance
Figure 4-2 Daily average temperature collected within each sample area of Sutton Lake compared to
the daily variance between temperature collected at each area for 2018.
2019
40 3.5
35 • 3.0
�, v
u 30 _ 2.5
c
ra
25 ;•• .c
•••• .• 2.0 ra
o 20 • •`
v
a) i 1.5
a 15 •• • :
E • : + •, 1.0 v
~ 10 :: :•, ::: • ••••• ••f• .. a
5 '.• . • 0.5 a
• . y. i-
0 • • 0.0
6/1 6/8 6/15 6/22 6/29 7/6 7/13 7/20 7/27 8/3 8/10 8/17 8/24 8/31 9/7 9/14 9/21
Date
-- Discharge -x--A B C
D _ E . .....—F G
H Intake •••• Variance
Figure 4-3 Daily average temperature collected within each sample area of Sutton Lake compared to
the daily variance between temperatures collected at each area for 2019.
11

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Bathymetric data was used to highlight depths and bottom contour of Sutton Lake as well as assess any
potential thermal barriers to fish migration. Data utilized for this work was previously collected during
2003 using a single-beam Lowrance depth finder and a Trimble GPS unit(Figure 4-1). A majority of the
temperature loggers were placed approximately one and a half meters deep (5 ft), as most of the lake
was less than three meters(10 ft) deep (i.e., mid-water column; Figure 4-1). Based on the bathymetric
data there are deeper channels that run along both the main and wing dikes as well as the horseshoe
shaped stream bed of Catfish Creek throughout the largest open area (i.e., H). Deeper channels within
the well mixed lake provide potential refugia for species with cooler thermal tolerances (CP&L 1996).
4.2 Habitat Formers
Habitat is an important aspect of an aquatic community that can influence survival, growth,
reproduction, and recruitment of the fisheries(Zale et. al 2012). On August 21 and 22, 2018,two
environmental services staff navigated around the perimeter of Sutton Lake and documented the types
and GPS locations of aquatic vegetation and other habitat formers present within and along the
shoreline of the lake. Nine dominant habitat types were identified and are listed by linear distance (m)
of coverage and percentage of shoreline each occupy(Table 4-3). Shoreline delineation of each habitat
type is displayed in a map to visually illustrate the coverage of each habitat type (Figure 4-4). Of the
habitat formers documented along the shoreline, a majority(>98%) of the lake is comprised of
developed shoreline (i.e., man-made embankment), overhanging vegetation, Phragmites, or a
combination of each. Additional habitat available to the aquatic and terrestrial species but not listed in
the table or figure is represented as open water(i.e.,approximately 1100 acres of surface water).
Historically, nuisance aquatic vegetation has been an issue for lake navigation and power plant
operations, but in recent years the lake has been void of such aquatic vegetation through the Company's
active management plan (DEP 2020). An abundance of healthy and diverse fish found throughout
Sutton Lake would suggest sufficient habitat capable of supporting a BIC within the lake.
Table 4-3 Distance (m) and percent(%) of shoreline that each of the nine documented habitat
formers occupy within and around Sutton Lake.
Habitat Type Linear Distance(m) %of Shoreline
Developed Shoreline 6,197 27.4
Overhanging Vegetation 6,122 27.0
Phragmites 4,231 18.7
Phragmites/Overhanging Vegetation 3,307 14.6
Rip Rap/Overhanging Vegetation 2,369 10.5
Cattail 176 0.8
Cattail/Alligator Weed 125 0.6
Phragmites/Alligator Weed 96 0.4
Alligator Weed 15 0.1
Total 22,638 100.0
12

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Ilk - • '
1 IC
Habitat Formers
AL ii-iii
- • Rh Rap,werhanging Vegetation 1
PhragmltesiOverhanging Vegetation
• Phragmites'Alligator Weed
• Ptlragmltes
r , • Overhanging Vegetation
4 • Developed Shoreline
• Catta VAlllgator Weed f
• Cattail
Xi
• Alligator Weetl
w
i:. Downed Tree
4 .1111=11 \it
i`` \ a /' a
U
n
•
e •�,'
H
; A _ , �,.
O 0204 0.8 1.2 -~
—m 'Kilometer 1
Figure 4-4 Distribution of each habitat former type documented within Sutton Lake.
4.3 Plankton, Periphyton, and Benthic Macroinvertebrates
4.3.1 Plankton, Periphyton and Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Early Sutton Lake environmental monitoring reports included sampling of the lake's plankton (CP&L
1982, 83,84, 85,86,87, and 88)and benthic macroinvertebrates (CP&L 1982, 83, 84, 85, and 86).
Monitoring was initiated for phytoplankton in August of 1982 to track blue-green algae blooms within
the lake, while zooplankton monitoring was initiated during 1985 to more fully understand the trophic-
level dynamics. The lake had moderate diversities of zooplankton typical of North Carolina
impoundments, and phytoplankton densities and diversity varied between sampling occasions due to
normal seasonal variation (CP&L 1985). Benthic macroinvertebrate collections were similar to benthic
communities within other coastal plain and piedmont reservoirs in North and South Carolina as
collections were found to be variable in spatial distributions, species composition, and relative
abundance (CP&L 1982). More recent research suggests that studies should focus on the fisheries
rather than macroinvertebrates as fish promote a trophic cascading effect or"top-down" approach that
provides a better understanding of the aquatic community(Iglesias et. al 2017). The United States
13

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Geological Survey(USGS) also states that fish growth and survival are dependent in part on
phytoplankton and zooplankton,therefore the fishery within a lake is a good indicator of the ecological
health of a lake (USGS 2015). Also, a low potential impact "LPI" determination was made for Sutton
Lake plankton, periphyton, and benthic macroinvertebrates due to "essentially no risk of aquatic
damage from the thermal discharge," as defined by Coutant(2013). Previous CP&L studies, new
research, and the LPI determination supported the decision to conduct a narrative assessment of the
plankton, periphyton, and benthic macroinvertebrates(excluding mussels)within Sutton Lake.
4.3.2 Mussel Community Survey
The presence of freshwater mussels can be an indicator of good water quality in different aquatic
systems,though abundance and diversity can vary by waterbody and geographic location (Haag 2012).
Sutton Lake was constructed by excavation of the surrounding land area as well as impounding Catfish
Creek, a small tributary which flowed through the area to the tidally influenced, lower Cape Fear River.
Species diversity is typically lower in lentic systems and mussel numbers are less abundant in tidally
influenced rivers(Haag 2012). Within the four sample locations, only two live Paper Pondshell
Utterbackia imbecillis were collected in area B (Table 4-4; Figure 4-4). Paper Pondshell are not native to
the Atlantic slope, but are widely dispersed in the Cape Fear River Basin. The only other bivalves
collected alive during the survey were Corbicula fluminea and Rangia cuneata, both non-native invasive
species. Rangia cuneata is typically found in estuarine environments,further illustrating the tidal
influence of the makeup pump water and lack of other freshwater mussel species found within the
survey areas.
Table 4-4 Data collected during the mussel surveys on Sutton Lake.
Mussel
CPUE
Search Number
2018 Survey Dominant Subdominant (catch- Sruvey Length
Latitude Longitude Time Scientific Name CommonName Observed Site Comment
Date Site Substrate Substrate per- Technique (mm)
(person- (alive) hour)
hours)
34.29177; -78.0092; Snorkel,
6/18 B 4 Sand Detritus Utterbackia imbecillis Paper Pondshell 2 0.5 39 and 40 Corbicula fluminea and Rangia cuneata present
34.29301 -78.0044 S.A.S
34.30346;-78.01082; Snorkel, No mussels or shells found;Corbicula fluminea and Rangia
6/19 D 4 Silt Sand 0
34.30232 -78.00984 S.A.S cuneata present
34.31227;-78.00079; Snorkel, No live mussels found only?Utterbackia imbecillis shells;
6/19 F 4 Sand 0
34.31431 -78.00466 S.A.S Corbicula fluminea and Rangia cuneata present
34.30619;-77.99883; Snorkel, No live mussels found only 1 Utterbackia imbecillis shell;
6/19 H 4 Sand 0
34.30160 -77.99632 S.A.S Corbicula fluminea and Rangia cuneata present
14

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
N 2018 Survey
A / / * Mussel Sites
� / eF G
0 650 1.300 2600 Fe
I r
Area G 0 170 340 6130 Meters
Punk
Boat
Ramp
■
Dike/
u Area H
new $
0.M Pane
Discharge
Canal Pah Pon:
Area B
Area A
\'\)
/` \ Intake
Canal
Milan Geak a
,L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
Figure 4-5 Mussel sample sites within areas B, D, F,and H of Sutton Lake.
g p
4.4 Fish Community Assessment
Twenty-six species of fish were collected in Sutton Lake during the two-year study. Of the 26-species
collected,the eight-species identified as RIS species made up approximately 88%of all individuals
collected during the study(highlighted gray in Table 4-5). More than 60%of the fish species collected
had tolerance ratings of intermediate(n=15)or intolerant(n=1), while only seven species collected had
a tolerant tolerance rating. Seven of the eight RIS species, including Flathead Catfish,were rated as
intermediate. Redbreast Sunfish was the only RIS species rated as tolerant. Three species collected
were estuarine fish species(i.e., Hogchoker,Atlantic Needlefish, and Southern Flounder) and therefore
did not have an associated tolerance rating. Based on these tolerance ratings,the fish community
within the lake was not dominated by pollution tolerant species.
The trophic guild of the collected fish species was represented by nine piscivores, eleven insectivores,
five omnivores,and one herbivore (NCDWR 2013, Froese and Pauly 2019,Tracey et. al 2020;Table 4-5).
Eighteen species of fish collected were indigenous to the Cape Fear River Basin, seven species were
nonindigenous, and an indigenous determination was not made for the hybrid sunfish. A diverse
population of mostly indigenous fish representing multiple trophic guilds not dominated by tolerant
species provides supporting evidence of a BIC within the lake.
15

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Table 4-5 Total quantity and biomass(g)of each fish species collected during the demonstration as
well as species tolerance rating,indigenous determination,trophic guild,and percent
composition. For the indigenous determination I = Indigenous, NI = Nonindigenous,and IB
= Indigenous but not in the basin. Trophic guild is coded as P=piscivore, I=insectivore, 0
= omnivore,and H = herbivore. NA represents not available for all columns.
Species Quantity Biomass(g) Tolerance Rating Indigenous Trophic %by
Determination Guild Species
American Eel 16 1,683 Intermediate I P 0.2%
Atlantic Needlefish 2 7 NA I P 0.0%
Black Crappie 9 1,074 Intermediate I P 0.1%
Blue Catfish 27 200,675 Intermediate NI P 0.4%
Bluegill 4,062 27,118 Intermediate I I 58.8%
Bowfin 3 671 Tolerant I P 0.0%
Channel Catfish 6 7,261 Intermediate IB 0 0.1%
Common Carp 26 77,759 Tolerant NI 0 0.4%
Eastern Mosquitofish 22 9 Tolerant I I 0.3%
Eastern Mudminnow 1 6 Intermediate I I 0.0%
Flathead Catfish 61 257,943 Intermediate IB P 0.9%
Gizzard Shad 99 32,872 Intermediate I 0 1.4%
Grass Carp 27 104,253 Tolerant NI H 0.4%
Hogchoker 1 3 NA I 0 0.0%
Inland Silverside 634 497 Intermediate I I 9.2%
Tessellated Darter 1 1 Intermediate I I 0.0%
Largemouth Bass 1,128 205,047 Intermediate I P 16.3%
Longnose Gar 13 25,776 Tolerant I P 0.2%
Redbreast Sunfish 106 2,745 Tolerant I I 1.5%
RedearSunfish 376 11,124 Intermediate NI I 5.4%
Sawcheek Darter 12 6 Intolerant I I 0.2%
Southern Flounder 3 198 NA I P 0.0%
Sunfish(Hybrid) 44 1,301 Tolerant NA I 0.6%
Swamp Darter 5 1 Intermediate I I 0.1%
Threadfin Shad 1 9 Intermediate NI 0 0.0%
Warmouth 227 2,423 Intermediate I I 3.3%
Total 6,912 960,462 100.0%
Multiple geartypes were used to collect fish during the demonstration,though a majority(i.e.,95%)of
the fish collected were captured using boat electrofishing. Other gear types were deployed during both
summer sampling periods (i.e., gill nets,fyke nets,flat seine, and dip nets)to decrease the potential
sample bias due to using limited geartypes (e.g. boat electrofishing;Table 4-6). Longnose Gar and
Sawcheek Darter were species only collected using net gear types(Table 4-6). Lakes of similar
morphology (e.g. shallow and clear) such as Sutton Lake may only need to utilize boat electrofishing to
quantify the majority of the fish species present, but without the other gear types eight percent(2
species)of the species diversity would have been excluded from this demonstration.
16

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Table 4-6 Total number and biomass of all fish species collected by geartype during the
demonstration.
Collection Method
4ft Hoop Net w/20ft 100 ft.Experimental
Species Electrofishing wings Gill Net 20 ft.Seine Dip Net Sweep
Number Biomass Number Biomass Number Biomass Number Biomass Number Biomass
Collected (g) Collected (g) Collected (g) Collected (g) Collected (g)
American Eel 16 1,683
Atlantic Needlefish 1 5 1 2
Black Crappie 1 35 5 1,034 2 4 1 1
Blue Catfish 20 167,550 1 14,750
Bluegill 3,874 26,213 1 126 6 164 173 360 6 19
Bowfin 3 671
Channel Catfish 5 5,636 1 1,625
Common Carp 26 77,759
Eastern Mosquitofish 2 2 4 2 16 5
Eastern Mudminnow 1 6
Flathead Catfish 60 248,443 1 9,500
Gizzard Shad 40 11,388 59 21,484
Grass Carp 27 104,253
Hogchoker 1 3
Inland Silverside 634 497
Largemouth Bass 1,104 199,063 1 388 8 4,440 14 721
Longnose Gar 1 2,100 11 23,675 1 1
Redbreast Sunfish 106 2,745
Redear Sunfish 365 10,762 1 141 1 47 9 174
Sawcheek Darter 12 6
Southern Flounder 3 198
Sunfish(Hybrid) 44 1,301
Swamp Darter 1 4 1
Tessellated Darter 1 1
Threadfin Shad 1 9
Warmouth 207 2,353 3 20 15 41 2 9
Total 6,543 860,576 10 13,289 90 66,205 223 1,306 37 40
Twenty-four of the 26 species of fish collected during the 316(a)demonstration were collected using
boat electrofishing within the eight sample stations. Species station specific CPUE values ranged from
zero fish per hour at multiple stations for multiple species to as high as 579 Bluegill per hour at station
F_3(Table 4-7). Catch per Unit Effort is a widely used and accepted fisheries metric that assumes
probability of capture is constant over space and time though fisheries biologist acknowledges the
probability of capture is not constant for either(Zale et al. 2012). Variability between CPUE of species
and locations was potentially due to species abundance(e.g.Southern Flounder), how well they respond
to high frequency boat electrofishing(e.g. Flathead Catfish), and the environmental conditions present
during sample collections(e.g. 579 Bluegill per hour was due to low dissolved oxygen levels from
Hurricane Florence floodwaters that congregated individuals at the surface). Electrofishing CPUE results
collected during the demonstration provided a high-level overview of the abundance and spatial
distribution of species present within the lake.
17

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Table 4-7 Catch per Unit Effort of all species collected with high voltage boat electrofishing
by
station. CPUE numbers were rounded to the nearest whole number for ease of interpretation.
Species Station CPUE(fish/hr)
B_1 B_3 D_1 D_3 F_1 F_3 H_i H_3
American Eel 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1
Atlantic Needlefish 1 1
Black Crappie 1
Blue Catfish 1
Bluegill 275 174 115 232 92 579 322 143
Bowfin 1 1
Channel Catfish 1 2
Common Carp 1 1 12 1
Eastern Mosquitofish 1 1
Eastern Mudminnow 1
Flathead Catfish 1 1
Gizzard Shad 1 9 3 1 4 3
Grass Carp 2 3 2 3 1 1 1 3
Hogchoker 1
Inland Silverside 9 14 1 39 21 19 216
Johnny Darter 1
Largemouth Bass 56 32 91 49 25 80 73 137
Redbreast Sunfish 8 5 7 11 2 9 11 1
Redear Sunfish 38 16 26 32 16 15 17 21
Southern Flounder 1 1
Sunfish (Hybrid) 4 1 2 2 14 1
Swamp Darter 1
Threadfin Shad 1
Warmouth 14 5 6 11 4 6 57 1
Comparing the CPUE of RIS species helps reduce some of the variability between species abundance and
distribution by eliminating the less frequently collected species. Six of the eight RIS species were
collected within each station of the lake (Table 4-7) of which four of those species were collected within
each area of the lake regardless of season (Table 4-8). Gizzard Shad and Flathead Catfish were the two
RIS species that were not collected at each station. Gizzard Shad typically occupies the limnetic zone of
a system (Zale et. al 2012),and therefore are not always collected with shoreline boat electrofishing.
Additional geartypes (e.g.,gillnets)were used to collect more pelagic fish species such as Gizzard Shad.
Flathead Catfish are not as susceptible to high voltage electrofishing and were not expected to be have
been collected during associated sampling efforts(Table 4-7)therefore,the additional low volt
electrofishing effort was used to capture Flathead Catfish each year of the demonstration. During the
two annual special targeted Flathead Catfish sampling occasions Duke staff and the NCWRC
electrofishing boats sampled for a combined 4.9 hours in 2018 and 3.6 hours in 2019. Collections from
this additional effort revealed that Flathead Catfish continue to be the dominant catfish species,though
Blue Catfish numbers have been increasing since their recent detection in the lake (NCWRC, Personal
Communication;Table 4-9). Bluegill, Largemouth Bass, Redear Sunfish and Warmouth were collected
18

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
within each area of the lake and during each season of the demonstration. American Eel were collected
in low numbers and not collected within each area each season sampled, and Redbreast Sunfish were
only absent from the area D collections during the winter(Table 4-8). Continuous seasonal distribution,
diversity,and abundance of the RIS species documented during this demonstration illustrate the lack of
impact to the fisheries in response to the thermal discharge.
Table 4-8 Number of each RIS species collected boat electrofishing in each area during the combined
2018 and 2019 sample seasons.
Spring Summer Fall Winter
RIS Species (March ) (June) (September) (December)
BDFH B D F HBDFHBDFH
American Eel 3 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 3 0 0 2 0
Bluegill 251 38 37 156 148 226 193 415 282 342 987 166 216 86 124 191
Flathead Catfish 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gizzard Shad 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 5 2 13 0 0 0 0
Largemouth Bass 39 32 90 137 57 74 59 86 61 76 42 162 18 97 17 35
Redbreast Sunfish 7 6 4 8 5 14 3 8 11 16 4 6 1 0 11 1
RedearSunfish 37 16 15 32 16 22 14 19 32 38 17 21 22 39 15 4
Warmouth 12 5 2 48 6 4 1 32 5 22 11 19 14 2 5 16
Table 4-9 Total number and CPUE of each catfish species collected during the two annual catfish
targeted low volt electrofishing surveys.
2018 2019
Species Number CPUE Number CPUE
Collected (fish/hr) Collected (fish/hr)
Blue Catfish 8 1.6 10 2.8
Channel Catfish 0 0.0 2 0.6
Flathead Catfish 21 4.3 36 9.9
To document the health and condition of the RIS species listed for Sutton Lake,the length frequency,
relative weight (Wr), and proportional size distribution (PSD) of each species was determined (Appendix
G, H, and I). The American Eel is a catadromous species that spawns in the Sargasso Sea (ASMFC 2000),
therefore recruitment would not occur in the lake,although individuals collected in the lake had a high
Wr and were determined to be healthy(Appendix H). Gizzard Shad had a wide length range within their
size distribution indicating successful reproduction and that recruitment had occurred even though low
numbers were collected due to their typical occupancy of the limnetic zone (Zale et. al 2012). Flathead
Catfish had a wide length range within their size distribution indicating successful reproduction and
recruitment and individuals were capable of reaching trophy size (i.e.,>1050 mm). All sunfish(i.e.,
Bluegill, Redear Sunfish, Redbreast Sunfish, and Warmouth) had high numbers of juvenile fish each year
of the study,and lower abundance of larger individuals. An abundance of juvenile fish species
represents good annual reproduction and high fecundity of mature(e.g.,>100mm)fish. Largemouth
Bass were collected each year in good numbers representing a wide size range of individuals (Appendix
G). Good numbers of juvenile bass (<200mm) collected each year and multiple PSD size classes
19

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
indicated good reproduction and recruitment. An angler survey conducted by the NCWRC in 2015—
2016 revealed most Sutton Lake anglers practice catch and release bass fishing releasing 98%of
Largemouth Bass they caught(NCWRC 2018). Limited harvest of Largemouth Bass potentially
contributed to increased number of Largemouth Bass in multiple PSD categories compared to other
sunfish species. All RIS species greater than stock size had a wide range of Wr's with an average Wr that
ranged from 77 to 106. While Wr for a species can vary among regions and water body types, 75%of
RIS species collected during this study had an average Wr greater than 80 indicating a majority of
relatively healthy RIS species (Zale et.al 2012;Appendix H). Representative important species of fish
collected during this demonstration had good annual reproduction, recruitment, health, and reached
quality or better size. Of the individual 6,912 fish collected, no individuals were preserved and returned
to the laboratory for identification or appeared to be in spawning condition. Two Redear Sunfish were
documented as emaciated,one Largemouth Bass had external sores on anus and mouth, one
Largemouth Bass had a cranial anomaly,one Flathead Catfish had a freshly lacerated caudal fin likely
due to the nature of collection with the chase boat, and one Common Carp had an injured eye and
operculum. In total, less than one percent(i.e.,0.07%) of the fish collected over the two-year study
period displayed signs of injury, potential external parasites,or abnormalities. Based on the low
incidence of injury, parasites,or abnormalities of the individuals captured during this demonstration,
further exemplifies that the fish community in the lake exhibited good health.
As stated within the"Limnology,Thermal Analysis, and Migration Barriers"section,the thermal
discharge circulates from the effluent channel into area H thru area A of the lake before being drawn
back to the intake canal (Figure 2-1). The structural configuration of the lake and dikes promote cooling
of the thermal effluent before reaching the intake canal. Electrofishing surveys collected once each
season during the demonstration in areas B, D, F, and H were collected to document whether or not
species abundance and distribution varied in relation to the seasonal/spatial variation in water
temperature. Had species abundance and distribution varied in relation to increases in temperature,
the expectation would be that the fish community at area H should be most dissimilar to the fish
community in area B. If water temperature shaped the fish community in sample areas,then areas
closer together(i.e., areas B and D, areas F and H)would be expected to be more similar. The use of
Primer-E v7 software allowed for multiple graphical interpretations of the electrofishing results to
determine if there was an influence on the fishery related to the circulation of the thermal effluent
within the lake. A systematic approach to demonstrate the distribution and abundance of the Sutton
Lake fisheries is illustrated in graphs 1 through 4(Appendix J). Graph one shows all fish species collected
per station during the demonstration (by year) in relation to water temperature (size of circle). There is
a slight difference among years likely due to water quality differences caused by Hurricane Florence
during 2018, but the majority of overlapping circles from different stations and thermal regimes reveals
there was no apparent thermally influenced distribution of fish species or impact to abundances in the
lake. Graph two highlights the seasonal collection of all species collected during the demonstration.
The 60%and 80%similarity circles reveal species distribution and abundance are similar at areas B
through H during the same seasons throughout the demonstration. Graph three isolates all stations by
year during the hottest two sample seasons(i.e.,summer and fall)for only RIS sunfish species collected.
During the hottest times of the year,stations in areas B, D, F, and H have RIS sunfish species abundance
and distributions that were 80%similar. Graph four displays the 60%and 80%similarity circles of RIS
sunfish species collected between stations during June and September in relation to water temperature.
Regardless of water temperature,the majority of stations sampled during these seasons were 60%
similar in RIS sunfish species and their abundances to each other. Within the 80%similarity circles there
is increased overlap of stations throughout the lake (areas B-H). All these graphs together illustrate that
20

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
temperature did not influence fish species distributions and their abundances, especially the RIS species.
Other than distance from the thermal discharge and associated water temperatures,other factors,such
as differences in habitat within the stations can contribute to fish assemblage difference. This analysis
only addressed the impact(or lack thereof)of the heated effluent, not the influence of local habitat or
other factors that might cause variability between stations and transects.
4.5 Other Vertebrate Wildlife
A natural resource survey was conducted the first year of the demonstration on August 21, 2018
(Appendix A). Staff observed and documented all wildlife associated with aquatic habitats and/or reliant
on the lake for foraging, reproduction,and other life functions. The survey was completed by slowly
navigating a boat around the outside perimeter of the lake's area H,while staff made visual observation
of all relevant vertebrate wildlife. Navigating around the perimeter of area H provided personnel visual
access to a large representative portion of the lake's perimeter with adjacent lands present rather than
narrow dikes of limited habitat or the concrete perimeter road. Binoculars were used to assist
identifying species that were farther away. All pertinent wildlife observed were identified to species,
enumerated, and the observed habitat that they were occupying as well as behavior was documented
(Table 4-10).All species of wildlife observed during the survey were of the Class Ayes(i.e., birds). None
of the species observed during the natural resource survey were state or federally listed as threatened
or endangered.
Table 4-10 Species distribution list of other vertebrate wildlife observed during the natural resource
survey.
Facility Individuals
Common Name Scientific Name Location Habitat* Behavior** observed
Osprey Pandion haliaetus H water flying 1
Green Heron Butorides striatus H dike/shore/water foraging 3
Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon H shore/water foraging 1
Spotted Sandpiper Actitus macularia H shore/water foraging 1
Great Egret Casmerodius albus H water/shore/tree perched 1
Common Tern Sterna hirundo H water flying 4
Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica H water flying 1
N. Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryxserripennis H water flying 7
* Habitat can include immediate shoreline, riprap,waterbody or canal associated with the discharge
** Behavior can include but not limited to loafing,foraging, swimming, preening and nesting
4.6 Threatened and Endangered Species
The USFWS IPaC tool was used to determine the potential threatened and endangered species known to
inhabit an eight square mile area around Sutton Lake. The tool resulted in two threatened mammalian
species,five threatened/endangered avian species,five threatened/endangered reptilian species,one
21

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
candidate threatened snail species,and four threatened/endangered flowering plant species (Table 4-
11). The manatee and sea turtle species are marine species that would not be expected to occur in the
lake, and none of the other species were observed during the natural resource or habitat former
surveys. Though not observed during the natural resource survey,the American Alligator has been
observed within the lake (Justin Dycus, personal observation).
Table 4-11 Federal threatened and endangered species list generated using the USFWS IPaC tool.
Common Name Scientific Name Status
Mammals
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Threatened
West Indian Manatee Trichechus manatus Threatened
Birds
Eastern Black Rail Laterallus jamaicensis ssp.jamaicensis Purposed Threatened
Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Threatened
Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa Threatened
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Endangered
Wood Stork Mycteria americana Threatened
Reptiles
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis Similarity of Appearance (Threatened)
Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened
Kemps Ridley Sea Turtle Lepidochelys kempii Endangered
Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochelys coriacea Endangered
Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta Threatened
Snails
Magnificent Ramshorn Planorbella magnifica Candidate Threatened
Flowering Plants
Colley's Meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi Endangered
Golden Sedge Carex lutea Endangered
Rough-leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia Endangered
Sea beach Amaranth Amaranthus pumilus Threatened
22

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
An additional threatened and endangered species query was completed using the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database.The query consisted of retrieving all threatened and
endangered species documented to occur within five square miles of Sutton Lake. Results from the
NCNHP query included an additional two bird,two reptile, 14 plant,and one fish species(Table 4-12).
None of the listed species found within the NCNHP query were observed during this survey. Other
known threatened and endangered aquatic species that occur within the lower Cape Fear River but not
listed in either of the previous queries are the Atlantic Pigtoe(Fusconaia masoni; NCWRC personal
communication),Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus), and Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrum; NOAA 2020). Although these three species have been documented to occur within the
lower Cape Fear River Basin, none have ever been documented in the lake.
Table 4-12 Federal threatened and endangered species list generated using the NCNHP database.
Common Name
Scientific Name Status
Birds
Bachman's Sparrow Peucaea aestivalis State Special Concern
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Federally Endangered
Least Bittern lxobrychus exilis State Special Concern
Reptiles
Southern Hognose Snake Heterodon simus State Threatened
Eastern Chicken Turtle Deirochelys reticularia State Special Concern
Plants
Cypress Knee Sedge Carex decomposita State Special Concern
Viviparous Spikerush Eleocharis vivipara State Endangered
Ribbed Bishop Weed Ptilimnium costatum State Threatened
Shrubby Seedbox Ludwigia suffruticosa State Threatened
Big Three-awn Grass Aristida condensata State Threatened
Florida Scrub Frostweed Crocanthemum nashii State Endangered
Pickering's Dawnflower Stylisna pickeringii var.pickeringii State Special Concern
Carolina Sunrose Crocanthemum carolinianum State Endangered
Savanna Milkweed Asclepias pedicellata State Special Concern
Lace-lip Ladies'Tresses Spiranthes laciniata State Special Concern
Robbins' Spikerush Eleocharis robbinsii State Special Concern
Venus Flytrap Dionaea muscipula State Special Concern
Savanna Indigo Bush Amorpha confusa State Threatened
Georgia Calamint Calamintha georgiana State Endangered
Fish
Least Killifish Heterandria formosa State Special Concern
5 Summary
Environmental monitoring has been conducted on Sutton Lake since initial construction as an off-stream
wastewater cooling pond for the retired L.V. Sutton Electric Plant in 1972. Since decommissioning the
23

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
coal-fired plant, and construction and operation of the combined-cycle natural gas-fired plant in 2013
the potential thermal discharge to the lake has been reduced by more than 50%. Even with this
reduction in thermal loading,the mid-water column temperatures throughout the lake were frequently
found in excess of the State's temperature water quality standard (i.e., not to exceed 32 °C)during the
summer months. With a lack of a similar sized, nearby, unheated, reference reservoir to compare
ambient water temperatures,the neighboring Cape Fear River was used for water temperature
comparison. Bimonthly sampling of the Cape Fear River during the same sample period revealed the
river had surface water temperatures greater than 30°C. The shallow,continuously circulating, heated
nature of the lake's water coupled with the perennially hot ambient temperatures of eastern North
Carolina contributed to the lake's elevated water temperatures.
Along with providing cooling water for the adjacent power plant,the lake has provided an additional
run' for eastern North Carolina since construction. Eastern recreational
fishingopportunity t It a North Carolina
PP Y
has ample river and coastal fishing opportunities, but there are few public impoundments available for
fishing,which makes Sutton Lake a great public asset for local anglers. The fishery was not found to be
dominated by pollution tolerant species and had adequate prey species and numbers(e.g.,silversides,
shad, small sunfish). The 26 species of fish collected during the study represented a very diverse species
list, partially due to the proximity of the tidally influenced stretch of the Cape Fear River,that
represented multiple trophic levels within the aquatic food web. Length frequencies and PSD of the RIS
species revealed successful reproduction and recruitment, and the individuals that survived above stock
size had relatively good condition factors(Wr). The sportfish (i.e.,sunfish and catfish)species were all
collected at quality or better size distributions. Despite the thermal effluent, most RIS species were
found throughout the lake in similar abundances regardless of season and have existed in the lake
annually for decades as documented in DEP's long-term monitoring program.
This demonstration found that the lake continues to be well-mixed and oxygenated throughout the
year,with potential for slight thermal stratification during late summer. The well-mixed and oxygenated
characteristic of the lake provides maximum habitat availability for aquatic species inhabiting the lake.
Increased habitat availability increases the carrying capacity of aquatic organisms,which in return can
benefit other invertebrate wildlife that utilize the lake particularly for foraging. Although the lake and
the habitats surrounding the lake have documented threatened and endangered species, none were
found/observed during this demonstration. Sutton Lake has and continues to provide adequate cooling
for the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex without creating a thermal regime that prevents the presence of a
balanced, indigenous fish community.
24

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
6 References
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). 2000. Fishery Management Report No. 36.
Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Eel. 99 pp.
Bodine, K.A., D. E.Shoup,J. Olive,Z. L. Ford, R. Krogman and T.J. Stubbs. 2013. Catfish sampling
techniques:where we are now and where we should go. Fisheries Vol. 38, Issue 12.
Braun, C.E., editor. 2005. Techniques for Wildlife Investigations and Management. Sixth edition. The
Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Clarke, K.R., R. N.Gorley, P.J. Somerfield,and R. M. Warwick. 2014. Changes in marine communities:
an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. 3rd Edition. Primer-E: Plymouth, New
Zealand.
Coutant, C. C. 2013. Considerations and requirements for biological determinations related to thermal
discharges.Special report NO. 13-02, National Council for Air and Stream Improvement.August
2013.
CP&L. 1982. L.V.Sutton Steam Electric Plant Environmental Monitoring Program 1977-1981. Carolina
Power& Light Company, New Hill, NC. 167pp.
. 1984. L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant 1982 Environmental Monitoring Report. Carolina Power&
Light Company, New Hill, NC. 179pp.
. 1984. L.V.Sutton Steam Electric Plant 1983 Annual Environmental Monitoring Report. Carolina
Power& Light Company, New Hill, NC. 168pp.
. 1985. L.V.Sutton Steam Electric Plant 1984 Annual Environmental Monitoring Report. Carolina
Power& Light Company, New Hill, NC. 101pp.
. 1986. L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant 1985 Annual Environmental Monitoring Report. Carolina
Power&Light Company, New Hill, NC. 74pp.
. 1987. L.V.Sutton Steam Electric Plant 1986 Annual Environmental Monitoring Report. Carolina
Power& Light Company, New Hill, NC. 42pp.
. 1989. L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant 1987Annual Environmental Monitoring Report. Carolina
Power& Light Company, New Hill, NC. 6Opp.
. 1990. L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant 1988 Annual Environmental Monitoring Report. Carolina
Power& Light Company, New Hill, NC. 56pp.
. 1996. Assessment of Potential Biological Impact Associated with Revised Discharge Temperature
Limits. H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant.Volume 4. Carolina Power& Light Company, New
Hill, NC. 33pp.
Duke Energy Progress. 2017. Plan of Study for Conducting an Initial 316(a) Demonstration: L.V. Sutton
Energy Complex, November 2017. Duke Energy Progress, INC. Raleigh, NC. 13pp.
25

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
. 2020. L. V. Sutton Energy Complex 2013-2017 Environmental Monitoring Report. Water
Resources. Duke Energy Progress, INC. Raleigh, NC. 74pp.
Froese, R. and D. Pauly. 2019. FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. www.fishbase.org.
version (12/2019).
Haag, W. R. 2012. North American freshwater mussels: natural history, ecology, and conservation.
Cambridge University Press. 505 pp.
Heyer, W. R., M. Donnelly, R. McDiarmid, L.Hayek,and M. Foster, editors. 1994. Measuring and
Monitoring Biological Diversity. 1994. Standards Methods for Amphibians. Smithsonian
Institution Press. Washington and London.
Iglesias, C., E.Jeppesen, N. Maxxeo,J. P. Pacheo, F.T. Mellow, F. Landkildehus, C. Fosalaba,J. M.
Clemente, and M. Meerhoff. 2017. Fish but not Macroinvertebrates Promote Trophic
Cascading Effects in High Density Submersed Plant Experimental Lake Food Webs in Two
Contrasting Climate Regions. MDPI.Water. 17pp.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. 2019. North Carolina 15A NCAC 02B Water
Quality Standards for Surface Waters. http://deq.nc.gov/docments/nc-stdstable-06102019.
Accessed September 29, 2020.
. 2020. DWR Surface Water Classification Map. http://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com. Accessed
September 29, 2020.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources. 2013. Standard Operating Procedure Biological
Monitoring. Stream fish community assessment program. Biological Assessment Unit.
December 2013. North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Resources, Environmental Sciences Section. December 01, 2013. 52 pp.
NCWRC. 2018. Long-term Assessment and Adaptive Management of Sutton Lake Largemouth Bass.
Fisheries Research Fact Sheet. Inland Fisheries Division. www.ncwildlife.org. 2pp.
NOAA. 2020. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce. Species
Diversity ESA Threatened and Endangered. www.fisheries.noa.gov. accessed September 21,
2020.
Quinn,S. P. 1988. Effectiveness of an electrofishing system for collecting flathead catfish. Proceedings
of the Annual Conference Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies,40(1986):85-
91.
Rachels, R.T., K.W. Ashley. 2002. Comparison of 3 Electrofishing Gear Types Used to Capture Catfish.
Tracey, B. H., F. C. Rohde, and G. M. Hogue. 2020. An Annotated Atlas of the Freshwater Fishes of
North Carolina. Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings: No. 60. Available at:
https://trace.tennessee.edu/sfcproceedings/volt/iss60/1.
USEPA. 1977. Interagency 316(a)technical guidance manual and guide for thermal effects sections of
nuclear facilities environmental impact statements. Washington, DC: United States
26

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Environmental Protection Agency.
USFWS. 2014. Endangered Species,Threatened Species, Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate
Species. New Hanover County, North Carolina. Raleigh Ecological Field Office. NC
USGS. 2015. Lake and Reservoirs: Guidelines for Study Design and Sampling. Chapter 10 of Section A,
National Field Manual for the Collection of Water Quality Data. Book 9, Handbook for Water-
Resources Investigations. 57pp.
Wetzel, Robert G. 2001. Limnology Lake and River Ecosystems. Third Edition. Academic Press,An
Imprint of Elsevier. 525 B Street,Suite 1900,San Diego, CA 92101-4495, USA.
Wilson, Don, F. Russell Cole,James Nichols, Rasanayagam Rudran, and Mercedes Foster, editors. 1996.
Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity. Standards Methods for Mammals. Smithsonian
Institution Press. Washington and London.
Zale, A.V., D.L. Parrish, and T.M. Sutton, editors. 2012. Fisheries techniques,third edition American
Fisheries Society. Bethesda, MD.
27

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix A
L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 316(a) Demonstration Study Plan, 2018-2019.
PROGRAM FREQUENCY LOCATION
Water quality Alternate calendar months Station H-1 (surface to bottom at
(January, March, May,July, 1-m intervals)
September, November)
Water chemistry Alternate calendar months Station H-1
(January, March, May,July,
September, November)
Habitat survey,including Once during summer months Whole lake
habitat formers
Mussel survey Once during summer months Areas B, D, F, H
Natural Resources Survey, Once during summer months Areas B, D, F, H
including other vertebrate
wildlife
Fisheries
Electrofishing Once every three calendar Stations B-1, B-3, D-1, D-3, F-1, F-
months (March,June, 3, H-1, H-3
September, December
Special Flathead Catfish Once annually during summer TBD
Study months
Netting/seining Once annually during summer Areas A, C,G
months
Thermal Analysis Once annually during summer Areas A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H
months
28

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix B
Sutton Lake 316(a) Demonstration Study Plan Decision Matrix.
w,e 1-.
ol. onstrate ..: o n
(relevant, absence of (non- literature? impact be of the study
internallextem prior thermal demonstrated
al)data? appreciable and/or using
harm thermal with reference lake
(APAH)? data)lake or literature?
with
available
Phytoplankton Dated Yes(Fish as None Yes No No Narrative
evidence of appropriate
APAH)
Zooplankton Dated Yes(Fish as None Yes No No Narrative
evidence of appropriate
APAH)
Habitat formers Dated NA None Yes No Yes(survey Survey
appropriate type TBD)
Shellfish/Macroinvertebrates Dated Yes None Yes Yes No(Mussel Narrative
Appropriate survey needed- macroinvertebrate;
see T/E) Mussel survey
Fish Yes Yes None Yes No Yes Study
appropriate
Other vertebrate wildlife No Yes None Yes Yes No(Continue Observations
a y•ro.riate observations
Temperature analysis Simple temperature data loggers deployed from near the discharge(Area H)to the Intake(Area A)
Migration barriers,thermal
traps,exclusion zones Lake configuration/Bathymetry/Lake Temperature Analysis
Threatened and endangered
species Survey/Observations/Literature survey
29

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix C
Sutton Lake water quality and water chemistry monitoring variables.
Temperature Specific Conductance
pH Secchi disk transparency
Dissolved oxygen
TOTAL ALKALINITY NUTRIENTS TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
TOTAL HARDNESS Total phosphorus TURBIDITY
IONS Total nitrogen TRACE ELEMENTS(TOTAL)
Chloride Nitrate-Nitrite Lower reporting limits in
parentheses
Sulfate Ammonia
Arsenic(0.5 µg/L)
Calcium Total organic carbon
Copper(0.5 µg/L)
Magnesium
Mercury(0.5 ng/L)
Sodium
Selenium (0.5 µg/L)
30

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix D
Bimonthly depth profiles of water temperature (°C), pH, dissolved oxygen (mg/L),specific conductance
(µS/cm), and Secchi depth (m) at Sutton Lake 2018 and 2019.
January 18, 2018
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 10.6 7.8 11.6 266 2.5
1 10.3 7.8 11.6 266
2 10.1 7.8 11.6 266
3 10.0 7.8 11.6 266
4 9.9 7.7 11.5 266
5 9.8 7.6 11.4 266
March 6, 2018
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
pH
(m) (°C) (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 16.6 7.6 9.9 270 2.4
1 16.6 7.6 9.9 270
2 16.6 7.6 9.9 270
3 16.0 7.6 9.9 270
4 14.9 7.4 9.6 270
5 14.8 7.5 9.7 270
May 15, 2018
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 28.3 7.8 7.7 246.5 2.2
1 28.1 7.7 7.7 247.5
2 27.8 7.7 7.4 245.5
3 27.6 7.7 7.2 247.5
4 27.1 7.5 6.4 246.5
July 17, 2018
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 32.0 7.4 6.5 220 3.0
1 32.1 7.4 6.5 219
2 32.1 7.4 6.5 219
3 32.0 7.4 6.5 219
4 31.6 7.2 5.5 219
5 31.3 7.0 5.1 218
31

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix D. (continued)
September 29, 2018
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 29.0 5.1 3.8 51 0.8
1 28.9 5.1 3.8 51
2 27.4 5.1 2.9 52
3 26.8 5.0 2.4 53
4 26.5 5.0 1.1 54
5 26.4 5.1 1.2 54
November 14, 2018
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 16.1 6.9 9.5 75 1.0
1 16.1 6.9 9.4 75
2 16.1 6.9 9.3 75
3 16.1 6.9 9.3 76
4 16.1 6.9 9.3 75
January 16, 2019
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 12.1 7.5 10.9 94 1.0
1 11.1 7.5 10.9 94
2 10.7 7.5 10.9 94
3 10.6 7.6 10.9 94
4 10.6 7.6 10.9 94
5 10.6 7.7 10.9 94
March 19, 2019
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 17.5 7.1 9.4 111 1.5
1 17.5 7.2 9.4 111
2 17.5 7.2 9.4 111
3 17.5 7.1 9.4 111
4 17.5 7.2 9.4 111
5 17.5 7.3 9.4 111
32

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix D. (continued)
May 16, 2019
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 25.5 7.4 7.1 113 2.8
1 25.4 7.5 7.0 113
2 25.3 7.5 6.9 113
3 25.3 7.6 7.0 113
4 25.3 7.7 7.0 113
July 25, 2019
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 30.5 7.4 6.8 155 3.0
1 30.5 7.5 6.8 155
2 30.5 7.5 6.8 155
3 30.5 7.5 6.8 155
4 30.5 7.5 6.8 155
September 23, 2019
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (uS/cm) (m)
0.2 31.3 9.0 9.5 164 1.0
1 30.0 8.9 9.2 164
2 27.5 8.1 8.2 161
3 27.3 7.3 6.9 161
4 26.5 6.9 4.4 162
5 26.5 7.1 4.6 162
November 11, 2019
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Secchi Depth
(m) (°C) pH (mg/L) (u5/cm) (m)
0.2 17.2 7.2 8.5 274 2.5
1 17.1 7.1 8.4 274
2 16.5 7.2 8.2 274
3 16.3 7.2 7.9 273
4 16.3 7.1 7.6 273
5 16.3 7.2 7.6 273
33

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix E
Water quality data collected during each fisheries survey.
Temperature Conductivity DO
Date (°C) pH (µS/cm) (mg/L)
2018-03-05 15.0 7.7 256 10.3
2018-03-06 16.6 7.8 260 9.8
2018-03-07 15.6 7.8 258 10.3
2018-06-18 31.3 7.5 219 5.0
2018-06-19 33.2 7.3 223 5.2
2018-06-20 32.6 7.0 220 6.4
2018-06-21 32.2 7.2 220 5.4
2018-07-16 31.9 NA 217 6.8
2018-09-27 27.5 5.8 46 0.4
2018-09-28 27.0 6.2 51 1.8
2018-12-05 12.4 7.3 84 9.9
2018-12-06 11.3 7.2 81 10.6
2019-03-19 16.9 6.9 110 9.5
2019-03-20 16.9 7.2 112 9.8
2019-06-18 30.5 7.3 127 7.4
2019-06-19 30.5 7.1 127 6.4
2019-08-26 28.0 7.3 163 6.3
2019-08-27 29.4 7.3 162 5.6
2019-09-25 28.5 8.7 163 9.0
2019-12-02 15.1 7.4 270 9.3
34

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix F
Annual mean and range of the bimonthly water chemistry and water quality variables collected
throughout the demonstration. Variables are in mg/L except where noted.
Water Chemistry Variables 2018 Mean(Range) 2019 Mean(Range)
Total Alkalinity 22.6 (8.4-33.5) 16.7 (11.4-20.1)
Ammonia 0.04 (0.01-0.14) 0.02 (0.01-0.04)
Arsenic(µg/L) 3.6 (1.7-6.2) 3.4 (2.0-5.5)
Calcium 6.3 (3.1-9.2) 5.9 (3.7-8.3)
Chlorophyll A 4.3 (0.3-10.2) 2.5 (0.0-10.5)
Total Organic Carbon 10.7 (7.0-21.0) 9.1 (6.3-11.5)
Chloride 29.1 (4.5-50.7) 21.5 (7.2-52.1)
Copper(µg/L) 7.4 (2.9-21.2) 5.5 (3.6-7.7)
Turbidity 1.9 (0.9-2.7) 2.3 (1.1-5.6)
Magnesium 3.1 (1.0-4.4) 2.8 (1.8-4.7)
Mercury(µg/L) 1.9 (0.5-7.1) 3.4 (1.0-12.6)
Nitrite+Nitrate 0.1 (0.02-0.37) 0.14 (0.04-0.39)
Total Nitrogen 0.5 (0.2-1.0) 0.7 (0.4-0.9)
Total Phosphorus 0.06 (0.02-0.15) 0.04 (0.02-0.06)
Selenium(µg/L) 1.1 (0.5-1.7) 1.3 (1.1-1.5)
Sodium 21.4 (5.0-34.6) 15.3 (5.0-37.7)
Sulfate 18.3 (3.3-26.1) 15.9 (10.5-24.7)
Total Dissolved Solids 70 (69-70) 100 (70-170)
Total Hardness 28.2 (12.6-36.5) 13.3 (0.0-34.3)
Water Quality Variables 2018 Mean(Range) 2019 Mean(Range)
Conductivity 190 (51-270) 153 (94-274)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 7.7 (1.1-11.6) 8.3 (4.4-10.9)
Dissolved Oxygen (%Sat) 83.6 (14.4-104.5) 91.2 (55.5-129.1)
pH(su) 7.0 (5.0-7.8) 7.5 (6.9-9.0)
Secchi Depth 2.0 (0.8-3.0) 1.5 (1.0-2.5)
Water Temperature (°C) 21.5 (9.8-32.1) 21.1 (10.6-31.3)
35

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix G
Length frequency distributions of RIS species collected each year of the demonstration. Vertical bars
correspond to the percent of each RIS individuals collected annually within a 10 mm length bins.
2018 American Eel(n=7) 2019 American Eel(n=9)
14 14 1
12 - 12 -
10 - 10 -
c 8 0 8 -
:I.; C
V
1 6 - 6
4 - 4 -
2 - 2 -
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
Length(mm) Length(mm)
2018 Bluegill(n=2744) 2019 Bluegill(n=1319)
10 10 -
8illiiiiim
8 -i
c 6 c 6 LU11iIIIIIII1IIL.I.IIL
ru
a ti 4 a 4
rn„ 0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Length(mm)
Length(mm)
2018 Gizzard Shad(n=36) 2019 Gizzard Shad(n=63)
ao - 40 1
35 - 35
l
30 - 30
a` 25 - a, 25 -,
4° 20 - iu 20 -I
u
a 15 - a 15 1
10 - 10 -
5 I 5
I i
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 3 0 400 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Length(mm) Length(mm)
36

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix G. (continued)
2018 Flathead Catfish(n=25) 2019 Flathead Catfish(n=36)
12 12 -
10 10 -
8 8 -
X at
d 6 0 6 -
a 4 Z 4 -
2 2 III illil II I I II II
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
length(mm) Length(mm)
2018 Largemouth Bass(n=441) 2019 Largemouth Bass(n=687)
8 - 8 -
7 - 7 -
I3
2 - 2
1 - 1
I- 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
Length(mm) Length(mm)
2018 Redbreast Sunfish(n=47) 2019 Redbreast Sunfish(n=59)
16 -join 16 -
14 14 -
12 12 -
X i0 X 10 -
8 0 8 -
I 6 a' 6 -
4 4 -
2 2 -
0 -1,
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175
Length(mm) Length(mm)
37

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix G. (continued)
2018 Redear Sunfish(n=110) 2019 Redear Sunfish(n=266)
8 - 81
7 -
6 - 6 -
X 5 II X 5 -
a 4 - it: 4 -
a' 3 - n 3 -
2 - 2 -
1 - 0
0 25 50 75 100125150175200225250275300 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300
Length(mm) Length(mm)
2018 Warmouth(n=139) 2019 Warmouth(n=88)
12 - ILL 12
10 - 30 JiltF 8 - 78 6 - E 6V. mn 4 - c 4
2 - 2
o l —,-, , 0 ■ II I II
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175
Length(mm) Length(mm)
38

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix H
Individual relative weights of RIS Species large enough to calculate a Wr. The horizontal line represents
the average Wr of the individuals represented.
American Eel(n=16) Bluegill(n=802)
140 - 130
130 -
120 . 120
110 - 110
100 • 100
3 90 - _ 90
80 ' 80 ,..�.. .. .
60- 60-
e
50- 50-
40 40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 0 200 400 600 800
Number collected Number collected
Flathead Catfish(n=61) Gizzard Shad(n=89)
110 - 130
100 - °
120 -
110 -
90 -
a
80- .,_0, 0 .. °e>, a° ' 40_ ,o0 0 a.�^•'0
90-
3 70 -. 0 0 ° o
60 - 000 o eu w 3 80
o ° ° 00 0 70 -
60 -
50 - 50.
40 40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 10 19 28 37 46 55 64 73 82
Number collected Number collected
Largemouth Bass(n=512) Redbreast Sunfish(n=84)
130 140 -
120 130 -
120 - ,
110 `� %O0 030 od o 0 110J ,
190 0. °o 'p" *,, d' ° <n ne .y4. . r .^ 100 -' :v o'z„S,00 n `O ,-„ ° ,.
80
m
60 60 -
50 50-
40 40
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 20 40 60 80
Number collected Number collected
Redear Sunfish(n=263) Warmouth(n=80)
120 120
r,
110 110 -
;a 4,J,
100 % 0 .. 100 . - °
3
90 c., • c o 'au .. 90 �", `+�i a
0c
50 ,> 50
40 40
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 20 40 60 80
Number collected Number collected
39

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix I
Proportional size distribution (PSD)of RIS species collected during the demonstration. Vertical bars
correspond to the number of fish collected within each PSD category. Only RIS species with
corresponding PSD indices are illustrated below.
Bluegill PSD Flathead Catfish PSD
50 67 30 28
45.
40• 25
Bi 35" 20•
30'
0 0
25• " 15•
20- E 11 11
=IS' = 10
6
10- 5
5• 1 2
0 •
P50 Stock PSD Quality PSD Stock PSD Quality PSD Preferred POD Memorable PSD Trophy
Largemouth Bass PSD Redear Sunfish PSD
180 180
159 156
160 160-
140• 1L^° 140•
120•
0 ice 2 120•
lOD 84 p 100•
80 72 g 80•
60• § 60-
Z 2
40- 40
19
20 9 20 1 1 3
0. 0 .._,....
'
PSD Stock PSI)Quality PSD Preferred PSO Memorable PSD Trophy PS0 Stock PSD Quality PSD Preferred PSD Memorable
Warmouth PSD
so-
78
80•
70-
&60.
o SO'
1 40•
30
Z
20
10-
1
0
PSI)Stock PSI)Quality
40

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Appendix J
Graphs 1 through 4 of the Bray-Curtis similarities and non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis
generated using Primer-E version 7.
Graph 1: Distribution of all fish species collected per station separated by year in relation to water
temperature.
iTransform:Square root
Res.mbtanea:S17 Bray-Curt s s ar ryt
Temperature (C) 2D Stress:0.16 Year
12 • 18
20 1 •19
30
32 • • •
34 - 11)
= •
) , 0,
n
rvr
Graph 2: Sixty and 80 percent similarity of the seasonal distribution of all fish species collected during
the two-year study.
iTra-storm.Square root
Easernbtenu:S17 Bray-Curtis se tare)
20 Stress:0.16 Similarity
_ - 801
Month
•3
n' ♦ 6
r �' .9
18 A
♦ 12
Di xty Yi 1 �[l
ij9
F``3 rs�e� � r
'Fs
H w p)
A xa
{t F3 yx1
1 * i � .
x)
1
41

L.V.Sutton Energy Complex L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2018-2019 Initial 316(a)Report
Graph 3:Sixty and 80 percent similarity of RIS species collected during June and September at all sample
locations by year.
.7,anstorm Square root
Rrser0tance St 7 Brai.Cudts se aartj
2D Stress 0 15 I $Imdarity
F1-79 60
Cr I- .. . 80
F3-18 Month
83-19 �' IF6
48) (S 9
H1-19
:1♦)
H3 19 D3-19 93-18
"a - =
'B1-19
-�18
.H1-18
D3-1 8
DLt9 _H319 ! 18 ti
(�ems `- B `r �)
i F3-19' - ia
tA�13-181- 9 �'i)(!) --__ _t a8'. 3-18 01-19 H1-.1P-_ ' ; , ',
(r) t•
81-18
Ht•18
F319 *D8 i) •i F1-18
(r) F, )
Graph 4: Sixty and 80 percent similarity of only the RIS sunfish species collected June and September
each year in relation to surface water temperature.
Tiersrorm Sware toot
�eserxtance S17 3ar Ortn smtarey J
temperature(C) 26 Stress 0 13 Similarity
67 26 d -- -.__ 60
80
€�. :1 30
Month
•6
.8 1113 •9
•
" ,,l ilitir
iiiio
42

ATTACHMENT 2
Outfall 008 DS and Outfall 008 Effluent Channel
Temperatures

Sutton Outfall 008 Downstream Buoy
Ave 35.4 Ave 36.0 Ave 35.0
Max 38.0 Max 42.8 Max 37.9
Min 33.2 Min 32.6 Min 28.0
Date Daily Max Temp Date Daily Max Temp Date Daily Max Temp
2018 Celcius 2019 Celcius 2020 Celsius
6/1/2018 34.5 6/1/2019 37.5 6/1/2020 33.1
6/2/2018 36.0 6/2/2019 36.3 6/2/2020 32.6
6/3/2018 36.1 6/3/2019 38.5 6/3/2020 32.6
6/4/2018 36.3 6/4/2019 40.0 6/4/2020 32.3
6/5/2018 36.6 6/5/2019 42.8 6/5/2020 32.1
6/6/2018 36.3 6/6/2019 40.0 6/6/2020 33.9
6/7/2018 35.4 6/7/2019 38.9 6/7/2020 34.6
6/8/2018 35.2 6/8/2019 38.0 6/8/2020 33.9
6/9/2018 35.0 6/9/2019 39.1 6/9/2020 33.5
6/10/2018 34.8 6/10/2019 37.6 6/10/2020 33.5
6/11/2018 35.7 6/11/2019 33.4 6/11/2020 33.3
6/12/2018 35.4 6/12/2019 32.6 6/12/2020 31.8
6/13/2018 34.8 6/13/2019 34.7 6/13/2020 32.0
6/14/2018 34.5 6/14/2019 6/14/2020 31.4
6/15/2018 34.0 6/15/2019 6/15/2020 30.8
6/16/2018 34.4 6/16/2019 6/16/2020 29.1
6/17/2018 34.6 6/17/2019 6/17/2020 28.6
6/18/2018 36.1 6/18/2019 6/18/2020 28.0
6/19/2018 36.6 6/19/2019 6/19/2020 29.6
6/20/2018 36.4 6/20/2019 v 6/20/2020 30.8
u
6/21/2018 37.2 6/21/2019 6/21/2020 31.7
cu
6/22/2018 36.9 6/22/2019 6/22/2020 33.5
o
6/23/2018 36.6 6/23/2019 6/23/2020 33.6
6/24/2018 37.0 6/24/2019 0 6/24/2020 33.8
6/25/2018 36.9 6/25/2019 g 6/25/2020 33.9
6/26/2018 36.2 6/26/2019 CO 6/26/2020 34.8
6/27/2018 35.1 6/27/2019 6/27/2020 36.1
6/28/2018 36.2 6/28/2019 6/28/2020 36.4
6/29/2018 35.5 6/29/2019 6/29/2020 36.6
6/30/2018 35.7 6/30/2019 6/30/2020 35.8
7/1/2018 36.5 7/1/2019 7/1/2020 34.7
7/2/2018 37.2 7/2/2019 7/2/2020 35.9
7/3/2018 38.0 7/3/2019 35.8 7/3/2020 35.9
7/4/2018 37.6 7/4/2019 36.3 7/4/2020 36.5
7/5/2018 37.8 7/5/2019 35.9 7/5/2020 36.8
7/6/2018 37.3 7/6/2019 35.7 7/6/2020 36.9
7/7/2018 37.7 7/7/2019 35.2 7/7/2020 36.3
7/8/2018 36.7 7/8/2019 36.5 7/8/2020 35.6
7/9/2018 34.9 7/9/2019 35.5 7/9/2020 35.6
7/10/2018 34.9 7/10/2019 35.2 7/10/2020 35.6
7/11/2018 33.6 7/11/2019 35.2 7/11/2020 36.0
7/12/2018 35.6 7/12/2019 36.0 7/12/2020 35.5

7/13/2018 35.4 7/13/2019 35.6 7/13/2020 36.1
7/14/2018 35.4 7/14/2019 35.4 7/14/2020 36.7
7/15/2018 35.8 7/15/2019 34.9 7/15/2020 36.3
7/16/2018 35.4 7/16/2019 35.5 7/16/2020 36.6
7/17/2018 35.8 7/17/2019 36.5 7/17/2020 36.9
7/18/2018 35.4 7/18/2019 37.2 7/18/2020 37.7
7/19/2018 35.2 7/19/2019 36.7 7/19/2020 37.9
7/20/2018 35.1 7/20/2019 36.9 7/20/2020 37.8
7/21/2018 34.4 7/21/2019 37.0 7/21/2020 37.1
7/22/2018 33.8 7/22/2019 36.7 7/22/2020 37.8
7/23/2018 33.6 7/23/2019 37.1 7/23/2020 37.7
7/24/2018 33.5 7/24/2019 36.7 7/24/2020 37.5
7/25/2018 33.4 7/25/2019 34.7 7/25/2020 37.3
7/26/2018 33.5 7/26/2019 34.0 7/26/2020 36.7
7/27/2018 33.4 7/27/2019 34.4 7/27/2020 37.9
7/28/2018 33.8 7/28/2019 34.8 7/28/2020 37.3
7/29/2018 33.9 7/29/2019 34.4 7/29/2020 36.5
7/30/2018 33.4 7/30/2019 34.3 7/30/2020 36.1
7/31/2018 33.2 7/31/2019 34.6 7/31/2020 36.6
8/1/2018 33.6 8/1/2019 36.4 8/1/2020 36.4
8/2/2018 34.0 8/2/2019 35.3 8/2/2020 34.9
8/3/2018 34.1 8/3/2019 34.7 8/3/2020 34.9
8/4/2018 33.8 8/4/2019 34.7 8/4/2020 35.1
8/5/2018 34.4 8/5/2019 34.7 8/5/2020 34.0
8/6/2018 34.7 8/6/2019 34.9 8/6/2020 34.1
8/7/2018 35.2 8/7/2019 35.2 8/7/2020 34.7
8/8/2018 36.3 8/8/2019 36.1 8/8/2020 35.1
8/9/2018 37.2 8/9/2019 37.5 8/9/2020 35.7
8/10/2018 36.7 8/10/2019 37.5 8/10/2020 35.9
8/11/2018 36.8 8/11/2019 36.9 8/11/2020 36.4
8/12/2018 36.0 8/12/2019 36.5 8/12/2020 36.8
8/13/2018 36.3 8/13/2019 35.8 8/13/2020 36.5
8/14/2018 36.0 8/14/2019 36.5 8/14/2020 36.4
8/15/2018 36.0 8/15/2019 36.8 8/15/2020 36.4
8/16/2018 36.2 8/16/2019 35.6 8/16/2020 36.0
8/17/2018 36.3 8/17/2019 35.3 8/17/2020 35.4
8/18/2018 36.7 8/18/2019 35.3 8/18/2020 35.4
8/19/2018 36.1 8/19/2019 34.6 8/19/2020 34.9
8/20/2018 35.4 8/20/2019 35.5 8/20/2020 34.4
8/21/2018 34.7 8/21/2019 35.7 8/21/2020 34.4
8 22 2018 36.2 8 22 2019 36.4 8 22 2020 35.0 I
8/23/2018 35.0 8/23/2019 36.7 8/23/2020 34.8 1
8/24/2018 35.0 8/24/2019 36.5 8/24/2020 34.1
8/25/2018 35.0 8/25/2019 36.3 8/25/2020 35.4
8/26/2018 35.0 8/26/2019 33.7 8/26/2020 36.1
8/27/2018 33.8 8/27/2019 33.8 8/27/2020 35.9
8/28/2018 34.8 8/28/2019 34.2 8/28/2020 35.5
8/29/2018 35.5 8/29/2019 34.3 8/29/2020 36.0
8/30/2018 35.1 8/30/2019 33.6 8/30/2020 35.8
8/31/2018 35.0 8/31/2019 34.2 8/31/2020 35.5

Sutton Outfall 008 Grab Temperature Samples
Data Range 7/2/2018 - 12/31/2020
Max I 40.5
Date Celcius Date Celcius Date Celcius
7/2/2018 40.2 1/2/2019 23.9 1/2/2020 26.4
7/3/2018 37.8 1/3/2019 25.6 1/3/2020 23.2
7/5/2018 36.9 1/4/2019 26.4 1/6/2020 26.5
7/5/2018 36.9 1/7/2019 27.4 1/7/2020 26.8
7/6/2018 38.3 1/8/2019 30.1 1/8/2020 21.4
7/9/2018 32.7 1/9/2019 21.7 1/9/2020 22.8
7/10/2018 32.6 1/10/2019 25.9 1/10/2020 27.7
7/11/2018 30.7 1/11/2019 21.5 1/13/2020 30.1
7/12/2018 36 1/14/2019 22.1 1/14/2020 27.8
7/13/2018 35.1 1/15/2019 29.1 1/15/2020 28.4
7/16/2018 37 1/16/2019 22.8 1/16/2020 27.5
7/17/2018 36.5 1/17/2019 22.6 1/17/2020 27.7
7/18/2018 36.4 1/18/2019 20.3 1/20/2020 23.2
7/19/2018 34 1/21/2019 20.4 1/21/2020 22.2
7/20/2018 36 1/22/2019 19.9 1/22/2020 20
7/23/2018 35.2 1/23/2019 18.7 1/23/2020 23.5
7/24/2018 33.9 1/24/2019 19.2 1/24/2020 20.1
7/25/2018 33.8 1/25/2019 24.6 1/27/2020 24.5
7/26/2018 35 1/28/2019 21.6 1/28/2020 20.4
7/27/2018 35.5 1/29/2019 21 1/29/2020 25.4
7/30/2018 35 1/30/2019 23.2 1/30/2020 20.9
7/31/2018 35 1/31/2019 21.9 1/31/2020 26.2
8/1/2018 35 2/1/2019 19.9 2/3/2020 22.4
8/2/2018 36.1 2/4/2019 21.9 2/4/2020 26.4
8/3/2018 35.5 2/5/2019 19.9 2/5/2020 26.2
8/6/2018 35.9 2/6/2019 21.1 2/6/2020 25.7
8/7/2018 36.8 2/7/2019 23.8 2/7/2020 27.2
8/8/2018 35.5 2/8/2019 24.9 2/10/2020 26.4
8/8/2018 21.8 2/11/2019 23.6 2/11/2020 30.2
8/9/2018 36.1 2/12/2019 24.1 2/12/2020 27.1
8/10/2018 35.8 2/13/2019 27.8 2/13/2020 30.2
8/13/2018 37.6 2/14/2019 24.6 2/14/2020 32.2
8/14/2018 35 2/15/2019 23.8 2/17/2020 30
8/15/2018 35.7 2/18/2019 22.2 2/18/2020 29
8/16/2018 36.1 2/19/2019 24.3 2/19/2020 27.2
8/17/2018 35.7 2/20/2019 22.7 2/20/2020 26.3
8/20/2018 36.3 2/21/2019 20.2 2/21/2020 23.6
8/21/2018 34.6 2/22/2019 23.5 2/24/2020 25.5
8/22/2018 34.4 2/25/2019 24.1 2/25/2020 24.3
8/23/2018 33.5 2/26/2019 24.7 2/26/2020 28.1
8/24/2018 32.9 2/27/2019 24.9 2/27/2020 27.8
8/27/2018 33.8 2/28/2019 26.1 2/28/2020 24.3
8/28/2018 35.9 3/1/2019 24 3/2/2020 24.1
8/29/2018 36.2 3/4/2019 27.7 3/3/2020 21.7

Date Celcius Date Celcius Date Celcius
8/30/2018 34.8 3/5/2019 23.1 3/4/2020 23.1
8/31/2018 32.8 3/6/2019 19 3/5/2020 26.2
9/4/2018 34.7 3/6/2019 19 3/6/2020 22.2
9/5/2018 37.2 3/7/2019 24 3/9/2020 25
9/6/2018 34.8 3/8/2019 23.6 3/10/2020 29.2
9/7/2018 33.7 3/11/2019 28.7 3/11/2020 30.4
9/10/2018 35 3/12/2019 25.8 3/12/2020 31.2
9/11/2018 34.2 3/13/2019 25.2 3/13/2020 31.2
9/12/2018 29.5 3/14/2019 26.1 3/16/2020 29.1
9/27/2018 32 3/15/2019 23.5 3/17/2020 30.8
9/28/2018 29.5 3/18/2019 23.5 3/18/2020 27.4
10/1/2018 27.9 3/19/2019 21.4 3/19/2020 30.1
10/2/2018 27.3 3/20/2019 22.9 3/20/2020 28.2
10/3/2018 25.5 3/21/2019 20.9 3/23/2020 29.9
10/4/2018 27.8 3/22/2019 20.3 3/24/2020 26.2
10/5/2018 27.1 3/25/2019 24.5 3/25/2020 27.8
10/8/2018 27.5 3/26/2019 22.8 3/26/2020 24.4
10/9/2018 26.7 3/27/2019 22.5 3/27/2020 29.7
10/10/2018 22.4 3/28/2019 17.9 3/30/2020 31.3
10/11/2018 26.6 3/29/2019 21.8 3/31/2020 29.9
10/12/2018 22.4 4/1/2019 23 4/1/2020 26.4
10/15/2018 26.1 4/2/2019 23.2 4/2/2020 30.2
10/16/2018 24.8 4/3/2019 22.5 4/3/2020 28.9
10/17/2018 25.4 4/3/2019 22.5 4/6/2020 28.6
10/18/2018 21.9 4/4/2019 23.8 4/7/2020 29.8
10/19/2018 21.4 4/5/2019 22.1 4/8/2020 30.8
10/22/2018 19.4 4/8/2019 26.2 4/9/2020 29.3
10/23/2018 19.2 4/9/2019 28.2 4/13/2020 23.1
10/24/2018 20.5 4/10/2019 27.8 4/14/2020 21.6
10/25/2018 17.6 4/11/2019 27.8 4/15/2020 17.6
10/26/2018 16.6 4/12/2019 25.7 4/16/2020 20.2
10/29/2018 18.5 4/15/2019 23.6 4/17/2020 18.6
10/30/2018 18 4/16/2019 23.7 4/20/2020 19.7
10/31/2018 15.5 4/17/2019 21.6 4/21/2020 20.1
11/1/2018 18.7 4/18/2019 21.7 4/22/2020 23.4
11/2/2018 20.7 4/22/2019 19.5 4/23/2020 20
11/5/2018 18.6 4/23/2019 20.9 4/24/2020 20
11/6/2018 20.7 4/24/2019 22.6 4/27/2020 20.4
11/7/2018 20.8 4/25/2019 22.2 4/28/2020 22.8
11/8/2018 20.1 4/26/2019 23 4/29/2020 23.7
11/9/2018 18.8 4/29/2019 29.8 4/30/2020 21.9
11/12/2018 15.8 4/30/2019 31.7 5/1/2020 20.7
11/13/2018 17.7 5/1/2019 29.4 5/4/2020 27
11/14/2018 16 5/2/2019 31.8 5/5/2020 26.3
11/15/2018 15.3 5/3/2019 30.6 5/6/2020 27
11/16/2018 12.7 5/6/2019 32.8 5/7/2020 24.9
11/19/2018 15.2 5/7/2019 31.7 5/8/2020 25.9
11/20/2018 15.1 5/8/2019 31.4 5/11/2020 26.8

Date Celcius Date Celcius Date Celcius
11/21/2018 12.9 5/9/2019 33.4 5/12/2020 25
11/26/2018 13.8 5/10/2019 29.4 5/13/2020 26.4
11/27/2018 13.1 5/13/2019 35.7 5/14/2020 28.5
11/28/2018 10.9 5/14/2019 32.9 5/15/2020 27.8
11/29/2018 9.8 5/15/2019 31.2 5/18/2020 28.8
11/30/2018 11.3 5/16/2019 30.6 5/19/2020 29.5
12/3/2018 15.7 5/17/2019 31.7 5/20/2020 28.9
12/4/2018 13.2 5/20/2019 33.2 5/21/2020 26.2
12/5/2018 12.5 5/21/2019 35.1 5/22/2020 25.2
12/6/2018 11.2 5/22/2019 33.4 5/26/2020 30.1
12/7/2018 11 5/23/2019 30.9 5/27/2020 33
12/10/2018 11.5 5/24/2019 30.9 5/28/2020 32.2
12/11/2018 9.1 5/28/2019 38.3 5/29/2020 33.6
12/12/2018 16 5/29/2019 34.3 6/1/2020 32.1
12/13/2018 21.6 5/30/2019 37.8 6/2/2020 31.2
12/14/2018 20.9 5/31/2019 34 6/3/2020 34.3
12/17/2018 21 6/3/2019 35.4 6/4/2020 30.9
12/18/2018 22.7 6/4/2019 32.7 6/5/2020 31.3
12/19/2018 22.7 6/5/2019 33.5 6/8/2020 33.5
12/20/2018 18.5 6/6/2019 35 6/9/2020 35
12/21/2018 21.2 6/7/2019 33.7 6/10/2020 33.7
12/26/2018 22.8 6/10/2019 33.2 6/11/2020 34.4
12/27/2018 20.2 6/11/2019 32.2 6/12/2020 31.4
12/28/2018 24.3 6/12/2019 29.7 6/15/2020 25.6
12/31/2018 22.2 6/12/2019 29.7 6/16/2020 26.2
6/13/2019 32 6/17/2020 28.3
6/14/2019 32.1 6/18/2020 28.3
6/17/2019 33.6 6/19/2020 29.3
6/18/2019 31.2 6/22/2020 33.1
6/19/2019 33.5 6/23/2020 31.7
6/20/2019 37.5 6/24/2020 33.3
6/21/2019 36.1 6/25/2020 32.5
6/24/2019 38.5 6/26/2020 32.5
6/25/2019 35.2 6/29/2020 37.1
6/26/2019 34.9 6/30/2020 35.4
6/27/2019 36.8 7/1/2020 34.4
6/28/2019 38.3 7/2/2020 34.7
7/1/2019 38.8 7/6/2020 37.5
7/2/2019 38.6 7/7/2020 36.7
7/3/2019 35.6 7/8/2020 34.9
7/5/2019 34.9 7/9/2020 35
7/8/2019 28.8 7/10/2020 35.9
7/9/2019 36 7/13/2020 36.6
7/10/2019 29 7/14/2020 37.4
7/10/2019 29 7/15/2020 36.4
7/11/2019 36.5 7/16/2020 36.4
7/12/2019 37.5 7/17/2020 36.5
7/15/2019 37.1 7/20/2020 37.1

Date Celcius Date Celcius Date Celcius
7/16/2019 37.6 7/21/2020 37.3
7/17/2019 38.5 7/22/2020 36.4
7/18/2019 37.8 7/23/2020 37
7/19/2019 35 7/24/2020 36.9
7/22/2019 40.5 7/27/2020 39.5
7/23/2019 39.1 7/28/2020 36.7
7/24/2019 37.6 7/29/2020 35.6
7/25/2019 37.1 7/30/2020 37
7/26/2019 33 7/31/2020 35.6
7/29/2019 35.5 8/3/2020 36.3
7/30/2019 35.7 8/4/2020 35.5
7/31/2019 34.7 8/5/2020 34.7
8/1/2019 39.8 8/6/2020 35.1
8/2/2019 35.5 8/7/2020 34
8/5/2019 37.6 8/10/2020 37.7
8/6/2019 36.6 8/11/2020 35.4
8/7/2019 34.6 8/12/2020 36.5
8/8/2019 34.3 8/13/2020 36.1
8/9/2019 39 8/14/2020 35.3
8/12/2019 37.7 8/17/2020 34.6
8/13/2019 37.1 8/18/2020 35.6
8/14/2019 37.8 8/19/2020 33.9
8/15/2019 39 8/20/2020 36.4
8/16/2019 34.7 8/21/2020 34.3
8/19/2019 38 8/24/2020 35.4
8/19/2019 38 8/25/2020 36.4
8/20/2019 36 8/26/2020 35.4
8/20/2019 36 8/27/2020 34.9
8/21/2019 36.1 8/28/2020 34.6
8/22/2019 36.5 8/31/2020 36.5
8/23/2019 33.6 9/1/2020 36.5
8/26/2019 35 9/2/2020 38
8/27/2019 33.2 9/3/2020 36.1
8/28/2019 35.7 9/4/2020 36.6
8/29/2019 35.5 9/8/2020 28
8/30/2019 34 9/9/2020 27
9/3/2019 28.8 9/10/2020 28.9
9/4/2019 28.3 9/11/2020 28
9/6/2019 25.6 9/14/2020 27
9/9/2019 33.1 9/15/2020 26.2
9/10/2019 36.1 9/16/2020 25.6
9/11/2019 33.7 9/17/2020 24.8
9/12/2019 34.1 9/18/2020 24.8
9/13/2019 36.1 9/21/2020 20.6
9/16/2019 34.6 9/22/2020 20.6
9/17/2019 35.7 9/23/2020 20
9/18/2019 32.3 9/24/2020 30.4
9/19/2019 31.5 9/25/2020 30.1

Date Celcius Date Celcius Date Celcius
9/20/2019 31.1 9/28/2020 32.1
9/23/2019 31.2 9/29/2020 38.4
9/24/2019 32.7 9/30/2020 31.3
9/25/2019 33 10/1/2020 33.2
9/26/2019 34.5 10/2/2020 30.2
9/27/2019 34.1 10/5/2020 26
9/30/2019 37.5 10/6/2020 30.5
10/1/2019 34 10/7/2020 30.1
10/2/2019 33.8 10/8/2020 30.1
10/2/2019 33.8 10/9/2020 33.1
10/3/2019 37.2 10/12/2020 34.7
10/4/2019 34.6 10/13/2020 34.9
10/7/2019 33.7 10/14/2020 33.9
10/8/2019 23.5 10/15/2020 32.6
10/9/2019 28.1 10/16/2020 36.6
10/10/2019 28.3 10/19/2020 33.5
10/11/2019 28.9 10/20/2020 33.6
10/14/2019 30.1 10/21/2020 35.3
10/15/2019 28.3 10/22/2020 34.8
10/16/2019 28.8 10/23/2020 33.5
10/17/2019 29.4 10/26/2020 31
10/18/2019 28.5 10/27/2020 32.3
10/21/2019 29 10/28/2020 34.5
10/22/2019 28 10/29/2020 30.9
10/23/2019 27.1 10/30/2020 29.9
10/24/2019 26.9 11/2/2020 25
10/25/2019 27.4 11/3/2020 27.9
10/28/2019 23.9 11/4/2020 30.2
10/29/2019 24.9 11/5/2020 27.1
10/30/2019 24 11/6/2020 25.9
10/31/2019 24.4 11/9/2020 30.6
11/1/2019 22.7 11/10/2020 31.4
11/4/2019 25.1 11/11/2020 32
11/4/2019 25.1 11/12/2020 31
11/5/2019 31 11/13/2020 28.4
11/6/2019 28.6 11/16/2020 29.7
11/7/2019 27.9 11/17/2020 28.1
11/8/2019 28 11/18/2020 27.2
11/11/2019 30.2 11/19/2020 27.4
11/12/2019 20.2 11/20/2020 27.4
11/13/2019 21.9 11/23/2020 25.5
11/14/2019 23.2 11/24/2020 24.5
11/15/2019 25.6 11/25/2020 28.3
11/18/2019 25.9 11/30/2020 33.1
11/19/2019 20.9 12/1/2020 26.1
11/20/2019 25.3 12/2/2020 21.2
11/21/2019 22.5 12/3/2020 28.1
11/22/2019 25.8 12/4/2020 22.5

Date Celcius Date Celcius Date Celcius
11/25/2019 24.7 12/7/2020 28.3
11/26/2019 23.8 12/8/2020 24.5
11/27/2019 25.3 12/9/2020 23.7
12/2/2019 22.5 12/10/2020 23.7
12/3/2019 24.1 12/11/2020 24.3
12/4/2019 23.5 12/14/2020 28.9
12/5/2019 22.2 12/15/2020 23.3
12/6/2019 25.4 12/16/2020 27.5
12/9/2019 19.8 12/17/2020 23.4
12/10/2019 24 12/18/2020 24.3
12/11/2019 27.7 12/21/2020 21.9
12/12/2019 22.8 12/22/2020 26.5
12/13/2019 26.6 12/23/2020 20.8
12/16/2019 26.3 12/28/2020 24.4
12/17/2019 26.8 12/29/2020 25.6
12/18/2019 22.7 12/30/2020 23.3
12/19/2019 25.2 12/31/2020 22.3
12/20/2019 21.5
12/23/2019 19.5
12/26/2019 20.8
12/27/2019 21
12/30/2019 21.7
12/31/2019 28

ATTACHMENT 3
Copper Water Effects Ratio (WER) Study for Outfall 008

Hazen SHEALY
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Copies:
Duke Energy Progress File
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex
From: Date:
Mary Sadler, PE November 16, 2020
Beth Thompson
Subject:
Site-Specific Metal Limit Development
Copper Water Effect Ratio Study
L.V. Sutton Energy Complex NPDES Permit No. NC0001422, Outfall 008
A copper Water-Effect Ratio (WER) study was conducted for the Duke Energy Progress L.V. Sutton
Energy Complex discharge Outfall 008. A Study Plan was approved by the Division of Water Resources
(DWR) in March 2020. The WER Study was conducted in accordance with the Environmental Protection
Agency's 1994 Interim Guidance Document(EPA 823-B-94-001). Per the approved Study Plan, the three
WER test measurements were developed using total and dissolved copper as toxicity test concentrations.
The site-specific tests were conducted in April, May, and June of 2020.
The WER Study results are provided in a report prepared by Shealy Consulting, LLC (July 2020). The
study resulted in a dissolved WER of 7.540 and a total WER of 7.315. Table 1 provides a summary of the
acute and chronic site-specific water quality criterion for copper at Outfall 008 using the dissolved WER.
An EPA-calculated translator of 0.348 was used for copper per North Carolina Division of Water
Resources(DWR)guidance. The calculated translator reflects an instream total suspended solids (TSS)
concentration of 10 mg/L per DWR policy. A median hardness value of 31.0 mg/L was used in the
calculations. The site-specific total recoverable instream criterion continuous concentration (CCC)was
calculated to be 71.4 pg/L. The site-specific total recoverable instream criterion maximum concentration
(CMC) was calculated to be 96.7 ug/L.
The effluent copper and hardness data used in this analysis is provided in Attachment A Tables A.1,A.2,
and A.3. The median hardness value was calculated using data from 2017 through present. Attachment A
also includes the effluent copper data to be used in the reasonable potential analysis. The reasonable
potential analysis worksheet from DWR appears to have incorrect or dated effluent copper data. The
worksheet also uses a default hardness value of 25 mg/L, which needs to be updated with the most recent
data. The following are notes regarding the data set in Attachment A.
• The hardness data from the WER study should be included in the median calculation for
hardness (Table A.1).
• The Outfall 008 effluent copper data is from the Discharge Monitoring Report data set
(Table A.2). It should be noted that the attached effluent copper data reported herein was
collected after Duke Energy completed the copper source reduction study at the facility.
• H_2 is the Sutton Lake 'Instream Sample'that is collected in Bay 8 and reported on Discharge
Monitoring Reports (DMR) (Table A.3). Bay 8 is the same portion of the lake that Outfall 008
Page: 1/2

j�SHEAI Y
Hazen
discharges to and the location of the public boat ramp.
• Location H_2 is the same location in which the WER samples were collected for this study.
Table 1: Summary of Acute and Chronic Site-Specific Water Quality Criterion using Dissolved
Copper WER
Criterion Maximum Criterion Chronic
Concentration (CMC) Concentration (CCC)
Hardness, mg/L 31.0 31.0
Published Criterion, Total Recoverable, ug/L 4.644 3.429
Published Criterion, Toxic Form, Dissolved, ug/L 4.458 3.292
Dissolved WER 7.540 7.540
Site-Specific Criterion, WER Adjusted, ug/L 33.61 24.82
EPA Translator 1 0.348 0.348
Site-Specific Criterion, Total Recoverable, ug/L 96.7 71.4
Allowable Discharge Concentration, ug/L 2 96.7 71.4
I EPA-derived translator calculated using an instream total suspended solids concentration of 10 mg/L per Division
of Water Resources policy.
2 Receiving 7Q10 of zero.
The WER study results demonstrate that the site-specific allowable discharge copper concentration is
significantly higher than the condition-specific allowable discharge concentration. The results of this site-
specific analysis demonstrate that reasonable potential for copper is not present at Outfall 008 with the
use of updated hardness values and effluent copper values. The WER study demonstrated a positive
outcome for the L.V. Sutton Energy Complex at Outfall 008.
Page:2/2

Hazen SHEALY J
Attachment A
Effluent Hardness and Copper Data

Hazen sHEAs.Y
Table A.1: WER Study Hardness Data
Hardness
Date mg/L
WER Sample 4/28/20 47
WER Sample 5/27/20 39
WER Sample 6/30/20 32
Table A.2: Outfall 008 Effluent Data
Copper
Date ug/L
11/9/2017 6
8/8/2018 8
8/9/2018 8
2/6/2019 7
8/7/2019 6
11/4/2019 5
2/3/2020 4.16
5/11/2020 3.77
8/5/2020 3.79
Table A.3: H_2 Data(Sutton Lake—WER samples at boat ramp)
Copper Hardness
Date ug/L mg/L
3/17/2017 6.7 ----
11/6/2017 6.1 29.9
3/7/2018 5.6 39.4
11/1/20181 10.5 19.7
3/18/2019 6 28.4
10/10/2019 2.9 26.2
3/16/2020 3.1 36.5
10/6/2020 3.5 29.1
On September 17, 2018, Sutton Lake was inundated by Cape Fear River
water during Hurricane Florence. The lake was completely flushed out
during this flood period. It is speculated that the Lake had not recovered by
the time the November 1, 2018 lake sample was collected.

SHEA
'. i+ •Pu." •NSULTING.LLC
DEVELOPMENT OF A COPPER WATER-EFFECT RATIO FOR
THE DUKE ENERGY L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX OUTFALL 008
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
NOVEMBER 17, 2020
Section 1: Executive Summary
Duke Energy Progress,LLC,(Duke Energy)operates the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex in New Hanover
County and is authorized to discharge wastewater under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit#NC0001422. Outfall 008 discharges into Sutton Lake, which
was deemed a water of the State of North Carolina as of November 5, 2014. The Sutton Energy
Complex October 1, 2017, permit modification included new Outfall 008 limits for total arsenic,
total copper,and total selenium, based on Reasonable Potential Analysis of discharges to the newly
designated lake. Duke Energy is seeking the development of site-specific total copper monthly
average and daily maximum limits for Outfall 008 in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B, Water Quality
Standards for Surface Waters.
The report provides the study details and documentation for a copper Water-Effect Ratio (WER)
derived for Outfall 008 using EPA 823-B-94-001, Interim Guidance on Determination and Use of
Water-Effect Ratios for Metals. Toxicity test procedures adhered to Methods for Measuring the
Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms,Fifth Edition,
EPA 821-R-02-012. A study plan based on these EPA guidance documents was developed by Shealy
Consulting, LLC, and Hazen and Sawyer in February 2020. It was submitted to the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality for review.A letter of approval was issued on March 3,2020.
Laboratory activities and toxicity testing was performed by Environmental Testing Solutions, LLC
(ETS)of Asheville, North Carolina (NC DEQ Certificate#600).
The first study of the copper WER procedure was performed April 28, 2020 using sample collected
April 27, 2020. The WER determined with Pimephales promelas was 7.315 for total copper and
7.860 for dissolved copper. The WER determined with Ceriodaphnia dubia was 6.756 for total
copper and 7.519 for dissolved copper.
The second WER study was performed May 27, 2020 using sample collected May 26, 2020. The
WER determined with P.promelas was 8.466 for total copper and 8.330 for dissolved copper.
The third WER study was performed June 30,2020 using sample collected June 29, 2020. The WER
determined with P.promelas was 6.954 for total copper and 6.548 for dissolved copper.
For the completed WER project,the final Water Effect Ratio (fWER) for total copper is 7.315, and
the fWER for dissolved copper is 7.540.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 2 of 23
Section 2: Site and Sample Description
The L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Outfall 008 operates in accordance with NPDES Permit NC0001422.
It is located in Wilmington, NC, in New Hanover County, and discharges into Sutton Lake. Sutton
Lake is a freshwater lake classified as Class C-Sw in sub-basin #030617 (CPF). Outfall 008 is
comprised of wastewater from combined cycle unit, simple cycle unit, and internal stormwater
outfalls SW001 through SW007. For each sample event, the samples were analyzed for NPDES
effluent compliance, as monthly monitoring is required in the NPDES permit.
The Simulated Stream water(SIMSTREAM)for all WER studies was comprised of 100%Sutton Lake
water. In accordance with the study plan, a sample of Sutton Lake was collected as a grab sample
at the wildlife ramp dock for each sample event. Per the study plan, this sample location was
considered to be representative of the water quality in the entire Sutton Lake, which recirculates
through the cooling system water pumps and Outfall 008.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 3 of 23
Section 3: Water-Effect Ratio Study Conducted April 28, 2020
The first WER study was conducted on Sutton Lake sample collected April 27, 2020. Toxicity tests
were conducted using the primary species, Pimephales promelas (a freshwater vertebrate in the
family cyprinidae),and the secondary species,Ceriodaphnia dubia(a freshwater invertebrate in the
family cladocera).
3.1 Sampling Information for the WER Study Conducted April 28, 2020
Sutton Lake water was collected on April 27,2020. The sample was collected as a grab sample from
the wildlife ramp of Sutton Lake at 10:30 am. The pH of the receiving stream at sample collection
was 6.42 SU and the temperature was 21.4°C. The sample was collected by personnel of the L.V.
Sutton facility, packed on ice, and delivered to ETS in Asheville, NC. The samples were received at
the ETS, LLC laboratory on April 28, 2020, at 10:05 am. A receipt sample temperature of 3.0°C was
documented. A copy of the Chain-of-Custody form which accompanied the samples is available in
Appendix A.
Weather conditions during the study were documented using monitoring reports provided by the
National Weather Service(New Hanover International Airport). Just prior to sampling,the weather
conditions were documented using weather data collected from a station at Outfall 008, if available.
A summary of the weather conditions is provided in Appendix A.
3.2 Flow Conditions for the WER Study Conducted April 28,2020
The flow of Outfall 008 was reported as 95.64 million gallons per day(MGD), which is indicative of
flow conditions during the start-up of one pump. Since the full flow generated by the use of one
pump (e.g., 144 MGD) was not yet achieved,the event was considered a Type I (low flow) WER.
The Sutton Lake sample collected for WER testing was submitted for the analysis of permitted
parameters to determine if the sample represented effluent compliance at Outfall 008. Table 1
provides a summary of the analytical results. The oil-and-grease concentration was <5 mg/L, TSS
was<5 mg/L, pH was 6.42 SU and total nitrogen was 0.45 mg/L. All parameter measurements were
less than the permitted discharge limits.
Table 1: Duke Sutton Outfall 008 Permit Limits and Analytical Results for Sutton Lake Sample
Collected April 27, 2020.
Measurement Lake Sample Collected Permitted Permitted
April 27,2020 Monthly Average Daily Maximum
Outfall 008 Flow 95.64 MGD -- --
Oil and Grease (mg/L) <5.0 15.0 20.0
Total Suspended Solids(mg/L) <5.0 30.0 100.0
Total Nitrogen (mg/L) 0.45 --
pH (SU) 6.42 6.0< pH <9.0 6.0< pH <9 .0

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 4 of 23
3.3 Copper Source for the WER Study Conducted April 28,2020
The copper source for the April 28, 2020, WER study was copper sulfate pentahydrate
(CuSO4*5H2O). A primary stock solution was prepared by dissolving 0.3930 g CuSO4*5H2O in 1,000
mL deionized water. The nominal copper concentration of this primary stock was 100 mg/L. This
stock was used to prepare all copper-spiked test treatments.
3.4 LABWATER Test Dilutions for the WER Study Conducted April 28,2020
Synthetic laboratory dilution water (LABWATER) was prepared according to the procedure for
obtaining soft reconstituted water found in Section 7 of EPA 820-R-02-012,Methods for Measuring
the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms.
A LABWATER sub-stock containing copper sulfate was prepared by diluting 10 ml of the primary
copper stock to 1000 mL synthetic water. This provided a sub-stock with a copper concentration
of 1 mg/L. Test dilutions were prepared by combining the sub-stock with un-spiked synthetic water.
Test concentrations prepared for the P. promelas LABWATER test were 0, 2.5, 3.9, 6.0, 9.1, 14, 21,
and 32 µg/L copper, nominal. Test concentrations prepared for the C. dubia LABWATER test were
0, 1.6,2.5,3.9,6.0,9.1,and 14 µg/L, nominal.
An aliquot of each LABWATER test concentration was preserved with nitric acid for total copper
analysis. A separate aliquot was filtered at 0.45 µm and preserved with nitric acid for dissolved
copper analysis.The remaining solution was used for toxicity testing.
3.5 SIMSTREAM Test Dilutions for the WER Study Conducted April 28,2020
The Outfall 008 simulated water(SIMSTREAM)was comprised of 100%Sutton Lake water.
A SIMSTREAM sub-stock of copper sulfate was prepared by diluting 10 mL of the primary copper
stock to 1,000 mL with SIMSTREAM. This provided a sub-stock with a copper concentration of
1 mg/L. Test dilutions were prepared by combining the metal sub-stock with un-spiked
SIMSTREAM. Test concentrations prepared for the P. promelas SIMSTREAM test were 0, 21, 32,
49, 75, 116, 179, and 275 µg/L copper, nominal. Test concentrations prepared for the C. dubia
SIMSTREAM test were 0, 14, 21,32,49,75, 116, and 179 µg/L, nominal.
An aliquot of each SIMSTREAM test concentration was preserved with nitric acid for total copper
analysis. A separate aliquot was filtered at 0.45 µm and preserved with nitric acid for dissolved
copper analysis.The remaining solution was used for toxicity testing.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 5 of 23
3.6 Analytical Profile of Test Waters for the Sutton 008 WER Study Conducted April 28,2020
Table 2 provides the analytical measurements for the synthetic laboratory dilution water and
Sutton Lake water. Full analytical reports are available in Appendix A.
Table 2: Analytical measurements for synthetic laboratory dilution water and
Sutton Lake water for the April 28,2020,study.
Parameter LABWATER Sutton Lake(SIMSTREAM)
Oil&Grease,HEM -- <5.0 mg/L
TKN -- 0.45 mg/L
Nitrate+Nitrite as N -- <0.10 mg/L
Total Nitrogen -- 0.45 mg/L
TSS <5.0 mg/L <5.0 mg/L
TDS <10 mg/L 51 mg/L
Specific Conductance 180 µmhos/cm 260 µmhos/cm
Alkalinity 34 mg/L 16 mg/L
Hardness 52 mg/L 47 mg/L
TOC 0.46 mg/L 6.06 mg/L
Total Copper 2 µg/L 5 µg/L
Dissolved Copper <2 µg/L 6 µg/L
3.7 Toxicity Test Data for the WER Study Conducted April 28,2020
3.7.1 Test Data for Ceriodaphnia dubia
Each test treatment consisted of 4 test chambers with 5 C. dubia each. Test organisms were fed
2 hours prior to test initiation, but no food was provided in the test solutions. Test organisms were
cultured in-house and were <24 hours old at test initiation. Test organisms were introduced into
all test chambers by 12:08 pm on April 28, 2020. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and temperature were
measured for each test concentration at test initiation. The test board was placed in an incubator
set at a temperature of 25+1°C.
At 24 hours, the test board was removed from the incubator. D.O., pH, and temperature were
recorded for each test concentration. Mortality was recorded,and the test board placed back into
the incubator.
The toxicity tests were terminated on April 30, by 12:09 pm. Immediately after mortality was
recorded,appropriate test solutions were filtered at 0.45 microns and preserved with nitric acid for
dissolved copper analysis. The solutions submitted for dissolved copper analysis included all
controls, the highest LABWATER and SIMSTREAM test concentrations at which there was no
mortality, all test concentrations having partial mortality, and the lowest LABWATER and
SIMSTREAM test concentrations having complete mortality. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and
temperature were measured for each test concentration at test termination.
Test reports for the LABWATER and SIMSTREAM C. dubia tests are available in Appendix A. All
water chemistry parameters were within the expected ranges. Temperature remained within 25+
1°C, and D.O. remained well above the required 6.0 mg/L(EPA 821-R-02-012). Table 3 provides a

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 6 of 23
summary of temperature and D.O. readings. Table 4 provides the metal concentration data and
mortality data for the LABWATER test. Table 5 provides the metal concentration data and mortality
data for the SIMSTREAM test. Survival was 100% in the laboratory dilution water control and un-
spiked SIMSTREAM control. The requirement for a valid test is>90%control survival.
Table 3: Summary of temperature and dissolved oxygen measurements taken during the
Sutton 008 WER C. dubia tests initiated on April 28, 2020.
Test Temperature Average D.O. Average
Range Temperature Range D.O.
(2C) (SC) (mg/L) (mg/L)
LABWATER 24.8-25.2 24.9 7.7-8.2 8.0
SIMSTREAM 24.8-25.2 24.9 7.9-8.2 8.1
Table 4: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON 008
LABWATER test with C. dubia initiated on April 28, 2020.
Ceriodaphnia dubia Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
LABWATER Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(µg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) (pg/L)
Lab Control 2.0/<2.0 4.0 0%
1.6 * * 0%
2.5 * * 0%
3.9 * * 0%
6.0 5.0/5.0 6.0 0%
9.1 8.0/7.0 8.0 40%
14 11.0/9.0 12.0 100%
*Analysis of copper was conducted on control,highest concentration with no mortality,all concentrations with partial
mortality,and lowest concentration with 100%mortality.
Table 5: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON 008
SIMSTREAM test with C. dubia initiated on April 28,2020.
Ceriodaphnia dubia Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
SIMSTREAM Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(µg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) (µg/L)
SIMSTREAM Control 5.0/6.0 5.0 0%
14 * * 0%
21 * * 0%
32 32.0/29.0 31.0 0%
49 45.0/41.0 46.0 25%
75 64.0/71.0 67.0 100%
116 90.0/107.0 * 100%
179 166.0/147.0 * 100%
*Analysis of copper was conducted on control,highest concentration with no mortality,all concentrations with partial
mortality,and lowest concentration with 100%mortality.
3.7.2 Test Data for Pimephales promelas
Each test treatment consisted of 2 test chambers with 10 P. promelas each. Test organisms were
fed 2 hours prior to test initiation, but no food was provided in the test solutions during the test.
Test organisms were cultured in-house and were <24 hours old at test initiation. Test organisms
were introduced into all test chambers by 11:30 am on April 28, 2020. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 7 of 23
temperature were measured for each test concentration at test initiation. The test board was
placed in an incubator set at a temperature of 25+1°C. At 24 hours, the test board was removed
from the incubator. D.O., pH, and temperature were recorded for each test concentration.
Mortality was recorded,and the test board placed back into the incubator.
The toxicity tests were terminated on April 30, by 11:32 am. Immediately after mortality was
recorded,appropriate test solutions were filtered at 0.45 microns and preserved with nitric acid for
dissolved copper analysis. The solutions submitted for dissolved copper analysis included all
controls, the highest LABWATER and SIMSTREAM test concentrations at which there was no
mortality, all test concentrations having partial mortality, and the lowest LABWATER and
SIMSTREAM test concentrations having complete mortality. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and
temperature were measured for each test concentration at test termination.
Test reports for the LABWATER and SIMSTREAM P. promelas tests are available in Appendix A. All
water chemistry parameters were within the expected ranges. Temperature remained within
25+ 1°C,and D.O. remained well above the required 6.0 mg/L(EPA 821-R-02-012). Table 6 provides
a summary of temperature and D.O. readings. Table 7 provides the metal concentration data and
mortality data for the LABWATER test. Table 8 provides the metal concentration data and mortality
data for the SIMSTREAM test. Survival was 100% in the laboratory dilution water control and un-
spiked SIMSTREAM control. The requirement for a valid test is>90%control survival.
Table 6: Summary of temperature and dissolved oxygen measurements taken during the
Sutton 008 WER P.promelas tests initiated on April 28,2020.
Test Temperature Average D.O. Average
Range Temperature Range D.O.
(QC) (QC) (mg/L) (mg/L)
LABWATER 24.5-25.0 24.8 7.6-8.1 7.9
SIMSTREAM 24.3-24.9 24.7 7.8-8.2 8.0
Table 7: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON 008
LABWATER test with P.promelas initiated on April 28,2020.
Pimephales promelas Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
LABWATER Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(µg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) ()1g/L)
Lab Control 2.0/<2.0 4.0 0%
2.5 * 0%
3.9 * 0%
6.0 5.0/5.0 * 0%
9.1 8.0/7.0 * 0%
14 11.0/9.0 * 0%
21 17.0/15.0 16.0 5%
32 26.0/23.0 23.0 75%
*Analysis of copper was conducted on control,highest concentration with no mortality and all concentrations with
partial mortality.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 8 of 23
Table 8: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON 008
SIMSTREAM test with P. promelas initiated on April 28,2020.
Pimephales promelas Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
SIMSTREAM Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(µg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) (µg/L)
SIMSTREAM Control 5.0/6.0 5.0 0%
21 * * 0%
32 32.0/29.0 * 0%
49 45.0/41.0 45.0 0%
75 64.0/71.0 72.0 10%
116 90.0/107.0 91.0 30%
179 166.0/147.0 149.0 50%
275 240.0/210.0 222.0 75
*Analysis of copper was conducted on control,highest concentration with no mortality and all concentrations with
partial mortality.
3.8 Copper WER Calculation for the WER Study Conducted April 28,2020
3.8.1 Copper WER Calculation for Ceriodaphnia dubia
The LC50 values were determined using both nominal and measured copper concentrations. The
Trimmed Spearman-Karber test (ToxCalc v5.0.32) was used to determine 48-hour LC50 values for
total and dissolved copper in the C. dubia LABWATER and SIMSTREAM tests.
The LC50 for total copper in the LABWATER test with C.dubia was 8.012 µg/L. Since it is important
that the LC50 values being used to calculate the WER represent the same hardness,the LABWATER
LC50 was normalized from the reported hardness of 52 mg/L to the SIMSTREAM hardness of 47 mg/L
using the published slope for copper of 0.9422, (EPA 2007). The normalized value became 7.284
µg/L total copper. The C. dubia LC50 value for dissolved copper was 7.057 µg/L, and was normalized
to 6.416 µg/L.
The LC5o for total copper in the SIMSTREAM test with C. dubia was 49.21 µg/L and for dissolved
copper was 48.24 µg/L.
The Water-Effect Ratio (WER) was calculated by dividing the SIMSTREAM LC5o by the normalized
LABWATER LC50. The total copper WER value for the study conducted April 28, 2020,with C. dubia,
was 6.756. The dissolved copper WER for the study was 7.519.
3.8.2 Copper WER Calculation for Pimephales promelas
The LC50 values were determined using both nominal and measured copper concentrations. Probit
(ToxCalc v5.0.32) was used to determine 48-hour LC50 values for total and dissolved copper in the
P. promelas LABWATER and SIMSTREAM tests.
The LC50 for total copper in the LABWATER test with P. promelas was 22.98 µg/L. Since it is
important that the LC50 values being used to calculate the WER represent the same hardness, the
LAWATER LC5o was normalized from the reported hardness of 52 mg/L to the SIMSTREAM hardness
of 47 mg/L using the published slope for copper of 0.9422, (EPA 2007). The normalized value

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 9 of 23
became 20.89 µg/L total copper. The P. promelas LC50 value for dissolved copper was 20.31 µg/L,
and was normalized to 18.46 µg/L.
The LC50 for total copper in the SIMSTREAM test with P.promelas was 152.8 µg/L and for dissolved
copper was 145.1 µg/L.
The Water-Effect Ratio (WER) was calculated by dividing the SIMSTREAM LC50 by the normalized
LABWATER LC50. The total copper WER value for the study conducted April 28, 2020, with P.
promelas, was 7.315. The dissolved copper WER for the study was 7.860.
3.10 Summary of April 28,2020,WER Study Results
Tables 9 and 10 provide summaries of the test results and WER values for the April 28, 2020, WER
study.
Table 9: Summary of copper LC50 values, the associated normalized values, and the calculated
copper WER values for the Duke Sutton Lake study conducted April 28,2020,with Ceriodaphnia
dubia.
LCso
LCso (µg/L Copper) WER
(µg/L Copper) Normalized to Hardness
of 47 mg/L as CaCO3
Test Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved
LABWATER 8.012 7.057 7.284 6.416
SIMSTREAM 49.21 48.24 -- -- 6.756 7.519
Table 10: Summary of copper LC50 values, the associated normalized values, and the calculated
copper WER values for the Duke Sutton Lake study conducted April 28, 2020, with Pimephales
promelas.
LCso
LCso (µg/L Copper) WER
(µg/L Copper) Normalized to Hardness
of 47 mg/L as CaCO3
Test Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved
LABWATER 22.98 20.31 20.89 18.46
SIMSTREAM 152.8 145.1 -- -- 7.315 7.860

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 10 of 23
Section 4: Water-Effect Ratio Study Conducted May 27, 2020
The second WER study was conducted on Sutton Lake sample collected May 26,2020. Toxicity tests
were conducted using the primary species,Pimephales promelas.
4.1 Sampling Information for the WER Study Conducted May 27,2020
Sutton Lake water was collected on May 26,2020. The sample was collected as a grab sample from
the wildlife ramp of Sutton Lake at 10:33 am. The pH of the receiving stream at sample collection
was 6.71 SU and the temperature was 25.8°C. The sample was collected by personnel of the L.V.
Sutton facility, packed on ice, and delivered to ETS in Asheville, NC. The samples were received at
the ETS, LLC laboratory on May 27, 2020,at 11:30 am. A receipt sample temperature of 1.8°C was
documented. A copy of the Chain-of-Custody form which accompanied the samples is available in
Appendix B.
Weather conditions during the study were documented using monitoring reports provided by the
National Weather Service(New Hanover International Airport).Just prior to sampling,the weather
conditions were documented using weather data collected from a station at Outfall 008,if available.
A summary of the weather conditions is provided in Appendix B.
4.2 Flow Conditions for the WER Study Conducted May 27,2020
The flow of Outfall 008 was reported as 288 MGD,which is indicative of flow conditions during the
operation of two (2) pumps. The event was considered a Type II (high flow)WER.
The Sutton Lake sample collected for WER testing was submitted for the analysis of permitted
parameters to determine if it represented compliant Outfall 008 discharge. The oil-and-grease
concentration was<5 mg/L,TSS was<5 mg/L,pH was 6.71 SU and total nitrogen was 0.49 mg/L. All
parameter measurements were less than the permitted discharge limits(see Table 11).
Table 11: Duke Sutton Outfall 008 Permit Limits and Analytical Results for Sutton Lake Sample
Collected May 26,2020.
Measurement Lake Sample Collected Permitted Permitted
May 26,2020 Monthly Average Daily Maximum
Outfall 008 Flow 288 MGD -- --
Oil and Grease (mg/L) <5.0 15.0 20.0
Total Suspended Solids(mg/L) <5.0 30.0 100.0
Total Nitrogen (mg/L) 0.49 --pH (SU) 6.71 6.0< pH <9.0 6.0< pH <9.0

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 11 of 23
4.3 Copper Source for the WER Study Conducted May 27,2020
The copper source for the May 27, 2020, WER study was copper sulfate pentahydrate
(CuSO4*5H20). A primary stock solution was prepared by dissolving 0.3930 g CuSO4*5H20 in 1,000
mL deionized water. The nominal copper concentration of this stock was 100 mg/L.This stock was
used to prepare all copper-spiked test treatments.
4.4 LABWATER Test Dilutions for the WER Study Conducted May 27, 2020
Synthetic laboratory dilution water (LABWATER) was prepared according to the procedure for
obtaining soft reconstituted water found in Section 7 of EPA 820-R-02-012,Methods for Measuring
the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms.
A LABWATER sub-stock containing copper sulfate was prepared by diluting 10 ml of the primary
copper stock to 1 000 mL synthetic water. Thisprovided a sub-stock with a copper concentration
pp Y pp
of 1 mg/L. Test dilutions were prepared by combining the sub-stock with un-spiked synthetic water.
Test concentrations prepared for the P. promelas LABWATER test were 0, 6.0, 9.1, 14, 21, 32, 49,
and 75 µg/L copper, nominal.
An aliquot of each LABWATER test concentration was preserved with nitric acid for total copper
analysis. A separate aliquot was filtered at 0.45 µm and preserved with nitric acid for dissolved
copper analysis. The remaining solution was used for toxicity testing.
4.5 SIMSTREAM Test Dilutions for the WER Study Conducted May 27,2020
The Outfall 008 simulated water(SIMSTREAM) was comprised of 100%Sutton Lake water.
A SIMSTREAM sub-stock of copper sulfate was prepared by diluting 10 mL of the primary copper
stock to 1,000 mL with SIMSTREAM. This provided a sub-stock with a copper concentration of
1 mg/L. Test dilutions were prepared by combining the metal sub-stock with un-spiked
SIMSTREAM. Test concentrations prepared for the P.promelas SIMSTREAM test were 0, 32,49,75,
116, 179, 275, and 423 µg/L copper, nominal.
An aliquot of each SIMSTREAM test concentration was preserved with nitric acid for total copper
analysis. A separate aliquot was filtered at 0.45 µm and preserved with nitric acid for dissolved
copper analysis. The remaining solution was used for toxicity testing.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 12 of 23
4.6 Analytical Profile of Test Waters for the Sutton 008 WER Study Conducted May 27,2020
Table 12 provides the analytical measurements for the synthetic laboratory dilution water and
Sutton Lake water. Full analytical reports are available in Appendix B.
Table 12: Analytical measurements for synthetic laboratory dilution water and
Sutton Lake water for the May 27,2020,study.
Parameter LABWATER Sutton Lake(SIMSTREAM)
Oil&Grease,HEM -- <5.0 mg/L
TKN -- 0.49 mg/L
Nitrate+Nitrite as N -- <0.10 mg/L
Total Nitrogen -- 0.49 mg/L
TSS <5.0 mg/L <5.0 mg/L
TDS <10 mg/L 140 mg/L
Specific Conductance 180 µmhos/cm 240 µmhos/cm
Alkalinity 34 mg/L 15 mg/L
Hardness 52 mg/L 39 mg/L
TOC <1.0 mg/L 6.33 mg/L
Total Copper 2 µg/L 4 µg/L
Dissolved Copper <2 µg/L 4 µg/L
4.7 Toxicity Test Data for the WER Study Conducted May 27,2020
Each test treatment consisted of 2 test chambers with 10 P. promelas each. Test organisms were
fed 2 hours prior to test initiation, but no food was provided in the test solutions during the test.
Test organisms were cultured in-house and were <24 hours old at test initiation. Test organisms
were introduced into all test chambers by 12:29 pm on May 27, 2020. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and
temperature were measured for each test concentration at test initiation. The test board was
placed in an incubator set at a temperature of 25+1°C.
At 24 hours, the test board was removed from the incubator. D.O., pH, and temperature were
recorded for each test concentration. Mortality was recorded,and the test board placed back into
the incubator.
The toxicity tests were terminated on May 29,2020, by 12:20 pm. Immediately after mortality was
recorded,appropriate test solutions were filtered at 0.45 microns and preserved with nitric acid for
dissolved copper analysis. The solutions submitted for dissolved copper analysis included all
controls, the highest LABWATER and SIMSTREAM test concentrations at which there was no
mortality, all test concentrations having partial mortality, and the lowest LABWATER and
SIMSTREAM test concentrations having complete mortality. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and
temperature were measured for each test concentration at test termination.
Test reports for the LABWATER and SIMSTREAM P. promelas tests are available in Appendix B. All
water chemistry parameters were within the expected ranges. Temperature remained within 25+
1°C, and D.O. remained well above the required 6.0 mg/L(EPA 821-R-02-012). Table 13 provides a
summary of temperature and D.O. readings. Table 14 provides the metal concentration data and
mortality data for the LABWATER test. Table 15 provides the metal concentration data and

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 13 of 23
mortality data for the SIMSTREAM test. Survival was 100%in the laboratory dilution water control
and un-spiked SIMSTREAM control. The requirement for a valid test is>90%control survival.
Table 13: Summary of temperature and dissolved oxygen measurements taken during the
Sutton 008 WER P.promelas tests initiated on May 27,2020.
Test Temperature Average D.O. Average
Range Temperature Range D.O.
(2C) (QC) (mg/L) (mg/L)
LABWATER 24.7-25.0 24.8 7.6-7.9 7.7
SIMSTREAM 24.7-25.0 24.8 7.8-8.2 8.0
Table 14: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON
008 LABWATER test with P.promelas initiated on May 27,2020.
Pimephales promelas Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
LABWATER Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(µg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) (µg/L)
Lab Control <2.0/<2.0 <2.0 0%
6.0 5.0/5.0 * 0%
9.1 8.0/9.0 8.0 0%
14 12.0/11.0 11.0 5%
21 19.0/19.0 20.0 40%
32 28.0/24.0 32.0 65%
49 42.0/38.0 48.0 90%
75 63.0/61.0 75.0 95%
*Analysis of copper not required.
Table 15: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON
008 SIMSTREAM test with P.promelas initiated on May 27,2020.
Pimephales promelas Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
SIMSTREAM Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(i.tg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) (µg/L)
SIMSTREAM Control 4.0/4.0 9.0 0%
32 37.0/35.0 * 0%
49 52.0/49.0 51.0 0%
75 79.0/72.0 81.0 5%
116 117.0/109.0 116.0 40%
179 176.0/162.0 175.0 70%
275 251.0/227.0 265.0 85%
423 413.0/367.0 396.0 90%
*Analysis of copper not required.
4.8 Copper WER Calculation for the WER Study Conducted May 27,2020
The LC50 values were determined using both nominal and measured copper concentrations. Probit
(ToxCalc v5.0.32) was used to determine 48-hour LC50 values for total and dissolved copper in the
LABWATER and SIMSTREAM tests.
The LC50 for total copper in the LABWATER test was 23.59 µg/L. Since it is important that the LC5o
values being used to calculate the WER represent the same hardness, the LABWATER LC50 was

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 14 of 23
of 2 mg/LtheSIMSTREAM hardness of mg/Lusi
ng
from the reported hardness 5 g/ to S S d ess 39 us g
the published slope for copper of 0.9422, (EPA 2007). The normalized value became 17.99 µg/L
total copper. The LC50 value for dissolved copper was 21.99 µg/L and was normalized to 16.77 µg/L.
The LCso for total copper in the SIMSTREAM test was 152.3 µg/L and for dissolved copper was 139.7
µg/L.
The Water-Effect Ratio (WER) was calculated by dividing the SIMSTREAM LC50 by the normalized
LABWATER LC50. The total copper WER value for the study conducted May 27, 2020, with
P. promelas, was 8.466. The dissolved copper WER for the study was 8.330.
4.9 Summary of May 27, 2020,WER Study Results
Table 16 provide summaries of the test results and WER values for the May 27, 2020, WER study.
Table 16: Summary of copper LC50 values, the associated normalized values, and the calculated
copper WER values for the Duke Sutton Lake study conducted May 27, 2020, with Pimephales
promelas.
LCso
LCso (µg/L Copper) WER
(µg/L Copper) Normalized to Hardness
of 39 mg/L as CaCO3
Test Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved
LABWATER 23.59 21.99 17.99 16.77
SIMSTREAM 152.3 139.7 -- -- 8.466 8.330

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 15 of 23
Section 5: Water-Effect Ratio Study Conducted June 30, 2020
The third WER study was conducted on Sutton Lake sample collected June 29, 2020. Toxicity tests
were conducted using the primary species,Pimephales promelas.
5.1 Sampling Information for the WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
Sutton Lake water was collected on June 29,2020. The sample was collected as a grab sample from
the wildlife ramp of Sutton Lake at 11:05 am. The pH of the receiving stream at sample collection
was 7.15 SU and the temperature was 37.1°C. The sample was collected by personnel of the L.V.
Sutton facility, packed on ice, and delivered to ETS in Asheville, NC. The samples were received at
the ETS, LLC laboratory on June 30,2020,at 10:37 am. A receipt sample temperature of 4.7°C was
documented. A copy of the Chain-of-Custody form which accompanied the samples is available in
Appendix C.
Weather conditions during the study were documented using monitoring reports provided by the
National Weather Service(New Hanover International Airport). Just prior to sampling,the weather
conditions were documented using weather data collected from a station at Outfall 008,if available.
A summary of the weather conditions is provided in Appendix C.
5.2 Flow Conditions for the WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
The flow of Outfall 008 was reported as 288 MGD,which is indicative of flow conditions during the
operation of two(2) pumps. The event was considered a Type II (high flow)WER.
The Sutton Lake sample collected for WER testing was submitted for the analysis of permitted
parameters to determine if it represented compliant Outfall 008 discharge. The oil-and-grease
concentration was<5 mg/L, TSS was<5 mg/L, pH was 7.15 SU and total nitrogen was 0.742 mg/L.
All parameter measurements were less than the permitted discharge limits(see Table 17).
Table 17: Duke Sutton Outfall 008 Permit Limits and Analytical Results for Sutton Lake Sample
Collected June 29,2020.
Measurement Lake Sample Collected Permitted Permitted
June 29,2020 Monthly Average Daily Maximum
Outfall 008 Flow 288 MGD -- --
Oil and Grease(mg/L) <5.0 15.0 20.0
Total Suspended Solids(mg/L) <5.0 30.0 100.0
Total Nitrogen (mg/L) 0.742 --pH (SU) 7.15 6.0<pH<9.0 6.0<pH <9.0

Copper WER Development
PP P
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 16 of 23
5.3 Copper Source for the WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
The copper source for the June 30, 2020, WER study was copper sulfate pentahydrate
(CuSO4*5H2O). A primary stock solution was prepared by diluting 0.3930 g CuSO4*5H2O in 1,000 mL
deionized water. The nominal copper concentration of this stock was 100 mg/L. This stock was
used to prepare all copper-spiked test treatments.
5.4 LABWATER Test Dilutions for the WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
Synthetic laboratory dilution water (LABWATER) was prepared according to the procedure for
obtaining soft reconstituted water found in Section 7 of EPA 820-R-02-012,Methods for Measuring
the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms.
A LABWATER sub-stock containing copper sulfate was prepared by diluting 10 ml of the primary
copper stock to 1,000 mL synthetic water. This provided a sub-stock with a copper concentration
of 1 mg/L. Test dilutions were prepared by combining the sub-stock with un-spiked synthetic water.
Test concentrations prepared for the P. promelas LABWATER test were 0, 9.1, 14, 21, 32, 49, 75,
and 116 µg/L copper, nominal.
An aliquot of each LABWATER test concentration was preserved with nitric acid for total copper
analysis. A separate aliquot was filtered at 0.45 µm and preserved with nitric acid for dissolved
copper analysis.The remaining solution was used for toxicity testing.
5.5 SIMSTREAM Test Dilutions for the WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
The Sutton Lake simulated water(SIMSTREAM)was comprised of 100%Sutton Lake water.
A SIMSTREAM sub-stock of copper sulfate was prepared by diluting 10 mL of the primary copper
stock to 1,000 mL with SIMSTREAM. This provided a sub-stock with a copper concentration of
1 mg/L. Test dilutions were prepared by combining the metal sub-stock with un-spiked
SIMSTREAM. Test concentrations prepared for the P. promelas SIMSTREAM test were 0, 49, 75,
116, 179, 275,423 and 650 µg/L copper, nominal.
An aliquot of each SIMSTREAM test concentration was preserved with nitric acid for total copper
analysis. A separate aliquot was filtered at 0.45 um and preserved with nitric acid for dissolved
copper analysis. The remaining solution was used for toxicity testing.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 17 of 23
5.6 Analytical Profile of Test Waters for the Sutton 008 WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
Table 18 provides the analytical measurements for the synthetic laboratory dilution water and
Sutton Lake water. Full analytical reports are available in Appendix C.
Table 18: Analytical measurements for synthetic laboratory dilution water and
Sutton Lake water for the June 30,2020,study.
Parameter LABWATER Sutton Lake(SIMSTREAM)
Oil&Grease -- <5.0 mg/L
TKN -- 0.74 mg/L
Nitrate+Nitrite as N -- <0.10 mg/L
Total Nitrogen -- 0.742 mg/L
TSS <5.0 mg/L <5.0 mg/L
TDS 100 mg/L 140 mg/L
Specific Conductance 170 µmhos/cm 230 µmhos/cm
Alkalinity 34 mg/L 18 mg/L
Hardness 46 mg/L 32 mg/L
TOC <1.0 mg/L 6.10 mg/L
Total Copper <2 µg/L 5 µg/L
Dissolved Copper <2 µg/L 11 µg/L
5.7 Toxicity Test Data for the WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
Each test treatment consisted of 2 test chambers with 10 P. promelas each. Test organisms were
fed 2 hours prior to test initiation, but no food was provided in the test solutions during the test.
Test organisms were cultured in-house and were <24 hours old at test initiation. Test organisms
were introduced into all test chambers by 11:50 am on June 30, 2020. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and
temperature were measured for each test concentration at test initiation. The test board was
placed in an incubator set at a temperature of 25+1°C.
At 24 hours, the test board was removed from the incubator. D.O., pH, and temperature were
recorded for each test concentration. Mortality was recorded,and the test board placed back into
the incubator.
The toxicity tests were terminated on July 2, 2020, by 11:49 am. Immediately after mortality was
recorded,appropriate test solutions were filtered at 0.45 microns and preserved with nitric acid for
dissolved copper analysis. The solutions submitted for dissolved copper analysis included all
controls, the highest LABWATER and SIMSTREAM test concentrations at which there was no
mortality, all test concentrations having partial mortality, and the lowest LABWATER and
SIMSTREAM test concentrations having complete mortality. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and
temperature were measured for each test concentration at test termination.
Test reports for the LABWATER and SIMSTREAM P. promelas tests are available in Appendix C. All
water chemistry parameters were within the expected ranges. Temperature remained within
25+ 1°C, and D.O. remained well above the required 6.0 mg/L (EPA 821-R-02-012). Table 19
provides a summary of temperature and D.O. readings. Table 20 provides the metal concentration
data and mortality data for the LABWATER test. Table 21 provides the metal concentration data

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 18 of 23
and mortality data for the SIMSTREAM test. Survival was 100% in the laboratory dilution water
control and un-spiked SIMSTREAM control. The requirement for a valid test is >90% control
survival.
Table 19: Summary of temperature and dissolved oxygen measurements taken during the
Sutton 008 WER P. promelas tests initiated on June 30, 2020.
Test Temperature Average D.O. Average
Range Temperature Range D.O.
(2C) (QC) (mg/L) (mg/L)
LABWATER 24.3-24.7 24.5 7.6-8.2 7.9
SIMSTREAM 24.2-24.7 24.5 7.7-8.2 8.0
Table 20: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON
008 LABWATER test with P.promelas initiated on June 30, 2020.
Pimephales promelas Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
LABWATER Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(µg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) (pg/L)
Lab Control <2.0/<2.0 <2.0 0%
9.1 9.0/8.0 * 0%
14 13.0/12.0 11.0 0%
21 18.0/18.0 18.0 5%
32 28.0/26.0 24.0 40%
49 44.0/42.0 40.0 45%
75 66.0/62.0 62.0 90%
116 96.0/110.0 97.0 100%
*Analysis of copper not required.
Table 21: Summary of toxicity test results and actual copper measurements for the SUTTON
008 SIMSTREAM test with P.promelas initiated on June 30,2020.
Pimephales promelas Initial Copper Concentration Final Copper Concentration Mortality
SIMSTREAM Treatment Measured Total/Dissolved Measured Dissolved at 48 Hours
(µg/L Copper,Nominal) (µg/L) (µg/L)
SIMSTREAM Control 5.0/11.0 8.0 0%
49 55.0/52.0 * 0%
75 83.0/78.0 73.0 0%
116 120.0/91.0 99.0 15%
179 175.0/166.0 157.0 30%
275 271.0/250.0 241.0 90%
423 404.0/372.0 344.0 100%
650 627.0/583.0 * 100%
*Analysis of copper not required.
5.8 Copper WER Calculation for the WER Study Conducted June 30,2020
The LCso values were determined using both nominal and measured copper concentrations. Probit
(ToxCalc v5.0.32) was used to determine 48-hour LC50 values for total and dissolved copper in the
LABWATER and SIMSTREAM tests.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 19 of 23
The LCso for total copper in the LABWATER test was 37.90 µg/L. Since it is important that the LC50
values being used to calculate the WER represent the same hardness, the LABWATER LC50 was
normalized from the reported hardness of 46 mg/L to the SIMSTREAM hardness of 32 mg/L using
the published slope for copper of 0.9422, (EPA 2007). The normalized value became 26.92 µg/L
total copper. The LC50 value for dissolved copper was 36.25 µg/L,and was normalized to 25.75 µg/L.
The LC50 for total copper in the SIMSTREAM test was 187.2 µg/L and for dissolved copper was 168.6
µg/L.
The Water-Effect Ratio (WER) was calculated by dividing the SIMSTREAM LC50 by the normalized
LABWATER LC50. The total copper WER value for the study conducted June 30, 2020, with P.
promelas, was 6.954. The dissolved copper WER for the study was 6.548.
5.9 Summary of June 30,2020,WER Study Results
Table 22 provide summaries of the test results and WER values for the June 30, 2020, WER study.
Table 22: Summary of copper LC50 values,the associated normalized values, and the calculated
copper WER values for the Duke Sutton Lake study conducted June 30, 2020, with Pimephales
promelas.
LCso
LCso (µg/L Copper) WER
(µg/L Copper) Normalized to Hardness
of 32 mg/L as CaCO3
Test Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Total Dissolved
LABWATER 37.90 36.25 26.92 25.75
SIMSTREAM 187.2 168.6 -- -- 6.954 6.548

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 20 of 23
Section 6: fWER for Copper Determination
6.1 fWER Calculation Flowchart
The calculation of the Final Water-Effect Ratio (fWER) is based on the following sequence (EPA
1994):
1. If there are two or more Type 1 WERs:
a. If a least 19%of all the WERs are Type 2 WERs,the derivation of the fWER depends on
the properties of the Type 1 WERs:
1) If the range of the Type 1 WERs is not greater than a factor of 5 and/or the
range of the ratios in the SIMSTREAM is not greater than a factor of 5,the fWER
is the lower of either the adjusted geometric mean of all the Type 1 WERs and
the lowest hWER.
2) If the range of the Type 1 WERs is greater than a factor of 5 and the range of
the ratios of the Type 1 WER to the concentration of metal in the SIMSTREAM
is greater than a factor of 5, the fWER is the lowest of (a) the lowest Type 1
WER, (b) the lowest hWER, and (c) the geometric mean of all the Type 1 and
Type 2 WERs.
b. If less than 19% of all of the WERs are Type 2 WERs, the fWER is the lower of(1) the
lowest Type 1 WER and (2)the lowest hWER.
2. If there is one Type 1 WER,the fWER is the lowest of(a)the Type 1 WER,(b)the lowest hWER,
and (c)the geometric mean of all of the Type 1 and Type 2 WERs.
3. If there are no Type 1 WERs, the fWER is the lower of (a) the lowest Type 2 WER and (b) the
lowest hWER.
The data for the Outfall 008 copper WER study produced two (2) Type II WERs and one (1) Type I
WER,therefore, condition#2 applies.
6.2 hWER Determination
The hWER (highest flow WER) is generally used to provide an environmentally conservative
estimate of the design-flow WER. hWER's are calculated using the design flow of the receiving
stream and the actual flow on the day of sampling. In the case of lakes, however, the design flow
of the'receiving stream'is'0' and would always equal the flow on the day of sampling. In this case,
the hWER will always equal the fWER as is not calculated separately.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 21 of 23
6.3 fWER Determination
Table 23:Copper WER values generated during the Sutton Outfall 008 Study:
Study Date Species Total Copper Dissolved hWER WER Type
WER Copper WER
4/28/2020 Pimephales promelas _ 7.315 7.860 n/a Type I
4/28/2020 Ceriodaphnia dubia _ 6.756 7.519 n/a Type I
5/27/2020 Pimephales promelas _ 8.466 8.330 n/a Type II
6/30/2020 Pimephales promelas 6.954 6.548 n/a Type II
The three sampling events produced one(1)Type I WER and two(2)Type II WER's. Since there was
one (1)Type I WER,the second condition applies. The fWER is the lowest of the following:
1. Lowest Type I Copper WER
2. Lowest hWER(not applicable to this study)
3. Geometric mean of all Copper WER's
For the total copper fWER,the Type I WER is 7.315 and the geometric mean of all WER's is 7.552.
The total copper fWER is 7.315.
For the dissolved copper fWER, the Type I WER is 7.860 and the geometric mean of all WER's is
7.540. The dissolved copper fWER is 7.540.
6.4 Secondary Species Confirmation of fWER
The C. dubia WER and endpoints meet the criteria for a secondary species confirmation of the
primary species fWER as it meets the following:
➢ The Ceriodaphnia dubia total copper WER value of 6.756 is within three (3)times the total
copper fWER of 7.315,
➢ The C. dubia dissolved copper WER value of 7.519 is within three (3) times the dissolved
copper fWER of 7.540,
➢ The C. dubia total copper endpoints were lower than the P. promelas endpoints for the
same sample,
➢ The C.dubia dissolved copper endpoints were lower than the P.promelas endpoints for the
same sample.

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 22 of 23
Section 7: Blank Analysis Results
Blanks were collected for copper analysis at various points during the WER studies. All analytical
reports for the blanks are in the appendix associated with each study. The results indicate there
were no pervasive issues with copper contamination during the study.
For Study#1,the field blank and all laboratory blanks resulted in copper< 2 µg/L.
For Study#2,the field blank and all laboratory blanks resulted in copper<2 µg/L.
For Study#3,the field blank and all laboratory blanks resulted in copper<2 µg/L.
Section 8: Copper LC50 Comparison with Other Laboratory Data
Control charts that demonstrate the health of the test organisms are included with the toxicity
test reports for each study.
Table 24: Comparison of copper LC50 values generated for C. dubia<24 hours old in laboratory
dilution water with results from another laboratory. All LC50 values are normalized to a
hardness of 25 mg/L.
Study/Facility Mean LC50 Value Range (2SD)
(µg/L) (µg/L)
Sutton Outfall 008 WER-April 28, 2020 4.018
Shealy Consulting, LLC. Copper Control Chart 3.08 1.35—4.82
Table 25: Comparison of copper LC50 values generated for P. promelas<24 hours old in
laboratory dilution water with results from another laboratory. All LC50 values are normalized
to a hardness of 25 mg/L.
Study/Facility Mean LCso Value Range (2SD)
(µg/L) (1tg/L)
Sutton Outfall 008 WER-April 28, 2020 11.53
Sutton Outfall 008 WER- May 27, 2020 11.83
Sutton Outfall 008 WER-June 30, 2020 21.34
Shealy Consulting, LLC. Copper Control Chart 20.8 0.1—44.1

Copper WER Development
Duke Energy Sutton 008
Shealy Consulting,LLC.
Page 23 of 23
Section 9: References
North Carolina Administrative Code(NCAC).2016.North Carolina Surface Water Quality
Standards Table. 15A NCAC 02B.
US Environmental Protection Agency(1994). Interim Guidance on Determination and Use of
Water-Effect Ratios for Metals. EPA 823-B-94-001. Office of Water, Washington,D.C.
US Environmental Protection Agency(1995). 1995 Updates: Water Quality Criteria Documents
for the Protection of Aquatic Life in Ambient Water.EPA 820-B-96-001. Office of Water,
Washington,D.C.
US Environmental Protection Agency(1996). The Metals Translator:Guidance for Calculating a
Total Recoverable Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion. EPA823-B-96-007. Office of
Water, Washington, D.C.
US Environmental Protection Agency(2001). Streamlined Water-Effect Ratio Procedure for
Discharges of Copper. EPA-822-R-01-005.Office of Water,Washington,D.C.
US Environmental Protection Agency(2002). Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of
Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms.Fifth Edition EPA
821-R-02-012. Environmental Research Laboratory,Duluth,MN.
US Environmental Protection Agency(2002). National Recommended Water Quality Criteria:
2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 November 2002. Office of Water,Washington,D.C.
US Environmental Protection Agency(2007). Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria—
Copper. EPA 822-R-07-001. Office of Water,Washington,D.C.

APPENDIX A
WER #1 TEST REPORTS
April 28, 2020

•
• CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
•
Client Name: ‘(--Ne___ -6 ems(? l� , 1® (' `
, ( Address: )\ ��U D (\ . —\EL.rex`t'\0,,\l 6 c- -
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
\\ cam.% n (\ A)�- ���a
Report to:
P Ce:Ao..r,,Z , c" ,J'enVn C'v___6o (A_vKe- erle,rt6y
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: q Lp_„ f-71_ GC„ Fax: //
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number: `
Project Name: a 5 A*-10""i\ W Re Analyses
Project Number:
15 5-5 v s
pH Checked Upon Receipt
Ct.<0.2 mg/I Upon Receipt
Preservatives
C V L: V �
Sample Identification `„ s _ ;: V L -0 0
E Q.) is ; } a ... . a "'
°J oe U r
a. ;, � ? Uc e ;? O (A"xO
E ` . v, a - c_ c c (4, z U . A' 3 /Field
: z4lIp.(
°C) Comments
2
3
4
5
6
Sample Condition Upon Receipt !Relinquished By (Company I/J^DDaate I Timee� (Accepted By (Company I Date I Time
Temperature CC) �J.0' (_ ( ,b I v �k rJV.� e. a-_2 , 12 I o .-e `jl, o1/4k`"L - 1.121
: Y / N O
Received on Ice
F=2�7� oa•�-� loos � oa-1.1-to tw)S
Sealed Cooler: / N 4b1.-2. ICI\ •kl k
Samples Intact: Y / N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and S ignature I Date
Print Name tof Sam er:
Signature of Sampler,- -7

WEATHER DATA SUMMARY
APRIL 2020
FACILITY: Duke L.V. Sutton /Outfall 008
Weather 1: On-site monitoring station (@ effluent channel)
Weather 2: NWS/New Hanover International Airport, North Carolina
Max
Date Avg Temp High Temp Low Temp Precip Wind Weather
(F) (F) (F) (IN) (mph) Station ID
4/20/2019 51 66 51 0.41 25.00 1
4/21/2019 62 76 47 0.00 28.00 2
4/22/2019 55 73 54 0.00 18.00 1
4/23/2019 66 71 50 0.31 47.00 1
4/24/2019 67 79 62 0.12 15.00 1
4/25/2019 65 68 61 0.00 15.00 1
4/26/2019 68 78 64 0.46 21.00 1
4/27/2019* 53 72 53 0.00 21.00 1
4/28/2019 63 78 47 0.00 20.00 2
4/29/2019 70 80 60 0.00 28.00 2
4/30/2019 66 73 58 0.95 32.00 2
`Sampling Date
I

ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING SOLUTIONS, INC.
TOXICITY TEST REPORT
INTRODUCTION/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Report Date: June 19,2020
Revision: 1
1. Client: Shealy Consulting, LLC
2. Study: Water-Effect Ratio testing of L.V.Sutton Energy Complex, Pond Water
3. Samples Tested: Pond Water
4- Test and Sample Dates: Sample date: April 27,2020
Test dates: April 28—30,2020
5. Test Species: Fathead Minnows(Pimephales promelas)
Daphnids(Ceriodaphnia dubia)
6. Test Type: Acute Toxicity Test(EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2002.0 and 2000.0)
7. Nominal Concentrations Tested: LABWATER tests:
P.promelas: 2.5,3.9,6.0,9.1, 14, 21, 32 ug/L Cu
C.dubia: 1.6, 2.5, 3.9,6.0,9.1, 14 uR/L Cu
SIMSTREAM tests:
C. dubia: 14,21, 32,49, 75, 116, 179 ug/L Cu
P.promelas: 21,32,49,75, 116, 179, 275 ug/L Cu
8. Client Contact: Beth Thompson
Phone#: [phone]
9. Consulting/Testing Lab: Environmental Testing Solutions, Inc.(ETS)
10. Lab Contact: Jim Sumner
Phone#: [phone]
SAMPLE CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Samples:
1. Sample Type: Grab
2. Sample Information:
Location Date/Time Collected Date/Time Received Arrival Date/Time Used
MM-DD-YY Time ET MM-DD-YY Time ET Temp. MM-DD-YY Time ET
(°C)
Pond Water 04-27-20 1030 04-28-20 1005 3.0 04-28-20 1130-1208
1

3. Sample Manipulation:
Lab Water test:
Synthetic water was prepared according to EPA protocol,which had a hardness
of 52 mg/L CaCO3. The synthetic water hardness was similar to site water
received from the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex(47 mg/L CaCO3).
A primary stock solution was prepared by diluting 0.3930 g CuSO4*SH2O in
1000 mL deionized water. The nominal copper concentration of this stock
solution was 100 mg/L.
A secondary stock solution was prepared by diluting 10 mL primary stock
solution into 1000 mL synthetic water(1000 pg/L Cu).
Test solutions evaluated for toxicity were prepared using this secondary stock
solution and were diluted using synthetic water.
Site Water tests:
Site water received from the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex had a hardness of 47
mg/L CaCO3.
The same primary stock solution prepared for the Lab Water test was used for
the Site Water tests. This primary stock solution was prepared by diluting
0.3930 g CuSO4*SH2O in 1000 ml deionized water. The nominal copper
concentration of this stock solution was 100 mg/L.
A secondary stock solution was prepared by diluting 10 mL primary stock
solution into 1000 mL site water(1000 µg/L Cu).
Test solutions evaluated for toxicity were prepared using this secondary stock
solution and were diluted using site water.
All test solutions were warmed to test temperature(25.0± 1.0°C)in a warm
water bath.
2

Nominal and measured total and dissolved copper analyses are provided below (µg/L Cu).
Blank glassware check: 2.0 µg/L
LABWATER Tests:
Ceriodaphnia Minnows
Initial Final Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved
Control 2.0 <2.0 4.0 <2.0
1.6
2.5
3.9
6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0
9.1 8.0 7.0 8.0
14.0 11.0 9.0 12.0
21.0 17.0 15.0 16.0
32.0 26.0 23.0 23.0
SIMSTREAM Tests:
Ceriodaphnia Minnows
Initial Final Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved
Control 5.0 6.0 5.0 6.0
14.0
21.0
32.0 32.0 29.0 31.0
49.0 45.0 41.0 46.0 45.0
75.0 64.0 71.0 67.0 72.0
116.0 90.0 107.0 91.0
179.0 166.0 147.0 149.0
275.0 240.0 210.0 222.0
3

TEST CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Pimephales promelas Ceriodaphnia dubia
Test Organisms:
1. Source: In-house Cultures In-house Cultures
2. Age: < 24-hours old <24-hours old
Test Method Summary:
1. Test Conditions: Static Static
2. Test Duration: 48-hours 48-hours
3. Control/Dilution Water:
LABWATER test: Synthetic water Synthetic water
SIMSTREAM test: Site water Site water
4. Number of Replicates: 2 4
5. Organisms per Replicate: 10 5
6. Test Initiation: (Date/Time)
LABWATER test: 04-28-20 1120 ET 04-28-20 1153 ET
SIMSTREAM test: 04-28-20 1130 ET 04-28-20 1208 ET
7. Test Termination: (Date/Time)
LABWATER test: 04-30-20 1120 ET 04-30-20 1154 ET
SIMSTREAM test: 04-30-20 1132 ET 04-30-20 1209 ET
8. Test Temperature: 25.0±1.0°C 25.0± 1.0°C
9. Physical/Chemical
Measurements: Parameters measured in the full-strength sample in the laboratory were
temperature, DO, pH, conductivity, alkalinity, hardness and total residual
chlorine. Intermediate and final measurements of temperature, DO and pH
were made at 24 and 48 hours, respectively.
10. Statistics: Statistics were performed according to methods prescribed by EPA
using ToxCalc version 5.0.32 statistical software (Tidepool Scientific Software,
McKinneyville, CA).
4

TOXICITY TEST RESULTS(see Appendix B for Bench Sheets)
1 LABWATER test:
Results of a Pimephales promelos 48-hour Acute/LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted April 28—30, 2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
2.5 100 100
3.9 100 100
6.0 100 100
9.1 100 100
14 100 100
21 95 95
32 40 25
LCso(µg/L Cu) 30.2 28.3
95%Confidence 27.1—35.5 25.5—31.4
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 24.6 23.0
95%Confidence 22.0—28.9 20.7—25.5
Interval WA Cu)
Measured: Dissolved Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 21.7 20.3
95%Confidence 19.4—25.6 18.3—22.6
Interval(µg/L Cu)
5

2. LABWATER test:
Results of a Ceriodaphnia dubia 48-hour Acute/LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted April 28—30, 2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
1.6 100 100
2.5 100 100
3.9 100 100
6.0 100 100
9.1 80 60
14 0 0
LCso(µg/L Cu) 10.4 9.5
95%Confidence
Interval(pet Cu) 9.6—11.2 8.7—10.5
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 8.7 8.0
95%Confidence
Interval(µg/L Cu) 8.1—9.3 7.3—8.7
Measured: Dissolved Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 7.5 7.1
95%Confidence
7.1—7.9 6.6—7.5
Interval(µg/L Cu)
6

3. SIMSTREAM test:
Results of a Pimepha/es promelos 48-hour Acute/LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted April 28—30, 2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
21 100 100
32 100 100
49 100 100
75 100 90
116 90 70
179 80 50
275 50 25
LCso(µg/L Cu) 275.4 174.9
95%Confidence
221.2—442.8 145.6—221.7
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 249.3 152.8
95%Confidence 196.2—411.7 126.1-196.3
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Dissolved Copper _
LCso(µg/L Cu) 209.9 145.1
95%Confidence
175.9-316.0 123.8-177.8
Interval WA Cu)
7

4, SIMSTREAM test:
Results of a Ceriodaphnia dubio 48-hour Acute/LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted April 28—30, 2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
14 100 100
21 100 100
32 100 100
49 95 75
75 0 0
116 0 0
179 0 0
.4 m
LCso(µg/L Cu) 59.3 54.5
95%Confidence 56.9—61.9 50.2—59.2
Interval(fig/L Cu)
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 52.7 49.2
95%Confidence 51.0—54.6 46.0—52.6
Interval WA Cu)
Measured: Dissolved Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 52.8 48.2
95%Confidence 50.5—55.1 44.2—52.6
Interval(µg/L Cu)
8

Appendix A
ADDITIONAL TOXICITY TEST INFORMATION
SUMMARY OF METHODS
1. Pimephales promelas
Tests were conducted according to EPA-821-R-02-012 using two replicates, each containing ten test
organisms, per treatment. Test vessels consisted of 500-mL plastic disposable cups,each containing 250
mL of test solution.
2. Ceriodaphnia dubia
Tests were conducted according to EPA-821-R-02-012 using four replicates,each containing five test
organisms, per treatment. Test vessels consisted of 40-mL polypropylene cups,each containing
30-mL of test solution.
DEVIATIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO TEST PROTOCOL
1. Pimephales promelas
None
2. Ceriodaphnia dubia
None
DEVIATIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO PRETEST CULTURE OR HOLDING OF TEST ORGANISMS
1. Pimephales promelas
None
2. Ceriodaphnia dubia
None
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL METHODS
1. Reagents,Titrants, Buffers,etc.:All chemicals were certified products used before expiration dates(where
applicable).
2. Instruments:All identification, service,and calibration information pertaining to laboratory
instruments is recorded in calibration and maintenance logbooks.
3. Temperature was measured by SM 2550 B-2010.
4. Dissolved oxygen was measured by SM 4500-0 G-2011,
S. The pH was measured by SM 4500-H+B-2011.
6. Conductance was measured by SM 2510 B-2011.
7. Alkalinity was measured by SM 2320 B-2011.
8. Total Hardness was measured by SM 2340 C-2011.
9

9. Total residual chlorine was measured by the ORION Electrode Method 97-70-1977.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Toxicity Test Methods: All phases of the study including, but not limited to,sample collection, handling and
storage;glassware preparation;test organism culturing/acquisition and acclimation;test organism handling
during test;and maintaining appropriate test conditions were conducted according to the protocol as
described in this report and EPA-821-R-02-012. Any known deviations were noted during the study and are
reported herein.
REFERENCE TOXICANT TESTS PP(See Appendix C for control chart information))
1. Test Type: 48-hour acute tests with results expressed as LCso values in g KCl/L or g NaCl/L.
2. Standard Toxicant: Potassium Chloride(KCI)or Sodium Chloride(NaCI).
3. Dilution Water Used:Moderately synthetic s nthetic water.
4. Statistics: Probits Analysis,Spearman-Karber,Trimmed Spearman-Karber, or graphical method.
REFERENCES
1. USEPA, Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and
Marine Organisms, EPA-821-R-02-012(October 2002).
2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,22nd Edition,2012.
3. Quality Assurance Program: Standard Operating Procedures, Environmental Testing
Solutions, Inc. (most current version).
4. USEPA,Streamlined Water-Effect Ratio Procedure for Discharges of Copper, EPA-822-R-01-005(March 2001).
10

Appendix B
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORDS
TOXICITY TEST BENCH SHEETS
11

•
•
CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
•
• Client Name: ,..03\4,„_,e -y. Xc) A
' Address: \ e`' 0 r\ , —1 eG.rwN P \6
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
`\\ (.C; (� A)C__ ��y a
Report to: ('e)`c�r,.�. , C�k Je��cC'� cLvKe— ene.%y
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: q l O—g�j_2p(„.,4.4 Fax: //
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: "� VV Re nested.Anal se
Project Number:
1 �-6 , s
pH Checked Open Receipt
CI,<0.2 mg/I Upon Receipt
Preservatives
Sample Identification u e c ° �- L
E U L. a+ u v 0
kid
u n ? ' ! e i V G o O I
3 FieldoE i - ... x 2 Temp.(DC) Comments
' ` E„ 1�/ Q, 2ooux@,oZ,a.1 y 27-xo \04b tk l - 21,L l Pi-I" 6,q2-
3
c
6
Sample Condition Upon Receipt !Relinquished I jCompany IDate I Time lAccepted By (Company I Date I Time
Temperature(DC) .0 '`.b6n Itr C'k. )fib -I/_/_r-at!"2.O 42 !/O F-ex .X Oak Th10 Cikto
.,`
Received on Ice: 0 ! N 2 .)C, 04-18-10 (00S CE�, 0A-11.10
Sealed Cooler: EJ / N b'L . .5S1\ C kti‘
Samples Intact: 3 / N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Priptect Na !of Sam er v�\0 0�r..._ :?,- ., 0
Signature of Sampler2

Page 1 of 2
Acute LCs0 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas
EPA-821-R-02-012,Method 2000.0
Client Shealy Consulting,LLC
Facility L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,LABWATER
Project# L sac
S Sample# INJA
Dilution Preparation:
Test concentrations(µg/L) 2.5 3.9 6.0 9.1 14 21 32 1'stock usiutwn prepared by diluting 0.3930gCuso,'SH,O into 1000 ml delonised
water.2'stock solution prepared by diluting 10 m[]'stock solution into 1000 mL
mL 2°Stock 2 5 3.9 6.0 9 t 14 21 32 tab water.This r stock solution was used to prepare the concentrations evaluated
mi.Dilution water 998 996 994 991 986 979 963 for toxicity tab water was used as the control and diluent.
Total volume(ml) 1000 1000 1000 1C00 1000 1000 1000
Chemical Analyses: Hours
0 24 48
Concentration Analyst .7-5 rti TS Analyst identified for each day,performed pH,dissolved oxygen and conductivity
measurements only.Temperatures performed at the time of test Initiation or termination by
pH(S.U.) 7.76
69 77. the analyst performing the toxicity test.Alkalinity,hardness and total residual chlorine
l performed by the analysts identified on the test specific bench sheets and transcribed to this
Dissolved oxygen(mei) 7�j -i-`-f' v fY 6 7 bench sheet.
Control, Conductivityfµmhosicmi 8'0 Chemical analyses: j
LABWATER Alkalinity;met CaC01) v34 parameter Reporting limit Method number Meter Serial number
Hardness frog/LOCO./ Si.- pH 0.1 5.(1 SM 450044-8.2011 Acrumet AR20 933/2452
Temperature(`C) �.{1..A i ` '1 e1 •5 U.1 Dissolved oxygen 1 0 met SM 4500.0 G.2011 YSi Model 52CE 182104 i24
pHfSU.) "" �"7 �7} y`4/ ' 77 Conductivity 149srmhes/cm SM25109.2011 AccumetA320 93312452
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) 7e9 (af T�t1 7- Alkalinity 5.0 erg CaCO,/t SM 2320 8.2011 Accumet AA20 93312452
2.5 µal.
Conductivity{µmhos/cm) /75 Hardness 5.0 mg CaCOfl SM 2340 Ci2011 Not applicable Not applicable
Temperature(°C) '`A A -x.41 I,A, a Temperature 0.1°C SM 25E08.201a Digital Thermometer 'in61.4`E5
pH(SU.) 7(L 4.i . 771 J�4
Dissolved oxygen(met) 7 9 -4 / g'
3.9 pglL 7 E
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 7t s
Temperature(°c) Z45.4 -1.4.1 IAA.i
Dissolved oxygen(mg/1) O '7 4 7 g'
6.0 µg/L T
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) I75
Temperature(°C) 'IAA\ IAA. NI,1
pH(S.U.) 74,3 i 9-7 7.70
9.1 µg/L Dissolved oxygen(ing/1) 9 Y 1 "1_Q/ •
7 Ca
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 4a7/_
Temperature('C) ! 1..4•Q 14,k 17s�1.0
pH(S.U.) 7 S1 778
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) 8 ! 3.et 7
14 ugh
Conductivity(µmhos/cm)
Temperature('C) 'b1v Za,S AAA°q
pH(S.u) , 75, '7•s`, ?Ai'
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) , g j key.D/ cr.0
21 µg/L •
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 175" QY
'72J
Temperature('C) 1.4•k �/1k. 24.1
pH(S.U.) O 'l,�J r 76/
Dissolved oxygen(mg/tl 4 62.0 9-°I
32 stett n
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) 'NO
1
Temperature(°C) 1, ,g IA 14.ct
SOP AT 18.Sevislen 6-f ehibit A113.3

Page 2 of 2
Acute LC50 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test, Species: Pimephales promelas
EPA-821-R-02-012,Method 2000,0
Client L.V.Sutton Energy Complex, LABWATER
Project tt 1SoS4 Sample It NIA
reeding Test InilletIon or Termination Location Randomidng tAeWATER
Hour: Date
Time Analyst Time Analyst Incubator/She5 Template Patch
�2., Uk e1Sse10 • o$SS 1‘'w � 1.C.. eeb tikii.vto
24
(A.1.et'to 4+1,1^"
48
•Test organisms were fed in holding 2 to S hours prior to test Initiation.Test organisms wer4ri*fed during the lest.
Test Organism Information:
Organism source: In-house Culture
Spawn date: Oda••1°.1.0
Age(1 to 14 days old): <24-hours oid
Date and time organisms OA••21'1.0 1SS� TO
were born between: (Alt,'2.o OQIS
Average transfer volume: <0.25 mt
Transfer bowl information: pH(S U) I,
Temperature rCl: 1.1/41•a
viva!Data (number of living organisms):
Control 2.5 µg/L 3.9 µg/L 6.0 µg/L 9.1 µg/L 14 µg/L 21 µg/L 32 µg/L
Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate
Hours
A B C © E F G H I 1 K L K L K L
0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
nniahnn
24 /b l0 10 10 10 It) 10 IQ tv /0 IO tp 10 �`� d 46
`k
tat 14
48 /0 I /0 /0 /0 / 0 /0 /0 / 0 /0 /0 /0 /0 9. 3 2_
Termination
Mean Survival 11)07. MCAMCA • _ I tZ l _ I opt. I U01. 1061. _ g 7 S I. -is7.
Comment codes: d=dead,u=unhealthy,bs=bent spines,s=stressed
‘li ee•L
Statistics: NOMII4Ak-- TOT FOl..
Di5::,aLve;a
Method Alec yr- Pti.o 6II- P644,1T
Lower 95% S �•! t
conRdencelimit(%) Z "w 1I L„ 2-0. ` i't^' iS. .. I s.-
Upper W ayr A U
ZS.S lit z + j0 R..
95X confidence limit VA) 31tt �0-
, _al L.
2 'b
48.hour tCso(%) 1.FI.J [e1 d2}'L
ents: —3,.0 a )L. 10.5 '!r
!
e
SOP AT18-Revision Et-Ealublt AT18.3

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: LAOWATER
End Dale. 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species. PP-Pirnephales promelas
Comments. NOMINAL VALUES
Conc-ugIL 1 2
0-Control 1,0000 1.0000
2.5 1.0000 1.0000
3.9 1.0000 1.0000
6 1.0000 1.0000
9.1 1.0000 1.0000
14 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 0.9000
32 0.4000 0.4000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugfL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
2.5 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1145 0 20
3.9 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1145 0 20
6 1.0000 1 0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2 810 0.1145 0 20
9.1 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1145 0 20
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1145 0 20
21 0.9500 0.9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 2.000 2.810 0.1145 1 20
'32 0.4000 0.4000 0.6847 0.6847 0.6847 0.000 2 17.851 2.810 0.1145 12 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 21 32 25.923 0,04783 0.04906 0 12967 0.00186 9.9E-07 7,8
Treatments vs 0-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma tier
Slope 10.4279 2.93785 4.66973 16.1861 0 0.00516 11,0705 1 1.48072 0.0959 3
Intercept -10.441 4.28395 -18.837 -2.0443
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0 9:
EC01 2.674 18.0981 10.0916 21.7472
ECOS 3.355 21.037 13.989 24 1891 o a
EC 1 O 3.718 22.7942 16.5812 25.7061 0.7 y
EC15 3.964 24.0619 18.5347 26.872
EC20 4.158 25.1195 20.1851 27.926 %0.6-
•
EC25 4.326 26.0639 21.6432 28.9623 a 0 5_
EC40 4.747 28.6039 25,2286 32.4688 w
EC50 5.000 30.2496 27.1264 35.4709 rx 0 4
EC60 5.253 31.9901 28.7939 39.2527 0 3-
EC75 5.674 35.1076 31.2531 47.2587 0 2
•
EC80 5.842 36.4274 32.1781 51.0422
EC85 6.036 38.0286 33.2445 55 9145 0 1 •
EC90 6.282 40,1436 34.5854 62.8039 0 0• e,•.a q•. ,
EC95 6.645 43.4966 36.6009 74.7535 1 10 100 1000
EC99 7.326 50.5602 40.562 104 003 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1 f • ♦ • ♦
1-tail,0.05 level
0 9 of significance
0.8
0.7
m
os
tn0.5
104
v
[N
0.3
0.2
0.1
04 ,
p N GT tl11 7 .- ..-
IN
el
C N ' J'
U
6
Page 1 ToxCalc v5 0 32 Reviewed byr„ 1

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: LAr3WATER
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Plmephales promelas
Comments: NOMINAL VALUES
Conc-ug/L 1 2
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000
2.5 10000 1.0000
3.9 1.0000 1,0000
6 1 0000 1.0000
9.1 1.0000 1.0000
14 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 0.9000
32 0.3000 0.2000
Transform:Aresin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugIL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
2.5 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1,4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 000 2.810 0.1405 0 20
3.9 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1405 0 20
6 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1405 0 20
9.1 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1405 0 20
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0,000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1405 0 20
21 0.9500 0.9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 1.629 2.810 0.1405 1 20
*32 0.2500 0.2500 0.5216 0.4636 0.5796 15.723 2 17.804 2 810 0.1405 15 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05( NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MS8 MSE F-Prob df
Dunnetl's Test 21 32 25.923 0,06194 0.06353 0.19467 0.0025 1 0E-06 7.8
Treatments vs 0-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiduciai Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 12.6911 10528 6.70764 18.6746 0 0.00106 11 0705 1 1 45197 0.0788 3
Intercept -13.427 4.4375 -22.125 -4.7297
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 09
ECO1 2.674 18.5639 12.5065 21.6711
ECO5 3.355 21.0071 15.6862 23.7461 0 5-
EC10 3.718 22.4385 17.6554 24.9947 0.7
•
EC15 3.964 23.4589 19.0883 25.9196
EC20 4.158 24.3029 20.2787 26.7196 m 0.8-
EC25 4.326 25.0511 21.3275 27.4661 a o 5-
EC40 4.747 27.0403 24.0005 29.7067 w
E050 5.000 28.3122 25.5484 31.4084 12 0.4
EC60 5.253 29.6439 26.9961 33.4539 0 3-
EC75 5.674 31.9978 29.177 37.6742 0.2
EC80 5.842 32.9829 29.9864 39.6302
EC85 6.036 34.1696 30.9067 42.1087 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 35.7235 32.0456 45.5329 0.0 e. • .o..o, a . .,,,.
EC95 6.645 38.1575 33.7259 51.2563 1 10 100
EC99 7.326 43.1796 36.9502 64.2964 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1 e • • • •
1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
08
0.7
n
2 0.6
rg0.5
=0,4
CO
03
•
0.2
01
0 ,
N cn
('1 en 7 N P
O
U
Q
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 X Q
9 Reviewed by: 1(�

J
Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date. 5/27; VV/1141aTest ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: tABWATER
End Date: 5 2020e.\•3O•ttrLab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02.012 Test Species: PP-Pimephates prometas
Comments: Total Concentrations
Conc-uglL 1 2
Control 1.0000 1.0000
5 1.0000 1.0000
8 1.0000 1.0000
11 1.0000 1.0000
17 1.0000 0.9000
26 0.4000 0.4000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Rasp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0 000 2 0 20
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.1331 0 20
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.1331 0 20
11 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.1331 0 20
17 0.9500 0.9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 1.732 2.830 0.1331 1 20
'26 0.4000 0.4000 0.6847 0.6847 0.6847 0.000 2 15.459 2.830 0.1331 12 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 17 26 21.0238 0.05782 0 05931 0.17063 0 00221 2.3E-05 5.6
Treatments vs Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Her
Slope 10.3224 2.93025 4.57911 16.0657 0 0.00331 7.81472 0.99995 1.39033 0.09688 3
Intercept -9.3516 4.00856 -17.208 -1.4948
TSCR t.o
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9-
ECO1 2.674 14.6205 8.02032 17.6167
EC05 3.355 17.021 11.1917 19.6095 0.8-
EC10 3.718 18.4578 13.3122 20.848 0.7
EC15 3.964 19.4951 14.9155 21.8003
EC20 4.158 20.361 16.2733 22.6618 0 6-
EC25 4.326 21.1344 17.4752 23.5099 a0.5-
EC40 4,747 23.2161 20.4356 26.3918 H
EC50 5.000 24.5659 22.0006 28.8747 0.4-
EC60 5.253 25.9942 23.3718 32.0152 0.3-
EC75 5.674 28.5545 25.3887 38.6895 0.2;
EC80 5.842 29.6392 26.1466 41.8523
EC85 6.036 30.9556 27.0202 45.932 0.1-
EC90 6.282 32.6953 28.1187 51.7127 0 0
EC95 6.645 35.4553 29.7701 61.768 10 ice
EC99 7.326 41.2764 33.0173 86.5067 Dose ug1L
Dose-Response Plot
1
1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
0.8
07
Z 0.6
yo5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Page 1 ToxCatc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date. 5f271 L oo412.11)Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: LABWATER
End Date: /2020 O4•30.1ALab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pirrephates prometas
Comments: Total Concentrations
Conc-ug/L 1 2
Control 1.0000 1.0000
5 1.0000 1.0000
8 1.0000 1.0000
11 1.0000 1.0000
17 1.0000 0.9000
26 0.3000 0.2000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t•Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 14120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 01634 0 20
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.1634 0 20
11 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1,4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.1634 0 20
17 0.9500 0.9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 1.411 2.830 0.1634 1 20
'26 0.2500 0.2500 0.5216 0.4636 0.5796 15.723 2 15.419 2.830 0.1634 15 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TO MSOu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnetl's Test 17 26 21.0238 0.07527 0.0772 0.25679 0.00333 2.3E-05 5,6
Treatments vs Control
Maximum Likelihood•Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma her
Slope 12,5765 3.03378 6.63031 18.5227 0 0.00058 7.81472 1 1.36132 0.07951 3
Intercept -12.121 4.13575 -20.227 -4.0147
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9
•
ECO1 2.674 15,0089 10.0531 17.5508
EC05 3.355 17.0034 12.6429 19.2454 0 8-
E010 3.718 18.1729 14.2502 20.2656 0,7
EC 15 3.964 19.007 15.4211 21.0217
EC20 4.158 19 6972 16.3949 21.6758 H 0.6-
EC25 4.326 20.3092 17.2534 22.2863 S.0.5
EC40 4.747 21.9371 19.4436 24.1208 N
EC50 5.000 22.9786 20.7128 25.5162 0.4
EC60 5.253 24.0696 21.8998 27.1959 0.3-
EC75 5.674 25.9989 23.6872 30.668 0.2-
EC80 5.842 26.8067 24.3503 32.2793
EC85 6.036 27.7801 25,1044 34.3225 0.1-
EC90 6.282 29.0552 26.0375 37.1476 0 0
EC95 6.645 31.0536 27.4145 41.8754 1 10 1C0
EC99 7.326 35.1803 30.0579 52.6691 Dose uglL
Dose-Response Plot
1-tail.0.05 level
0.9 of significance
O8
0,7
0.6
rj 0.5
OA
03
0.2
01
0
Page 1 ToxCaic v5 0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 5/27 0 174u'soTest ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: LABWATER
End Dale: /2020O'Sil'to Lab 10: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol, Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-P,mephales promelas
Comments: Dissolved Concentrations
Conc-ug/L 1 2
Control 1.0000 1 0000
5 1.0000 1.0000
7 1.0000 1.0000
9 1.0000 1.0000
15 1.0000 0.9000
23 0.4000 0.4000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugiL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Rasp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 01331 0 20
7 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0 000 2 0.000 2.830 0.1331 0 20
9 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.1331 0 20
15 0.9500 0.9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 1.732 2.830 0.1331 1 20
'23 0.4000 0.4000 0.6847 0.6847 0.6847 0.000 2 15.459 2.830 0.1331 12 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSOp MSB MSE F-Prob d1
Dunnett's Test 15 23 18.5742 0.05782 0.05931 0.17063 0.00221 2 3E-05 5,6
Treatments vs Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 10,2372 2.94533 4.46433 16.01 0 0.00092 7.81472 0.99999 1.33694 0.09768 3
Intercept -8.6865 3.87291 -16.277 -1.0956
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0 9
•
ECO 1 2.674 12.8736 6.89352 15.5594
EGOS 3.355 15.0062 9,70493 17,3245 0.9-
EC10 3.718 16.2839 11.5985 18.4215 0.7,
EC 15 3.964 17,2069 13.0367 19.2652
EC20 4.158 17.9776 14.2588 20.0292 w 06-
EC25 4.326 18.6663 15.3434 20.7827 a0.5-
EC40 4 747 20.5209 18.0207 23.361 ul -
EC50 5.000 21.7243 19.4311 25.6058 cc 0.4
EC60 5.253 22.9981 20.6596 28.4635 0.3-
EC75 5.674 25.2832 22.4569 34.57 0.2
EC80 5.842 26.2517 23.1308 37.4745
EC85 6.036 27.4276 23.91371 41.2293 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 28.9822 24.8828 46.5839 0.0
EC95 6.645 31.4499 26.3495 55,8786 1 10 100
EC99 7.326 36.6598 29.2339 78.9502 Dose ug1L
Dose-Response Plot
1 • • •
I 1-tail,0.05 level
O.B of significance
0B
07
m
0,6
2
rn 0.5
TtA O
N
0.3
0.2
O.1
0
n r rn - N
c
u
U
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Page 1 of 2
Acute LCso Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas
EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2000.0
Client Shealy Consulting,LLC
Facility L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,SIMSTREAM
Project It tS Sample ti -Ltoq° k.0 L
Dilution Preparation.
Test concentrations(pg/t) 21 32 49 75 116 179 275 t°stocksolutionpreparedbydilu0ng0.3930gCu50fSH,o'mto1000msdeionited
water.1°stork solution prepared by diluting 10 mt.1°slmk solution Into 1000 mt.
mL2°Stock 21 32 49 75 116 179 275 SIMSTREAM. this)'stock solution Wes used lo wove theConcentration&evaluated
mL Dilution water 979 968 951 925 884 821 725 fortoaicity. 5iMSTREAM was used as the control and diluent
Total volume(ml) 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Chemical Analyses: Hours
0 24 48
ConcentraUcn f M s r� Analyst identified for each day,performed pH,dissolved oxygen and conductivity
Analyst
i ! t measurements only.Temperatures performed at the time of test initiation or termination by
pH(S.Lt.) "7/7 11 -7 ✓c-3 '7 L.'5 the analyst performing the toxicity test.Alkalinity,hardness and total residual chlorine
( �I�1 7 `w' performed by the analysts identified on the test specific bench sheets and transcribed to this
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) 79 -7.6 7 9 bench sheet.
Control, Conductivity(µmhos/cm) '1e1 Chemical analyses:
SiMSTREA.M Alkalinity(mg/L CaCO,) eel
to earamelcr Reporting limit Method number Meter Serial number
Hardness Img/L CaCO,) 4'1 pH 015.0 SM 4500.H.132011 Accumet AR20 93312452
Temperature(°C) i....t14 1..0 -LA°S Dssolved oxygen 1.0 mg/I. 5M 4500.0 G-2011 vSI Model52CE 180104324
pH(S.U) f 3 75`3 Conductivity 14.9 limbos/ern SM 2510 t1 2011 Accumet 020 93311452
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) 4 5 3 '�-/ 7.cy Alkalinity 5.0 mg CaCO3/L 5M 2320 8-2011 Alcvmet ARV) 9331/452
21 pg/L V // -g .
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) 2{°j°s r) Hardness 5.0 mg CaCO,/t. 3M 2340 C-2011 Hot applicable riot applicable
Temperature(°C) ' A -1fO.S y4,S Temperature U 1°C SM 25509•2010 Digital 7hermometes (�64 t)r 6H(5 U.) 733 't-.3 et7 7 c6 lW.�f
p
Dissolved oxygen(mg/lj C:0 p G r O
32 lie.. 75 / r7 .
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) 250 ,,++
Temperature("C) AAA �.4a•S TA,
pH(5.U,) 73iF M.6-vCfv 77Q
Dissolved oxygen(mg/l) Qr I 4 9,0
49 Wt.
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) 250
Temperaturet°C) L44°1 14• S ��•.
pH(5.u.) 7.36 :36, 7.56
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) TS. 1 7.q g r 0
' 75 oat Q• 1 f
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) e'750
Temperature(°C) �°q 121.1 ""1.4,6
pH(S.Li) 7314 '7.3Z. 7.119
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) ? I �7 R 8.o
116 pg/t T
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) R57
Temperature(°C) -IA.G ..-1•� .1 -I r[°"7
R.pH(Su.) 7. .1 -4-30 7!4(
Dissolved oxygen(mg/l) . 4° () '7( O O
179 palT 5tj t•tit
Conductivity(ymhos/cm) `- J�7 •5`
Temperature(°C) -7r -p
-0.i -it.i,y 1..4..1
pH ls.u.) lr/S `E•ZC0 1 7 7 V
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) (S.C sp l _ �°t
275 pg/1 V
Conductivity jpmhos/cm) ,I61
Temperature(°C) i1r t Z41e 6, - t
SDP AT1g Revision 6-Exhrbrt ATla 3

Page 2 of 2
Acute LCso Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas
EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2000.0
Client L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,SIMSTREAM
Project# 1505k• Sample N ZO 0418.01-.,
feeding Telt Initiation or Termination Location Randomlring
Hours Date
Time Analyst Time Analyst incubator/Him Template
0
o*I.to o S SS � 1 t3 a y 't.: .R..eN
24 A
fAt•'L0.1p EL��3
48
..,m,N,a, 0A•3n•10 1131 . Q�Yf�\
•Test organisms were tea in ttoldmg 2 to 5 hours prior to lest initiation Test organisms were Ace du+mg the test
Test Organism Information:
Organism source: In-house Culture
Spawn date: Q*.L•S
Age(I to 14 days old): <24-hours old
Date and time organisms 0A•'l.V 10 \SS(i "rt)
were born between: .•1 •20 oeb
Average transfer volume: <0.25 mL J
Transfer bowl information: pH MU.): g,1}
Temperature(iC): `1„,1_0
viva/Data (number of living organisms):
or :
Control 21 µg/L 32 µg/L 49 µg/L 75 µg/L 116 µg/L 179 µg/L 275 µg/L
Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate
Hours
A a C D E F G H I 1 K L K L K L
0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
lotab0n
24 )0 10 16 1 p /0 (0 /0 /0 10 l'0 ct"k i4A g trA 5`t Ss.q
48 /0 /0 /0 rp /0 /0 /0 10 'd IA3.4 9 z.t
� + o 1 -t S S —L 3
Terrn.r.t.an
Mean Survival I OCI• 1 001. ( Oal1. _ 160. _ il DT- '1Cr- S O?. -1S ?.
Comment codes: d=dead,u=unhealthy,bs=bent spines,s=stressed
aa-h,
Statistics: Pk1HItJA I— 01"(\1... ►-1 SSoLVe.Zj 'C-0ThL._
/�
p \ssf,��e�
Method ftZL 1T Sir' oiSti" YILU�\'C` g((
Lower 95% tel \•LS•�
confidence limit(%) ItiSr 1lr 1t -It it... 1"i, .t.1!L p
Upper / p•f `' E a1 b� E 1A.p
95%confidence limit(%) zz t• ) l 1.• {1‘e _Ill..
1•' 1.6,GL t/v 1 E. i5,1 1�S•t
48-hour LC"(%) 1ltirg�/L.. ISE. i1.. 1` t.0 . l- o6t5•lo
i lets:
SOP ATIR•Revislon 6-Eshibn ATI33

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol:ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: NOMINAL VALUES
Conc-uglL 1 2
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 1.0000
32 1.0000 1.0000
49 1.0000 1.0000
75 1.0000 1.0000
116 0.9000 0.9000
179 0.8000 0.8000
275 0.5000 0.5000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-uglL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
21 1,0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.0281 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.0281 0 20
49 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.0281 0 20
75 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.0281 0 20
116 0.9000 0.9000 1.2490 1.2490 1.2490 0.000 2 16.297 2.810 0.0281 2 20
'179 0.8000 0.8000 1.1071 1.1071 1,1071 0.000 2 30.487 2.810 0.0281 4 20
*275 0.5000 0.5000 0.7854 0.7854 0.7854 0.000 2 62662 2.810 0.0281 10 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnelt's Test 75 116 93.2738 0.00952 0.00976 0 10355 0 0001 3.5E-11 7,8
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 4.04502 1.0323 2.02172 6.06832 0 0.74198 11.0705 0.98059 2.44 0.24722 4
Intercept -4.8699 2.35407 -9.4838 -0.2559
TSCR 10
Point Probits ugh 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9.
ECO1 2.674 73.2634 27.2808 104.611
ECO5 3.355 107.985 57.9825 139.033 o.8-
EC10 3.718 132.794 85.1095 164.439 0.7
EC15 3.964 152.678 108.541 187.08 -
EC20 4.158 170.584 129 542 210.703 a 0 ti'
EC25 4.326 187,61 148.332 237.169 a0.5
EC40 4.747 238.435 194.445 342.93 v,
EC50 5.000 275.424 221.223 442.826 tz 0 a
EC60 5.253 318.151 248.54 579.068 0.3
EC75 5.674 404.34 297.449 917.112 0.2-
EC80 5.842 444.698 318.579 1103.64
EC85 6.036 496.85 344.711 1371.05 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 571.246 380.168 1803.71
EC95 6.645 702.486 438.752 2713.26 0.0 ♦♦.♦.I 10 100 ,oco 10000
EC99 7.326 1035.42 572.117 5856.21 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1= • • ♦ 1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance 1
0.7
m
0.6
tj 05
=0.4
V
el
03
0.2
0.1
0
n 0,
, WI CO
e
U
O
Page 1 ToxCalc v5 0.32 Reviewed by. k

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Stan Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID' PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID. ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: NOMINAL VALUES
Con,c-ug/L 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 1.0000
32 1.0000 1.0000
49 1.0000 1.0000
75 0.8000 1.0000
116 0.7000 0.7000
179 0 5000 0.5000
275 0.2000 0.3000
Transform:Aresin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N f-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
21 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.2291 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.412C 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.2291 0 20
49 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 14120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.2291 0 20
75 0.9000 0.9000 1.2596 1.1071 1.4120 17.115 2 1.869 2.810 0.2291 2 20
'116 0.7000 0.7000 0.9912 0.9912 0.9912 0.000 2 5.161 2.810 0.2291 6 20
'179 0.5000 0.5000 0.7854 0.7854 0.7854 0.000 2 7.684 2.810 0,2291 10 20
'275 0.2500 0.2500 0.5216 0,4636 0.5796 15.723 2 10.919 2.810 0,2291 15 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail.0,05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 75 116 93.2738 0.11809 0.12112 0.23989 0.00665 2.0E-05 7,8
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma tier
Slope 3.7535 0.65767 2.46446 5.04254 0 0.82911 11.0705 0.97514 2.24282 0.26642 4
Intercept -3.4184 1.42579 -6.213 -0.6239
TSCR 1 0
Point Probits uglL 95'/ Fiducial Limits 09
ECO! 2.674 41.9798 21,2756 59.6775
EC05 3.355 63.768 39,5286 82.8817 0.8
EC10 3.718 79.688 54.5937 99.47 0.7
EC15 3.964 92.6183 67.4932 113,148 -
EC20 4.158 104.375 79.464 126,014 m 06-
EC25 4.326 115.645 90 929 138,946 a 0 5-
EC40 4.747 149.736 123.842 183.267 v,
EC50 5.000 174,913 145.604 221,728 tr 0''1
EC60 5.253 204.323 168,66 272,286 0,3-
EC75 5.674 264.556 210.904 391,161 0 2-
EC80 5.842 293.119 229.469 453.606
EC85 6 036 330.328 252.693 540.121 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 383.928 284,682 674.21 0o e• .,..
EC95 6.645 479.777 338.714 939.262 1 to 100 1000 10000
EC99 7.326 728.789 466.756 1758.76 Dose ugIL
Dose-Response Plot
I to - e
0.9' \\\ 1-tail,0.05 level
0 8 _ of significance
0.7
m
.2 0,6
y 0.5
=0,4
co
v
0,3
02
0.1
0
C hi
O
v
0
Page 1 ToxCatc v5.0.32 Reviewed by. ts,..

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID. SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA.821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Total Concentrations
Conc-ug!L 1 2
Control 1,0000 1.0000
32 1.0000 1.0000
45 1.0000 1.0000
64 1.0000 1.0000
90 0.9000 0.9000
166 0-8000 0.8000
240 0.5000 0.5000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugiL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Slat Critical MSD Resp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.0282 0 20
45 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.0282 0 20
64 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.0282 0 20
'90 0.9000 0.9000 1.2490 1.2490 1.2490 0.000 2 16.297 2.820 0.0282 2 20
'166 0.8000 0.8000 1.1071 1.1071 1.1071 0.000 2 30.487 2.820 0,0282 4 20
`240 0.5000 0.5000 0.7854 0.7854 0.7854 0.000 2 62.662 2.820 0.0282 10 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 64 90 75.8947 0.00956 0.0098 0.11368 0.0001 4.3E-10 6.7
Treatments vs Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma !ter
Slope 3.69499 0.90818 1.91495 5.47502 0 1 74272 9.48773 0 78294 2.39669 0.27064 4
Intercept -3.8557 2.01356 -7.8023 0.09083
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug(L 95%Fiducial Limits 09
ECOI 2.674 58.4916 21.6914 85.364 .
ECO5 3.355 69.4399 47.7971 117.089 0.8-
EC10 3.718 112.164 71.511 141.13 07,
EC15 3.964 130.675 92.2291 162.891
EC20 4.158 147.542 110.942 185.772 w 0.6-
EC25 4.326 163.737 127.845 211.445 n0.5-
EC40 4.747 212.875 170.516 314.022
EC50 5.000 249.281 196.203 411.713 o.a
EC60 5.253 291.914 222.942 546.612 0.3-
EC75 5.674 379.517 271.81 888.077 0.2-
EC80 5.842 421.176 293.239 1079.69
EC85 6.036 475.54 319.966 1357.47 0.1
EC90 6.282 554.019 356.597 1813.13 0 0 ... ......... . ...
EC95 6.645 694.78 417.942 2789.75 1 10 100 1000 10000
EC99 7.326 1062.39 560.824 6283.61 Dose ugh
Dose-Response Plot
1 • • • 1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
08
0.7
N CI.S
104
0.3
0.2
0.1
G ,
c9m N
o '
Page 1 ToxCalc v5 0.32 Reviewed by: Ins.

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir,Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitonng Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02.012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments- Total Concentrations
Conc-ug/L 1 2
Control 1.0000 1.0000
32 1.0000 1.0000
45 1.0000 1.0000
64 0.8000 1.0000
90 0.7000 0.7000
166 0.5000 0.5000
240 0.2000 0.3000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Slat Critical MSD Resp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.2458 0 20
45 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.2458 0 20
64 0.9000 0.9000 1.2596 11071 1.4120 17.115 2 1.749 2.820 0.2458 2 20
'90 0,7000 0.7000 0.9912 0.9912 0.9912 0.000 2 4.828 2.820 0.2458 6 20
'166 0.5000 0.5000 0.7854 0.7854 0.7854 0.000 2 7.188 2 820 0.2458 10 20
'240 0.2500 0.2500 0.5216 0.4636 0.5796 15.723 2 10.213 2.820 0.2458 15 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 64 90 75.8947 0.12998 0.13331 0.25386 0.0076 8.3E-05 6.7
Treatments vs Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi•Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma !ter
Slope 3.56236 0.5969 2.39243 4.7323 0 2.07554 9.48773 0.72187 2.18414 0.28071 4
Intercept -2.7807 1.24998 -5.2306 -0.3307
TSCR t 0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9
ECOI 2.674 33.9705 17.5775 48.3971
ECOS 3.355 52,7723 33.2216 68.7415 0 6-
EC10 3.718 66.7405 46.261 83.5699 07
EC15 3964 78.1983 57.4721 95.9536 -
EC20 4.158 88.6919 67.8959 107.713 „0.6-
EC25 4.326 98.8097 77.8929 119.616 a0.5-
EC40 4.747 129.724 106.757 160.664
EC50 5.000 152.805 126.134 196.296 0.4-
EC60 5.253 179.993 147.001 243.139 0 3-
EC75 5.674 236.306 185.996 353-75 0 2
EC80 5.842 263.264 203.37 412.183
EC85 6.036 298.591 225.264 493.492 01 -
EC90 6.282 349.853 255.667 620.224
EC95 6 645 442.454 307.566 872.793 1 10 too 1000 tc000
EC99 7.326 687.342 432 698 1665.44 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
.
0.9 1-tl,0.05
0.8 ofai signif cancelevel
0.7
0.6
Z
0.5
=0.4
03
0.2
Ot
0
N4 a m m m
C
O
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0 32 Reviewed oy:_

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephaies promelas
Comments: Dissolved Concentrations
Conc-ug/L 1 2
Control 1.0000 1.0000
29 1.0000 1.0000
41 1.0000 1.0000
71 1 0000 1.0000
107 0.9000 0.9000
147 0 8000 0.8000
210 0.5000 0.5000
Transform:Aresin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugfL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
29 1.0000 10000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.0282 0 20
41 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.0282 0 20
71 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.0282 0 20
•107 0.9000 0.9000 1.2490 1.2490 1.2490 0.000 2 16.297 2.820 0.0282 2 20
'147 0.8000 0.8000 1.1071 1.1071 1.1071 0.000 2 30.487 2.820 0.0282 4 20
'210 0.5000 0.5000 0.7854 0.7854 0.7854 0.000 2 62.662 2.820 0.0282 10 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Ounnett's Test 71 107 87.1608 0.00956 0.0098 0,11368 0.0001 4.3E-10 6,7
Treatments vs Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 5.01317 1.35348 2.36034 7.666 0 0.48166 9.48773 0.97526 2.32199 0.19947 4
Intercept -6.6405 2.9727 -12.467 -0.8141
TSCR 1 0-
Point Probits ugfL 95%Fiducial Limits 09
ECO1 2.674 72.1016 29.394 97.195
ECO5 3.355 98.6019 56.0319 121.644 0 8-
EC10 3.718 116.508 78.0431 138.836 0 7;
EC15 3.964 130.392 96.3577 153.736
EC20 4.158 142.597 112.345 169.066 1,0.0-
. .
EC25 4.326 153.974 126.273 186.169 8.0.5-
EC40 4.747 186,834 158.442 253.927 N
EC50 5.000 209.89 175.878 316.047 rr 0.a
EC60 5.253 235.791 193.028 397.855 0.3-
EC75 5.674 286.111 222.629 590.369 0.2-
EC80 5.842 308.94 235.073 692.011
EC85 6.036 337.858 250.219 833.572 0 1-
EC90 6.282 378.119 270.387 1054.63
EC95 6.645 446.784 302.869 1496,73 0.c •a
1 10 100 1000 10000
EC99 7.326 610.996 373.662 2894.3 Dose ug(L
Dose-Response Plot
1 • • • Hail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
0.8
0.7
I0.6 0.5
004
N
03
0.2
01
0 ,
° N ; r c
C is,
U
Page 1 ToxCeic v5.0.32 Reviewed by:'

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date. 4128/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Dissolved Concentrations
Conc-ug/L 1 2
Control 1.0000 1.0000
29 1.0000 1.0000
41 1.0000 1.0000
71 0.8000 1.0000
107 0.7000 0.7000
147 0.5000 0.5000
210 0.2000 0.3000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugIL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Rasp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1,4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
29 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.2458 0 20
41 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.2458 0 20
71 0.9000 0.9000 1.2596 1.1071 1.4120 17.115 2 1.749 2.820 0.2458 2 20
'107 0.7000 0.7000 0.9912 0.9912 0.9912 0.000 2 4.828 2.820 0.2458 6 20
"147 0.5000 0.5000 0.7854 0.7854 0.7854 0.000 2 7.188 2.820 0..2458 10 20
"210 0.2500 0,2500 0.5216 0.4636 0.5796 15.723 2 10.213 2.820 0.2458 15 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test{1-tail,0.05) NOEL LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 71 107 87.1608 0.12998 0.13331 0.25388 0.0076 8.3E-05 6,7
Treatments vs Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma !ter
Slope 4.381 0.83969 2.73521 6.02679 0 0.27992 9.48773 0.99107 2.16163 0.22826 3
Intercept -4.4701 1.77195 -7.9431 -0.9971
TSCR 1,0
Point Probits ugiL 95%Fiducial Limits 09
ECOS 2,674 42.719 21.5717 59.2039
ECOS 3.355 61.1193 37.7862 77.8278 0.8-
EC10 3.718 73.9784 50.6618 90.5509 0 7-
EC15 3.964 84.1502 61.468 100.742
EC20 4.158 93.2229 71.3698 110.127 tI,1 0
EC25 4.326 101.782 80.7605 119.411 c 05.
EC40 4.747 126.999 107.125 150.731
EC50 5.000 145.087 123 827 177.803
EC60 5.253 165.752 140.791 213.227 0.3-
EC75 5.674 206.818 170.398 294.986 0 2-
EC80 5.842 225.807 182.984 337.046 .
EC85 6.036 250.152 198.456 394.445 0 1 '
EC90 6.282 284.548 219.351 481.723 0 0 e ......
EC95 6 645 344.415 253.751 649.583 1 1e 100 1000 10000
EC99 7.326 492.764 331.89 1143.62 Dose uglL
Dose-Response Plot
19 •
0.9 1-tail,0.05 level
0.8 _ of significance
07
n
0.6
y 05
QA
m
03
0.2
01
0
V n O
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Page ion
Acute LCso Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Ceriodaphnia dubia
EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2002.0
Client Shealy Consulting,LLC
Facility L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,SIMSTREAM
Project# t So‹,g Sample# - 64:12.(51. ,
Dilution Preparation:
Test concentrations WA) 14 21 32 49 75 116 179 l'stock softMon prepared by diluting 0.3930g CuS0,*Sii3Otnto 1000 std.delonned
water.2"stock solution prepared by diluting 10 ml 1°stock solution Into 1000 art
mL 2°Stock 14 21 32 49 75 116 179 SIMSTREAM.This 2"stock solution was used to prepare the toncentrations evaluated
art Dilution water 986 979 968 951 925 884 821 for tox;city.SIMSTREAM was used as the control and dttuent.
Total volume(mi.) 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Chemical Analyses: Hours
0 24 48
Concentration Analyst / 5 T' Analyst identified(or each day.performed pH,dissolved oxygen and conductivity
measurements only.Temperatures performed at the time of test initiation or termination by
7'pH(S.U.) 7.1111 3 L5 7.61 the analyst performing the toxicity test.Alkalinity,hardness and total residual chlorine '
performed by the analysts Identified on the test specific bench sheets and transcribed to this
Dissolved oxygen img/L) 7.1 ,q O 7
bench sheet.
Control, Conductivity 1pmhos/cm) ,Id'f Chemical analyses:
SIMSTREAM
Alkalinity(mg/t CaCO3) ,1 Parameter Reporting limit Method number Meter Serial number
Hardness dmg/L Ca C0,1 -1 1 off 01 S.U. sM 45000Hsi 8.2011 Accumet A120 93312452
Temperature I'CI 1?', . 'Ls v` + °��ADissolved oxygen 1 0 mg/t SM 4500.0 G-2011 5SI Model 52CE 180104324
pH(5.IJ.( 7Li I l y 37 -a f�nS Conductivity I4.9µmhos/cns SM 25108.20t1 Accumet AR20 9331245:
Dissolved oxygen(mg,/1.)) 9 1.0 7 (CI Albgnity 5.0 mg CaCO,/l SM 2320 5-2011 Assumes AA20 93312452
14 µg/t
Conductivity(pmhos/cm} ll C'/ Hardness 5,0 mg CaCO,/l SM 2340 C•2011 Not appleabie Not applicable
Temperature(t) -LL4 0$ •)„k.8- ""`4 1, temperature 0.I°c SM 25 505-2010 Digital thermometer 150L(.3414]
pH(S,U.) 7..39 ' -75 700
Dissolved oxygen,mg/L) 7.0 e. b aQ
21 µg/L 0
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) '77C�j
Temperature(°c) �'(�-lick' -LA.1 -15, 0
pH)S.U.) 739 3.31 7.5$
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) g"0 6` (i'1
32 µg/L r n
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 1�50
Temperature CC) IA
4 (°i,1 tc,tt
pH(S.U.) 73'fr 3•33 7672
Dissolved oxygen(mg/Li V.
V { I b.a
49 µg/t. VV 11
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) Z,5:)
Temperature('Cl �1.1.t. -fAt l..C-
ti ..l.;, t
^A
pH(S.U.) 3 Co/ 7 -3
Dissolved oxygen(mg/l) . �'
75 µg/L 1
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 0,a,�0
Temperature(°C)° IA,I AS. 0 tiq'1.
7 J
-+
pH(5.u.) ! t LI
r 3
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) V. t
116 µg/L
Conductivity(µmhos/cml 26/r
Temperature 1°C) - '24.di 114*i
pH(S.U.) 728' 73 0
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) D.1 &"'
179 µg/L
Conductivity(µmisos/cm) 26b
Temperature(°C) Zt.,_ t W,0
SOP AT9-Revision 6-Exhibit A19.3

Page oft
Acute LCso Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Ceriodaphnia dubia
EPA-821•R•02-012,Method 2002.0
Client L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,SIMSTREAM
Project tSocg Sampleli 1.QOde14,UL-
seet/tn6 Ten tndauon or Termrnarinn torn., aandorrurina
Noun Date
time Analyst lime Analyst Intub.tor/Shen 1-emotive
°.'' OV14•lo L7t5o y( l'Ld2 �{ Lf-i o�tmxe
2A `
01•2110 %lob (�
Alt
'Test a.Eannms wrrr led In OaIdo l 7 to s r`OUfl prior to test irirarion teat ogannms II red drool Ole:e r
Test Organism Information:
Organism Source; in-house Culture
Source)organisms were pooled): ( 1-II,,r- N—C,
Age. <24-hours old vJ
Date and time organisms to- -1.- 6AS) V )
were born between: 04.-Lt.ID a-54
Average transfer volume: <0.25 ml.
Transfer bowl information: pis(5 till; 1. -1 Temperature 'CI 1.'1,.11
Survival Data(number of living organisms):
Control 14 µg/L 21 pg/L 32 µg/L
Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate
Hours
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 0 P
0 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
24 S S S S S S S S S 5 S 5 S S S
48 S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S
Tnm,�a o
ra<ar.survival I•,l I DO 7. 1 Q4 7. _ t 401. {9a 1.
49 µg/L 75 µg/L 116 µg/L 179 µg/L
Hours Replicate Replicate Replicate ReplIcate
Q R 5 T U V W X Y Z AA BB CC DO EE FF
0 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
24 S 5 q 44 J 0 G( Osc4 05 O0( O t� 0OL 0 03sk
48 � "--1, a 0 O b 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 0
Mean$urrhralIS] 15 7. 0 i. (7- CV.
Comment codes:d=dead,u=unhealthy
ak•k
Sfatistia: NO PUNA L-- 1 T A 1`— b) solve.1) Z'Uc-NC-- ",5 oe..
Method SK IA ti SK SV.
LoWe95%c 2 lilt) IL- 94. IL- 46.Q 4 2
95X confidence limit Y.1 ��+ma's^ y.�L � C �1 +�
upper
L.. lirf SJ.b I L S[ 1 IL.
rJ2.�O 's�..�at
9S%confidence limit f%) 5q. .L.11t� t f+
48•hour tCso)%) Ca t.l S �UU'� 5t.`{ e, O�� J qe.� It--O�\S'10 �9.Z.. �`�•2
Comments:
SOP ATt rieenion 6-Exhibit AT9.3

Acute Daphnid Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID. CdFRAC Sample ID: SIMS1REAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: CD-Ceriodaphnia dubia
Comments: NOMINAL VALUES
Conc-ug/L 1 2 3 4
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
49 1.0000 1.0000 0.8000 1.0000
75 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
116 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000
179 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root Rank 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N Sum Critical Resp Number
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 0 20
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0 000 4 18.00 10.00 0 20
21 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 18.00 10.00 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0,000 4 18.00 10.00 0 20
49 0.9500 0.9500 1.2857 1.1071 1.3453 9.261 4 16.00 10 00 1 20
75 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
116 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
179 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Shapiro-W1k's Test indicates nor-normal distribution(p<=0,01) 0,5089 0.868 -2.7962 11.6732
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU
Steel's Many-One Rank Test 49 75 60.6218
Treatments vs 0-Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 95%CL
0.0% 59.345 56.932 61.860
5.0% 59.946 58.584 61.340
10.0% 59.946 58.584 61.340 1 0 e
20.0% 59.946 58.584 61.340 0.9
Aut0-0.0% 59.345 56.932 61.860
08-
07-
0'0.6-
C
a0.5
N
0 0.4-
tt
03-
0z-
0 1-
1 10 100 1000
Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1♦ • •
0.9
08
0.7
TO
Z06
rn 0.5
x 0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 e •
N M v n
C
0
Page i ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by: _

Acute Daphnid Test-48 Hr Survival
Stan Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID. CdFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir,Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: CD-Ceriodaphnia dubia
Comments: NOMINAL VALUES
Conc-ug/L 1 2 3 4
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
14 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1,0000
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
49 0.8000 0.6000 0.8000 0.8000
75 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
116 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
179 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root Rank 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N Sum Critical Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 0 20
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 18.00 10.00 C 20
21 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 18.00 10.00 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 18.00 10.00 0 20
'49 0.7500 0.7500 1.0519 0.8861 11071 10.508 4 10.00 10.00 5 20
75 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
116 0.0000 0 0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
179 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Shapiro-Wntk's Test indicates non-normal distribution(p<=C.01) 0 5089 0.868 -2.7962 11.6732
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU
Steel's Many-One Rank Test 32 49 39.598
Treatments vs D-Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 95%CL
0.0% 54.499 50.185 59.184
5.0% 55.061 50.158 60.444
10.0% 55.574 49.764 62.063 1.0
20.0% 56.336 47.218 67.216 0.9
•
Auto-0.0% 54.499 50.185 59.184
08-
0.7-
N06
c •
a 0.5-
N
tY0.4-
0 3-
0 2-
0.1 -
1 10 100 1000
Dose ugh!.
Dose-Response Plot
t e •
0.9
0.8
0.7
m
0.6
h 0 5 :\\\\\
=0 4
0.3
0.2
0.1
o • •
p a,
N ! V n
C �
Page 1 ToxCaic v5.0.32 Reviewed by:t

Acute Daphnid Test-24 Hr Survival
Stan Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: CdFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID:. ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: CD-Ceriodapttnia dubia
Comments: Total Concentrations
Conc-uglL 1 2 3 4
Control 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
45 1.0000 1.0000 0.8000 1.0000
64 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
90 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
166 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root Rank 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N Sum Critical Resp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1,3453 1.3453 0.000 4 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 18.00 11.00 0 20
45 0.9500 0.9500 1.2857 1.1071 1.3453 9.261 4 16.00 11.00 1 20
64 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
90 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
166 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates non-normal distribution(p<=0.01) 0.63351 0.805 -2.2978 7.08889
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tall,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TO
Steel's Many-One Rank Test 45 64 53 6656
Treatments vs Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 95%CL
0.0% 52.744 50.992 54.556
5.0% 53.171 52.169 54.191
10.0% 53.171 52.169 54.191 1 o e o
20.01/4 53.171 52.169 54.191
Auto-0.01/4 52.744 50.992 54.556 0.9-
0.8-
0.7•
N06 '
C -
a0.5
0.4-
0.3-
0.2-
0,1 -
1 10 100 1000
Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
rn 0.5
0.4
03
02
0.1
0 •
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Daphnid Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date: 412 812 0 2 0 Test ID: CdFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Dale: 4/30'2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: CD-Ceriodaphnia dubia
Comments- Total Concentrations
Conc-ug!L 1 2 3 4
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
45 0.8000 0.6000 0.8000 0.8000
64 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
90 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
166 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Aresin Square Root Rank 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugiL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N Sum Critical Resp Number
Control 1.0000 1,0000 1.3453 1.3453 13453 0.000 4 0 20
32 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1,3453 0.000 4 18.00 11.00 0 20
`45 0.7500 0.7500 1.0519 0.8861 1.1071 10.508 4 10.00 11.00 5 20
64 0.0000 0 0000 0,2255 0.2255 0 2255 0.000 4 20 20
90 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
166 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates non-normal distribution(p<=0.01) 0.63351 0.805 -2.2978 7.08889
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU
Steel's Many-One Rank Test 32 45 37.9473
Treatments vs Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 951/4 CL
0.0°/a 49.212 46.017 52.628
5.0% 49.610 45.986 53.521
10.0% 49.974 45.685 54 665 1.0 • o
20.0% 50.512 43.780 58.278 0.9-
Auto-0.0% 49.212 46.017 52.628
0.8-
0.7
w06-
c
n05-
N
11,0,4
cc
0.3-
0.1 -
00
1 10 100 1000
Dose ug!L
Dose-Response Plot
•
0.9
0.8
0.7
o'
0.6
Z
rn 0 5
0.4
co
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 • •
3
U.S
Page 1 ToxCalc v5 0.32 Revewed by

Acute Daphnid Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 4/28/2020 Test ID: CdFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 4/30/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02.012 Test Species: CD-Ceriodaphnia dubia
Comments. Dissolved Concentrations
Conc-ug/L 1 2 3 4
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
29 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
41 1.0000 1.0000 0.8000 1.0000
71 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
107 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
147 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root Rank 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug1L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N Sum Critical Resp Number
Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 0 20
29 1.0000 10000 1.3453 1.3453 1.3453 0.000 4 18.00 11.00 0 20
41 0.9500 0 9500 1.2857 1.1071 1.3453 9.261 4 16,00 11.00 1 20
71 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
107 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
147 0.0000 0.0000 0.2255 0.2255 0.2255 0.000 4 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Shapiro-Willis Test indicates non-normal distribution(p<-0.01) 0.63351 0.805 -2.2978 7.08889
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tall,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU
Steel's Many-One Rank Test 41 71 53.9537
Treatments vs Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 95%CL
0.0% 52.759 50.507 55.113
5.0% 53.180 51.626 54.780
10.0% 53.180 51.626 54.780 1.0 ♦o
20.0% 53.180 51.626 54.780 0.9-
Auto-0.0% 52 759 50.507 55.113
0.8-
0.7-
»0.6•
c
a054'04-
-
m
0.3-
0 2-
0 1-
1 10 100 1000
Dose ug1L
Dose-Response Plot
I ••
0.9
0.8 -
0.7
0.6
e
a,0.5
10.4
03
02
01
0 • •
c
c
U
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by.

•
40 CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Requesi
•
• `` � Client Name: ED----5, I /��'
1 .,- Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to: 44.- n evei
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: �j y1-rpt,) tl.) .(Z Requested Analyses
Project Number: 020O4Q6.6 51 pH Checked Upon Receipt
Ct_<0.2 rued Upon Receipt
Preservatives ? ///
Sample Identification - _ ; c ,/ L.; _s-
Q UG Ur_. O '�E v E v, : •-., c C ii ° .._.OO O vt: (rt ield
cA C c 7 P x z, z -�l ,) / mp.(°C) Comments
i 5 vt-t-on) c_.Aue UJP Gr l ee 3D •)..) o4-ta-to logo X X X' X
'- rttQ) SA-ro,..) lf.4k.(pert Cr iq033„1 NP)° et(Zbao i au
3 -E. WNTt( [Iee.3z 11)
oq. 6.2.0 Ilpo 2(
a Cte t.L Sk ANt< G- Icle v.) [03 ,>C
5 L_A WRY Cr rleal4 ui t X >< x X
f, F _ 'm vnTerL (r lae% I03G X
Sample Condition Upon Receipt 'Relinquished By (Company I Date Time 'Accepted By (Company I Date I Time
Temperature(°C) ci (.� 1-..__- ETS oil-�"' J a, i�t C=S� ia� 0 /0-2 -
Received on Ice. Y / NOt1
/
Sealed Cooler: �Y�/
Samples Intact: / Y ) N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature f Date
-y swthr,-. t.e. #7,0 _ 50 tr\ t tJL. Printed Name of Sampler ��^Zf0
L�A - s0 i�a� � s�MN�
Signature of Sampler: r

Rogers &Callcett44,
=w
,wfr,
ENVIRONMENTAL tgepa`Rio .
Laboratory Report
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0050106
351 Depot St. Received: 05/01/2020 10;30
Asheville,NC 28801-4310
Dear Client:
Rogers and Callcott appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you. The attached laboratory services report includes analytical results and chain of
custody for samples that were received on May 01,2020. Rogers and Callcott maintains a formal QA/QC program. Unless otherwise noted,all analyses
performed under NELAP certification have complied with all the requirements for the TNI standard. The analyses met the QAJQC confidence interval
for each test method unless otherwise qualified. Estimated uncertainty is available upon request.
Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this report and is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee,or
the person responsible for delivering to the person addressed,you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone else If you receive this message by
mistake,please notify Rogers and Callcott immediately.
We strive to provide excellent service to our clients. Please contact Sarah Baker, your Project Manager,at sbakerLrcenviro.com,
(864)-232-I556 if you have any questions about this report.
Report Approved By:
Sarah Baker
Project Manager
This report may not he reproduced,except in fell.without written perntissiot jinn?Rogers&Callcott,Inc.
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 F.tirforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 rn3 r 864.232.1556 .ax 86.1.232.6140 r-ogersandcallcott.com
an,?mployae-owned company
Page 1 of 23

1 ;v, Rogers &Ca[lcott T�
`,yea
ENVIRONMENTAL
South Carolina Greenville Laboratot j'identification 23/05
South Catalina Columbia Lahoratay IdentiUkation 411572
Certificate of Analysis North Cmn/inaLthoratoiy Certification Number 27
North Cardin Drinking St5iter Lab Number 457/0
NF,LAP Utah Certificate Nuiniter SC00004201.1-1
Georgia Drinking IVater Lab IL)880
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0050106
351 Depot St. Received: 05/01/2020 10.30
Asheville,NC 23301-4310
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampled Type
0050106-01 DiH2O Blank Filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-02 Sutton Lab H2O Control Final Filtered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-03 Sutton Lab H2O 21 ugL initial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-04 Sutton Lab H2O 21 ugL initial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106.05 Sutton Lab H2O 21 ugL final filtered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-06 Sutton Lab H2O 32 ugL initial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-07 Sutton Lab 1120 32 ugL initial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-08 Sutton Lab H2O 32 ugL final filtered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-09 Sutton Lab H2O contra)final filtered cd Wastewater 04/30f20 12:30 Grab
0050106-10 Sutton Lab H2O 6 ugL initial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-11 Sutton Lab H2O 6 ugL initial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-12 Sutton Lab H2O 6 ugL final filtered cd Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-13 Sutton Lab H2O 9.1 ugL initial Wastewater 04/30/20 12.30 Grab
0050106.14 Sutton Lab H2O 9.1 ugL initial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-IS Sutton Lab 1420 9.1 ugL final filtered cd Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106.16 Sutton Lab H2O 14 ugL initial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-17 Sutton Lab H2O 14 ugL initial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-18 Sutton Lab H2O 14 ugL final filtered cd Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-19 Stmstream control final filtered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-20 Simstream 32 ugL inutial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-21 Simstream 32 ugL intitial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-22 Simstream 49 ugL intitial ‘Vastewatcr 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-23 Simstream 49 ugL intitial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-24 Simstream 75 ugL intitial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-25 Simstream 75 ugL intitial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106.26 Simstream 75 ugl.final tittered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-27 Simstream 116 ugL intitial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29605 426 Fairiorest Way Greenville.SC 29607 rN±41 364.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an emr:plvyee-awried company
05/27/2020 /6-59 This report way tot be repmdtced,except in lid!.without written permission from Rogers 4(alkali.Inc Page 2 of 23

>,a�t Rogers & Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampledl rd Type
0050106-28 Simstream 116 ugL intitial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-29 Simstream 116 ugL final filtered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-30 Simstream 275 ugL intitial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-31 Simstream 275 ugL intitial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-32 Simstream 275 ugL final filtered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-33 Simstream control final filtered cd Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-34 Simstream 32 ugt_final filtered cd Wastewater 04130/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-35 Simstream 49 ugL final filtered ed Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-36 Sunstream 75 ugL final filtered cd Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-37 Simstream 49 ugL final filtered pp Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-38 Simstream 179 ugL initial Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-39 Simstream 179 ugL initial filtered Wastewater 04/30/20 12:30 Grab
0050106-40 Simstream 179 ugL final filtered pp Wastewater 04/30120 12:30 Grab
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcalicott.com
an employee-owned rtunpany
05/27/2020 16.59 This report mar not be reproduced.except in filth.without written permission front Rogers&Cedk it,Inc, Page 3 of 23

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801.4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Case Narrative
Revised Report
Revised to update the sample results for 0050106-31,0050106-32 and 0050106-33. After review of all 40 samples,sample
results have been updated as needed. This report replaces the one generated on 05/07/2020 at 09:25.
•
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforesc VVa Greenville,Sc29607 tram 864.232.1556 fax [phone] ro ersand y g caitcott.com
an employee-owned c orn{ tny
05/27/2020 16:59 Tins report nifty not be reproduced,except to fill!,without twiny?permission front Rogetx&Copcott.roe. Page 4 of 23

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Data
Sample Number 0050106-01
Sample Description DiH2O Blank Filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.002 0.002 mgtL 1.00 05/05/20 16:18 EPA 200,8 TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-02
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O Control Final Filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 16:22 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-03
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 21 ugL initial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
P g
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.017 0,002 mgt. 1.00 05/05/20 16:26 EPA MS TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-04
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 21 ugL initial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.015 0.002 mail 1.00 05/05/20 16:31 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-05
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 21 ugL final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.016 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 16:35 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0063
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 ;nay 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
.rn e111ttlov4r4nwnecl company
03127/2020 16.59 This report may not be reproduced,except rtr faU.without written permission from Rogers&CUUcott,inc.
Page 5 of 23

u Rogers &Caticott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-43 1 0 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Number 0050106-06
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 32 ugL initial collected on 04/30/20 12::30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.026 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 16:40 EPA 200 R TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-07
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 32 ugL initial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Uuita DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.023 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 16:44 EPA 200.5 TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-08
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 32 ugL final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.023 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 16:48 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-09
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O control final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.004 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 17:0I EPA200.R TLT BOE0063
Sample Number 0050106-10
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 6 ugL initial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.005 0.002 mg/l. 1.00 05/05/20 17:05 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0063
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 fairforest VVay Greenville,5C 29607 mat,864.232.1556 ,flit 864.232.6140 rogersandcalicott.com
an employee•awned company
05/27/2020 16:59 This report may not be reproduced,except In full,without ttwilien percussion flown Rogers c4 Colkotr,toe. Page 6 of 23

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Number 0050106-11
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 6 ugL initial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.005 0.002 mglL 1.00 05/05/20 17:09 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-12
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 6 ugL final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.006 0.002 toga- 1.00 05/05/20 17:14 EPA7.00.8 TLT BOE0063
Sample Number 0050106-13
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 9.1 ugL initial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.008 0.002 MIL 1.00 05/05/20 17:18 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0063
Sample Number 0050106-14
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 9.1 ugL initial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.007 0.002 mg/t. 1.00 05/05/20 18:21 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-15
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 9.1 ugL final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.008 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 18:25 EPA 200.8 TLT 130E0064
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville.SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an employee-owned company
0512712020 16:59 This report*say not be reproduced except in full,without written permission from Rogers di Galleon.Inc. Page 7 of 23

''' Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Number 0050106-16
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 14 ugL initial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Resole Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.011 0.002 rng1L 1.00 05/05/20 17:40 EPA 200.8 TCr B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-17
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 14 ugL initial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.009 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 18:30 EPA200.8 TLT /30E0064
Sample Number 0050106-18
Sample Description Sutton Lab H2O 14 ugL final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.012 0.002 mil 1.00 05/05/20 18:34 EPA200.8 TIT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-19
Sample Description Simstream control final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.006 0.002 mail 1.00 05/05/20 18:38 EPA200.8 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-20
Sample Description Simstream 32 ugL intitial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.032 0,002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 17:57 EPA 200.8 TGr B0E0064
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville.SC 29607 ma,r•864.232.1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an et nployamowned company
05127/2020 16.59 This report may not be reproduced,except in fill!,without written permission front Rogers dr Callcort,Inc_
Page 8 of 23

'' 4 Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Number 0050106-21
Sample Description Simstream 32 ugL intitial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result L1mI Units DE Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.029 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 14:04 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-22
Sample Description Simstream 49 ugL intitial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.045 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 18:47 EPA 2001 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-23
Sample Description Simstream 49 ugL intitial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.041 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 18:52 EPA 2001 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-24
Sample Description Simstream 75 ugL intitial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.064 0.002 mg/I- 1.00 05/05/20 19:13 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-25
Sample Description Simstream 75 ugL intitial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.071 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 19:00 EPA 200.8 TLT BOE0064
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fatrforast Way Greenville,SC 29607 moor r 864.232,1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an employee-owned company
05/27/2020 16:59 This report may not be ruprothrced,except in foil.without written permission/rain Rogers&Callrntt,Inc Page 9 of 23

. $uL Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Number 0050106-26
Sample Description Simstream 75 ugL final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.072 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 18:56 EPA 200.8 TLT 130E0064
Sample Number 0050106-27
Sample Description Simstream 116 ugL intitial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units Df•Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.090 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 19:26 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-28
Sample Description Simstream 116 ugL intitial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.107 0.002 ing/L 1.00 05/05/20 19:22 EPA 2001 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-29
Sample Description Simstream 116 ugL final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.09i 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 19:17 EPA 200.8 TLT 80E0064
Sample Number 0050106-30
Sample Description Simstream 275 ugL intitial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.240 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 19;30 EPA 200 8 TLT B0E0064
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.155E fax B64.232.6140 rogersandcalicott.com
an emptoyee-awned company
05/27/2020 16.19 Thu report may nml be reproduced,emept in full,without wrfueu permission from Rogers sE Calico",Inc, Page 10 of 23

- Rogers &Callcott
it ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Sample Number 0050106-31
Sample Description Simstream 275 ugL intitial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.210 0.002 men- 1.00 05/19/20 22:40 EPA 200.E TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-32
Sample Description Simstrcam 275 ugL final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.222 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/19/20 22:45 EPA2003 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050 1 06-3 3
Sample Description Simstrcatn control final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Volts DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.005 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/19/20 22:49 EPA ZOO.3 TLT B0E0064
Sample Number 0050106-34
Sample Description Simstream 32 ugL final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.031 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 18:43 EPA 200.A TLT B0E0022
Sample Number 0050106-35
Sample Description Simstream 49 ugL final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Volts OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.046 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 14:08 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0022
PC Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersafldcallcott.Com
an enplayea-oymed cornptny
05/27/2020 16.39 Thtt report may not be reproduced.except hi frill,without written/re mission front Rogers 8 Console,/ne. Page 11 of 23

jj Rogers &Calleott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05f27/20 16:59
Sample Number 0050106-36
Sample Description Simstream 75 ugL final filtered cd collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.067 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 14:12 EPA 200.8 TLT BOE0022
Sample Number 0050106-37
Sample Description Simstream 49 ugL final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.045 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 14:25 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0022
Sample Number 0050106-38
Sample Description Simstream 179 ugL initial collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.166 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 13:10 EPA 200.8 TLT B0E0022
Sample Number 0050106-39
Sample Description Simstream 179 ugL initial filtered collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.147 0.002 man- 1.00 05/05/20 14:29 EPA200.8 TLT B0E0022
Sample Number 0050106-40
Sample Description Simstream 179 ugL final filtered pp collected on 04/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analy
zed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.149 0.002 mg/L 1.00 05/05/20 14:33 EPA200.8 TLT BOE0022
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 +nun 864.232.1556 fix 864.232.6140 rogersandcalleott.eom
an ernployw!•ovrned company
05/27/2020 16.19 Tiffs report my not be reproduced.error in fill,without written permission from Rogers d Conceit I,rr. Page 12 of 23

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL 1
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch B0E0022-EPA 200.8
Blank(B0E0022-BLKI)
Copper ND 0.002 rag/L
LCS(B0E0022-BSI)
Copper 0.212 0.002 mg/L 0.200 106 85-115
Duplicate(B0E0022-DUP2) Source:0050106-38
Copper 0.170 0.002 mg/L 0.166 2 20
Matrix Spike(00E0022-MS2) Source:0050106-38
Copper 0.376 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.166 105 70-130
t Spike(B0E0022-PS2) Source:0050106-38
...vper 0.419 mg/L 0.250 0.166 101 75-125
Batch B0E0063-EPA 200.8
Blank(B0E0063-BLK I)
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L
LCS(B0E0063-BSI)
Copper 0.216 0.002 mg/I. 0.200 108 85-115
Batch B0E0064-EPA 200.8
Blank(B0E0064-BLKI)
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L
LCS(B0E0064-BSI)
Copper 0.206 0.002 mg/L 0.200 103 85-115
Duplicate(B0E0064-DUP1) Source:0050106-16
Copper 0.010 0.002 mg/L 0.011 8 20
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 mam 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an employee-owned company
05/27/2020 1619 This report may not be reproduced.except in full,without written permission frnm Rogers do Calkan.Inc. Page 13 of 23

Rogers &Caticott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RED
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RED Limit nags
Batch B0E0064-EPA 200.8
Duplicate(B0E0064-DUP2) Source:0050106-20
Copper 0.032 0.002 mg/L 0.032 0.1 20
Matrix Spike(B0E0064-MS I) Source:0050106-16
Copper 0.209 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.011 99 70-130
Matrix Spike(130E0064-MS2) Source:0050106-20
Copper 0.230 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.032 99 70-130
Post Spike(80E0064-PSI) Source:0050106-16
Copper 0.261 mg/L 0.250 0.011 100 75-125
;t Spike(B0E0064-PS2) Source:0050106-20
--,per Q280 mg/L 0.250 0.032 99 75-125
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairlorest Way GreenvUle,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an employee-owned curnpany
05/27/2020 /6:59 This report may not be,eptodu ed•except in frill,without written permission froth Rogers d Calico::.Inc_
Page 14 of 23

. Rogers &Callcott
44 ENVIRONrIENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27120 16:59
Sample Preparation Data
Parameter Batch Sample ID Prepared Analyst
EPA 200.8 Metal Digestion
EPA 200.8 B0E0063 0050106-01 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 B0E0063 0050106-02 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.S 00E0063 0050106-03 05/04/2020 13.50 TLT
EPA 200.8 60E0063 0050106-04 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 60E0063 0050106-05 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0063 0050106-06 05/04/2020 13.50 TLT
EPA 200.8 130E0063 0050106-07 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0063 0050106-08 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOE0063 0050106-09 05/04n020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0063 0050106-10 05/04/2020 13:50 TLC
EPA 200.8 130E0063 0050106-11 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0063 0050106-12 05/04/2020 13:50 TLC
EPA 200.8 80E0063 0050106-13 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA200.8 80E0064 0050106-14 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 150E.0064 0050106-15 05/04/2020 1150 TLT
EPA 200.8 6000064 0050106-16 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200,8 80E0064 0050106-17 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-18 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 8000064 0050106-19 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-20 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-21 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 150E0064 0050106-22 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106.23 05/04/2020 13:50 TL`C
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-24 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 00E0064 0050106-25 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-26 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 B0E0064 0059106-27 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 60E0064 0050106-28 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-29 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 B0E0064 0050106-30 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-31 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-32 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0064 0050106-33 05/04/2020 13:50 TLT
EPA 200.8 80E0022 0050106-34 05/04/2020 09:48 TLT
EPA 200.8 150E0022 0050106-35 05/04/2020 09:48 TLT
EPA 200.8 B0E0022 0050106-36 05/04/2020 09:48 TLT
'iPA 200.8 80E0022 0050106-37 05/04/2020 09:48 TLT
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 m.rr6 S64.2321556 to 864.232.6140 rogersandeallcott.com
.1 et toyee-owned tamtrany
05117)2020 16.19 Tins rtporr,may not be reproduced,except info//,without written pervntszinn from Rogers&Callcotl,Mr. Page 15 of 23

41 Rogers &Cattcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0050106
Asheville,NC 28 80 1-43 1 0 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
EPA 200.8 B0E0022 0050106-38 05/04/2020 09:48 TIT
EPA 200.8 B0E0022 0050106-39 05/04/2020 09:48 TLT
EPA 200,8 B0E0022 0050106-40 05/04/2020 09:48 TLT
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville.SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcaikott.com
an employee-owned company
05/27/2020 16:59 This report may not be reproduced,except in fill,without written permission from Rogers&Callcott,Inc. Page 16 of 23

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
35 t Depot St. Work Order. 0050106
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 05/27/20 16:59
Data Qualifiers and Definitions
ND Analyte NOT DETECTED at or above the reporting limit
NR Not reported
RPD Relative Percent Difference
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforcet Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an employee-owned company
05/27/2010 /6:59 This report may not be reproduced.except in fdl,without written permission from Rogers&Colkoo.Inc. Page 17 of 23

4t.i Rogers & Callcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORKORDER____C7OSd IOr1 \n-)
-r, r
- '1ENVIRONMENTAL
E AL I I 1 I 1 Filtered les/ o
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Falrforest Way 2158 Stonerldge Drive I l CooledNo
Address: GrPhone(66,Sc 9606 Address: Greenville,2 2-C 2961407 Columbia,
ne Sc 09210 ij Container Type�� �
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] I
Client Name Container Volume(mL) j 2t3)
Address j� Sample Type Grab omposlte)
F— ) ` l Aie Sample SourceOMr GW,DW,SW,S, Other)
03
Report To: o Preservation Code(s)
Email Address o A—None E HCi I—Zn Acetate
`a 8-HNO3 F—Na2S203 J—H3P0,,
Telephone# E Y C—H2SO4 G—Boric Acid K-MCAA
D—NaOH H—Ascorbic Acid L-
c PO# Project#
R&C YR :°
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION F° a
COMMENTS
_o i 043 26 12 . O D,;�U w(do &l.kr d -/ ;i I 4 L�s"s / etc
-0Z- SU 3TU1 (do PPio l(i to lima A r
-t73 - S`u � es_
I Liu, Iva , oa e
—°1I \ 21J.41. 10rhad4 I
—e5 110,1E • f k
—0c, 3 2,U.�L ti'N.ka,P .
0-1 3 2 L I mi 1.tikes r r
A
� 1 �n hot Piro_ AUttzve _
-0
-lo 1/titsl 4 i At r Fiat 1. I
SAMP ER— LINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: _
1. V 5V jw 2. Ers wait. 05 01' Composite Start Date:
REL U.15,HED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3. C(�c,2/t.i'{,/ 09)12'0 4. S.1 rt,U I O
-2Allit . Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
S 6.
Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection .0
7. 8. At time of lab receipt Q,Z 'C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: I I Non-Hazard Flammable Skin irritant I I Poison Unknown [Thther Form Revised July,2014 Page r
Page 18 of 23

_
�,, 2ST5
Rogers & Callcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER
r + .1� ENVIRONMENTAL I 1 I I I Fiitere es/No)
r f
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Fairforest Way 2158 Stonerldge Drive Cooled(Yes/_O)
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,SC 29210
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] Container Type S21 Glass)
Client Name Container Volume(m1-) 23;)
Address Sample Type(Cd'ab Composite)
/�— !�`/ �' Sample Source✓ GW,DW,SW,S, Other))
Report To: ( o Preservation Code(s)
Email Address o A-None E-HCI I-ZnAcetate
v B-HNO3 F-Na2S203 J-H3PO4
Telephone# sa E :� C-H2SO4 G-Boric Acid K-MCAA
PO# Proect# _2 E D-NaOH H-Ascorbic Acid L-
J
R&C YR_
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION 1- a
COMMENTS
1230 ml e) (
11 r b Wcct t G 4MIL i car E-t j 4t,1114/4 I )0 / 1 N('.
— 1z . I . 444 fi nu1
— t3 Q.I uriccrt.lkw, f 0o. e
—- Lti . \
(t,. 144,004, kNch' - .
"1-1 ;quilt, ,'rzFred f,U- d
SAMPLER-RE QUISHED BY:
DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
1. 0-Or2.° 2. ETS M e-/- 050120 Composite Start Date:
R ISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED B(v^� DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3' r Llkt9./U -Cl O5D120 4.
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: S i'r p t02DIJ Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
DATE/TIME:
5 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection •C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt D 2 'C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: Non-Hazard uFlammable Skin Irritant I I Poison nown nOther Form Revised July,2014 Page -of
Page 19 of 23

u
y
l a•iRogers & CalLcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER u
` i
_ -�--+-I i E N V I R O N M F N TA I ( I I I I I Filtered(Ygs/No
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Falrforest Way 2158 Stnnerldge Drive Cooled(Yes/
Address: Greenville,Sc 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia SC29210 `-ContainerT e •astir
Phone[phone] Fax I864 232-6140 Phone8 Y Glass) Q3 5Q9-8999 p L � )
Client Name Container Volume(mL)2j
Address Sample Type(5r1b7 omposite)
Sample Source(WW, W,DW,SW,S, Other)
El—S—i/ C iii
.c
Report To: o Preservatbn Code(s)
Email Address A-None E-NCI I-ZnAcetate
v
B—HNO3 F—Na2S203 J—H3PO4
Telephone#
C_
v H2504 G—Boric Add K-MCAA
PO# Project# z E D--NaOH H—Ascorbic Acid L-
R&C YR L°
d
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION ~ eL
` COMMENTS
— .1ci OIt3yo t720 S�m6hr«.7 �a+�v f�n(.6'1#wata____, C_ s. < + C
2 lc. N,i4-,uQ ( _ So thin Werz__
—2?, gel Ask, N,hJP
'21( -4 1.5&IR, i Ai"hal)
'2 ,_ "/5,upi,;N•tia14)i tkAtd .
-Li tk , r (�(,,C) it V mitt. )Nr k
SAMPR-RELINQUIS ED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY:
DATE/TIME:
1. Ch-01.z0 2. y ` c.fiat -+'-k CS UX1/.;e., 0 jet 20 Composite Start Date:
�RELIN UISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
Ci-bil-er 05.0i. 4- Pry
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
I 10`?3� Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
DATE/TI M E:
S 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection °C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt 0.2 °C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: Non-Hazard Flammable []Skin Irritant []Poison 1 []known [Other Form Revised July,2014 Page of
Pape 20 of 23

r
) Rogers Callcatt CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER
1-11- -t- I
ENVIRONMENTAL I I I Fiitere es
Mailing PO Box 565S Shipping 426 Falrforest Way 215E Stoneridge Drive Cooled`Yes/ O
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,SC 29210
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] Container Type aS C/Glass)
Client Name Container Volume(mL) ,2
C5
Address �� ,L r Sample Type( ab_ mposite)
/ r—l 1 Sample Source W,OW,SW,S, Other)
Report To: o Preservation Code(s)
EmailAddfeSS o A—None E—HCI I—Zn Acetate
B—HNO3 F—Na2S203 J—H3PO4
Telephone# n a`, C-H2SO4 G-Boric Acid K-MCAA
PO# Pro eCt# z D—NaOH H—Ascorbic Acid L-
f R3 d
R&C YR - w
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION I— eL COMMENTS
-21 - Q'Iy,O IZ30Sim5h0. IIU IL 1141;14;1-Nd i ," -Crt, t' kic
1
-754 — -1, (Ilia It ; a0.4,Cud /4n GUCYZ
-216 - I L N,t - Ro©. e
FMaiic,I Ntlid I1 b
-31 ` 215 Alibi'lw h e 4••
_"37 ". 2'4Su5t(- 19,dd hltcd �„ 4
SAMPLER-RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
1 i a 0 Jrat-2-0 Z __. .-66U���. 05.O/,00 Composite Start Date:
RE kALQ. SHED,BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3 w e�J[.),A.-17 e)cslal. 4. Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
S 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection 'C
7- g, At time of lab receipt 0(2.— 'C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: FIN/on-Hazard TIFlammabie I Skin Irritant 1 1 Poison Unknown FlOther Form Revised July,2014 Page of
Page 21 of 23

'�
�5
r
at-7J Rogers &Callcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER
•ram,.—r-t-r_fl ENVIRONMENTAL ( L _l I I FiltereciVE
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Felrforest Way 2158 Stonerldge Drive Cooled(Yes/M
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,5C 29607 Columbia,SC 29210
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] Container Typelasti lass)
r
Client Name Container Volume(mL) 29)
Address Sample Typc Gr /Composite)
�` f� c Sample Source5GW,DW,SW,5, Other)
p Cam/ ��/ C a
Report To: U Preservation Code(s) 1
Email Address o 4 A-None E-HCI I-ZnAcetate
V B-HNC)/ F-Naz52O3 J—H3PO4
Telephone# E a, C—H2SO4 G-Boric Acid K-MCAA
PO# Project# z E
1 D-NaOH H-Ascorbic Acid L
V
&C YR o
R
WORK ORDER DATE TIME �� L SAMPLE DESCRIPTION'[
`32) " 7 Q� O 1236 ,Sirir`�r tYQm CihoLiti� A UC4 cd r .. COMMENTS
• ,4 _ 1 3Att Pr nci( ?l f�nt.1 1 X 4) i/in t
3-5 - ? 1 J
- ,uyk,,�c .�r.>l coed I X �7oo, e
---bco_
SAMPLER RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: '
1. - L)S. 05.01.7-0 2.F-- U.lL)1 i4( 0501.2,0 Composite Start Date:
RELIMI IL1ED BY: DATE/TIME
BY::( RECEIVED4; DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3 1.-_-.7
COO��rV j� 4 Inn 5 I?.', l6236 Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY;
DATE/TIME:
S. 6, Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: -DATE/TIME: At time of collection °C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt 0‘7..--' °C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: 7 Non-Hazard nFlammable I !Skin Irritant El Poison Unknown �ther Form Revised July,2014 Page^ or
Page 22 Of 23

q Rogers &Callcott
l:r_i ENViRONMENTAL
Sample Receipt Verification
Date Work
Client: t /` Received: S Order: bCSCA b 472
Carrier Name: Client FedEx UPS US Mail Courier Field Services Other:
Tracking Number:
Y N N
Receipt Criteria a Comments
s o A
Shipping container I cooler intact? Damaged Leaking Other:
Cust ady seals intact?
COC.included with samples?
COC signed when relinquished and received? X
P t �
Sample bottles intact? V Damaged Leaking Other:
Sample ID on COC agree with label on bottle(s)?
Date/time on COC agree with label on bottle(s)?
Number of bottles on COC agrees with number of bottles received? y\
Samples received within holding time?
Sample volume sufficient for analysis?
VOA.vials free of headspace(<6mm bubble)?
Samples cooled? Temp at receipt recorded on COC Ice Cold Packs D Ice None
Temp measured with IR thermometer-SN:97050067 Dry
Samples requiring pH preservation at proper pH?
No c: Samples for metals analysis may be preserved upon receipt in the lab.
Noa.e: Samples for O&G and VOA analysis—preservation checked at bench.
Samples dechlorinated for parameters requiring chlorine removal at �
the time of sample collection?
Note. Chlorine checked at bench for samples requiring Bacterial,VOA,and HAA
analysis.
If in-house preservation used — record Lot#
HCL H5POa
H2SO4 NaOH
HNO3 Other _
Comments:
Were non-conformance issues noted at sample receipt? Yes or eo
Non-Conformance issue other than noted above:
Revised February 2018 Completed by:
Page 23 of 23

CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request 1 1
��
4c• Client Name: L } / Ai
TT' Address:
1.
,:z,` Environmental Testing Solutions, Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],L' 1102..._.Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: Su "v Requested Analyses
Project Number: 6013,56 I
ptt Checked Upon Receipt
Ch<U2mph Upon Receipt
Preservatives
C ` , V
1., o y. it .0 L A
Sample Identification v C �- 11 L g
., u y, - u u ti
U z p � C c t �t
C o L
U u z L
v E " E o n. ' Q ° Field
u rn ti ` A S i� M x "- U 2 Z
Temp.CC) Comments
I D.' Nv b(artk, A bizttd toetoa ,� O,l!ozz r , i . t ic
halo Conl fnrJ-t��kolf° tgeewl �''_ , , L _ 1/
3 bb1470 ZI,ugI t, f N,-6,2 IOl0eb2 y(
�' 2I"it INtl'atF ►Q1eett3 _ .
21,uq 1 -4161 RU td pp I46as4
4 32 is 1µliai lams, , /
Sample Condition Upon Receipt IRelitwishcd B} (Company I _ pat: I Trite !Accepted By !Company I Date I Time
Temperature(°C) Kri LDS 0130
o I3 2(-
Received on Ice: Y I N
Sealed Cooler: i N
Samples Intact: Y
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature • I Date
Printed Name of Samples,.
S,h4 tJ eta 0-1'36 1—3
Signature of Sampler: i

• 'J`jG// i
• CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
S F .-.,-,,. Client Name: t� t I N 1.
Address:
Environmental TestingSolutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone], IA)
[phone] I'O Number:
Project Name: CU- VV Ci-re-' Re nested Analyses
Project Number: AbtI ,' j p11 Checked Upon Receipt
CI;<0.2 mn'l Upon Receipt
Preservatives
75
o =
0. (7,
a ` C
A=Sample Identification u A Nu HC U e u
e.
12
t: ' U = U ?_ e ''ii -- p
v w U Z vs Field
—
v i- �r x U �s ac'
to � c 2 2 Temp.(C) Comments
I ab14-A)62iiiic.iyilldrAin4 ileotoc, to, olso70 pa, I 1 )/
12Mgu 4,vA At d-q4'14. _ X
3 f orr}1w 1••Ci thiRd C I Pee 8 _ x
g L tp
1L /:ha-0 (eloa"P ` k
6 W it 64,4_ q w J tll ei v '�C
Sample Condition Upon Receipt I Relinquished By 'Company Date P By (Company I Date I Tune
- � Time [Accepted "
Temperature(°C) A /�JS /Vt,t 0 !3'N
Received on Ice: Y I N (, `+
f t
Sealed Cooler: Y / N
Samples Intact: Y /
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler
Signature of Sampler:

a• CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request 01)(\
�"
r
`` Client Name: (. . , i c,
Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: c' l/ldr/l_
Re nested Analyses
Project Number: 40}0430 3.31 pH Checked Upon Receipt
Ct_<0.2 mF/I Upon Receipt
Preservatives
no
a Sample Identification ' ' u } E. „a V Z - p - - cy
h
E v c
i ' i- � 4 x V o' O Field
c
�
I ���a.""'tl 2 � Temp.(°C) Comments
t,iK 681" _`ADt,l.3o.a (21 I I
q•[ju U,t i4i&L Riuu
4 1 q A to I(- 1 N: tat _ l e '
I ►`f uq IL fN;4,t�-�I t'i° v lli
' 1
Sample Condition Upon Receipt 'Relinquished 13t (Company I _ Date ( Time 'Accepted By 'Company I Date I Time
Temperature(°C) � e-)� O430,1 133v
Received on Ice: Y / N 7V
Sealed Cooler: / N
Samples Intact: Y N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
Signature of Sampler:

•
CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request 3L�
' Client Name: as, / /iC
`t
, ,
, ,
Address:
.. . Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: —.S\li / u1 L" Re nested Analyses
Project Number: At!)1430.56)
pit Checked Upon Receipt
CI;<0.2 nv/I Upon Receipt
Preservatives
Sample Identification " e s; 7 p }
-I
u u
� ¢cyr Nz q �
Q
E J ' n aEE o
ti
c ONO U O'V ' Field
U ( : S O ... P' S., w — Z z
1� � Temp.(°C) Comments
S:frthwr Con iolfowlatiNd-fp h igvo IZ'A ✓
`' 52 •1L t,..,..hug lgset�i ✓
3 3 Z,(,cil►(r I`N 3I 0 d I - 4 .
_ �
Im6htcun y q k1 t L !N t iut osee 1 ei0 302,0 rt3c, .4
Sample Condition Upon Receipt 'Relinquished By I 'ompatty I Date Time B
'Accepted Y ICotnpariy� =.1 Date:' I Time
Temperature(°C) f I i{ �y 14� I33(,
Received on Ice: Y / N '�l� t1
Sealed Cooler: / N
Samples Intact: Y /
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I DA1e
Printed Name of Sampler:
Signature of Sampler:

•
•
CHA -OF'-CUSTODY / Analytical Request t
al
leClient Name: "i NC
F 1.,..„.,_ , ,.
.,„.
Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565, Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],,Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: SU tlin NM—
Re nested Analv:ses
.
Project Number: ot,(30, t)) pH Checked Upon Receipt
CI,<0.2 nil Upon Receipt
.� c
6.
L. V
u
Sample Identification " R = 9yPreservatives
oyud
if
f n <. E S V E O O v, Field
C7 c G �, i— ^ U M �'
x z z Temp.CC) Comments
1lel trxM►,;rr1Sb L1 4/04tkNd- �03 Ua`1'O1 O IL 1 t X
/S,w1 10,ha/ �tl,64rd to eeies I
a l'S AI `Na Q 1•``Ui".tu. eemoo" 1
lit,WI i khkJ- I4‘869} v
let ei6 a I R, 1 N i 4Il Atrtt �� ` . , }
Sample Condition Upon Receipt (Relinquished By 'Company I .. Dote I Time (Accepted By Company ( (?ate I 'Tine
Temperature(°Cj 1 Ds 0435 iJ t33(
Received on Ice: Y / N �� JU�cJ
Sealed Cooler: Y / N
Samples Intact: Y
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of_S_a.?_ er
,.)t-1.1,3P.vC_ 0+3Q't U
Signature of Sampler:

0 CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
•
• F. Client Name: s j itl C.
x ..
t Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: Eu a WLY-- Re nested Analyses
Project Number: D 143ciml pit Checked Upon Receipt
CI_<0.2 nil Upon Receipt
Preservatives
0 a.
tooGo
C` V o:7
Sample Identification ' E ,, a - ; y
r 0 u
z o1 Y
Go „ E z: ; E - c ii 'ci, O p 'n Field
L n gi p' y _ = U c �1 V ° n'
�q(300g —� Y z z Temp.(°C) Comments
1 , 1'/rl cfZ(0''01 II V,uj �t',i10.i{i l 14 F» s 0(000 f 23o I I �`
g i Acts
lae8q° 1
1.31,u9 rNtAd "f '
GA 75,E ,t";h _ I
2 fib rv.h I,it,G i
Sample Condition Upon Receipt (Relinquished By (Company I Date ( Time (Accepted By (Company I Date I Time
Temperature(°C) /t�> > lk L 1S O I� t3 V
Received on Ice: Y / N t`f'
Sealed Cooler: / N
Samples Intact: Y
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler: C
-JJHNG2. 0`IZO-2d
Signature of Sampler: l'\''''

A -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request g�
CHA
,
fi F 61. , f hlC_
Client Name:
Address:
Inc.
Environmental Testing Solutions,.� Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax:
/l(828)350-9368 PO Number:
Project Name: Jn Vl'i uk_7-_
Re nested Analyses
Project Number: clOOL 30 , )] pH Checked Upon Receipt
CI_<0.2 mg/l IJpon Receipt
Preservatives
C i
U11, ivSample Identification I
r U < h y c- c° r 2 x U 2 v Ci , M' y F'ielci
r Tem
} n F z p•(°C) Comments
AI
. , Pi' 04302-4 Mu ii'I
Cod, of 'lac has , c-ea�. 9
N
' 'l
mrc f�N 6
Ai IL Oti (t' i d' 6 /
6 VOL 4�tta.�(01_, tad , `
6
Sample Condition Upon Receipt IRelincpiishcd II) 'Company I Dote I Time Accepted.By (Company I Dtate, I Time
Temperature(°C) NA IL—
�- — O'eDS ' ,O (33 Li
Received on Ice: Y 1 N 1(
Sealed Cooler: Y / N
Samples Intact: Y /
Additional Comments: Sampler'Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
Signature of Sampler:
V

APPENDIX B
WER #2 TEST REPORTS
May 27, 2020

�$ CIA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
Client Name:^ \ )V t ,r;() C tU�,'tf
Address: )( ,.�t„.4,_-7,1\ -r ki,6-- Rc,, L
—— }-_
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc. tiL }C/g. A
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone:
Fax:
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: e I y LL_-�L....d\r—
Project Number. ']137 6131 I Re nested Analyses
"J�2t� / pN CI ecked Upon Rtc••1
Cl.<Q.N mg9 Upon Receipt
Preservatives
C i Sample Identification 7 e , �°
Li j /
Z A O Y O = Ii
'CS 6 `V U n, Z U O a' Field /
� � � �R aDI �y z z Temp.CC) Comments
� ` Ci
3 — r
1 _
Sample Condition Upon Receipt _IRelinquished By ICompatty I Date.. I Time .IMO fed
Temperature(°C) `.8 Fe`' OS.rt.to
a� •
f t�0 E 0 5-1_1•to 1130
Received on Ice: t Y {/ ,cl,11,
Sealed Cooler: ..(0,-,sk
Samples Intact: Y / N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I
Date
`'i(v"CL--5W lcQS6 P� N9tteofSample•• �•��)U
Si�naatnr r
'��-.

WEATHER DATA SUMMARY
MAY 2020
FACILITY: Duke L.V. Sutton /Outfall 008
Weather 1: On-site monitoring station (@ effluent channel)
Weather 2: NWS/New Hanover International Airport, North Carolina
Highest
Date Avg Temp High Temp Low Temp Precip Wind Weather
(F) (F) (F) (IN) (mph) Station ID
5/1/2020 63 71 55 0.00 23.0 2
5/2/2020 63 75 51 0.00 13.0 2
5/3/2020 74 88 60 0.00 20.0 2
5/4/2020 76 89 62 0.00 20.0 2
5/5/2020 66 73 59 0.77 32.0 2
5/6/2020 65 76 53 0.08 30.0 2
5/7/2020 58 69 47 0.00 21.0 2
5/8/2020 59 73 45 0.02 29.0 2
5/9/2020 56 65 47 0.03 23.0 2
5/10/2020 56 71 41 0.00 17.0 2
5/11/2020 65 76 54 0.00 28.0 2
5/12/2020 57 69 45 0.00 16.0 2
5/13/2020 61 74 48 0.00 13.0 2
5/14/2020 67 80 53 0.00 16.0 2
5/15/2020 69 80 58 0.00 15.0 2
5/16/2020 72 83 61 0.00 14.0 2
5/17/2020 73 81 65 0.04 26.0 2
5/18/2020 76 83 69 0.16 18.0 2
5/19/2020 63 72 63 0.33 16.0 1
5/20/2020 72 76 63 0.70 25.0 1
5/21/2020 72 77 68 0.71 28.0 1
5/22/2020 67 87 67 0.00 25.0 1
5/23/2020 74 89 66 0.03 14.0 1
5/24/2020 71 87 69 0.00 19.0 1
5/25/2020 69 80 65 0.00 14.0 1
5/26/2020` 68 73 63 0.06 14.0 2
5/27/2020 73 77 69 0.31 21.00 2
5/28/2020 79 85 73 0.01 21.00 2
5/29/2020 79 86 72 0.08 20.00 2
5/30/2020 76 80 71 1.18 13.00 2
5/31/2020 73 82 64 0.00 21.00 2
*Sampling Date

ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING SOLUTIONS, INC.
TOXICITY TEST REPORT
INTRODUCTION/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Report Date: June 19, 2020
1. Client: Shealy Consulting, LLC
2. Study: Water-Effect Ratio testing of L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,Pond Water
3. Samples Tested: Pond Water
4. Test and Sample Dates: Sample date: May 26,2020
Test dates: May 27-29, 2020
5. Test Species: Fathead Minnows(Pimephales promelas)
6. Test Type: Acute Toxicity Test(EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2000.0)
7. Nominal Concentrations Tested: LABWATER tests:
P. promelas: 6.0,9.1, 14, 21,32,49,75 µg/L Cu
SIMSTREAM tests:
P.promelas: 32,49, 75, 116, 179, 275,423 µg/L Cu
8. Client Contact: Beth Thompson
Phone#: [phone]
9- Consulting/Testing Lab: Environmental Testing Solutions, Inc. (ETS)
10. Lab Contact: Jim Sumner
Phone#: [phone]
SAMPLE CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Samples:
1. Sample Type: Grab
2. Sample Information:
Location Date/Time Collected Date/Time Received Arrival Date/Time Used
MM-DD-YY Time ET MM-DD-YY Time ET Temp. MM-DD-YY Time ET
(°C)
Pond Water 05-26-20 1033 05-27-20 1130 1.8 05-27-20 1229
1

3. Sample Manipulation:
Lab Water test:
Synthetic water was prepared according to EPA protocol,which had a hardness
of 52 mg/L CaCO3. The synthetic water hardness was similar to site water
received from the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex(39 mg/L CaCO3).
A primary stock solution was prepared by diluting 0.3930 g CuSO4*5H2O in
1000 mL deionized water. The nominal copper concentration of this stock
solution was 100 mg/L.
A secondary stock solution was prepared by diluting 10 ml primary stock
solution into 1000 mL synthetic water(1000 µg/L Cu).
Test solutions evaluated for toxicity were prepared using this secondary stock
solution and were diluted using synthetic water.
Site Water tests:
Site water received from the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex had a hardness of
39 mg/L CaCO3.
The same primary stock solution prepared for the Lab Water test was used for
the Site Water tests. This primary stock solution was prepared by diluting
0.3930 g CuSOa*5H2O in 1000 mL deionized water. The nominal copper
concentration of this stock solution was 100 mg/L.
A secondary stock solution was prepared by diluting 10 mL primary stock.
solution into 1000 mL site water(1000 pg/L Cu).
Test solutions evaluated for toxicity were prepared using this secondary stock
solution and were diluted using site water.
All test solutions were warmed to test temperature(25.0±1.0°C)in a warm
water bath.
2

Nominal and measured total and dissolved copper analyses
are provided below (µg/L Cu).
Blank glassware check: <2.0 µg/L
LABWATER Tests:
Minnows
Initial Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved
Control <2.0 <2.0 <2.0
6.0 5.0 5.0
9.1 8.0 9.0 8.0
14.0 12.0 11.0 11.0
21.0 19.0 19.0 20.0
32.0 28.0 24.0 32.0
49.0 42.0 38.0 48.0
75.0 63.0 61.0 75.0
SIMSTREAM Tests:
Minnows
Initial Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved
Control 4.0 4.0 9.0
32.0 37.0 35.0
49.0 52.0 49.0 51.0
75.0 79.0 72.0 81.0
116.0 117.0 109.0 116.0
179.0 176.0 162.0 175.0
275.0 251.0 227.0 265.0
423.0 413.0 367.0 396.0
3

TEST CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Pimephales promelas
Test Organisms:
1. Source: In-house Cultures
2. Age: < 24-hours old
Test Method Summary:
1. Test Conditions: Static
2. Test Duration: 48-hours
3. Control/Dilution Water:
LABWATER test: Synthetic water
SIMSTREAM test: Site water
4. Number of Replicates: 2
S. Organisms per Replicate: 10
6. Test Initiation: (Date/Time)
LABWATER test: 05-27-20 1217 ET
SIMSTREAM test: 05-27-20 1229 ET
7. Test Termination: (Date/Time)
LABWATER test: 05-29-20 1205 ET
SIMSTREAM test: 05-29-20 1220 ET
8. Test Temperature: 25.0± 1.0°C
9. Physical/Chemical
Measurements: Parameters measured in the full-strength sample in the laboratory were
temperature, DO, pH, conductivity, alkalinity, hardness and total residual
chlorine. Intermediate and final measurements of temperature, DO and pH
were made at 24 and 48 hours, respectively.
10. Statistics: Statistics were performed according to methods prescribed by EPA
using ToxCalc version 5.0.32 statistical software (Tidepool Scientific Software,
McKinneyville, CA).
4

TOXICITY TEST RESULTS(see Appendix B for Bench Sheets)
1. LAB WATER test:
Results of a Pimephales promelas 48-hour Acute/LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted May 27—29, 2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
6.0 100 100
9.1 100 100
14 100 95
21 80 60
32 50 35
49 30 10
75 15 S
LCso(mil Cu) 36.5 26.9
95°!Confidence 30.9—43.9 23.1—31.5
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 31.7 23.6
95%Confidence ( 26.9—37.7 20.3—27.5
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Dissolved Copper
'LCso(µg/L Cu) 29.3 22.0
95%Confidence 25.1—35.1 19.1—25.5
Interval(nil_Cu)
5

2. SIMSTREAM test:
Results of a Pimephafes promelas 48-hour AcutJ LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted May 27—29,2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
32 100 100
49 100 100
75 100 95
116 95 60
179 60 30
275 35 15
423 20 10
LCso(µg/L Cu) 237.3 153.8
95%Confidence
Interval(pg/L Cu) 201.3—286.1 130.0—183.0
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(pg/L Cu) 228.7 152.3
95%Confidence
Interval(pg/L Cu) 195.7—274.8 130.2—179.3
Measured: Dissolved Copper
LCso(pg/L Cu) 207.7 139.7
95%Confidence 178.5—247.9 119.9—163.8
Interval(µg/L Cu)
6

Appendix A
ADDITIONAL TOXICITY TEST INFORMATION
SUMMARY OF METHODS
1. Pimephales promelas
Tests were conducted according to EPA-821-R-02-012 using two replicates, each containing ten test
organisms,per treatment. Test vessels consisted of 500-m1 plastic disposable cups,each containing 250
mL of test solution.
DEVIATIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO TEST PROTOCOL
1. Pimephales promelas
None
DEVIATIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO PRETEST CULTURE OR HOLDING OF TEST ORGANISMS
1. Pimephales promelas
None
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL METHODS
1. Reagents,Titrants, Buffers,etc.:All chemicals were certified products used before expiration dates(where
applicable).
2. Instruments:All identification,service,and calibration information pertaining to laboratory
instruments is recorded in calibration and maintenance logbooks.
3. Temperature was measured by SM 2550 8-2010.
4. Dissolved oxygen was measured by SM 4500-0 G-2011.
5. The pH was measured by SM 4500-H+8-2011.
6. Conductance was measured by SM 2510 8-2011.
7. Alkalinity was measured by SM 2320 B-2011.
8. Total Hardness was measured by SM 2340 C-2011.
9. Total residual chlorine was measured by the ORION Electrode Method 97-70-1977.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Toxicity Test Methods: All phases of the study including, but not limited to,sample collection, handling and
storage;glassware preparation;test organism culturing/acquisition and acclimation;test organism handling
during test;and maintaining appropriate test conditions were conducted according to the protocol as
described in this report and EPA-821-R-02-012. Any known deviations were noted during the study and are
reported herein.
7

REFERENCE TOXICANT TESTS(See Appendix C for control chart information)
1. Test Type: 48-hour acute tests with results expressed as LCso values in g KCl/L.
2. Standard Toxicant: Potassium Chloride(KCI).
3. Dilution Water Used:Moderately hard synthetic water.
4. Statistics: Probits Analysis,Spearman-Karber,Trimmed Spearman-Karber,or graphical method.
REFERENCES
1. USEPA, Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and
Marine Organisms, EPA-821-R-02-012(October 2002).
2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 22nd Edition, 2012.
3. Quality Assurance Program: Standard Operating Procedures, Environmental Testing
Solutions, Inc.(most current version).
4. USEPA,Streamlined Water-Effect Ratio Procedure for Discharges of Copper, EPA-822-R-01-005(March 2001).
8

Appendix B
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORDS
TOXICITY TEST BENCH SHEETS
9

CHA -0E-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
Client Name: (,I) C! ti
ie
Address: ( \5 U CIC'I i
Environmental Testing Solutions, Inc. '�
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone:
Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: .r.[ 4;�C.�• 1
.f '
Project Number: '' 37 Re uested Analyses
��^^ SI3 /
052; hec Receiprl
CIpN<C 0?mw/kedI UponUpon Receipt
Preservatives
I
u
A Sale I
I
: mPentmlcatm11
e _ ts.o aii o a f V 7 z
I` Temp.CC)) Comments
� (
r � ,` t / �, 20D �D1 ;�� � -�L fCJ�'�� r � c��
4
_ 1
5 - r
Sample Condition Upon Receipt 'Relinquished By (Company I Date I Tune,, 'Accepted By 'Company j Date I Time .,
Temperature(°C) k. Fe`, OS.rt-
LO *tad � , dS-1:1•io 1130
Received on Ice: 1 Y 1/ (,..orliA
Sealed Cooler: Y ,�'1
Samples Intact: Y / N
Additional Comments:
Sampler Name and Signature I Date
,tit)(. '-b'CL`5S11 i e$b p_riotr N tte of Sample • `
I<t (- ice A it r P/lc Lre '-2
Sinatur r

III
Acute 1050 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pirnephales promelas Page 1 of 2
EPA-821-R-02-012,Method 2000.0
Client Shealy Consulting, LLC
I
Facility L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,LABWATER
Project tl %SYS \ Sample tt I4A
Dilution Preparation:
Test Concentrations(µg/I) 6.0 91 14 21 32 49 75 1°stock sotutton prepsredbydttoting 0.3930 a Cu10,•SH,0 into 1000 nit delonited
mi.2°Stock 6,0 9.1 14 21 3 49 75 water. 2°Pock solution prepared by diluting 20 mt 1°stock solution into 2000 mt
LABWATER.This 2`stock solution was used to prepare theeaicentratfons evaluated
mt.Dilution water 994 991 986 979 968 951 925 i0 touicitp IOOWASEO was used,,the control it jOunni
I
Total volume(ml) 1CC0 I000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Chemical Analyses: Hours
0 24 48
Concentration Analyst �'s re T S Analyst identified for each day,performed pH,d'efsolved oxygen and conductivity
ff measurements only. Temperatures performed at the time of test initiation or termination by
pH(S U.f .3 r„/� -4� 7( the analyst performing the toxicity test.Alkalinity,hardness and total residual chlorine
7 I ! performed by the analysts identified on the test specific bench sheets and transcribed to this
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) I'?
f '4_6 7 9' bench sheet.
I Control, Conductivity(µm5oc/cm) 1
93 O Chemical analyses:
51MSTREAM Alkalinity(mg/LCaCo,l sJtt A
Parameter Reporting limit Method number Meter Serial number
IHardness(mg/L CaCD,) 5 Z- pH 0.4 S.0 SM d500 H°9-2011 Accumet AA20 93312452
Temperature(°C) �.1 '1 ir .L�r Dissolved oxygen 1.0 mg/l SM 4500-0 G-2011 Y51 Model 5211 180104324
pH(S.U.) - 1 t Conductivity 14.9 amhos/cm SM 2510 9 2011 Ac;umet A020 9331245E
8.0 ugh. Dissolved oxygen(nigh) 6 "4-6 7& Alkalinity 5 0 mg CaCO,A SM 2320 9-2011 Accumet AA20 93312,151
Conductivity(µmhos/em) 1:2 Hardness 5.0 mg CaCO,/L sM 2340 C-2011 Not applicably Met appt1;able
Temperature(°C)
pH(S.t..) `4,,�t 1l v1 t.( -c
7 Temperature 0 1°C ,Ma 25509.2830 Digital Thern•omnir, �Qt�ttbgs
`1
�-51 �-r31 (9�
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) `i-6 /. 7,
9.1 Pg/1 77-0
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 132
Temperature(°C) IA'
g .Ai
'N.,-k.c,
pH(5 U) 4'54f ,`4i 79 7.60
Dissolved oxygen(mg/I) / QQ
14 µg/L �VJ �-� 7•6
Conductivity{in-rhos/cm) l
Temperature{'C) ''')1a.& p 7
V-I. �-LA- F
pH(S.U.f -SS 7 r (05
Dissolved oxygen{mg/L) .3-'4 'y(, _7 9
21 HS/L -t
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) a
Temperature(°C) 1.4.1 Z� ` _
— 1s p
pH(5.u) * •SS 'fTp f tQ
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) 3)4 --/ 1_ !)S t'
32 µg/L T
Conductivity)prnhos/cm) t 4o
Temperature(°C) A. i f 1LS.0
pH - �-(5.U.) 1- 75 7.6)9 ,
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) -�t,�7 7`
49 Pet. - f t 7 G
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 14 o
Temperature(°Cp -ILL cf �t14-g 14-v
•pH(5.0 1 TsSj 1 70
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) �'I•e '7 1 �! 7. 9
75 µg/L "'!t 7
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) /�'
Temperature(°C} �, 1t..1-

; ' i 7, <, ""` PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
EnvlronmentaiTesttng Solutions,Inc. Certificate of Analysis
Project name: Environmenal Testing Solutions,Inc. Project number: 200528.500
Collection date: 27-May-20
Date received: 27-May-20
Sample identification: Lab Water-Grab Sample number: 199764
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Total Organic Carbon SM 5310 B <1.00 1.00 mg/L 2-iun-2o ANB 1,2
Copper 200.8 0.002 0.002 mg/L s-May-20 TLT I
Solids,Total Suspended SM 2540 D <5.0 5.0 mg/L 29-Aprao KEK
Dissolved Solids.Total SM 2540 C <10 10 mg/L 30- r-2o KEK
Conductance,Specific SM 2510 B 180 14.9 phosem I-May-20 KEK
Hardness,Total Slvl 2340 C 52 5.0 mg/L I•May-20 KEK
Alkalinity,Total SM 2320 B 34 5.0 mg/L I-May-20 KEK
Sample identification: Lab Water Filtered-Grab Sample number: 199765
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L I-Jun-20 TLT 1,2
Sample identification: Simstream-Grab Sample number: 199766
Parameter Method Result RL Units Dale Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Nitrate+Nitrite as N SM4500-NO3 H <0.10 0.10 mg/L 9-Jun-20 ELN 1
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 35I.2 0.49 0.10 mg/L 4-tun-20 LKH 1
Total Nitrogen Calculation 0.49 0.100 mg/L 9-tun-20 LKH 1
Oil and Grease,HEM EPA 1664 B <5.0 5.0 mg/L 29-May-20 CTS 1
Total Organic Carbon SM 5310 B 6.33 1.00 mg/L 2-Jun-20 ANB 1
Copper 200.8 0.004 0.002 mg/L faun-2o TLT 1
Solids,Total Suspended SM 2540 D <5.0 5.0 mg/L 28-May-2a KEK
Dissolved Solids,Total SM 2540 C 140 10 mg/L 28-May-20 KEK
Conductance.Specific SM 2510 B 240 14.9 µhosicm 29:May-20 KEK
Hardness,Total SM 2340 C 39 5.0 mg/L 29410-20 KEK
Alkalinity,Total SM 2320 B 15 5.0 mg/L 29-May.20 KEK
Sample identification: Simstream Filtered-Grab Sample number: 199767
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 0.004 0.002 mg/L IJun-20 UT 1
This report should not be reproduced,exept in its entirety,without the written consent of Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
The results in this report relate only to the samples submitted for analysis.

FiF;7,77 PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Certificate of Analysis
Project name: Environmenal Testing Solutions,Inc. Project number: 200528.500
Collection date: 27-May-20
Date received: 27-May-20
Sample identification: DI Water-Grab Sample number: 199768
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L i-Jun-20 TLT I,2
Collection date: 26-May-20
Date received: 27-May-20
Sample identification: Field Blank-Grab Sample number: 199769
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L 1-Jun-20 TLT 1,2
Collection date: 27-May-20
Date received: 27-May-20
Sample identification: Field Blank Filtered-Grab Sample number: 199769
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L faun-20 TLT 1,2
RL=Reporting Limit. Values are reported down to the Reporting Limit only.
I. Sample analzyed by Rogers&Callcott Environmental,Inc.
2. Result is an estimated value. Result is below the reporting limit. Parameter has been J-Flagged.
Date reviewed: O(p-13.?O NC Certification Number: 600
Data reviewed by: Kelley E.Keenan SC Certification Number: 99053
NC Drinking Water Certification Number: 37786
Signature:
This report should not be reproduced,exept in its entirety,without the written consent of Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
The results in this report relate only to the samples submitted for analysis.

Rogers &Cattcott c
ENVIRONMENTAL `"apiraso"''
Laboratory Report
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
J
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0051236
351 Depot St. Received: 05/29/2020 09:50
Asheville,NC 28801-4310
Dear Client:
Rogcts and Callcott appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you. The attached laboratory services report includes analytical results and chain of
custody for samples that were received on May 29,2020. Rogers and Callcott maintains a formal QA/QC program. Unless otherwise noted,all analyses
performed under NELAP certification have complied with all the requirements for the TNI standard. The analyses met the QA/QC confidence interval
for each test method unless otherwise qualified. Estimated uncertainty is available upon request.
Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this report and is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee,or
the person responsible for delivering to the person addressed,you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone else. If you receive this message by
mistake,please notify Rogers and Callcott immediately.
We strive to provide excellent service to our clients. Please contact Sarnh Baker, your Project Manager,at sbaker d rcenviro.com.
(864)-232-1556 if you have any questions about this report.
Report Approved By:
Sarah Baker
Project Manager
This report may not be reproduced.except in fill.without n-rirtcnr permission from Rogers cf Callrort,Inc.
PO Box 5655 Gr rcenvillc,SC 29606 426 Fait-forest Way Greenville,SC 29607 ma.864,232.1556 'ax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott,com
a r employee-owned company
Page 1 of 22

J,,a[cxror�,
r� S
I Rogers &Cattcott
ENVIRONMENTAL ORnto
South Carolina Greenville Laboratory Identification 23103
South Carolina Columbia Laboratory Identification 40572
Certificate of Analysis North Ortolan:Laboratory CertifrcationNumber 17
North Carolina Drinking Water Lab Number 45710
NELAP Utah Certificate Number SC000042014-1
Georgia Drinking Water Lab ID 880
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan work Order: 0051236
351 Depot St. Received: 05/29/2020 09:50
Asheville,NC 28801.4310
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampled Type
0051236-01 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Wastewater 05/27/20 12:19 Grab
0051236-02 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 12:22 Grab
005 1 2 3 6-03 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Wastewater 05/27/20 12:19 Grab
0051236-04 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstreatn filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 12.24 Grab
0051236-05 ETS Inc Sutton WER-DI H2O Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-06 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Field Blank Wastewater 05/26/20 10:33 Grab
0051236-07 ETS Inc Sutton WER-DI H2O Blank filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-08 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial6.0 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-09 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 6.0 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-10 ETS Ina Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 9.1 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
005 1236-1 1 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 9.1 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0031236-12 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 14 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-13 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 14 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-14 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 21 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-15 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 21 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-16 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 32 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-17 ETS Int Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 32 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-18 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 49 t Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-19 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 49 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-20 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 75 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-21 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 75 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:08 Grab
0051236-22 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 32 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
0051236-23 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 32 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
1 0051236-24 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 49 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
0051236-25 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 49 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
0051236-26 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 75 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
0051236-27 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 75 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Palydorest way Greenville,SC 29607 '„,m 864 232.1556 t.,x 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
am'enttikrveeowned carnisany
06/11/2020 08:05 this report may not be rep vducod,mop/lot MI,without Women permission from Rogers&Cutlrat.bre 1 Page 2 of 22

-1 Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampled Type
0051236-28 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 116 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
005 1 2 36-29 ETS Inc Sutton WER•Simstream initial 116 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
0051236-30 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 179 Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
005 1 23 6-3 1 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 179 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13.46 Grab
0051236-32 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 275 Wastewater 05/27f20 13:46 Grab
0051236-33 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstrcarn initial 275 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
0051236-34 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 423 Wastewater 0.5/27/20 13:46 Grab
0051236-35 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 423 filtered Wastewater 05/27/20 13:46 Grab
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fwforesc Way Greenville,SC 29607 man 864.232.1556 ftr.864.232.61-10 rogersandcailcott.com
,an rmploY�e,ovnied tornparly
0611112020 08:05 This report may no!he reproduced.except in Inn n•/the a!written permission from Rogers&['uncoil.Inc. Page 3 of 22

Rogers &Cal[cott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Sample Data
Sample Number 0051236-01
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O collected on 05/27/20 12:19
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
General Chemistry Parameters
Total Organic Carbon ND 1.00 mg/L 1.00 06/02/20 14:19 SM 53108.2011 ANB B0F0066
Total Metals
Copper NO 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 19:44 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0008
Sample Number 0051236-02
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O filtered collected on 05/27/20 12:22
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 19:48 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0008
Sample Number 0051236.03
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream collected on 05/27/20 12:19
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
General Chemistry Parameters
Nitrate-Nitrite as N ND 0.10 mgJL 1.00 06/09/20 11:48 SM 4500M03H-2011 ELN B0F0440
Oil and Grease.Total,HEM ND 5.0 mgit. 1.00 05/29/20 10:15 EPA I664B CTS B0E1359
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0,49 0,10 mg/L I.00 06/04/20 11:36 EPA3512 LKH BOF0186
Total Nitrogen(TKN+Nitrate+Nitrite) 0.49 0.100 mg/L 1.00 06/09/20 11:48 Calculation LKH [CALL]
Total Organic Carbon 6.33 1.00 mg/L 1.00 06/02/20 14:33 SM 53108-2011 ANB B0F0066
Total Metals
Copper 0.004 0.002 m8/L 1.00 06/01/20 18:33 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0008
Sample Number 0051236-04
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream filtered collected on 05/27/20 12:24
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units BF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.004 0.002 tng/L 1.00 06/01/20 19:53 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0008
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fair`orest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.eom
_... an ent0k,yee-owned company
06/1//2020 08:05 rigs)sport may not be reproduced,except in fa without written permission from Rogers di CoUcou.Inc. I Page 4 of 22

-Th Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Sample Number 0051236-05
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-DI H2O collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units of Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/I 1.00 06/01/20 18:52 EPA 200,S TLT BOF0008
Sample Number 0051236-06
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Field Blank collected on 05/26/20 10:33
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 19:57 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0008
Sample Number 005 1 236-07
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-DI H2O Blank filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 20:10 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0008
Sample Number 0051236-08
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 6,0 collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.005 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 20:14 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0008
Sample Number 0051236-09
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 6.0 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.005 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 20:19 EPA 200.8 TLT 80F0008
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 n:am 864.232.1556 far 864.232.6110 rogersandcalleott.com
an oroptow-e-nwnetl company
04//1/2O10 08:05 This report way ow he reproduced.army in fidl.without written permissionfinm Rogers&Calico!.Inc. Page 5 of 22

s Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Sample Number 0051236-10
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER•Lab H2O initial 9.1 collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Uniti DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.008 0.002 mg/L t.00 06/01/20 20:23 EPA200.8 TLT B0F0008
Sample Number 005 1 236-1 1
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 9.1 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.009 0.002 me/L. 1.00 06/01/20 20:27 EPA200.8 TLT B0F0008
Sample Number 0051236-12
Sample Description ETS tnc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 14 collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.012 0.002 ing/L 1.00 06/01/20 21:37 EPA200,8 TLT B0F0009
Sample Number 0051236-13
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 14 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.011 0.002 mgli 1.00 06/01/20 21:41 EPA 2001 TLT 80F0009
Sample Number 0051236-14
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 21 collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.019 0.002 mg/l. 1.00 06/01/20 21:45 EPA200.8 TLT 80F0009
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 tix 864.232.6140 rogersandeallcott.com
.,,emirioy:e' caned company
06/11/2020 08:03 This report muy not be reproduced.except in full.without written perrnixs/on from Rogers&Cullers",lyre.
Page 6 of 22

' ` Rogers &Cattcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Sample Number 0051236-15
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 21 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.019 0.002 mg& 1.00 06/01/20 21:50 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-16
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 32 collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.028 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 21:54 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-17
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 32 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.024 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 21:59 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-18
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 49 collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Links OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst. Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.042 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:03 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-19
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 49 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.038 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:07 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
PO Box 56S5 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest VVay Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fay 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an emplgyee.ownt,i t ornpdriy
06/11/2020 08.15 This report may not he reproduced.except in full,without written permission from Rogers di Cattalo.loc. Page 7 of 22

� Rogers &Cattcott
v ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Sample Number 005 1 2 36-2 0
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 75 collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.063 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:12 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0031236-21
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O initial 75 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:08
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.061 0.002 m8/1- 1.00 06/01/20 22:16 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-22
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstreain initial 32 collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.037 0.002 mg/L I.00 06/01/20 22:29 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 005 1 23 6-23
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 32 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed. Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.035 0.002 mg/t- 1.00 06/01/20 22:33 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-24
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstrcam initial 49 collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.052 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 20:48 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0009
PO Box 56SS Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 maw 864,232.1556 fak B64.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an employee owned comp.tny
06/11/2020 0R:05 This report my ow be reproduced,eecgv in full,without nrilten permission from Rogers&Callcoa,Mc. Page 8 of 22

'.'"Th Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/I I/20 08:05
Sample Number 0051236-25
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 49 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting P g
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.049 0.002 ing/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:38 EPA MO 8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-26
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 75 collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.079 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:42 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0009 I
Sample Number 0051236-27
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 75 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.072 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:46 EPA 200.8 TLT 80F0009
Sample Number 0051236-28
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 116 collected on 05/27/20 I3:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.117 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:51 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-29
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 116 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.109 0.002 me- 1.00 06/01/20 21:08 EPA240.8 TLT BOF0009
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Iairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 nti.un 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
4,ti empinyeu-owned company
11611l/2020 08:05 This report may xot be repnodaced,etcept to fill!.without written permission from Rogers 4 Callcon.Inc. Page 9 of 22

''''''') Rogers &Callcott
1 b ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
35! Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Sample Number 0051236-30
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 179 collected on 05/27/20 13:46
1 Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.176 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 22:55 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-31
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 179 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.162 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/01/20 23:00 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0009
Sample Number 0051236-32
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 275 collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.251 0.002 mg1L 1.00 06/03/20 16:25 EPA 200.8 TLT BOFO104
Sample Number 0051236-33
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 275 filtered collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.227 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/03/20 16:30 EPA 200.8 TIT B0F0104
Sample Number 0051236-34
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream initial 423 collected on 05/27/20 13:46
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.413 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/03/20 16:44 EPA 200.8 TLT BOFO104
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fair?orest Way Greenville,SC 29607 maim 864.232.1556 t r 861.232.6140 rogersalldCalICott.Com
en en pioyt':'-6arrt,'d CfI'll:any
ON/l/202 0 08:05 This report may not be reproduced,ercept m full,without written permirrion front Rogers do Calkoli.Inc,
Page 10 of 22

e, Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch BOF0008- EPA 200.8
Blank(B0F0008-BLKI)
Copper ND 0.002 mg'L
LCS(B0F0008-BSI)
Copper 0.200 0.002 mg/L 0.200 100 55-115
Duplicate(B0F0008-DUPI) Source:0051236-03
Copper 0.004 0.002 mg/L 0.004 5 20
Duplicate(130F0008-DUP2) Source:0051236-05
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L ND 20
atria Spike(B0F0008-MS1) Source:0051236-03
sopper 0.197 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.004 96 70-130
Matrix Spike(B0F0008-MS2) Source:0051236-05
Copper 0.196 0.002 mg/L 0.200 ND 9S 70-130
Post Spike(130F0008-PSI) Source:0051236-03
Copper 0.234 mg/L 0.250 0.004 100 75-125
Post Spike(B0F0008-PS2) Source:0051236-05
Copper 0.249 mg/L 0_7.50 ND 99 75-125
Batch B0F0009-EPA 200.8
Blank(B0F0009-BLKI)
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L
LCS(B0F0009-BSI)
Copper 0.203 0.002 mg/L 0.200 101 85-115
Duplicate(B0F0009-DUPI) Source:0051236-24
Copper 0.050 0.002 mg/L 0.052 3 20
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairfnrese Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1356 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an empioyae•osmn-d,:umpr.ny
06/11/2020 08:05 This repots may nor be reproduced,except MAIL without written pernsissum from Rogers&Calcm",lroc.
Page 14 of 22

Rogers &Callcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch BOF0009-EPA 200.8
Duplicate(130F0009-DUP2) Source:0051236-29
Copper 0.110 0.002 mg/L 0.109 0.7 20
Matrix Spike(BOF0009-MSI) Source:0051236-24
Copper 0.245 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.052 97 70-130
Matrix Spike(BOF0009-MS2) Source:0051236-29
Copper 0.302 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.109 96 70-130
Post Spike(130F0009-PSI) Source:0051236-24
Copper 0.298 mg/L 0.250 0.052 99 75-125
it Spike(B0F0009-PS2) Source:0051236-29
copper 0.343 mg/L 0.250 0.109 93 75-125
Batch BOF0104-EPA 200.8
Blank(B0F0104-BLKI)
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L •
LCS(B0F0104-BSI)
Copper 0.205 0.002 mg/L 0.200 102 85-115
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairtorest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864:232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
en employee•owned company
06/11/2010 08:05 This report may not be reproduced,except is fill.without written permission fiom Rogers&Callcan.Inc.
Page 15 of 22

6,-,,,i‘\ Rogers &Cattcottt
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08.05
Sample Preparation Data
Parameter Batch Sample ID Prepared Analyst
EPA 200.8 Metal Digestion
EPA200.8 BOF0008 0051236-01 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0008 0051236-02 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0008 0051236.03 06/01/2020 11:42 TLC
EPA 200.8 BOF0008 0051236-04 06/01/2020 If:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 8010008 0051236-05 06/01/2020 11:42 TLC
EPA 200.8 80F0008 0051236-06 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 130F0008 0051236-07 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0008 0051236-08 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOE0008 0051236-09 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 130E0008 0051236-10 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0008 0051236.11 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 130F0009 0051236-12 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0009 0051236-13 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0009 0051236-14 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0009 0051236-15 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0009 0051236-16 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 8000009 0051236-17 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0009 0051236-18 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0009 0051236.19 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0009 0051236.20 06/01/2020 11.42 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0009 0051236-21 06/01/2020 11:42 ILI
EPA200.8 00F0009 0051236-22 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0009 0051236-23 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0009 0051236-24 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0009 0051236-25 06/01/2020 11:42 -CLs
EPA 200.8 BOF0009 0051236-26 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0009 0051236-27 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200,8 80F0009 0051236-28 06/01/2020 11:42 TLC
EPA 200.8 6000009 0051236-29 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0009 0051236-30 06/01/2020 11:42 TLT
EPA 200.8 6000009 0051236-31 06/01/2020 I 142 TLT
EPA 200.8 8000104 0051236-32 06/02/2020 14:46 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0104 0051236-33 06/02)2020 14.46 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0104 0051236-34 06/02/2020 14:46 UT
EPA 200.8 80F0104 0051236-35 06/02/2020 14:46 TLT
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fair€ores(Way Greenville,SC 29607 iomo 864.232.1556 n><8611.232.6140 rogersandcailcott.com
nn employee-owne'I r urspany
06/11l2020 08:05 Th!.s report nw-not be reproduced.except in fill without written permission from Rogers.&Callao!.Inc Page 16 of 22

Rogers &Callcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0051236
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:05
Data Qualifiers and Definitions
ND Analyte NOT DETECTED at or above the reporting limit
NR Not reported
RPD Relative Percent Difference
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an employ.re-owned company
06/11/2020 08:05 This report may nor be reproduced.except in full.without written permission from Rogers&CafkWr.Inc.
Page 17 of 22

,y �J _ - 1
Rogers & Ca1lcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER C:10 1 I:MO
SIC.
1p ENVIRONMENTALI . . Flltered(_Yes/N
Mailing PO Box 5655 ShIppIng 426 Fairforest Way 2158 Stonerid a Drive Cooled es o
Address: Greenville,SC 29506 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,Sc 29210 ....
`-^` �
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] Container Type( asti Glas
Client Name Container Volume(mL)
Address Sample Type Lf rab/t ompos(te)
Sample Source VW,DW,SW,S, Other)
Report To; ' / .�
o Preservation Code(s)
Email Address o 4 A-None E-HC1 I-ZnAcetate
B-HNO3 F-NazS2O3 1-H3PO4
Telephone# o a`� C-HzSO4 G-Boric Acid K-MCAA
PO# Project# z E V ...7* D-NaflH H-AscorbicAad L
R&C YR [7 a
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION 1- 4 of COMMENTS
-at 052710 f 219 lose,(ii o - 3 rz .' c ETs, I N C
—ta I'm I PLIttry d I >G
_ , r2S g t m511)mA- y Sc,�f�t1n WC�2_
—04 t 2 4 1 f eC
—o5 ro , c 3° D, 14-20 I V
—Ott OZA.) I (333 Tia6 flan 14- ti `f Q not recPiyed
w 13LQ D:Wiz 8tarm_ cu uu'd 1 t
-09 4 Lab i�t�iry (a.t� 1 aC
--aq I L.o Or1 1
-1a tiabt4/0r'Ntkas (1.1 ( i
SAMPLER-RELI�N-QUUIISSHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
1• Cy! S .2T, 2. ei S WO �'S•Z R.2+J Composite Start Date:
_
REELLIINNQU!SHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECE' _ Y: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3!•^_/'S CO_) 2.-r tr 05.Za.20 4.
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: -5'7DAATE//TIME Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
5. 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection ^C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt _ .' •C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: I Non-Ha zard uFlammable Skin Irritant rlpascn [ Unknown pother Form Revised July,2014 Page c/
Page 18 of 22

0,
el
Rogers �r"�(,�COtt CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER 0() 123� ti�
;-;-,-, 6 ENVIRONMENTAL Filtered(Yes/N
Mailing PO 8ox 5655 Shipping 426 Fairforest Way 21S8 Stoneridge Drive _ Cooled 0) �^���4tio
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,5C 29607 Columbia,SC 29210 Container Typ (P Stf� jC/Cl Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] _
Client Name Container Volume(mLQfj
Address Sample Type b omposite)
c Sample Source W, W,OW,SW,S, Other)
Report T0: U Preservation Codes))
Email Address o —� A—None E—HCI I—Zn Acetate
B—HNO5 F—Na2S203 J—H3P0,
Telephone# -0 w C—H2SO4 G—Boric Add K-MCAA
PO# Project# z E D—NaOH H—Ascorbic Acid L-
R&C YR_ a
To
E m V WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION 1-- COMMENTS
-11 ,CTA) 11.13 14,40 1-1Zui Nifral Q. j Ai2Ovid r tt 6 t N C
"'Z t t S I)Han (4)CrL-
_,3 I a plavel
-44 Z I -3-:_nqy_ Cars
-is . \
-kkc 32
-1� 32 -LLbj
_,q ' 11 -A Wrnd
-26 (-2-1 ti - J =u , S
SAMPM-RELLINQ RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
1• V(— ,, 2,1 2,0 2•0 WOrtt 0,29 zo Composite Start Date:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECE Y: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3`( , .c2 ,Ro 4.
Zq-ZC Qt1SO Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
5, 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection oC
7' 8• At time of lab receipt 2.a "C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: Ei Non-Hazard Flammable I ISkin Irritant Polsa Unknown I !Other Form Revised July,2014 Page c'
Page 19 of 22

Rogers &Caltcott CHATN_OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER bc� tiTIb t�°1�'
' G' ENVIRONMENTAL Filtered(Yes/N
Mailing PO Box 565S Shipping 426 Falrforest Way 2158 Stonerldge Drive CoOIe Yes 0)
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,5C 29210
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] Container Type,ea-
C1a55)
Client N2rne Container Volume(mL) a n
Address Sample Type ab ompasite)
,� i
,
C Sample Source( t GW,DW,SW,S, Other)
Report To: 5- ! . Preservation tlon Codes)
Email Address o A—None E—HCI I-7nAcetate
n B—HNO3 F—Na2S203 J—H3P0t
Telephoned C—H2SO. G—Boric Acid K-MCAA
v
PO# Project;# z E 0—NaOH H—Ascorbic Acid l-
R&C YR To
c,..4WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION F°— eL
COMMENTS
-21 05717b. 13H80.9r4m5 „n IN; 3z I
--Lc 'II .pi Hita I
.'a::Eia"'A__CLs.:,
q-5.1 Ikkd
--Z11 , I I b
-29 - itatad
-'31 \I (31G�' d
SAMP/tm—RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVE BY: DATE/TIME:
1. ► QS q 2. j S 6210/lt.tf OS Z924 Composite Start Date:
R UN ISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RE sy_ ' DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
REL tSHED BY: •� i'�"� 5. #, i O'�.1 Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
DATE/TIME: RECF V T BY: DATE/TIME:
5. 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection eC
7. 8. At time of lab receipt Z.cd aC
Possible Hazards associated with samples; nNon-Hazard LiFlammabie 1Skin Irr!:ant ®Poison Unknown - Other Form Revised July,2014 page
Page 20 of 22

•
qfp Rogers & Cakkkott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER 005123b C"
r 4 ENVIRONMENTAL Filtered(Yes/
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Fairforest Way 215E Stoneridge Drive Co Ole (Ye /a. 4
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,5C 29607 Columbia,SC 29210
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] Container Type(P(a�stic/Glass
Client Name Container Volume(mL) f¢yt �
Address Sample Type(G a /Composite)
L.-- --.i7/ 6(1 Sample SourceNW,DW,SW,S, Other)
Report To: f ( Preservation Code(s)
8
Email Address o A—None E—HCI I—ZnAcetate
Y 8—HNO3 F—Na2S2Q3 J—H3PO4
Telephone# E °: C—H2SO4 G—Boric Acid K-MCAA
43)
D—NaOH H—Ascorbic Acid L-
PO# Project it z
A&C YR_ o
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION I
,2 OSL�Z�jI3qc�..�s' i COMMENTS
e
TS
—�
�5hefin 1 m. iex,A 5 / 4 S /t/
- �� 5p dI Su nWez
- `123I -
105 `123 t ltrtri ,t t,'
S
-
SAMPLERS--RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
1. ►"L.- ©S O q2-() 2,E.E,75 au . Cl?zo Composite Start Date:
RELINQUISHED/-' BY: D1D ��
A1rTEJTIME: REC EB.�Y: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3d (.�IU/�.t ` -253 4� S-7410 QQSU Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
5. 6,
RELINQUISHED BY: Temperature of blank or representative sample
DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection "C
7. 8• At time of lab receipt 2•Z "C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: 7Non•Hazard 'Flammable nSkin irritant [l Poson I— nknown [}Other Form Revised July,2014 Page
Page 21 of 22

` Rogers&Cattcott
.-r•rr:T*; ENVIRONMENTAL
Sample Receipt Verification
Date Work
Client: 1S Received: .-1a,7.o Order: OD 5{23 b i
Carrier Name: Client FedEx UPS US Mail Courier Field Services Other:
Tracking Number:
Y
Receipt Criteria e o A Comments
S
Shipping container/cooler intact? X Damaged Leaking Other:
Custody seals intact? X
COC included with samples? X
COC signed when relinquished and received? X
Sample bottles intact? X Damaged Leaking Other:
Sample ID on COC agree with label on bottle(s)? X
Date/time on COC agree with label on bottle(s)? X
`Number of bottles on COC agrees with number of bottles received? Ni,
Samples received within holding time? X
Sample volume sufficient for analysis? X
VOA vials free of hcadspace(<6mm bubble)? X
Temp at receipt recorded oa COC /�
Samples cooled? `\ Ice Cold Packs Dry Ice None
Temp mcazured with LF thermometer•SN:97050067
Samples requiring pH preservation at proper pH?
Note: Samples for metals analysis may be preserved upon receipt in the lab.
Note: Samples for O&G and VOA analysis—preservation checked at bench. '
Samples dechlorinated for parameters requiring chlorine removal at
the time of sample collection? X
Note: Chlorine checked at bench for samples requiring Bacterial.VOA.and BAA
analysis.
If in-house preservation used — record Lot#
HCL H5PO4
H2SO4 NaOII
HNOj Other
Comments:
Were non-conformance issues noted at sample receipt? Yes or No
Non-Conformance issue other than noted above:
Revised February2018 Completed by: 4-
Page 22 of 22

410
CHA-- - -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request ___
0 \k‘P..")
* ql\
Client Name: EIS t►,,C.
- __.-- i Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc. Report to:
PO Box 7565, Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: `JJr713t3 uE& Requeste 'ses
Project Number: aka>S2.e-SOO pH Checked Upon Receipt
CI:<0.2 myl Upon Receipt
76
Preservatives
G ` J U Q
E C f
Sample Identification E `; Ea y o ////
a C
7 v 32 oL 'h v +a , Q
a i j
E r E c a 2 c = ° 2 g O 5 U1 j xV, Nr S Field
U ' 4 U m' /- CJ
c i= ? a T x z z ¢ Temp.(°C) Comments
At 1A stay �'.� 0`i2aZ2 (DoiX
ct�Teftt -( tQ3-145 v'")05212,0 I2Z2 ` X
.
s SiHST 3� CT !VOL,!VOL,u 03"' ,052174 Mot X . ' k k
' . , Pere e- (,- (VI4-io'I ,OsQS-Alx 172•4
Di. AA-LO G- (R4}b8 .�0) 352-i20 t3G13 \ 1 _ X
F
b F‘ek 8vA.tok. Cr'144}b q ow) (82.)azo NM ' \ X
Sample Condition Upon Receipt !Relinquished By (Company Date ( Time 'Accepted By (Company I Date I Time
Temperature CC) /\ E t�k,�Zt� (�jsc �S 69,724) is
Received on Ice: Y i / (J Y�
Sealed Cooler: Y / 0
Samples Intact: O! N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
x,Mh3et_
Signature of Sampler: ram/\

•
).1• CIA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
al
Client Name: E_A" , t NIL,
Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: rj -vc WES&
Project Number: 2�0525520
Ret nested Analyses
/ pi[Checked Upon Receipt
JCI,<Q2 ing,1 Upon Receipt
Preservatives
Sample Identification ' 7 r t' o
a „ e � .
E ° - -' a u u u
v L G C5 - E C `t
H n 4 C C r 3. G O Z J O Field
Temp.CC) Comments
I lit ta, U o LAN t:- F,cte2kt Cr I 1 RD � w 130E , -- , X
tA5► 2_0 t ovciAL 10.0 cr 1%61a -J 1
3 to.0 Ft,,Te N l� l 2 .A° 1 1 \ X
6‘.\F‘‘.:Ce44..b(7. 1991:"I
1 , i —
Sample Cooition Upon Receipt (Relinquished By Lem .fit .,- z- _ ,.
Temperature(°C) AiL) --\--S 05L3'0 13S0 IA-- Ds US29z0 '3rs r,)
Received on Ice: Y
Sealed Cooler: Y
Samples Intact: 0,:- N
Additional Comments: S fp1erNameand Signature ..
I Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
-vt1sJe1t
Signature of Sampler:

•
! CIA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Req est �'
a
• Client Name: _'\''S I NC
Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: ‘I'Viltill...1 wElkReyuested Analyses
Project Number: 2.12 0` .26 9A,
pH Checked Upon Receipt
_<02 mg/i Upon Receipt
Preservatives
c.
J
E U V
Sample Identification F. r o
o
c.
E. U ue, Qo c E CE. . _ U G V / ipl
Comments
lAbti10 ism-mL t4 FtoTPJtea Iei47 4 `o/ '05L-320 Cab \ \
1 "Lk cr V1) W s?. I .\ ` ,k�
Z‘ s=kka-e+t (r191'n 8 NP) t \
=' z G'i 14 1 ,,ya
3-L C tLIeA. (r' 0 9-3Qa .1 1 \ >� 6}) AIL
6 �9 6" ►g1401 ,14) v \ X
Sample Condition Upon Receipt I Relintgtisktcd By (Company i Date ( Time Accepted By Coto 'a • .,y
Temperature CC) 4 )------ - �`� :41 1353 VA-- OS 052313 I3S0
Received on Ice: Y /1
Sealed Cooler: Y N
Samples Intact: )' N
Additional Comments:
• Alb enndSignatut ;.: I ,=.Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
Signature of Sampler:

•
• CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request ,,\A"
• (f\
0 Client Name: .:'\-S , iNC
_
Address:
lie Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: Requested Analyses
Project Number: 052.631
pH Checked upon Receipt
Ct.<0.2 me I Upon Receipt
Preservatives
✓. J
Sample Identification " _ f y
u
7 y r. U U s +
nw
,
� a n U n^ , R U p �c' C.J ce
Field
`" :: in u 2 MS = = = 2 Z Temp.(°C) Comments
'tAdt!-ro ►him RL 'Aq FB.3f4Eb6- I` ,>r
Z ' O5Z}2-0 1309 \ \ X
l5ne3 'is') \ \ X
3 .15 5%Lxeiteb6-1(40 ,))3 1 \ X
50N5TIIINIA tNtClAI. 711- Cr rigle5 .J") onv-o 13qtp \
x
Sample Condition Upon Receipt RelinquishedB} I Time Aceepted{By (Comparty� I Date
�441tJIl�AV � Date l'imr
Temperature(°C) F 0 �1Z I , / —
052124
135.)
Received on Ice: Y � �j i!�
Sealed Cooler: Y / N
Samples Intact: 0I N
Additional Comments: SailiPtarNalleilASignaWW ..-4: `pace
a
Printed Name of Sampler:
J Svtet2
Signature of Sampler: 6--

o
CH:A -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request 0
6c1\
Client Name: E..\--r-, t la c
Address:
_ Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: Requested Analyses
Project Number: LO0si6.504
pH Checked Upon Receipt
CI,<Q,?mg/I Upon Receipt
2.
Preservatives
•c _
I
U
Sample Identification v - = o
o
Z a u o .. U p o -. C. +
e U = u
n = a = 2 ` c. Q p �; Field
ki
v . `' et _ = = = L Z Temp.CC) Comments
1 ,>ikS.aen+, tNcrta -lace nir406 't)S2:12o NtA 1 \ X
is Ig4l0q •?*) J \ \
X
3 —NS F,Z. eil I q9 a ,o'› Y"
4 ��� Cr lelg441 43° \ \ x
' I\ oFttre th 19 -42 �� \ I )<
6 rig & vici*9 � ti —
Sample Condition Upon Rcc.opt Iltelinciuisltid 13} C e. I Time IAceep ,' - t r '
Temperature(°C) .._.,. EC S O5l 3 13S 3 Eas O 70
Received on Ice. Y / N
Sealed Cooler: Y / N
Samples Intact: 0 / N
Additional Comments: ul pier Name and Signature Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
ESQ MNe l_
Signature of Sampler:

•
CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Reques'
„„ :,.; 1 Client Name: �� tJ `)
Address:
( 4
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc. Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: ‘3.-71"n WEK Re uested Analyses
Project Number:
Z pH Checked Upon Receipt
Ch<0 2 mg/I Upon Receipt
Preservatives
c r u
E u . �
�, G u .= v 7 A
Sample Identification `; e ; 5' �= E. , o
T - V
L. ' O Y } — '+. E.
V
= ` O O cz O G .7 rr: Q
y ` U a U 4 i O
a w `n n U Field
c E w C 4 °� z' §. u z ,J. G Temp.(°C) Comments
I
Si►15t ' uasTtrrt t1`k Fkt,'reJ61�1q4 d� 1:,c3 13`1tP ` J�.'`
1 z-15 G ► enis ..)' l \ X
1 S c% Ceaeb� 194"lit, ' i ` >
4
111. Cr Ig9�4 •>*i \ \ )
5 .f *IS Ft�teneA Cr I' IVI 6 �� \ . \ J
6
Sample Condition Upon Receipt 'Relinquished By !Compa-nyyam I Date I Time 'Accepted By ICompam I Date I Time
Temperature(°C) /"_T E` > h 2�7 135D I/` (a ' 20 / .5
Received on Ice: Y / N — lF�L Y
Sealed Cooler: Y / 3
Samples Intact: No, �`.N//
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler: .—c J t-'\ _
Signature of Sampler: ()

Rogers &Cattcott ��Tit
ENVIRONMENTAL '44.0; 0
Laboratory Report
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0060152
351 Depot St. Received: 06/02/2020 13.00
Asheville,NC 28801-4310
Dear Client:
Rogers and Callcott appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you. The attached laboratory services report includes analytical results and chain of
custody for samples that were received on June 02,2020. Rogers and Callcott maintains a formal QA/QC program Unless otherwise noted,all analyses
performed under NELAP certification have complied with all the requirements for the TN1 standard The analyses met the QAIQC confidence interval
for each test method unless otherwise qualified. Estimated uncertainty is available upon request.
Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this report and is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee,or
the person responsible for delivering to the person addressed,you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone else. If you receive this message by
mistake,please notify Rogers and Callcon immediately.
We strive to provide excellent service to our clients. Please contact Sarah Raker, your Project Manager,at [e-mail],
(864)-232-1556 if you have any questions about this report
•
•
•
•
Report Approved By:
11 Sarah Baker
Project Manager
Tins report may not be reproduced except in fill,without rxrittea pet mission from Rogers d Cancun,Inc
POBox 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairtorc t Way Greenville.SC 29607 u: >n 864.232.1556 fay 864.232.6140 rogersandcalleott.com
do employee-rnvned company
Page 1 of 10

r°AC Cqp
t Rogers &Cattcott . ' )i
;� ENVIRONMENTAL 48oR��o4.'
South Carolina Greenville Laboratory Identification 23105
South Carolina Columbia Laboratory Identification 40572
Certificate of Analysis North Carolina Laboratory Certification Number 27
North Carolina Drinking Water Lab Number 45710
NEL,4P Utah Certificate NumberSC000042014-I
Georgia Drinking Water Lab ID 880
Client Environmental'resting Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0060152
351 Depot St, Received: 06/02/2020 13:00
Asheville,NC 28801-43 1 0
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampled Typc
0060152-01 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered Control Wastewater 05/29/20 12:13 Grab
0060152-02 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 9.1 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:13 Grab
0060152-03 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 14 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:13 Grab
0060152-04 ETS inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 21 Wastewater 05/29120 12:13 Grab
0060152-05 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 32 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:13 Grab
0060152-06 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 49 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:13 Grab
0060152-07 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 75 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:13 Grab
0060152-08 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered Control Wastewater 05/29/20 12:27 Grab
_ 0060152-09 ETS Inc Sutton WER•Simstream Final Filtered 49 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:27 Grab
0060152-10 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 75 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:27 Grab
0060152-I 1 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 116 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:27 Grab
0060152-12 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 179 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:27 Grab
0060152-13 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 275 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:27 Grab
0060152-14 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 423 Wastewater 05/29/20 12:27 Grab
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fait-forest Way Greenville,SC 29607 mare 864.232.1556 i:wK 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott•com
an enfwprrry*a nwvnpd company
06/111200 08-06 This report may not be reprodrrred.except In full.without written permission from Rogers&Calicos,Me-. Page 2 of 10

B '"T‘ Rogers &Callcott
Z ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0060152
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:06
Sample Data
Sample Number 0060152-01
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered Control collected on 05/29/20 12:13
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mgfL 1.00 06/03/20 17:48 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0104
Sample Number 0060152-02
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 9.1 collected on 05/29/20 12:13
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.008 0.002 mtW 1.00 06/03/20 17:53 EPA 20O.3 TLT BOF0104
Sample Number 0060152-03
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 14 collected on 05/29/20 12:13
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.011 0.002 mg/L 1,00 06/03/2017.57 EPA NU TLT BOF0104
Sample Number 0060152-04
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 21 collected on 05/29/20 12:13
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DE Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.020 0.002 mglL 1.00 06/08/20 19:20 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0180
Sample Number 0060152-05
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 32 collected on 05/29/20 12:13
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DE Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.032 0.002 me. 1.00 06/08/20 19:25 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0180
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforesr Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an?rnplayer-owned t nmpany
06/11/2020 0006 This report may not be reproduced.ereepr In,full,without written permission front Rogers&Callcott.lnc. Page 3 of 10

. .\ Rogers &Callcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0060152
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:06
Sample Number 0060152-06
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 49 collected on 05/29/20 12:13
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Inks OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.048 0.002 mg&L 1.00 06/08/20 19:29 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0180
Sample Number 0060152-07
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab H2O Final Filtered 75 collected on 05/29/20 12:13
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.075 0.002 ntg/L 1.00 06/08/2.0 19133 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0180
Sample Number 0050152-08
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered Control collected on 05/29/20 12:27
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Volts OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.009 0,002 mg/L 1.00 06/08/20 19:38 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0180
Sample Number 0060152-09
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstreatn Final Filtered 49 collected on 05/29/20 1217
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.051 0.002 mg/L 1,00 06/08(20 18:35 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0180
Sample Number 0060152-10
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstreatn Final Filtered 75 collected on 05/29/20 12:27
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Volts OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.081 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/08/20 19:42 EPA200.8 TLT BOF0180
PC:Boa 565S Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairlorest Way Greenville,SC 29607 reAin 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
All r•mptoytm-owned.,rntrmy
O6RI/2020 08.•06 This report may not be reproduced.except in ftrtl,without wintery pstrmission frons Rogers it Colima.Inc. Page 4 of 10

"- Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0060152
Asheville,NC 28801.4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:06
Sample Number 0060152-11
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 116 collected on 05/29/20 12:27
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.116 0.002 me- 1.00 06/08/20 19:46 EPA 200.8 TLT BOF0180
Sample Number 0060152-12
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 179 collected on 05/29/20 12:27
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.175 0.002 nil- 1.00 06/08/20 19:51 EPA200.8 TLT B0F0180
Sample Number 0060152-I3
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 275 collected on 05/29/20 12:27
Reporting
Parameter Result limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.265 0.002 mg/L 1.00 06/08/20 19:55 EPA 2008 TLT BOF0IB0
Sample Number 0060152-14
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Final Filtered 423 collected on 05/29/20 12:27
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.396 0.002 nil- 1.00 06/08/20 19;59 EPA 200.9 TLT BOFO 180
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville.SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax 864.232,6140 rogersandcalleott.com
an employee-owned c tnpany
06/11/2020 08:06 This report may nor be repmhrced.eergst in frill,without written permission from Rogers d Calkott,Inc. Page 5 of 1 0

k', Rogers &CaUcott
4. ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0060152
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:06
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch BOF0104-EPA 200.8
Blank(B0F0104-BLK1)
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L
LCS(B0F0104-BSI)
Copper 0.205 0.002 mg/L 0200 102 85.115
Batch BOFO180-EPA 200.8
Blank(B0F0180-B1.K1)
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L
LCS(B0F0180-BSI)
pper 0.228 0.002 mg/t. 0.200 114 85-115
Duplicate(B0F0180-DUP1) Source:0060152-09
Copper 0.057 0.002 mg/L 0.051 Il 20
Matrix Spike(60F0180-MSI) Source:0060152-09
Copper 0.273 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.051 III 70-130 `
Post Spike(B0F0180-PSI) Source:0060152-09
Copper 0.336 mg/L 0.250 0.051 114 75-125
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 nwm 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandeallcott.com
.ill employee owned corns any
06/11/2020 08:06 This report may not be reproduced,ercepr in/id!.without nrluen permission from Rogers&Calicoq,Inc.
Page 6 of 10

Rogers &Cattcott
tw ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0060152
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:06
Sample Preparation Data
Parameter Batch Sample ID Prepared Analyst
EPA 200.8 Metal Digestion
EPA 200.8 BOF0104 0060152-01 06/02/2020 14:46 TLT
EPA 200.8 B0F0104 0060152-02 06/02/2020 14:46 TLT
EPA 200.8 130F0104 0060152-03 06/02/2020 14:46 TLT
EPA 200.8 130F0180 0060152-04 OW03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 30F0180 0060152-05 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 B0F0180 0060152-06 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0180 0060152-07 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0180 0060152-08 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0180 0060152-09 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA200.8 BOF0180 0060152-10 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 130F0180 0060152-11 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 80F0180 0060152-12 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 B0F0180 0060152-13 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
EPA 200.8 BOF0180 0060152-14 06/03/2020 11:33 TLT
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 to<864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an employe -owned company
06/11/2020 08:06 This report may not be reproduced,except in full without written permission from Rogers&Colleen,Inc. Page 7 of 10

Rogers &Callcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0060152
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 06/11/20 08:06
Data Qualifiers and Definitions
ND Analyte NOT DETECTED at or above the reporting limit
NR Not reported
RPD Relative Percent Difference
PO Box 5655 Grcenviile,SC 29606 426 Pairforest VVay Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.eom
an omployee-awnod company
06//1/2020 08.06 This report may not be reproduced.except in full,without written permission from Rogers d Callan!.Inc.
Page 8 of 10

_ • •4
Lf
T
Rogers & Callcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER ()Oki)01s2
ENVIRONMENTAL Filtered(Yes/N(?j')
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Falrforest Way 2158 Stoneridge Drive - Cooled`Y85{ OT
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,SC 29210 ContainerTlyp�-es1�a5T: Glass)
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone]
Client Name Container Volume(mt.) ?
Address _ Sample Type,(_ra omposite)
0�i/ Al Sample Sourc6W,OW,SW,S, Other)
co
Report To: o Preservation Code(s)
Email Address o , A-None E-HCI I-Zn Acetate
.E.:.
B-HNO3 F-Na3S303 J-H3PO4
aC-HaSO4 G-Boric Acid K-MCAA
Telephone# t
PO# Pro ect# 0-NaOH H-Ascorbic Acid L
7
R&C YR_ ' m
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION I-- °-
COMMENTS
—0 I + 1, (2 LD-blUcckzfiNzt httothiearthoi ! IC .En. / i4G
--G C o
-0, t i.{
t \ .
Su u�ta2.
2!
-Cs
-Qco
-156
1 721 c t rr-v�houn k/Y.l N1 ,44v idContw(
-01 ya
-to -
-iti ,
!1co
_)2 (1R
7.1.5
,(4- .. y23
SAMP ER-RELINQUISHED BY:' DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
1. IX CS 0(4' o(21) 2.Fecb��►n 0 (00
1� Composite Start Date:
RELINQUISHEDIN BY: DATE/TIME: REC w ' � DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3• a 4 .tV•2•2O 1%OO Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RE _ DATE/TIME:
S. 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection °C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt 2 5.2 °C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: Ti frlamrrizble Skin Irritant I !Poison nY.nown her Form Revised July,2014 Page s
Page 9 of 10

Rogers&Cattcott
ENVIRONMEN.TA�L
Sample Receipt Verification
Date Work
Client: P Tc Received: ,Z,Z© Order: ()6(0 d)5_7
Carrier Name: Client cclE UPS US Mail Courier Field Services Other:
Tracking Number: 4(QZ2 35l l 1,111D
Receipt Criteria e o A Comments
Shipping container/cooler intact? Damaged Leaking Other:
Custody seals intact?
COC included with samples?
COC signed when relinquished and received? `K
Sample bottles intact? X Damaged Leaking Other:
Sample ID on COC agree with label on bottle(s)?
Date/time on COC agree with label on bottle(s)?
Number of bottles on COC agrees with number of bottles received? `C
Samples received within holding time?
Sample volume sufficient for analysis?
VOA vials free ofheadspace(<6mrn bubble)?
Temp at receipt recorded on COC
Samples cooled? t emp measured wslh IR thermometer-SN:97050067 x Ice Cold Packs Dry lee .None
Samples requiring pH preservation at proper pH?
Note: Samples for metals analysis may be preserved upon receipt in the lab.
Note: Samples for O&G and VOA analysis-preservation checked at bench.
Samples dechlorinated for parameters requiring chlorine removal at
the time of sample collection? �!
Note: Chlorine checked at bench for samples requiring Bacterial,VOA,and HAA /l
analysis.
If in-house preservation used — record Lot#
HCL H3PO4
H2SO4 NaOH
HNO3 Other
Comments:
Were non-conformance issues noted at sample receipt? Yes or Na
Non-Conformance issue other than noted above:
Revised February 2018 Completed by: `-c' -
Page 10 of 10

•
CIJA: -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request ,U
it � m ��fl
,7.; Client Name: ti 1w1 C
i `----- Address:
�„- Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc, Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: SOTTOt�` 1.3E-it Itesuested Analyses
Project Number: QQSZef,a,p pH Checked Upon Receipt
Upon Receipt
Preservatives
it li.
ESample Identification " i= 5- o
�7 a vu ////di top.(°C) Comments
I Lt\ba L.+ tace_J
Ftai*1, cttze s - Cptv(to‘. CT 199eZ1 kP) o5,1a-73) l 1 X
q.\ �,. t6a1�22-S 4'3 \ \
3 la Cr (1 or-) _ \
\. X
4 -z\ & tt9823 .,)') ti \
- -
' Si. 4 g962 6 �.a \
\. X
lagetet
G ®aniliii:
Sample Condition Upon Receipt (Relinquished l'.3. ICompany I Dote I `I itne 'Accepted By ICom�paa�ny'� I Date' I Time
()
Temperature(C) 1 G- OS•2r1-26 123 o 1 ... �-—�) " `j ra-3 I 23)
Received on Ice: Y / N
Sealed Cooler: Y / N
Samples Intact: YO N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler: v
Signature of Sampler:

•
CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Requesi,.._
\-• -----,,.,
1 --_ Client Name:
I
- „
I I .`,
Address:
/-
--__-
\ —
,_..„ Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc. Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: '5‘)\-TO h3 - 1).3 ,-(Z--. Requested Analyses
Project Number: 7-0,1:52c1.6-7)0 nil Checked Upon Receipt
C12<0 2 mlpil Upon Receipt
Preservatives
7.
1.-
$2. Sample Identification -:;,-'
'.' 7; L''' ....r. t.;'=
u , g r.' on
... . .—= .
ci t r c4 .:. = S I '2; Z 2. Temp.(°C) Comments
SiVsS-ret.e.est-A
I CiOAL Csk_Telkb UP4\11--"- G- i glaS 1 l''' os'll'e 10 122:* k \ X
, Lkek & 1144a32 44 I \ \ X
. ...
3 -1 S (- - tetel,633 ‘13.3) ‘ \
. ,
Cr 14 1634 V14) \ \ X
5 tick Cr 194031;
2\S C,r ss)ol 1 1 X
6
i 4' —ai• :,'_ 1- I. 4,
Sample Condition Upon Receipt 'Relinquished By ICompaily I Date I Time (Accepted By 'Company I Date I Time
Temperature(°C) i\..0. c).../..... - CtS OS-'el-tt (230 4 0,3 osio/23o Received on Ice: Y /4)
Sealed Cooler: Y )773
Samples Intact: 0 N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Punted Name of Sampler:--
-3 S 0 t-AF.P_Ate— 0S-1.'1"10
Signature of Sampler:
_

APPENDIX C
WER #3 TEST REPORTS
June 30, 2020

•
C 1 OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
Client Name:
Address: 33p(
\. \ "\CICI(\ i\) ;9-(P)(-(C /
._, Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to: a-Art,c'N,X ,7,‘ft-.NVcr__(a)c-X.. Ace,---tiv-Cr.:1 - --001
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: citc--..„271-20.6-,L{ Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: 6L) tr,'",4-,-,3 \sp,i EP\
Project Number: I52AOCs Re nested Analyses pit checked Upon
Receipt
CI,<0 2 meil Upon Recelpt
Preservatives
.....' 2 ; / / / /
..,.
'-..2 Sample Identification c;,' E. .3. 5 tl t.,l ; -p
. ,,.., E ,,, r. z, '-• ,44 0 ,e, 9, p .... 7-7 v;,., Field
TeMp.(°c) Comments
/1 . 7 i 0\. -7 ir
.---
.?/-'•
: . —
6 i
tattrii:',. '..'i's'ratrAtilieip I I RelirgJistred 1.1) Corn ar I Nile Time I ACA j.„0:71,..'-'-'-',,7-' - 1C0 6 511- ;I '''''gr.% :'I"; Ilk"
Temperature('C) Lk.:"1 ' C. 4 G..., ttwekhoteAtt_ I,7‘1.zt Ot."51-0 t 1 OS C.e... .e.,./. 01.1.6i L6 k\OS
Received on Ice: CY)+ N ce 0106,--16 10-51 o.._ EN-s ot,-,3b---u2 ic-5-1
Sealed Cooler: (y9/ N
Samples Intact: 9 N
Additional Comments: r
,4L„v_i_ Sinfplerislante arid Sigpatata 1 -Dale,v_
PITI, jaVVt'llf71e':ZIV(-2,11.\ac.:;.
Signature of
e...__---

co D
2 °) 0) 0) a) 0) rno) 0) a) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) rna) 0) a) o) v w C) Zm
N N N N N N N N N . . . . . O O O O 0 S S r m —J
Co -.I O CJi A CO N --> O CAD CO V CD C\t A CO N -. O CO co \ C\ A W N _. v CD CD 2
N N) NJ NJ N)
(p p N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CD -< M
N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N - •• �7
0 p N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Sv * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D
`D D zOvo -I
< D
W 0 CD O (n
co -Amm -A -4 -Jw .,, ,, ,, --Arnrnrnrnrn .--4 -Jrnoo -Amw --4 -1 -.IrnrnT (D3 fD
N m — N Ul Ui oo .A m (Ji ? O (fl CA CT (.O -I N (fl O O W - - Cb (fl (0 (fl v D * 3
O
I 2 = >
(n W — F. m
= O -<
(0 co (o co Cb co (n co oD Cb w Cb -J rn -I m 00 Cb ) ao co Coo Cb 00 00 C) , (0
C�J (Tt O --� O A N c,J CA A - O A aD O (�.) co m N o 01 0 O -I Ui m 4 --� �I
mKO r+
O fD ... -+.
rn d 7 O
-I J V -J v v v v O O m ul O m O O m m -I v v v v v v v (T U.1 3 = 1G O
(.0 A NJ N - 0 01 JN m Ui m (C w w NJ A ? OO CA CT 01 W NJ of O N O m -J D w CD
DE
(D
O O O O O O NJ CD0 0 ---> CD CD CO O O CD CD O CD CD O Z n 0 z
PO iv O I O O *— GJ O O N A N CJ) O O O O -- O N O O O O v•p' P. f)
O - - O m O ) -s 0 0 0 O - N U) NJ CD O — A -� O m O 4J O O O O =
Z e)
_ CC = O z
2 (fl 3
N — _. — N — -. -O 5. = S
fD
_ _
A C) co a) O C_J NJ CO CI) C3) NJ Ui CO -J NJ — NJ -, — NJ NJ -, — — NJ — NJ NJ -, D- Q Cl) 00 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O -> CO NJ CD C CO D Cb CO CO 9) CO CD CD w co
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OO
co v
O v
C— D
— - N N — - - NJ N NJ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 -

ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING SOLUTIONS, INC.
TOXICITY TEST REPORT
INTRODUCTION/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Report Date: July 24,2020
1. Client: Shealy Consulting, LLC
2. Study: Water-Effect Ratio testing of L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,Pond Water
3. Samples Tested: Pond Water
4. Test and Sample Dates: Sample date: June 29,2020
Test dates: June 30—July 02,2020
5. Test Species: Fathead Minnows(Pimephales promelas1
6. Test Type: Acute Toxicity Test(EPA-821-R-02-012,Method 2000.0)
7. Nominal Concentrations Tested: LABWATER tests:
P.promelas: 9.1,14, 21,32.49,75, 116 ugh Cu
SIMSTREAM tests:
P.promelas: 49,75.116, 179,275.423,650 ug/l Cu
8. Client Contact: Beth Thompson
Phone#: [phone]
9. Consulting/Testing Lab: Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.(ETSI
10. Lab Contact: Jim Sumner
Phone#: [phone]
SAMPLE CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Samples:
1. Sample Type: Grab
2. Sample Information:
Location Date/Time Collected Date/Time Received Arrival Date/Time Used
MM-DD-YY Time ET MM-DO-YY Time ET Temp. MM-DO-YY Time ET
et)
Pond Water 06-29-20 1105 06-30-20 1037 4.7 06-30-20 1150
1

3. Sample Manipulation:
Lab Water test:
Synthetic water was prepared according to EPA protocol,which had a hardness
of 46 mg/L CaCO3. The synthetic water hardness was similar to site water
received from the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex(32 mg/L CaCO3).
A primary stock solution was prepared by diluting 0.3930 g CuSO4*5H2O in
1000 mL deionized water. The nominal copper concentration of this stock
solution was 100 mg/L.
A secondary stock solution was prepared by diluting 10 mL primary stock
solution into 1000 mL synthetic water(1000 µg/L Cu).
Test solutions evaluated for toxicity were prepared using this secondary stock
solution and were diluted using synthetic water.
Site Water tests:
Site water received from the L.V.Sutton Energy Complex had a hardness of
32 mg/L CaCO3.
The same primary stock solution prepared for the Lab Water test was used for
the Site Water tests. This primary stock solution was prepared by diluting
0.3930 g CuSO4*5H2O in 1000 mL deionized water. The nominal copper
concentration of this stock solution was 100 mg/L.
A secondary stock solution was prepared by diluting 10 mL primary stock
solution into 1000 mL site water(1000 µg/L Cu).
Test solutions evaluated for toxicity were prepared using this secondary stock
solution and were diluted using site water.
All test solutions were warmed to test temperature(25.0±1.0°C)in a warm
water bath.
2

Nominal and measured total and dissolved copper analyses
are provided below (µg/L Cu).
Blank glassware check: <2.0 pg/L
LABWATER Tests:
Minnows
Initial Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved
Control <2.0 <2.0 <2.0
9.1 9.0 8.0
14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0
21.0 18.0 18.0 18.0
32.0 28.0 26.0 24.0
49.0 44.0 42.0 40.0
75.0 66.0 62.0 62.0
116.0 96.0 110.0 97.0
SIMSTREAM Tests:
Minnows
Initial Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved
Control 5.0 11.0 8.0
49.0 55.0 52.0
75.0 83.0 78.0 73.0
116.0 120.0 91.0 99.0
179.0 175.0 166.0 157.0
275.0 271.0 250.0 241.0
423.0 404.0 372.0 344.0
650.0 627.0 583.0
3

TEST CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Pimephales promelas
Test Organisms:
1. Source: In-house Cultures
2. Age: <24-hours old
Test Method Summary:
1. Test Conditions: Static
2. Test Duration: 48-hours
3. Control/Dilution Water:
LABWATER test: Synthetic water
SIMSTREAM test: Site water
4. Number of Replicates: 2
5. Organisms per Replicate: 10
6. Test Initiation: (Date/Time)
LABWATER test: 06-30-20 1140 ET
SIMSTREAM test: 06-30-20 1150 ET
7. Test Termination:(Date/Time)
LABWATER test: 07-02-20 1140 ET
SIMSTREAM test: 07-02-20 1149 ET
8. Test Temperature: 25.0±1.0°C
9. Physical/Chemical
Measurements: Parameters measured in the full-strength sample in the laboratory were
temperature, DO, pH,conductivity,alkalinity, hardness and total residual
chlorine. Intermediate and final measurements of temperature, DO and pH
were made at 24 and 48 hours, respectively.
10. Statistics: Statistics were performed according to methods prescribed by EPA
using ToxCalc version 5.0.32 statistical software(Tidepool Scientific Software,
McKinneyville, CA).
4

TOXICITY TEST RESULTS(see Appendix 8 for Bench Sheets)
1. LABWATER test:
Results of a Pimephales prometas 48-hour Acute/LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted June 30—July 02, 2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
9.1 100 100
14 100 100
21 100 95
32 65 60
49 60 55
75 35 10
116 20 0
LCso(µg/L Cu) 58.0 43.0
95%Confidence
Interval(µg/L Cu) 48.1—72.2 37.0—50.2
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 50.5 37.9
95%Confidence 42.1—62.3 32.6—44.1
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Dissolved Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 50.1 36.3
95%Confidence 41.2—63.5 31.1—42.6
Interval(µg/L Cu)
5

2. SIMSTREAM test:
Results of a Pimephales promelas 48-hour Acute/LCso
(Genus species) (Duration/Type)
Conducted June 30—July 02,2020
Percent Surviving
Nominal Concentration
(µg/L Cu) 24-hours 48-hours
Control 100 100
49 100 100
75 100 100
116 100 85
179 100 70
275 40 10
423 0 0
650 0 0
LCso(µg/L Cu) 263.5 188.5
95%Confidence 239.8—289.5 164.9—215.3
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Total Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 257.4 187.2
95%Confidence 234.9—282.2 165.6—212.4
Interval(µg/L Cu)
Measured: Dissolved Copper
LCso(µg/L Cu) 239.4 168.6
95%Confidence 219.1—261.5 146.5—193.9
Interval(µg/L Cu)
6

Appendix A
ADDITIONAL TOXICITY TEST INFORMATION
SUMMARY OF METHODS
1. Pimephales promelas
Tests were conducted according to EPA-821-R-02-012 using two replicates, each containing ten test
organisms, per treatment. Test vessels consisted of 500-mL plastic disposable cups,each containing 250
mL of test solution.
DEVIATIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO TEST PROTOCOL
1 Pimephales pramelas
None
DEVIATIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO PRETEST CULTURE OR HOLDING OF TEST ORGANISMS
1. Pimephales promelos
None
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL METHODS
1. Reagents,Titrants, Buffers,etc.:All chemicals were certified products used before expiration dates(where
applicable).
2. Instruments:All identification,service,and calibration information pertaining to laboratory
instruments is recorded in calibration and maintenance logbooks.
3. Temperature was measured by SM 2550 B-2010.
4. Dissolved oxygen was measured by SM 4500-0 G-2011.
5. The pH was measured by SM 4500-H+B-2011.
6. Conductance was measured by SM 2510 B-2011.
7. Alkalinity was measured by SM 2320 B-2011.
8. Total Hardness was measured by SM 2340 C-2011.
9. Total residual chlorine was measured by the ORION Electrode Method 97-70-1977.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Toxicity Test Methods: All phases of the study including,but not limited to,sample collection,handling and
storage;glassware preparation;test organism culturing/acquisition and acclimation;test organism handling
during test;and maintaining appropriate test conditions were conducted according to the protocol as
described in this report and EPA-821-R-02-012. Any known deviations were noted during the study and are
reported herein.
7

REFERENCE TOXICANT TESTS(See Appendix C for control chart information)
1. Test Type: 48-hour acute tests with results expressed as LCso values in g KCl/L.
2. Standard Toxicant: Potassium Chloride(KCI).
3. Dilution Water Used:Moderately hard synthetic water.
4. Statistics: Probits Analysis,Spearman-Karber,Trimmed Spearman-Karber, or graphical method.
REFERENCES
1, USEPA, Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and
Marine Organisms, EPA-821-R-02-012(October 2002).
2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 22'd Edition, 2012.
3. Quality Assurance Program: Standard Operating Procedures, Environmental Testing
Solutions, Inc. (most current version).
4. USEPA,Streamlined Water-Effect Ratio Procedure for Discharges of Copper,EPA-822-R-01-005(March 2001).
8

Appendix B
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORDS
TOXICITY TEST BENCH SHEETS
9

•
41/
1110
IP 1r1 .. ,„ CHA. -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
Client Name: J ,,)\< — .I —``5l ' ,{
Address: ( 3 �
k,.)..) , AA ,,c\ C(\ 1 u C-- ;,9. C
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: ci(C)—,277(-2067,4{ Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
�{
l
Project Name: ti�U\ G(,lp \J\) ��` ` ReInested Analyses
Project Number: t 52.0tj / / pH Checked Upon Receipt
Cl.<0.2 mUl Upon Receipt
Preservatives
Sample Identification El
a 1 i:t r -- �e 7,— a <Cr L :, c E 2 ' c. Q r Field_ c c , _ z = w' = = z 2. z Temp.CC) Comments
r
) (0-:71-2°IV-6-\\A- X 3?. ( (1--Th
}
l
--1
6
Sample Condition Upon Receipt (Relinquished B3 IComja►.�)a,,.. 1 Date f ' ttl t~ °l `40111 4, :„.. .. ICompO ,. 1.,..Pik; .=h fit. ,m
Temperature(°C) 4.1 • C
G-- 4024,6044i. I011...R._ 06-1.5-'to 1,1pj ;'t,el-L s tIUS
Received on Ice: Li), N '.42Qb C�1 -10 10-51 E 7s 0�3b-12 ) r3--1
lj.11 _ r
Sealed Cooler: Yr. N
Samples Intact: CY) N
Additional Comments: 4 L 1.1_ 3S`, '.436 Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Pri>tAl Iti'a e of Sample 2
Signature of Sant ler -)----7--
t

Acute LC50 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas Pagel of 2
EPA-821-R-02-012,Method 2000.0
IClient Shealy Consulting, LLC
Facility L.V.Sutton Energy Complex, LABWATER
IProject a ‘eCJ,Z Ob Sample It > `°aa•0(r,)A
Dilution Preparation:
I Test concentrations WA) 9 1 14 21 32 49, 75 116 1°stock solution prepared by diluting 0.3930 g Cu50,'5i-i O into 1000 mi.deionited
water,2°stock solution prepared by diluting 20 mi.1°stock solution into 2000 mt.
mL 2°Stock 9.7. 14 21 32 4') 75 116 LASWATER.This 2°stock solution was used to prepare the cOneentratons evaluated
ml Dilution water 990.9 986 979 968 951 925 884 for toxicity,LABWATER was used as the control and diluent.
• ' Total volume(ml) 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Chemical Analyses: Hours
0 24 48
i Concentration Analyst
Analyst identified for each day,performed pH,dissolved oxygen and conductivity measurements
pH(SAL) rrg�� only, Temperatures performed at the time of test initiation or termination by the analyst
7`� performing the toxicity test.Alkalinity,hardness and total residual chlorine performed by the
Dissolved oxygen en /l) T
I
Yg (� g s 79' '�,8 B•.p analysts identified on the test specific bench sheets and transcribed to this bench sheet.
Control, Conductivity(µmhos/cm) //6 Chemical analyses:
SIMSTREAM Alkalinity(mg/i CaC0i) ! k Parameter Reporting limit Method number Meter Serial number
I
Hardness(met CaCO,) AV:, pH 0,1 S.U. SM45W-Aa8-2011 Aecvmet AR20 97312A52
Temperature('Cl 1.� ` u,°� AAA
1 Dssatvedoxygen 1.Omg/t SMa500aG-2011 YSI Model 52C£ 139104324
pH(s.u.) 753 55" ..i Conductivity 14 9 Hmhas/cm SM 2510 0-7011 Accumet 3420 33312452
Dissolved oxygen(rmg/U 7 9 t "1. 7 `�•C) Alkalinity 5.OmgCaCO,/l 5M23208-2011 AccureetAR20 93312452
9.1 µg/l a �I 1
Conductivity(µmhos/cm} /6 Jw Hardness 5.0 mg CaCO,/l 5M 2340 C-2011 Not applicable Not applicable
Temperature('C) -,• •t —I.A.rj —1A..y Temperature 0.1°C SM 25508-2010 Digital Thermometer El/b1AAV$?
pH)5 U.) Iy.�53 453 T•J.
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) Ti5 ndtq' ) ' --4
14 µg/L I
r tJ
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) r614 ptv
Temperature(°C) 14°6 IA.S 'IA.E2
pH(5 u l 753 �•15--z 3.Ss
21 petDissolved oxygen(mg/l) b'd 6 4.4:
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) )/,s(.j
I
Temperature(°C) r 1,.4,to -la•S "1.k•3
pH(s.U) 7S� 1.5Z 7 SS
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) T>, °` `,6 4.9, -q•�
I 32 µg/L
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 411
Temperature(°0) 14.6 AM.--1 IA.tea
I pH($.U.) 75/ �•S� �•53
Dissolved oxygen(mg/U V.2 t! 33
49 µg/l
Conductivity{µmhos/cm) 1/j
Temperature 1°C) Itvltti!-1 -7�ct•� tA,�
pH(S.0) 7,So 1•-+l 1-5Z�j?�S/�
Dissolved oxygen(mg/t) ' lee-, .yr'
75 Pet.
S/ 6?-06?-0 K
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) J/��l o
Temperature CC) (t(/144-k. 1�G.' 1_'•b
I pH(S.u,) (• t� �.50
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) {7° 1 _ 62.0
116 µg/l a
Conductivity(µmhos/cm( /fol/n I Temperature(°C) 14.L 1`t• ( 1A.s
SGP ATIfi-Rev,s4on r>-{ghibrt via 3

Ii
E- Page 2,rf 2
Acute LCS5 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas
EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2000.0
Client L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,LABWATER
Project ti 1S2op Sample# N(a
iFeed rig Test Initiation or Termination location Randomizing IABVATFC
Ho_ Date
Time Analyst Time Analyst Incubator/Shelf Template Batch
mom 0.'56 10 CS DO 4( MO 'Lc 2eb ob'6 to
24
Ui.ot 20 tt' S 3(
48 i %t`i0 Y�
e,ml.rt�en ova.'1,U
s •Test organisms were fed in holding P to 5 hours prior to test initiation.Test organisms were not fed during the test.
Test Organism Information:
iOrganism source: in-house Culture
Spawn date: 0%..1:k-10
1 Age(1 to 14 days old): <24-hours cld
"20Date and time organisms 4�.1'�'. 1��5 *TD
were born between: Me'30"AO 0 S 15
IAverage transfer volume: <0.25 mL
Transfer bowl information: pR(5 u) 8.A4
Temperature;'CI •15,.3t
I
341rviva!Data (number of living organisms):
I Control 9.1 µg/L 14 µg/L 21 µg/L 32 µg/L 49 µg/L 75 µg/L 116 µg/L
Hours Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate
A B C D E F G H I 1 K L K L K L
0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
n .itrn
I
24 /o /u /u lb rp i!q I!o 10 " � e� ''-k‘at Z tad
10 /� p,,( / rtd t't I b( /114 Za(
48 1 0 1 () r U �Q 1b /0 l to (. 5 (ea I ( V 0
e n i„.t un th [ 9 ..---•-.
Mean Survival )1 Op/. 100 7- 1& dJ'•1. 1 (41. SS 7. _ to 7. Qt
.
Comment codes: d o dead,<n unhealthy,bs=bent spines,s=stressed
I
(AtSIL
Statistics: ''IS-k LC.5o y..1aN113m- p%SSot..veb -rtn—kl..
IMethod P{2-08,-c' P(LOa1<- Pru1e,1T
Lower 3.t,\ •i Z.b
95%confidence limit 1%) tiJ� �{—13i. J
Upper •LI ‘-ktk.1
.�
95%confidence limit(%) 5I Q
316
48-hour LCw '1.J(%) 8 '3 3=t
tuts:
I
SOP AT1S-Revision 6-Ex hib,s AT 1S.3

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID' LABWATER
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir Testing Sal. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales prometas
Comments: Nominal Copper
Conc-ug/L 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
9.1 1.0000 1.0000
14 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 1.0000
32 0.6000 0.7000
49 0.6000 0.6000
75 0.4000 0.3000
116 0.2000 0.2000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugil Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
9.1 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1,4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1044 0 20
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1044 0 20
21 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 01044 0 20
'32 0.6500 0.6500 0.9386 0.8861 0.9912 7.916 2 12.743 2.810 0.1044 7 20
'49 0.6000 0.6000 0.8861 0.8861 0.8861 0.000 2 14.157 2.810 0.1044 8 20
'75 0.3500 0.3500 0.6322 0.5796 0.6847 11.753 2 20.991 2.810 0.1044 13 20
'116 0.2000 0.2000 0.4636 0.4636 0.4636 0.000 2 25.527 2.810 0.1044 16 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed I
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail.0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MS13 MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 21 32 25.923 0,04268 0.04377 0.30809 0.00138 1.6E-08 7,8
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Problt
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chl-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 3.393 0.52303 2,36787 4.41813 0 5.50149 11.0705 0.35778 1.76307 0.29472 6
Intercept -0.9821 0.89557 -2 7374 0.77321
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 09
EC01 2.674 11.952 6.23405 17.2505
ECO5 3.355 18 9799 11.8962 25.0162 0.8-
EC 10 3.718 24.2866 16.6797 30.6974 0 7,
EC15 3.964 28.682 20.8493 35.4157
EC20 4.158 32.736 24.7854 39.8529 w 0.6-
EC25 4.326 36.6677 28.6247 44.2921 o 0,5-
o.
EC40 4.747 48.7983 40.1085 59.2939 N
EC50 5.000 57.9525 48.0962 72.1891 IX 4- •
EC60 5.253 68.824 56.8316 89.1927 0.3-
EC75 5.674 91.5928 73.3408 129.644 0.2
EC80 5.842 102.593 80.7557 151.125
EC85 6.036 117.094 90.1503 181.097 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 138.286 103.287 227.946 O.o ♦ • ..
EC95 6.645 176.95 125.938 321.646
EC99 7.326 280.999 181.562 617.405 t 10 100 Doc Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
i} • •
1-tail,0.05 level
09 of significance
08
0.7
m
2 o.s
rn 0.5
=OA -
v
N
03 -
0.2
01
0 ,
c rn
a
U
as
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by. i......

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID LABWATER
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol:ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales prometas
Comments: Nominal Copper
Conc-ugfL 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
9.1 1.0000 1.0000
14 1.0000 1.0000
21 1.0000 0.9000
32 0.6000 0.6000
49 0.5000 0.6000
75 0.1000 0.1000
116 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-uglL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
9.1 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.1444 0 20
14 1.0000 1.0000 1,4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.1444 0 20
21 0.9500 0.9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 1.592 2.820 0.1444 1 20
'32 0.6000 0.6000 0.8861 0.8861 0.8861 0.000 2 10.273 2.820 0.1444 8 20
'49 0.5500 0.5500 0.8357 0.7854 0.8861 6.518 2 11.256 2.820 0.1444 9 20
'75 0.1000 0.1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0.000 2 21.296 2.820 0.1444 18 20
116 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob dr
Dunnett's Test 21 32 25.923 0.06412 0.06577 0.35511 0.00262 7.0E-07 6,7
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma ;ter
Slope 4.95246 0.73178 3.51817 6.38675 0 4.71804 11.0705 0.45125 1.63386 0.20192 3
Intercept -3.0916 1.20125 -5.4461 -0.7372
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9
ECO1 2.674 14.5923 9.14597 19,154
ECO5 3.355 20.0323 14.1181 24.7813 0 8-
EC 10 3.718 23.7186 17.7259 28.5391 0.7-
EC15 3.964 26.5817 20.6129 31,4746
EC20 4.158 29.1018 23.1877 34.0971 v°'+0.6-
•
EC25 4,326 31-4533 25.5981 36.5967 0 0.5-
EC40 4.747 38.2563 32.4491 44.2683 m • •
•
EC50 5.000 43.0387 37.0234 50.1762 Z 0.4-
EC60 5.253 48.4189 41.8649 57.3855 0.3-
EC75 5.674 58.8914 50.4851 72.9683 0.2
EC80 5.842 63.6502 54.1402 80.6216
EC85 6.036 69 6845 58.6064 90.7617 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 78.0962 64.5893 105.618 0 0 4
EC95 6.645 92.4673 74.3329 132.698 10 100 1333
EC99 7.326 126.939 96.1068 204.977 Dose ugIL
Dose-Response Plot
1 • •
1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
0.8
0.7
A
2 0.6
(.,0.5
=0.4
0.3
0.2
01
0
o s o n
v v
Page t ToxCaic v5.0.32 Reviewed by:t\

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date' 6/30/2020 Test ID' PpFRAC Sample ID: LABWATER
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol:ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales prometas
Comments: Total Copper
Conc-ugfL 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
9 1.0000 1.0000
13 1.0000 1.0000
18 1.0000 1.0000
28 0 6000 0.7000
44 0.6000 0.6000
66 0.4000 0.3000
96 0.2000 0.2000
Transform:Aresin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-uglL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
9 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1044 0 20
13 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1044 0 20
18 10000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 14120 0.000 2 0.000 2,810 0.1044 0 20
'28 0.6500 0.6500 0.9386 0.8861 0.9912 7.916 2 12.743 2.810 0.1044 7 20
' '44 0.6000 0.6000 0,8861 0.8861 0.8861 0.000 2 14.157 2.810 0.1044 8 20
'66 0.3500 0.3500 0.6322 0.5796 0.6847 11.753 2 20.991 2.810 0.1044 13 20
1 '96 0.2000 0.2000 0.4636 0.4636 0.4636 0 000 2 25.527 2.810 0.1044 16 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 18 28 22.4499 0 04268 0 04377 0.30809 0.00138 1.6E-08 7,8
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma 'ter
Slope 3.50776 0.5337 2.4617 4.55382 0 5 56526 11.0705 0.35084 1.7029 0.28508 6
Intercept -0.9734 0.88411 -2.7062 0.75949
TSCR 1_0
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits tl 9
ECO1 2.674 10.9572 5.88738 15.6006
ECO5 3.355 17.1388 10.96 22.3741 0.8-
EC10 3.718 21.7546 15.1697 27.2859 0.7_
EC15 3.964 25.5523 18.8018 31.3412
EC20 4,158 29.038 22.2067 35.1358 at,0 6-
EC25 4.326 32.4051 25.5106 38.914 Q05-
EC40 4.747 42.7242 35.3278 51.5548 In
ECSO 5.000 50.4543 42.1213 62.2922 04- .
EC60 5.253 59.5831 49.5256 76.3231 0.3-
EC75 5.674 78.5567 63.4449 109.307 0.2-
EC80 5.842 87.6657 69.6663 126.653
EC85 6.036 99.6247 77.5244 150.701 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 117.016 88.4717 187.997
EC95 6.645 148.531 107.252 261.765 1 40 100 1000
EC99 7,326 232.327 152.97 490.009 Dose ugIL
Dose-Response Plot
1 9 • •
1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance0.8
0.7
m
.205
�,0.5
0
N
0.3 -
0.2
of
o ,
} Q
c
0
ca
0
i
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: LABWATER
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol:ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Total Copper
Conc-ug/L 1 2
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000
9 1.0000 1.0000
13 1,0000 1.0000
18 1.0000 0.9000
28 0.6000 0.6000
44 0.5000 0.6000
66 0.1000 0.1000
96 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Aresin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1,4120 0,000 2 0 20
9 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0,000 2 0.000 2.820 0.1444 0 20
13 1.0000 1.0000 1,4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.1444 0 20
18 0.9500 0,9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 1.592 2.820 0.1444 1 20
*28 0.6000 0.6000 0 8861 0.8861 0.8861 0.000 2 10.273 2.820 0.1444 8 20
'44 0.5500 0.5500 0.8357 0.7854 0.8861 8.518 2 11.256 2.820 0.1444 9 20
'66 0.1000 0.1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0.000 2 21.296 2.820 0,1444 18 20
96 0.0000 0.0000 0,1588 0.1588 0.1588 0 000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 18 28 22.4499 0.06412 0.06577 0.35511 0.00262 7.0E-07 6 7
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiduciai Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma !ter
Slope 4.93538 0.70225 3.55897 6.31179 0 5.51204 11.0705 0.35663 1.57859 0.20262 4
Intercept -2.7909 111694 -4.9801 -0.6017
TSCR 1.0 ♦
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits .09
EC01 2.674 12.8005 8.16754 16.7324
EC05 3.355 17.5918 12.543 21.7122 08-
EC10 3.718 20.8412 15.7064 25.0421 0 7-
EC15 3.964 23.3662 18.2332 27.6435
EC20 4.158 25.5894 20.4848 29,9658 c1.0.6-
EC25 4.326 27.6646 22.5923 32.1765 2,0.5-
EC40 4.747 33.671 28.5915 38.9329 N
cu
EC50 5.000 37.8956 32.6154 44.1017 0 4;
EC60 5.253 42.6502 36.8962 50.3757 0.3-
EC75 5.674 51.9102 44.5655 63.8645 0.2- I
ECBO 5.842 56.1199 47.8297 70.4693
EC85 6.036 61.4595 51.8247 79.2072 0.1-
EC90 6.282 68.9056 57.1843 91.9882 0 0
EC95 6.645 81.6331 65.9275 115.234 1 10 100 1000
EC99 7.326 112.189 85.514 177.039 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1! •
1-tad.0.05 level
0.9
of significance
0.8
0.7
N
•20.6
rn 0.5
m 0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
O a, e, m N v . c
C7
S
U
O
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: LABWATER
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Dissolved Copper
Conc-ug1L 1 2
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000
8 1.0000 1.0000
12 1.0000 1.0000
18 1.0000 1.0000
26 0.6000 0.7000
42 0.6000 0.6000
62 0.4000 0.3000
110 0.2000 0.2000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N I-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 01044 0 20
12 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1044 0 20
18 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.810 0.1044 0 20
'26 0.6500 0.6500 0.9386 0.8861 0.9912 7.916 2 12.743 2.810 0..1044 7 20
'42 0.6000 0.6000 0.8861 0.8861 0.8861 0.000 2 14.157 2.810 0.1044 8 20
'62 0.3500 0.3500 0.6322 0.5796 0.6847 11.753 2 20.991 2.810 0.1044 13 20
'110 0.2000 0.2000 0.4636 0.4636 0.4636 0.000 2 25.527 2 810 0.1044 16 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of valiance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis lest(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 18 26 21.6333 0.04268 0.04377 0.30809 0.00138 1.6E-08 7,8
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Flducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Her
Slope 3.18993 0.48494 2.23945 4.14042 0 6 84255 11.0705 0.23262 1.69971 0.31349 6
Intercept -0.422 0.79231 -1.9749 1.13096
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits uglL 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9
ECO1 2.674 9.34181 4.8003 13.6536 .
ECO5 3.355 15.2781 9.49801 20.3139 0.6-
•
EC10 3.718 19.8591 13.565 25.2917 0.7-
EC15 3.964 23 7029 17.1568 29.4863
EC20 4.158 27.2818 20.575 33.4778 N 0 6-
EC25 4.326 30.7798 23.9282 37.5133 a 0.5-
EC40 4.747 41.7146 34.0395 51.3905 0 •
EC50 5.000 50.0852 41.1513 63.504 cc,c,0 4.
EC60 5.253 60.1354 49.0234 79.6342 0 3-
EC75 5.674 81.499 64.1655 118.569 0 2-
EC80 5.842 91.9487 71.0615 139.52
EC85 6.036 105.832 79.8684 169.02 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 126.316 92.2964 215.667 0 0 �,�• .
EC95 6.645 164.191 113.986 310.522 1 to 100 1000
EC99 7.326 268.527 168,325 619.018 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1 0 • •
1-laii3O.05level
0.9 of significance
.........„\\IN
0.8
0.7
R
0.8 -
y 0.5
1 0.4
Q
N
03
02
01
0 r ,
a N o
O
N W
U
ID
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: LABVVATER
End Date: 712/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Enylr.Testing Sol, Sample Type. OMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-82 1-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Dissolved Copper
Conc-ugiL 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
8 1.0000 1.0000
12 1.0000 1.0000
18 1.0000 0.9000
26 0.6000 0.6000
42 0,5000 0.6000
62 0,1000 0.1000
110 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugfL Mean N•Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Reap Number
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.1444 0 20
12 1.0000 1 0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.820 0.1444 0 20
18 0.9500 0.9500 1.3305 1.2490 1.4120 8.661 2 1.592 2.820 0.1444 1 20
26 0 6000 0.6000 0.8861 0.8861 0,8861 0.000 2 10.273 2.820 0.1444 8 20
42 0.5500 0 5500 0.8357 0 7854 0.8861 6 518 2 11.256 2.820 0.1444 9 20
62 0.1000 0 1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0.000 2 21.296 2.820 0.1444 18 20
110 0.0000 0 0000 0,1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TO MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob Of
Dunnett's Test 18 26 21 6333 0.06412 0 06577 0.35511 0.00262 7,0E-07 6,7
Treatments vs D-Coatrol
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 4,80591 0.7113 3.41177 6.20005 0 5.86875 11,0705 0.3192 1.55937 0.20808 3
Intercept -2.4942 1.10723 -4 6644 -0.324
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits ug/L. 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9-
ECO1 2.674 11.8934 7 42009 15.6568
ECO5 3.355 16.4858 11,6045 20.4246 0.8-
EC10 3,718 19.6203 14,6658 23.635 0.7
EC15 3.964 22.0652 17.1249 26.1584
EC20 4.158 24.2239 19.3223 28.4252 0.6-
c
EC25 4.326 26.2434 21.381 30.5969
o.
EC40 4.747 32.1108 27.2303 37.3265 •
••4' 4
EC50 5.000 36.2549 31.1313 42.5589 0 -
EC60 5.253 40 9338 35.2636 48.9757 0.3-
EC75 5.674 50.0856 42.6562 62.9056
EC80 5 842 54,2611 45.8082 69.7704
EC85 6.036 59.5696 49.6731 78.8886 0.1 -
EC90 6.282 66.9928 54.8709 92.294
EC95 6,645 79.7303 63.3772 116.86 1 IC 100 1000
EC99 7 326 110.516 82.5256 183.094
Dose ugiL
Dose•Response Plot
ip
1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
0.8
0.7
0.6
,7)0.5
D
[0
0 3
0 2
I
0
a
c-?
Page 1 ToxCaic v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

II
Acute LCS0 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas Page 1 of 1
EPA-821-R-02-012,Method 2000.0 1
rClient Shealy Consulting,LLC
Facility L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,SIMSTREAM
Project 0 61 Qb Sample M -Lc,OV5O.CA
1 il ,
Dilution Preparation:
0 Test concentrations(ig/L) 49 r 75 116 179 275 423 650 1'stock solution prepared by diluting 03930gCuSO,•0H,0Iota1000mLdeianiled
water 2'stock solution prepared 6yd/seine 20 mt.1•stock solution Into 2000 m1
mL 2°Stock 49 75 116 — 179 275 423 650 SIMSTREAM.This 2'stock solution was used to prepare the concentrat,ons evaluated
mL Dilution water 951 925 884 821 725 577 350 for toxicity SIMSTREAM was used as the control and diluent.
jJTotal volume(m1) 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Chemical Analyses: Hours
0 24 48
1-51 Concentration Analyst 1SS HS Analyst identified for each day,performed pH,dissolved oxygen and conductivity
r C1 measurements only.Temperatures performed at the time of test initiation or termination by
pH(S,U I 7!9 q-•T? 1-r79 the analyst performing the toxicity test.Alkalinity,hardness and total residual chlorine
// `4.�J J J performed by the analysts identified on the test specific bench sheets and transcribed to Ih,s
1 3 Dissolved oxygen(mg1L) sit 1 ',9 i- bench sheet.
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) av t3 Chemical analyses:
Control, 1
SIMSTREAM G
Alkalinity(mg/L CaCO,I %0 Parameter Reporting limit Method number Meter Serial number
0.
J
Hardness(mg/L CaCQ;i .3'L, pH 015.U. SMA500-H.0-20E1 Accumet AA 20 93312452Temperature{°CJ •.1. 1 .��•` �.t Dissolved oxygen I 0 metSM 4500-0 0.2011 YSi Model 52CE 1801041/4
•
pH(S.o.) /[, A.g 7 ^7.2(:1 Conductivity 14 9 pi-ohm/cm SM 2510 5.2011 Accumet AR20 93312452
Dissolved oxygen(mg/I) . 1 ' ,9 7.c a Alkalinity S.0 mg CaC0dt SM 2320 0-2011 Accumet A520 93312452
Q9 H8lL [
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) GC' Hardness S.0 mg CaCO,/t SM 2340 C-2011 Not applicable Not yplkabtent p�
Temperature('CI -s,. ., 17.�.74.t -OA.t7 Temperature 0.1.0 SM 25505.2010 DIVA!Thermometer CI 91 16.4 c, s
pH(S.U.( q�T g.ns-
Dissolved oxygen(melt) it,I 6O q-4Q.J
I 75 Ng/L l
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) r 1 1
Temperature("C) 1.23�IAk.1 ` 1 IA-4 �L74.6
PH(S.U(
!OP q.Z
Dissolved oxygen(mg/LI Q I ,OA q
il 116 pg/l __. C! t
Conductivity(pmhos/cvt) eq!0
I
Temperature('CI -7Z/►y�•1 —/l.�r� `lit•L
pH(S.V.) lSJl1 "7•aI 1.2©
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) g 1 6 0 8,o
I 179 pg/L
Conductivity(µmhos/cmj `1 I
Temperature('Cl 't(4,� �xrylt.q 7'1 .s
I pH(SU) 6.v� 't-7'rT T'laa��
Dissolved oxygen(mg/LI t� 1 6. V LT 1
275 µg/L O
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 4.21
I
ITemperature('C) 1.4.4, Zy _S Zara•S
pH(SAL) Or I O 1.1Z .I►
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) lep�
I 423pg/I. t1
Conductivity(Hmtos/cm) II
Temperature)'C) 14.10 xi..S i.t.4
pH(S.U.) .r3 q.11
0
Dissolved oxygen(m (y J
g/LI b e I U I C
650 pet.
Conductivity(Fnthos/cmJ Ra
Temperature('C) zit.t7 1.4•(o l'l-LI
so:Ai la rews«.n e-f+h.bd ATMs

0
Rage 2 of 2
rAcute LC50 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas
EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2000.0
i, Client L.V.Sutton Energy Complex,SIMSTREAM
�! Project# t S 2.00 Sample 21 "Z,opb34.0‘
g
Feeding Test Initiation or Termination Location Randomizing
Hours Date
Time Analyst Time Analyst Incubator/Shelf, Template
0 e
U r,t.n , a‘:3a-10 (not) 1\
2o cn-ol 11SD - b tt�
2a (i4 S j(
48 s{
•£est organisms wore fed In hording 2 to S hours prior to test initiation Test organisms were r1bt ed during the test.
Test Organism Information:
Organism source: in-house Culture
Spawn date: d to-1-4-1..o.
Age(1 to 14 days old): <24-hours aid
Date and time organisms 6ti•�•lC 1A.S0 "ro
were born between: 0V.S a ZA 0&IS
Average transfer volume:
J g <0.25 ml
Transfer bowl information:
plt(5t1.):. Ss,t%%
Temperature I°C): .5
II —viva/Data (number of living organisms):
H Control
Replicate 49 µg/L
Replicate 75 µg/L
Replicate 116 µg/L
Replicate 179 µg/L
Replicate 275 µg/L 42
3 µg/L
Replicate Replicate 650 µg/
L
Replicateours
A B C D E F G H I 1 K L K L K L
0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Ir.,n,bon
r��•�t f( 4 (4 tod is", to.�
I 24 (� �o (0 /0 10 !o �o ' o to to t 1 ( 0 0 d
a. -14 'lot IA 3J 34
48 1D I(- 10 io 10 '0 '1 8 t t ( 0 0 0 0
Termination
Mean Survival I DOT. i 00 I loop_ k r_ ''o T_ t(3 7. 0 ?. 0 t_
Comment codes' d=dead,uheal,hy,bs=bent spines,s=stressed
Statistics: p Notilt) l- biS$ot.•s e.-''�
1 flat
I Method Pitt O VI--
��T f�481T—
Lower (64.4 ('4 6 o S t tP 5 AV:t
95%confidence limit(%)
Upper 'y VISA e • 2'�Z.•-1
95%confidence limit(%) 21S. .J
48-hour lCso(%) 1 aR•S 1 8•b 1 g"1'Z
ants:
I
SOP.A1.132rn22AT63rA5;AT63.AU32.A22:Af63+erAtAZ63

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date. Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Nominal Copper
Conc-ug/L 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1 0000
49 1.0000 1.0000
75 1.0000 1.0000
116 1.0000 1.0000
179 1.0000 1.0000
275 0.4000 0.4000
423 0.0000 0.0000
650 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-uglL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
49 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1..4120 1.4120 0 000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
75 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
116 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
179 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
'275 0.4000 0.4000 0.6847 0.6847 0.6847 0.000 2 72.730 2.830 0.0283 12 20
423 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 01588 0.000 2 20 20
650 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equably of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 179 275 221.867 0.00959 0.00984 0.17632 0.0001 2.1E-09 5,6
Treatments vs D-Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 95%CL
0.0% 263.51 239.82 289.54
5.0% 262.37 236.41 291.19
10.0% 261.26 232.71 293.30 1.o •
20.0% 259.11 223.89 299.86 09
Auto-0.0% 263.51 239.82 289.54
0.8•
0 7-
y06
c
a
cc 0.4-
0 3•
0.2•
01-
1 10 100 1000
Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1 • • • • 1-tall,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
0.8
0.7
a.
06
0.5
=0.4
N
0.3
02
0.1
0 •
N Q
O
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0 32 Reviewed by'_,

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date 6/30/2020 Test ID PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date' 7/2/2020 Lab ID. ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date. Protocol ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments' Nominal Copper
1 Conc-ug/L 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
49 1.0000 1.0000
75 1.0000 1.0000
116 0.9000 0.8000
179 0.6000 0.8000
275 0.1000 0.1000
423 0.0000 0.0000
650 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc•ugfL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
49 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.2146 0 20
75 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.2146 0 20
'116 0.8500 0.8500 1.1781 1.1071 1.2490 8.517 2 3.085 2 830 0.2146 3 20
'179 0.7000 0.7000 09966 0.8861 1.1071 15.685 2 5.478 2.830 0.2146 6 20
'275 0.1000 0.1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0.000 2 14.377 2.830 0.2146 18 20
423 0.0000 0.0000 0.1586 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
650 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunrett's Test 75 116 93.2738 0.10806 0.11083 0.36464 0.00575 4 1E-05 5.6
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma !ter
Slope 6 6831 1.12707 4.47405 8.89216 0 3.45855 11 0705 0 62967 2.27523 0.14963 3
Intercept -10.206 2 57202 -15.247 -5.1644 i
TSCR 1 o _
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits '
09
ECO1 2.674 84.5536 55.2732 106.207
ECO5 3.355 106.931 77.7031 127.994 0.8-
EC10 3.718 121.19 92.8735 141.839 07
EC 15 3.964 131.869 104.519 152.35
EC20 4.158 141.024 114.598 161.552 m 0.6-
EC25 4.326 149.383 123.803 170.181 Q 0 5-
EC40 4.747 172.71 148.918 195.968 0 -
EC50 5.000 188.463 164 916 215,271 04
EC60 5.253 205.653 181.221 238.319 0 3-
EC75 5.674 237.766 208.771 286.541 0.2
•
ECBO 5.842 251.86 219.948 309.52
ECBS 6.036 269.345 233.259 339.33 0 I -
EC90 6.282 293.08 250.57 381.842
EC95 6.645 332.16 277.7 456.347 I 10 100 1000
EC99 7.326 420.068 334.7 641.472 Dose ugh!.
Dose-Response Plot
1 •
0.9 1-tail,0.05 level
0.8 - of significance
0.7
A
�0.6 -
N 0.5
=0.4
m
v
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 v •
8 a eN- n IN m 0
Q • •
' ? 0
U
a
Page 1 ToxCaic v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6i30l2020 Test ID' PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol. Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Total Copper
Conc-ug/L 1 2
D-Contro! 1.0000 1 0000
55 1.0000 1.0000
83 1,0000 1.0000
120 1.0000 1 0000
175 1.0000 1.0000
271 0.4000 0.4000
404 0.0000 0.0000
627 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Aresin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugIL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
D-Conlrol 1.0000 1.0000 1,4120 1,4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
55 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
83 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
120 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
175 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1,4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
'271 0.4000 0.4000 0.6847 0.6847 0.6847 0.000 2 72.730 2.830 0.0283 12 20
404 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
627 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 175 271 217.773 0.00959 0.00984 0.17632 0.0001 2.1E-09 5.6
Treatments vs D-Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 95%CL
0.0% 257.44 234.89 282.15
5.0% 256.61 231.86 284.01
10.0% 255.80 228.51 286.34 1.0 s
20.0% 254.22 220.26 293.42 0 5
Auto-0.0% 257.44 234.89 282.15
08-
07-
N0.6-
c
op5-
a. •
CC
Q
0.3-
02-
0.1 -
1 10 100 1000
Dose ugIL
Dose-Response Plot
1 1-tail,0.05 level
0.9 of significance
0.8
0.7
0.6
rn 0.5
=0.4
r
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Ln n o n
in
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0 32 Reviewed by: �`

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID' SIMSTREAM
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir,Testing Sol. Sample Type: OMR.Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date Protocol:ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Total Copper
Conc-ug/L 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
55 1.0000 1.0000
83 1.0000 1.0000
120 0.9000 0.8000
175 0.6000 0.8000
271 0.1000 0.1000
404 0.0000 0.0000
627 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total 1
Conc-ugiL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number I
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
55 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.2146 0 20
83 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.2146 0 20 I
'120 0.8500 0.8500 1.1781 1.1071 1.2490 8.517 2 3.085 2.830 0.2146 3 20
'175 0.7000 0.7000 0.9966 0.8861 1.1071 15.685 2 5.478 2.830 0.2146 6 20
'271 0.1000 0.1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0.000 2 14.377 2.830 0.2146 18 20
404 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
627 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 83 120 99.7998 0.10806 0.11083 0.36464 0.00575 4.1E-05 5,6
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 7.18963 1.1943 4.8488 9.53046 0 2.70886 11.0705 0.74476 2.27228 0.13909 3
Intercept -11.337 2.71122 -16.651 -6.0229
TSCR 10 e
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9-
ECO1 2.674 88.8614 60.8327 109.232 .
EC05 3.355 110.535 83.2354 130.087 0.8-
EC10 3.718 124.175 98.0579 143.254 0.7-
EC 15 3.964 134.316 109.281 153.221
EC20 4.158 142.963 118.891 161.931 m 0 6-
EC25 4.326 150.823 127.588 170.088 a 0.5-
EC40 4.747 172.602 150.965 194.38 vt
EC50 5.000 187.19 165.636 212.424 cc 0 a
EC60 5.253 203.012 180.483 233.753 0.3-
EC75 5.674 232.326 205.466 277.649 0.2-
EC80 5.842 245.1 215.583 298.282
EC85 6.036 260.879 227.616 324.832 0.i -
EC90 6.282 282.184 243.231 362.338
EC95 6.645 317.004 267.61 427.244 10 100 1000
EC99 7.326 394,324 318.421 585.103 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1 } •
0.9 NNi 1-tail,0.05 level
0.8 _ .A........„..„.
of significance I
0.7
R
.2 0.6
,n0.5
=0A
e
0co
02
0.1
0 •
C N , o I(S .- a n
v, . N ^ V
O
U
o
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed by:

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date: 6/30/2020 Test ID: PpFRAC Sample ID: SIMSTREAM
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sal Sample Type: DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
Sample Date: Protocol. ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promeias
Comments: Dissolved Copper
Conc-ug/L 1 2
D-Control 1 0000 1.0000
52 1.0000 1,0000
78 1,0000 1,0000
91 1.0000 1.0000
166 1.0000 1.0000
250 0.4000 0.4000
372 0.0000 0.0000
583 0.0000 0,0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ugiL Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1,4120 1.4120 1.4120 0 000 2 0 20
52 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
78 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
91 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
166 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1 4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.0283 0 20
'250 0.4000 0.4000 0 6847 0.6847 0 6847 0 000 2 72.730 2.830 0,0283 12 20
372 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
583 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSS MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 166 250 203 715 0.00959 0 00984 0.17632 0.0001 2.1E-09 5,6
Treatments vs D-Control
Trimmed Spearman-Karber
Trim Level EC50 95%C L
0.0% 239.39 219.14 261.52
5,0% 238.50 216.28 263.01
10.0% 237.63 213.17 264 90 1.0 •
20.0% 235.94 205.63 270.72
0.9-
Auto-0.0%, 239.39 219.14 261.52
0.8-
0.7-
c •
E10.5
0.4-
0.3-
0.2-
0 1 •
00
10 100 1000
Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
I • • • • 1-tail,0.05 level
.......
0 9 of significance
0.8
0.7
To'
>0.6
0.4
0.3
0,2
0 1
0 , •
0
A
(.7
Pap?. 1 ToxCalc v5.0.32 Reviewed

Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date. 6/30/2020 Test ID' PpFRAC Sample ID SIMSTREAM
End Date: 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir Testing Sot Sample Type. DMR-Discharge Monitoring Report
' Sample Date: Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments: Dissolved Copper
Conc-ug/L 1 2
D-Control 1.0000 1.0000
52 1.0000 1.0000
78 1.0000 1.0000
91 0.9000 0.8000
166 0.6000 0.8000
250 0.1000 0.1000
372 0.0000 0.0000
583 0.0000 0.0000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-ug/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Rasp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 20
52 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.2146 0 20
78 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0.2146 0 20
'91 0.8500 0.8500 1.1781 1.1071 1.2490 8.517 2 3.085 2.830 0.2146 3 20
'166 0.7000 0.7000 0.9966 0.8861 1.1071 15.685 2 5.478 2.830 0.2146 6 20
'250 0.1000 0.1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0.000 2 14,377 2.830 0.2146 18 20
372 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0.1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
583 0.0000 0.0000 0.1588 0 1588 0.1588 0.000 2 20 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob df
Dunnett's Test 78 91 84.2496 0.10806 0.11083 0.36464 0.00575 4.1E-05 5,6
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Ltkellhood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chl-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Iter
Slope 6.01656 0.89258 4.2671 7.76603 0 7.66298 110705 0.17581 2.22675 0.16621 4
Intercept -8.3974 1.99646 -12.31 -4.4843
TSCR 10 ♦
Point Probits ug/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0.9
ECO1 2.674 69.1978 46.4443 87.4277
ECO5 3.355 89.8177 66.33 108.227 0 8•
EC10 3.718 103.216 79.9336 121.685 0.7-
EC 15 3.964 113.367 90.4514 131.995
EC20 4.158 122.142 99.608 141.064 H 0.5-
EC25 4.326 130.21 108.02 149.588 a0.5-
EC40 4.747 152.982 131.296 175.014 v,
EC50 5.000 168.558 146.476 193.888 re 0 4
EC60 5.253 185.72 162.323 216.239 0.3-
EC75 5.674 218.2 189.992 262.725 0.2-
EC80 5.842 232.613 201.496 284.878
EC85 6.036 250.618 215.366 313.682 01 -
EC90 6.282 275.267 233.638 354.919
EC95 6.645 316.328 262.72 427,663 1 10 100 '000
EC99 7.326 410.589 325.256 610.705 Dose ug/L
Dose-Response Plot
1 ♦ •
0.9 - 1-tail,0.05 level
OS - _ of significance
0.7
N
Z 0.6
rn 0.5
=0.4
m
a
0.3
02
01
0 ♦
O N CO O O N 2
N O O h N
C N
O
0
6
Page 1 ToxCalc v5.0 32 Reviewed by' ` \

Appendix C
REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST
CONTROL CHART INFORMATION
IQ

Pimephales promelas
Acute Reference Toxicant Control Chart
Environmental TOSYIng SohnIons.Me. Source: In-house Culture
i i I 1 I 1 1 i 1 1 I T"i i I f 1 i I i
1.2 — Control Limits (± 2 Standard Deviations)
1.1 - -
• •
1.0 - • • r • a -�, .•! • •...,
•
• _ . •
0 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I I
Ln
J 1.4 i I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I
L
o - Warning Limits -
ec
a
CO
1.0 - �,_ • •,.. • iir •• • -•—
—
0.8 — . ,. _
I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
�3 1.9
.CI'DOD'01-��Ag.10.03 6�SP'"9 SO pa6 .109 .19 .�0.10. 0.0�19 .11A - 01'.O�.0�QL0 13 03.e�Q.e1 Qa:19,-��.05 Q6.01 Q611Y
Test date
• 48-hour LC50=median lethal concentration. An estimation of the potassium chloride concentration
which is lethal to 50%of the test organisms in 48-hours(calculated using ToxCalc).
Central Tendency(mean logarithmic LC,converted to anti-logarithmic values)
-----, Control Limits (mean logarithmic LC,±2 standard deviations converted to anti-logarithmic values)
—... ..: Laboratory Warning Limits(mean logarithmic LC,±2 coefficent of variations converted to anti-logarithmic values)
-=—--.. USEPA Warning Limits(mean logarithmic LC,±S„5 converted to anti-logarithmic values,
SA75=75`h percentile of CVs reported nationally by USEPA)
lerav,me
•evened by
IImSM(r.Surma!'
(
V

Pimephales promelas
Acute Reference Toxicant Control Chart
Mrro ��.•,•.n,sa,. «. Source: In-house Culture
Log10 Conversion Anti-logarithmic Values(g/L KCI)
Test number Test date 48-hour LC50 Laboratory Calculated CV 75th Percentile CV
ToxCal Determination 48-hour LCS0 CT 5 CT Control Limits Warning Limits Warning Limits
(g/L KCI) CT-25 CT+2S CT-2CV CT+2CV CT-5A 75 CT+SA,75
1 03-05-19 0.9857 -0.0063 0,0030 0.0127 1,0069 0.9498 1.0674 0.9502 1,0670 0.8156 1.1982
2 04-02-19 1.0165 0.0071 0.0036 0.0125 1.0084 0.9519 1.0683 0.9524 1.0678 0.8168 1.2000
3 04-09-19 0.9529 -0.0210 0.0029 0.0135 1.0068 0,9461 1.0714 0,9465 1.0709 0.8155 1.1981
4 05-03-19 0.9960 -0.0017 0,0028 0.0135 1.0064 0.9456 1.0712 0.9460 1.0707 0.8152 1.1977
5 06-04-19 1.0306 0.0131 0.0023 0.0129 1.0053 0.9473 1.0667 0.9476 1.0664 0.8143 1.1963
6 07-09-19 1.0079 0.0034 0.0028 0.0127 1.0065 0.9493 1.0671 0.9496 1.0667 0.8152 1.1977
7 08-06-19 0.9897 -0.0045 0.0021 0.0127 1.0049 0.9477 1.0656 0.9480 1.0653 0.8140 1.1959
8 09-10-19 1,0311 0.0133 0.0034 0.0125 1.0078 0.9515 1.0676 0.9519 1.0671 0.8164 1.1993
9 09-20-19 0.9857 -0.0063 0.0016 0.0111. 1.0037 0.9538 1.0562 0.9540 1.0560 0.8130 1.1944
10 10-08-19 0.9904 -0.0042 0.0012 0.0111 1.0028 0.9527 1.0555 0.9528 1.0554 0.8122 1.1933
11 11-05.19 0.9971 -0.0013 0.0012 0.0111 1.0028 0.9527 1.0555 0.9528 1.0553 0.8122 1,1933
12 12-03-19 1.0425 0.0181 0,0007 0.0101 1.0016 0.9563 1.0492 0.9563 1.0491 0.8113 1.1920
13 01-07-20 0.9973 -0.0012 0.0003 0.0100 1.0006 0.9558 1.0476 0,9559 1.0475 0.8105 1.1908
14 02-04-20 0.9685 -0.0139 -0.0004 0.0104 0.9992 0,9523 1.0484 0.9522 1.0485 0.8093 1.1890
15 03-03-20 0.9739 -0.0115 -0.0013 0.0105 0.9969 0.9498 1.0463 0.9496 1.0465 0.8075 1.1863
16 04-07-20 1.0079 0.0034 -0.0004 0.0100 0.9991 0.9542 1.0461 0.9542 1.0462 0.8093 1.1889
17 04-28-20 1,0207 0.0089 -0.0001 0.0102 0.9997 0.9540 1.0476 0.9540 1.0476 0.8098 1.1896
18 05-05-20 0.9973 -0.0012 -0.0004 0.0101 0 9990 0,9536 1,0465 0.9536 1.0465 0.8092 1.1888
19 06-02-20 0.9971 -0.0013 -0.0009 0.0098 0.9978 0.9536 1.0441 0.9535 1.0442 0.8082 1.1874
20 06-30-20 1.0372 0.0159 0.0004 0.0102 1.0010 0.9552 1.0490 0.9553 1.0490 0.8108 1.1912
Note 48-hour LC50= 48-hour median lethal concentration. An estimate of the potassium chloride concentration which is lethal to 50%of the test organisms in 48-hours(calculated using ToxCaic).
CT= Central tendency of the LCSavalues.
S= Standard deviation of the LCso values.
Control Limits= Mean logarithmic LCsa±2 standard deviations converted to anti-logarithmic values.
Warning Limits= Mean logarithmic ICso t 2CV or 50,75 converted to anti-logarithmic values.
SA_75= Standard deviation corresponding to the 75`5 percentile of CVs reported nationally by USEPA. (5Q.,75=0.19).
CV= Coefficient of variation. .•<•,„

I
Page 1of2
Acute LC50 Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas
IEPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2000.0
Pimephales pramelas Potassium Chloride Acute Reference Toxicant Test
IPpKCIAC# t 0,S
Dilution Preparation:
Test concentrations(nigh KCI) 500 750 1000 1250 1500 A stock solution was prepared by diluting 100 g KCI into 2000 mL deionized water This 50,000 mg/L.
KCI stock solution was used to prepare the concentrations evaluated for tonicity.
Stock solution 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
mL Dilution water 495.0 492.5 490.0 487.5 485.0 0p 1
' total volume(mil S00 500 500 500 500 Stock solution INSS 8; %6a3
Chemical Analyses: Hours
0 24 48
I Concentration Analyst ta / L.,.1, J(� 'Analyst identified for each day,performed pH,dissolved oxygen and conductivity
measurements only Temperatures performed at the time of test initiation or termination by
pH(s.U.) 2 ^ the analyst performing the toxicity test,Alkalinity and hardness performed by the analysts
777�co s � -72 identified on the test specific bench sheets and transcribed to this bench sheet.
IDissolved oxygen(mg/L) �Li 77
Control, Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 77 p
MHSW Alkalinity(mg/LCaCO,) �/t Chemical analyses:
Hardness(mgJL CaCO,) \S Parameter Reporting limit Method number Meter Serial number
Temperature(°C) •i'4 -5 'L',S t,-.b pH 0.1S.11. SM4500-H•B-2011 AccometAR20 93312452
pH(S u.) 7 OLI �•1q f_1 --y-e/ Dissolved oxygen 1.0 reg/L SM 4500-0 G.2011 PSl Made!52CE 5t0104324
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) 7 q 1 CJ i '1 V/_� Conductivity 14,9 µmhos/ern SM 25108-7011 Accumet AR20 93312452
S00 mg/L 1 �G7 -
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) ),, L)0 alkalinity 5.0 mg CaCO,/L SM 2320 B-2011 Accumet 4R20 93312452
Temperature(°C) "LA.b 'Z4.,1 'IA-L. hardness 5.0 mg CaCO3/L 5M 2340 C-2011 Not appleablc Not appl,caele
pH(S.U-) 7 gg 4 A?'l 4-aJ/_ temperature 0.1°C SM 2550B-2010 Digital Thermometer 1S1t J wv�b S
Dissolved oxygen(mg/1) l' 0 6 *4-6
750 mg/L
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) //t/}
Temperature('C) u71.A.6 1,1
(.� t k-
u /-
pH(S. .l P1 " •UT , '1-61:7
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) g•a '3 '36
1000 mg/L
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) �f 9o50
Temperature)°C) 144,(� -AA r'` ,4'� _S
/ -q
pH(SU1 78 -66 -4'68
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) D 0 4_9 �,q
1250 mg/L t
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) eAll 4?530
Temperature(°C) 14 L _4,L \4t_c
pH((Su.) .90 "_1-}-5 e 7 6'p
Dissolved oxygen(mg/L) Cc°Q 3 9 'VI1500 mg/L 6
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) cnaQ
Temperature(°C) 1t4•S Zy•S ZAA
SOP AT19-Revision 6-Exhibit AT19-1

I Page 2 of 2
Acute LCsa Whole Effluent Toxicity Test,Species: Pimephales promelas
EPA-821-R-02-012, Method 2000.0
1 Pimephales promelas Potassium Chloride Acute Reference Toxicant Test
IPpKCIAC It 1 x
Feeding Test Initiation or Termination Location Randomizing
Hours Date MM$w Batch
Time Analyst Time Analyst Incubator/Shelf Template
I a •
u`30 to 00100 /1 tttt lb. vz b 06-ts-10
24
f 1-Gt•1-o tt'1 �j
48 X.
rt,r.l,Srbn to-o't•10 t l 2,N /�j►,1\\
'Test organisms were fed in holding 2 to 5 hours prior to test initiation.Test organisms w not fed during the test
Test Organism Information:
EPA loading requirement for freshwater species
Organism Source: In-house culture
of<0 40 g/L at 25.0°C has been documented by
Spawning date: 6 1 to 14 ETS to never be exceeded using dayold
Ct, 13-'LU
Age(1 to 14 days old): P.promelas.
t -rt) 1 IlAa S ok..lil
Gt..2Q --ZU O S 0
Hatch date and times:
p t.•.1.1-0 0 f 1 S
Average transfer volume: <0.25 mL
Transfer bowl information: pH(S.U.7 rr
Temperature(°C) Z5 'j
Survival Data (number of living organisms):
Control 500 mg/L 750 mg/L 1000 mg/L 1250 mg/L 1500 mg/L
Hours Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate Replicate
A B C D E F G H I J K L
0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
In:Taoon
t
24 10 t 0 10 1 0 10 f 0 8 v� q 'a 3� L i i °tit 94(
,� t.< v. i,I ,c
48 1 0 1 tJ l 0 10 9 '1 8 lD I< t 0 l
Termination
Mean Survival t&Q1_ 1001. `k01• 10/. [07, S 7.
Comment codes: d=dead,u=unhealthy,bs=bent spines,s=stressed
Statistics:
Method
At 0 ,T Comments:
Lower 95%confidence limit
(mg KCMJA) 'I'S-1
Upper 95%confidence limit(mg KCl/L) t 1 t 2 • 0
48-hour LC50(mg KCl/L( I Gb1 • L.
Test
Reviewed by:
SOP AT t n.R.,,i,...,r..c,,,,;.•e r•n 1

Statistical Analyses
Envtronm*..W TA.IIne SoWf Ion,-Mc.
Acute Fathead Minnow Test-24 Hr Survival
Start Date 6/30/2020 Test ID. PpKClAC Sample ID, REF-Ref Toxicant
End Date 7/2/2020 Lab ID: ETS-Envir.Testing Sol Sample Type: KCL-Polassium chloride
Sample Date Protocol ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species: PP-Pimephales promelas
Comments:
Conc-mg/L 1 2
0-Control 1.0000 1.0000
500 1.0000 1 0000
750 1.0000 1 0000 •
1000 0,8000 0.9000
1250 0,3000 0.2000
1500 01000 01000
•
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-mg/L Mean N-Moan Moan Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Rasp Number
0-Control 1.0000 1_0000 1,4120 1.4120 1.4120 0 000 2 0 20
500 1.0000 1 0000 1.4120 1.4120 1 4120 0.000 2 0 000 2.830 0.1497 0 20 I
750 1.0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 14120 0.000 2 0.000 2.830 0,1497 0 20
'1000 0.8500 0.8500 1.1781 1 1071 1.2490 8 517 2 4.421 2.830 0.1497 3 20
'1250 0 2500 0 2500 0.5216 0.4636 0,5796 15.723 2 16.829 2.830 0 1497 15 20
'1500 0 1000 0 1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0 000 2 20.607 2.830 0 1497 18 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail.0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSS MSE F•Prob dt
Dunnetts Test 750 1000 856.025 0.06719 0.06892 0 48751 0 0028 2.1E-06 5,6
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma Item
Slope 14.1113 2.72829 8..76387 19.4588 0 1 31544 7.81472 0 72547 3.05641 0 07087 3
Intercept -38.271 8.38752 -54.711 -21831
TSCR to
Point Probits mg/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0 9
ECO1 2.674 797 167 618.462 899 772 -
ECOS 3 355 890 93 736.552 979.549 0 8•
EC10 3.715 945.342 807.342 1026 35 0 7-
EC15 3 964 983.919 858.08 1060.21 I
EC20 4.158 1015.7 899.924 1088.82 m 0 6•
EC25 4.326 1043.78 936.688 1114,87 a 0 5-
EC40 4.747 1118.03 1030.91 1189.31 m -
ECSO 5.000 1165.22 1086.57 1242 76 &0.4
EC60 5.253 1214.39 1139.7 1304.91 0.3- I
EC75 5,674 1300.78 1221.5 1429.48 f
EC80 5.842 1336,74 1252.24 1486 08 0.2
EC85 6.036 1379.92 1287.39 1556.9 0.1 • 1
EC90 6.282 1436.23 1331.1 1653 2 0.0 �'
EC95 6.645 1523.94 1395.93 1810.5 1 10 10o 10o0 10000
EC99 7,326 1703 19 1520.96 2154.41 Dose mg/L
Dose-Response Plot
19 O
0 9 1-tail,0.05 level
of significance
08 1
0.7
I
0.6
0 5
= 0.4
.r
N
43 -
02 -
0 1
in
6

Statistical Analyses
EmManm+nut Timing Sotwtans.Inc.
Acute Fathead Minnow Test-48 Hr Survival
Start Date 6/30/2020 Test ID. PpKClAC Sample ID REF-Ref Toxicant
End Dale. 7/2/2020 Lab ID ETS-Envir Testing Sol. Sample Type. KCL-Potassium chloride
Sample Date. Protocol: ACUTE-EPA-821-R-02-012 Test Species PP-Pimepnales promelas
Comments:
Conc-mg/L 1 2
D-Control 1 0000 1 0000
500 1.0000 1.0000
750 0.9000 0 9000
1000 0.8000 0.6000
1250 0.1000 0.1000
1500 0.0000 0.1000
Transform:Arcsin Square Root 1-Tailed Number Total
Conc-mg/L Mean N-Mean Mean Min Max CV% N t-Stat Critical MSD Resp Number
D-Control 1.0000 10000 14120 14120 14120 0.000 2 0 20
500 1 0000 1.0000 1.4120 1.4120 1.4120 0.000 2 0 000 2.830 0.2244 0 20
750 0.9000 0.9000 1.2490 1,2490 1.2490 0 000 2 2 056 2 830 0.2244 2 20
'1000 0 7000 0.7000 0.9966 0.8861 1.1071 15.685 2 5239 2.830 0.2244 6 20
'1250 0.1000 0.1000 0.3218 0.3218 0.3218 0 000 2 13,751 2 830 0,2244 18 20
'1500 0 0500 0 0500 0.2403 0 1588 0.3218 47.963 2 14.779 2.830 0.2244 19 20
Auxiliary Tests Statistic Critical Skew Kurt
Normality of the data set cannot be confirmed
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis Test(1-tail,0.05) NOEC LOEC ChV TU MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob dt
Dunnett's Test 750 1000 866.025 0.11476 0.11771 0.56645 0.00629 1.5E-05 5.6
Treatments vs D-Control
Maximum Likelihood-Probit
Parameter Value SE 95%Fiducial Limits Control Chi-Sq Critical P-value Mu Sigma !ter
Slope 11 0253 1.95054 7.20221 14.8483 0 2.9949 7 81472 0.39241 3 01587 0.0907 3
Intercept -28.251 5.91313 -39 841 -16 661
TSCR 1.0
Point Probits mg/L 95%Fiducial Limits 0 9
ECO1 2 674 638.073 477 511 739.916
ECO5 3.355 735.669 590.833 826.457 08-
EC10 371E 793.659 660849 877998 07-
EC15 3.964 835 346 711.974 915.532 - i
EC20 4.158 870.034 754 744 947.342 0 6-
EC25 4 326 900.939 792.803 976.344 so 0.5-
EC40 4.747 983.769 892.705 1059
EC50 5.000 1037.22 953.662 1118.02 ,0 4 4EC60 5.253 1093.58 1013 45 1186.53 0 3-
EC75 5.674 1194.12 1108,41 1325.01 0 2-
EC80 5.842 1236 54 1144.85 1388 77 -
EC85 6.036 1287.89 1186.93 1469.35 0 1-
EC90 6.282 1355.53 1239.82 1580.27
r^
EC95 6.645 1462.38 1319.31 1764.64 1 to too moo 1e000
EC99 7.326 1686.06 1475.93 2180 Dose mg/L
Dose-Response Plot
19
0.9 - 1-tail,0.05 level
0.8 r of significance
0.7 •
06
in 0.5
= 04
4
03
02
0.1 • -
0 • r---
9. •
o g
7 i j N 1�.

rtr177 N4' v 7 PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc. Certificate of Analysis
Project name: Environmenal Testing Solutions,Inc. Project number: 200630.535
Collection date: 30-Jun-20
Date received: 30-Jun-20
Sample identification: Simstream-Grab Sample number: 200816
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Nitrate+Nitrite as N SM4500-NO3 H <0.10 0.10 mg/L 6-Jul-20 ELN 1
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 351.2 0.74 0.10 mg/L a-hd-2o LKH 1
Total Nitrogen Calculation 0.742 0.100 mg/L s-Jul-2o LKH
Oil and Grease.HEM EPA 1664 B <5.0 5.0 mg/L 6-Jul-20 CTS
Total Organic Carbon SM 5310 B 6.10 1.00 mg/L to-Jul-20 ANB
Copper 200.8 0.005 0.002 mg/L la-Jul-20 TLT I
Solids,Total Suspended SM 2540 D <5.0 5.0 mg/L I-Jul-20 KEK
Dissolved Solids,Total SM 2540 C 140 10 mg/L 2-Jul-2o KEK
Conductance,Specific SM 2510 B 230 14.9 phostcm 0tat-2o KEK
Hardness,Total SM 2340 C 32 5.0 mg/L 2-Jul-20 KEK
Alkalinity,Total SM 2320 B 18 5.0 mg/L 2-J0-20 KEK
Sample identification: Simstream Filtered-Grab Sample number: 200817
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 0.011 0.002 mg/L 14-Jut-20 TLT
Sample identification: Labwater-Grab Sample number: 200818
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Total Organic Carbon SM 5310 B <1.00 1.00 mg/L 10-Jul-20 ANB 1,2
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L 14-Jul-20 TLT 1.2
Solids.Total Suspended SM 2540 D <5.0 5.0 mg/L l-Jul 20 KEK
Dissolved Solids,Total SM 2540 C 100 10 mg/L 2-Jul-20 KEK
Conductance,Specific SM 2510 B 170 14.9 mhos/cm 0-Jul-20 KEK
Hardness,Total SM 2340 C 46 5.0 mg/L 2-Jul-20 KEK
Alkalinity,Total SM 2320 B 34 5.0 mg/L 2-Jul-20 KEK
Sample identification: Lab Water Filtered-Grab Sample number: 200819
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L 14-Jul-2o TLT 1.2
This report should not be reproduced,excpt in its entirety,without the written consent of Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc
The results in this report relate only to the samples submitted for analysis.

..., PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc. Certificate of Analysis
Project name: Environmenal Testing Solutions,Inc. Project number: 200630.535
Collection date: 30-Jun-20
Date received: 30-Jun-20
Sample identification: DI Water Grab Sample number: 200820
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L 14-lut-20 TLT I,2
Collection date: 29-Jun-20
Date received: 30-Jun-20
Sample identification: Field Blank-Grab Sample number: 199769
Parameter Method Result RL Units Date Analyst Footnotes
Analyzed
Copper 200.8 <0.002 0.002 mg/L 14-1ul-2o ILT 1,2
RL=Reporting Limit. Values are reported down to the Reporting Limit only.
1. Sample analzyed by Rogers&Callcott Environmental,Inc.
2. Result is an estimated value. Result is below the reporting limit. Parameter has been J-Flagged,
Date reviewed: 09.10120 NC Certification Number: 600
Data reviewed by: Kelley E.Keenan SC Certification Number: 99053
NC Drinking Water Certification Number: 37786
Signature:
This report should not be reproduced,exept in its entirety,without the written consent of Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
The results in this report relate only to the samples submitted for analysis.

Nominal and measured total and dissolved copper analyses
are provided below (µg/L Cu).
Blank glassware check: <2.0 µg/L
LABWATER Tests:
Minnows
Initial Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved
Control <2.0 <2.0 <2.0
9.1 9.0 8.0
14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0
21.0 18.0 18.0 18.0
32.0 28.0 26.0 24.0
49.0 44.0 42.0 40.0
75.0 66.0 62.0 62.0
116.0 96.0 110.0 97.0
SIMSTREAM Tests:
Minnows
Initial Final
Nominal Total Dissolved Dissolved
Control 5.0 11.0 8.0
49.0 55.0 52.0
75.0 83.0 78.0 73.0
116.0 120.0 91.0 99.0
179.0 175.0 166.0 157.0
275.0 271.0 250.0 241.0
423.0 404.0 372.0 344.0
650.0 627.0 583.0

QPtCApO ". ,
Rogers &Callcott r`
`l'NI
ENVIRONMENTAL "gQopaso
Laboratory Report
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0070230
351 Depot St. Received: 07/01/2020 13:10
Asheville,NC 28801.4310
Dear Client:
Rogers and Calfcott appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you. The attached laboratory services report includes analytical results and chain of
custody for samples that were received on July 01,2020. Rogers and Callcott maintains a formal QA/QC program. Unless otherwise noted,all analyses
perforntcd under NELAP certification have complied with all the requirements for the TNI standard The analyses met the QA/QC confidence interval
for each test method unless otherwise qualified. Estimated uncertainty is available upon request
Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this report and is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee,or
the person responsible for delivering to the person addressed,you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone else. If you receive this message by
mistake,please notify Rogers and Callcott immediately.
We strive to provide excellent service to our clients. Please contact Lauren Hollister, your Project Manager,at [e-mail],
(864)-232-1556 if you have any questions about this report.
Report Approved By:
c,:elawtek*teeidoit
Lauren Hollister
Project Manager
This report mqr nor be reproduced,except Will.without written permission from Rogers&Callcott./nc.
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426"rainforest way Greenville.SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fax [phone] roget-sandcallcott.com
an empluye�xu J 1Pd coraparay
Page 1 of 10

,...,ip.
Rogers &Callcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL 8,10,,.
South Carolina Greenville Laboratory Identification 23105
South Carolina Columbia Laboratory identification 40572
Certificate of Analysis North Carolina Laboratory CertifrcationNumber 27
North Carolina Drinking Water Lab Number 95710
NELAP Utah Certificate Number SC000042014-I
Georgia Drinking Water Lab ID 880
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0070230
351 Depot St. Received: 07/01/2020 13.10
Asheville.NC 28801-4310
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampled Type
0070230-01 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070230-02 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream-filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070230-03 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab water Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070230-04 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab water-filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070230-05 ETS Inc Sutton WER-DI water Wastewater 06/3020 12:30 Grab
0070230-06 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Field Blank Wastewater 06/29/20 11:05 Grab
PO Box S655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 rntm 864.232.1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcalkott.com
an crnlrtoyte-ns nml company
07/16/2020 16:35 This report may not he reproduced.except in full,without written permission front Rogers&Caticou,Inc. Page 2 of 10

`\ Rogers &Callcott
1 V ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070230
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:35
Sample Data
Sample Number 0070230-01
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
General Chemistry Parameters
Nitrate-Nitrite as N ND 0.10 mg/L 1.00 07/06/20 16:09 Sat4SOONO3H-2ot1 ELN B000028
Oil and Grease,Total,HEM ND 5.0 mg/L 1.00 07/06/20 11:00 EPA 16648 CTS B0G0209
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.74 0.10 m8/L 1.00 07/08/20 15:22 EPA 351.2 LKH B0G0236
Total Nitrogen(TKN-rNitratewNitrite) 0.742 0.100 mg/L 1.00 07/08/20 15:22 Calculation LKH [CALCI
Total Organic Carbon 6.10 1.00 mg/L 1 00 07/10/20 05:28 3M 5310B-201I ANB B0G0409
Total Metals
Copper 0.005 0.002 mgiL 1.00 07/14/20 19:31 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0180
Sample Number 0070230-02
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream-filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.011 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 21:02 EPA200.8 TLT B000I80
Sample Number 0070230-03
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab water collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analysed Method Flag Analyst Batch
General Chemistry Parameters
Total Organic Carbon ND 1.00 mg'L 400 07/10/20 06:35 SM 5310t3-201t AND B000409
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 19:57 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0180
Sample Number 0070230-04
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab water-filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 21:06 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0180
PO Box 56SS Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fa/rim-est Way Greenville,SC 29607 rrstin 864.237.1556 ta,,864.232.6140 rogersandcailcott.eom
att,srnployca,-ownnd.-nrrapany
97/16/2020 16::35 This report osan not be mon:wined,except In fill,without written permission from Rogers Et Cullcott Inc. Page 3 of 10

.m Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070230
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:35
Sample Number 0070230-05
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Dl water collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 m81L 1.00 07/14/20 21:10 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0180
Sample Number 0070230-06
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Field Blank collected on 06/29/20 11:05
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 21:14 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0180
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 ma:n 864.I32,1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
,rn rnplcry r-awned Company 1
07/I6/2o210 16:31 This report may not be repnuluced,except in fiiA,without written permission from Rogers&Colima.Inc. Page 4 of 10

Rogers &CaRcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070230
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:35
General Chemistry Parameters
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch B0G0028-General Prep-Wet Chem KL
Blank(BOG0028-BLKI)
Nitrate-Nitrite as N ND 0,10 mgi4
LCS(0000028-BSI)
Nitrate-Nitrite as N 1.30 0.10 mg/L 1.25 104 85-115
Batch B0G0209-General Prep-O&G
Blank(B0G0209-BLKI)
Oil and Grease,Total,HEM ND 5,0 mg'L
LCS(80G0209-BSI)
and Grcasc.Total,HEM 38.3 5.0 mg/L 40.0 96 78-114
LCS Bop(BOG0209-BSDI)
Oil and Grease,Total,HEM 36.9 5.0 mg/L 40.0 92 78-114 4 18
Batch B0G0236-EPA 351.2-TKN
Blank(B0G0236-BLKI)
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ND 0,10 mg/L
LCS(B0CO236-BSI)
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 3.01 0.10 mg/L 3.00 100 90-110
Batch B0G0409-General Prep-TOC
Blank(80G0409-BLKI)
Total Organic Carbon NO 1.00 mg/L
LCS(B0G0409-BSI)
Total Organic Carbon 4.83 1.00 mg,L 5,00 97 85-115
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Farrforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 fir 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
Mt utnirit>yen-owneti ttienitdity
O7/1612O20 16:35 This report may not be reproduced,except in full,without written permission front Rogers&Cnitcon,Inc. Page,5 of 10

Rogers &Callcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070230
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:35
General Chemistry Parameters
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch B0G0409-General Prep-TOC
Matrix Spike(B000409-MS1) Source:0070230-01
Total Organic Carbon 10.1 1.00 mg/L 3.73 6.10 108 80-120
Matrix Spike Dap(B000409-MSDI) Source:0070230-01
Total Organic Carbon 10.3 1.00 matt. 3.75 6.10 112 80.120 l 20
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 malt 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an 2r1111l0yen-owned company
07116/2020 16.33 This report may not he reproduced.except in f+dl,without written permission from Rogers&Callcott,lnc. Page 6 of 10

L Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project; ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070230
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:35
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch BOG0180- EPA 200.8
Blank(BOG0180-BLK1)
Copper NO 0.002 mg/l.
LCS(BOG0180-BSI)
Copper 0.211 0.002 mg/L 0.200 105 85-115
LCS Dup(BOG0180-BSD1)
Copper 0 211 0.002 mg/L 0.200 106 85-115 0.4 200
Duplicate(BOG0180-DUPI) Source:0070230-01
Copper 0.005 0.002 mg/L 0.005 0,09 20
plicate(BOG0180-DUP2) Source:0070230-03
.opper NO 0.002 mg/L ND 20
Matrix Spike(BOG0180-AISI) Source:0070230-01
Copper 0.200 0.002 mg/L 0.200 0.005 98 70-130
Matrix Spike(BOG0180-MS2) Source:0070230-03
Copper 0.199 0.002 mg/L 0.200 ND 99 70-130
Post Spike(BOG0180-PSI) Source:0070230-01
Copper 0.262 mg/L 0.250 0.005 103 75-125
Post Spike(84GOI8O-PS2) Source:0070230-03
Copper 0.262 mg/L 0.250 ND 105 75-123
Sample Preparation Data
Parameter Batch Sample ID Prepared Analyst
EPA 200.8 Metal Digestion
EPA 200.8 BOG0180 0070230-01 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 BOG0180 0070230-02 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 80G0180 0070230-03 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 80G0180 0070230-04 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200,8 BOG0180 0070230-05 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000180 0070230-06 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864.232.1556 tm,864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an,>mltir/n-owned company
07/16/2020 16:35 This report may not be reptnrhtced.except MAIL without written permission front Rogers&Callao,.bin. Page 7 of 10

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070230
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:35
Data Qualifiers and Definitions
ND Analyze NOT DETECTED at or above the reporting limit
NR Not reported
RPD Relative Percent Difference
PO Box 5655 Greenvlle,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 mam 864.232.1556 t =864.232.6140 rogersandcalleott.com
an emp'c,ys owned company
07/16/2020 16:35 This report may not be reproduced,except inN a without written permission froth Rogers&Calicos!.hrc. Page 8 of 10

s jRo ers C iA�N QF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER U2�g aticott a9Z ENVIRONMENTAL Filtered` es/!so
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Fairforest Way 21.58 Stonerldge Drive Cooled(Yes/
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,SC 29210 y / -/GIa
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] Container Type Pl StiO C/GIaS��j
Client Name Container Volume(ml) Valk:AO
Address Sample Typera omposite)
a Sample SourceW,DW,SW,S, Other)
2c
Report To; o Preservation Code(s)
.- 4 A—None E—HCI I—ZnAcetate
Email Address o . B—HNO3 F—Na251O, 1—H3PO4
Telephone# C-H2SO4 G-Boric Acid K-MCAA l
PO# Project# z' r D-NaOH H-Ascorbic Acid L-
6 2 v
R&C YR Q
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRtPT�ON -� °- COMMENTS/+
-'0] ��?�l �
z3u 1 tY‘S}1Qam ( v 0,1 k „i St 1 m c
-02 1 S,mc .eun - £t 6l a_ I V Sv thin tic Z
-04. Lab ux,d3r _,ev32Adf 1 `r
-05 I D.' wac-v I V
—sot) tom 1 UJ s n'wJ Q Lang-- 1
SAMPLER-RE{INQUIS^[cBY: 06A DATE/TIME: RECEIVED B^;: DATE/TIME:
1 tYY,,((�� `,, JJ ss��lJJ rr (J`�/ `! Composite Start Date:
RE UISHEDBY: DATE/TIME: R VED Y: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3. e 4 -4,t.
Z_0_13t 0 Time or Flow (Circle one) .Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEI
S DATE/TIME:
6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection °C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt I J •C
-
Possible Hazards associated with samples: ' 'Non-Hazard nnammable fSk{n Irritant n Poison Unknown I }Other Form Revised July,2014 Page
rPage 9 of 10

t Rogers &Callcott
Lean ENVIRONMENTAL
Sample Receipt Verification
Date Work
Client: I S Received: --1.70 Order: U 0 47,-10
Carrier Name: Client FedEX) UPS US Mail Courier Field Services Other:
Tracking Number: l,p tj 7,51 y 50'4a
N N
Receipt Criteria e o A Comments
s
Shipping container/cooler intact? x Damaged Leaking Other:
Custody seals intact?
COC included with samples?
COC signed when relinquished and received? `f‘
Sample bottles intact? x I Damaged Leaking Other,
X.Sample ID on COC agree with label on bottle(s)?
Date/time on COC agree with label on bottle(s)?
Number of bottles on COC agrees with number of bottles received?
Samples received within holding time?
Sample volume sufficient for analysis?
VOA vials free of hcadspace(<6mm bubble)?
Temp at receipt recorded on CCC - ' •
Samples cooled? Temp measured with IR thermometer-SN:97050067 Cold Packs Dry Ice Note
Samples requiring pH preservation at proper pH?
Note: Samples for metals analysis may be preserved upon receipt in the lab.
Note: Samples for 0&0 and VOA annt}sis—preservation checked at bench. 11
Samples dechlorinated for parameters requiring chlorine removal at
the time of sample collection?
Note: Chlorine checked at bench for samples requiring Bacterial,VOA,and FLAA
analysis.
If in-house preservation used — record Lot#
HCL H3PO4
H2SO4 NaOH
IINO3 Other
Comments:
Were non-conformance issues noted at sample receipt? Yes or is
Non-Conformance issue other than noted above:
Revised February 2018 Completed by: (IA
Page 10 of 10 ,

10
• CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Requesi
* --
Client Name:
Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: ......„5„Znt..) k.o.tr_k Requested Analyses
Project Number: ' 35 \,. „.., c pi Cie Upon Receipt
N gel Upon Receipt
Preservatives 1 /4"."
:: ..7.
:-.-. _ . i-,)
.... . 41
Sample Identification `7.' 72 ..`.... 5
;,:,), 4- Vi 4'
c., 1."' . a: "-7-- rt= .-:', '; f <
4 7 s' .. .1. ... ° -a' t 4. , 4) } 1
(-, -. - r 0
Field
..
I Temp.("C) Comments
I S vArscitePoA G-2.)06(0 vw 0.-35.20 rtso
2 t1ASTfteAtA- Ft\--TRARI G- o2oost3 4.00) X
. tit- G- 02)06 let Vi u) X X X X
4 ›v"
k.P&vamv.IL.- c40-121.) 6- 19 1,3 1/41.)
G- ctog21 to' 4119. 1 d5
Sample Condition Upon Receipt filatfrritjAtk,;Z:212Lir,., 4:11'11 =41Z410,:11;;1466:--71:k
Temperature et) p,../jA c...... t/...............-- C-7S 0(:6),L0 114 0 f a S 0 10 3074 12-i-i 0
Received on Ice: Y 1 1\0
t ..
Sealed Cooler: Y
Samples Intact: 0 i N
Additional Comments: Sample; Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
7Svm taut_ c4\30-zo
Signature ot Sampler:

Rogers &Caticott
ENVIRONMENTAL
eRR
Laboratory Report
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0070229
351 Depot St, Received: 07/01/2020 13:10
Asheville,NC 28801-4310
Dear Client:
Rogers and Callcott appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you. The attached laboratory services report includes analytical results and chain of
custody for samples that were received on July 01,2020. Rogers and Callcott maintains a formal QA/QC program. Unless otherwise noted,all analyses
performed under NELAP certification have complied with all the requirements for the TNl standard The analyses met the QA/QC confidence interval
for each test method unless otherwise qualified, Estimated uncertainty is available upon request.
Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this report and is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee,or
the person responsible for delivering to the person addressed,you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone else. If you receive this message by
mistake,please notify Rogers and Callcott immediately.
We strive to provide excellent service to our clients. Please contact Lauren Hollister, your Project Manager,at [e-mail],
(864)-232-1556 if you have any questions about this report.
Report Approved By:
c7elcunet j/*Aetidat
Lauren Hollister
Project Manager
This report nuns not be reproduced,except in full,without written permission f our Rogers&Calkou,Inc.
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fairforest Wiy Greenville.SC 29607 main 864.2321556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an employee-owned comp<tny
Page 1 of 17

''° Rogers &CalUcott q
{
4 400100.
o100.
South Carolina Greenville Laboratory identification 23105
South Carolina Columbia Laboratory Identification 40572
Certificate of Analysis Nardi Carolina Laboratory CertiJicationNumber 27
North Carolina Drinking Water Lab Number 45710
NELAP Utah Certificate Number SC000042014-I
Georgia Drinking IVater Lab 1D 880
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0070229
351 Depot St. Received: 07/01/2020 13:10
Asheville,NC 28801-4310
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampled Type
0070229-0I ETS Inc Sutton WER-Di Water-filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-02 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 9.1 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-03 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 9.1 Filtered Wastewater 06130,20 12:30 Grab
0070229-04 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 14 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-05 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 14 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-06 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 21 Wastewater 06/30/20 12.30 Grab
0070229-07 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 21 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-OS ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 32 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-09 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 32 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-10 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 49 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-I1 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 49 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-12 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 75 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-13 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 75 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-14 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 116 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-15 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 116 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-16 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 49 Wastewater 06/30120 12:30 Grab
0070229-17 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 49 Filtered Wastewatcr 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-13 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 75 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-19 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 75 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-20 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 116 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-21 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 116 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-22 ETS Inc Sutton lVER-Simstream 179 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-23 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 179 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-24 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 275 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-25 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 275 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-26 ETS Inc Sutton WER•Simstream 423 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-27 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 423 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 .426 Fair-fewest Wa1 Greenville,SC 29607 ill,864.232 1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
sn arntrtnyr -awned company
07116/2020 16.:33 This report mur not be repindr ed.evicepr in All wirhoru written permtraronfloor Rogers&Cullcort,toe Page 2 of 17

Rogers &Caticott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Number Sample Description Matrix Sampled Type
0070229-28 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 650 Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
0070229-29 ETS Inc Sutton WER-Strustrcam 650 Filtered Wastewater 06/30/20 12:30 Grab
PO Box 5655 Greenville.SC 29606 426 Fait-forest Way Greenville,SC 29607 roam 864.232.1556 fax 864.232,6140 rogersandcalkott.com
an etnplayPP-owned company
07116/2020 16:33 This report may not he reproduced.except in fug,without written permission from Rogers&Colkcou.Inc. Page 3 of 17

'&z Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
35l Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Data
Sample Number 0070229-01
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Di Water-filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper ND 0.002 mg/1- 1.00 07/14/20 16:45 EPA 200.8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-02
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 9.1 collected on 0630/20 12.30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyse Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.009 0.002 inWL 1.00 07/14/20 17:30 EPA200.8 TLT B000179
Sample Number 0070229-03
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 9.1 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 1230
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.008 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 17:34 EPA 200.8 TLT 60G0179
Sample Number 0070229-04
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER.-Lab Water 14 collected on 06/30/20 12,30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.013 0.002 mg1L 1.00 07/14/20 17:38 EPA 200.8 TLT B0G0I79
Sample Number 0070229-05
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 14 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.012 0.002 man- 1.00 07/14/20 17:43 EPA 200.8 TLT B000179
PO Box 5655 Greenvale,SC 29605 426 Fairforest Wty Greenville.SC 29607 ma,n 864,232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
Itrr,empIoyeF-uwne.l ccsmp.ariy
07/16/2020 f 6:33 This report may not he repm hrced.except or hilt,without urinrcrr permission from Rogers&Collcoit Inc Page 4 of 17

-7---*‘\ Rogers &Callcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Number 0070229-06
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 21 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.018 0.002 sight, 1.00 07/14/20 17:47 EPA 200.8 TLT 130G0179
Sample Number 0070229-07
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 21 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.018 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 17:51 EPA 200.8 TLT B000I79
Sample Number 0070229-08
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 32 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.028 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 18:05 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-09
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 32 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.026 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 18:10 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-10
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 49 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Volts DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.044 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 18:14 EPA 200.8 TLT B0G0179
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 2%06 426 Fairtorzsr Way Greenville,SC 29607 m-m 864.2321556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
en 110V,.-'wined company
0711612020 16:33 Thts report nroy not be reproduced,except to fall,without written permission from Rogers&Calico",Inc; Page 5 of 17

Rogers &Cattcott
C ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Number 0070229-1 I
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water49 Filtered collected an 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.042 0.002 n'glL 1.00 07/14/20 18:18 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-12
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 75 collected on 06/30/20 12.30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.066 0.002 malt, 1.00 07/14/20 18:22 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-13
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 75 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.062 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 18:27 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-14
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 116 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Vohs DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.096 0.002 ms/t, 1.00 07/14/20 18:31 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-15
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Lab Water 116 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.110 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 18:35 EPA200.8 TLT B0G0179
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fan-forest Way Greenville,SC 29607 rm,n 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
int employ:-.utvnn I company
07/16/2020 16 33 This report may not be reproduced,ercepi in Elul,wlrhont written permission/iivm Rogers&Calkcotr,hie, Page 6 of 17

rm Rogers &Callcott
j ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Number 0070229-16
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 49 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analysed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.055 0.002 mg1L 1.00 07/14/20 18:40 EPA200.8 TLT BUG0179
Sample Number 0070229-17
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 49 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.052 0.002 n g/l. I.00 07/14/20 18:44 EPA 2008. TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229.18
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 75 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DE Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.083 0.002 tug/L 1.00 07/14/20 18:58 EPA 2200,8 TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-19
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 75 Filtered collected on 06/3020 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.078 0.002 mg/L 1,00 07/14/20 19:02 EPA 200.E TLT B0G0179
Sample Number 0070229-20
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Sttnstream 116 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.120 0.002 mg/L 1 00 07/14/20 17:14 EPA 200.8 TLT B0G0179
PG Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairlorest Way Greenville,SC 29607 ,warn 864.232.1556 ins 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
,11 5mp10y-,r-a+mcvI I c)r p,tny
07/16/2020 16:33 This report may not be reproduced.except in jrdl,without written permission from Rogerr&CaUcott.Inca Page 7 of 17

- Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Number 0070229-21
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 116 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.091 0,002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 20:13 EPA 200.8 TLT BOG0180
Sample Number 0070229-22
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream]79 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.175 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 20:17 EPA 200.8 TLT BOG0180
Sample Number 0070229-23
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstrcam 179 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.166 0.002 owl. 1.00 07/14/20 20:22 EPA200,8 TLT BOG0180
Sample Number 0070229-24
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 275 collected on 06/30/20 12.30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.271 0.002 rBIL 1.00 07/14/20 20.26 EPA 200-8 TLT BOG0180
Sample Number 0070229-25
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 275 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units OF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.250 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 20:30 EPA 200.8 TLT BOG0180
PO Box 5655 GreenviI k.SC 29606 426 Fairforesc Way Grecnvillc,SC 29607 mart.864.232.1556 ,ax 864.232.6140 rogersandealleott.com
an nnoi,, ,-ov n;acl crmi)any
07/16/2010 16:Ji Tins report may not be reptrrduced,&crept In full,without ururen permission from Rogers&CMlcoft.Inc, Page 8 of 1 7

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Number 0070229-26
Sample Description ETS tnc Sutton WER-Simstream 423 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.404 0,002 mg11- 1.00 07/14/20 20:35 EPA'200.8 TLT 130G0180
Sample Number 0070229-27
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 423 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.372 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 20:49 EPA 200.8 TLT 60G0180
Sample Number 0070229-28
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simsiream 650 collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DF Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.627 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 20:53 EPA 200.8 TLT BOG0180
Sample Number 0070229-29
Sample Description ETS Inc Sutton WER-Simstream 650 Filtered collected on 06/30/20 12:30
Reporting
Parameter Result Limit Units DE Analyzed Method Flag Analyst Batch
Total Metals
Copper 0.583 0.002 mg/L 1.00 07/14/20 20:57 EPA 200 8 TLT BOGO 180
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 miss 864.232.1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an s=mptoy,,e-owned company
07/16/2020 16:33 This tepoee may not be reproduced,except in full,without written permission front Rogers st Ca/Icao.Inc. Page 9 of 17

1 Rogers &Cattcott
4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Repotting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result *AR EC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch BOG0179-EPA 200.8
Blank(BOG0179-BLKI)
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L
LCS(BOG0179-BSI)
Copper 0.219 0,002 mg&L 0,200 109 85-115
LCS Dup(BOG0179-BSDI)
Copper 0.218 0.002 mgli 0.200 109 85-115 0.3 200
Duplicate(BOG0179-DUPI) Source:0070229-01
Copper ND 0.002 mg/L ND 20
plicate(B0G0179-01JP2) Source:0070229-20 1
a.opper 0.119 0.002 mg/L 0.120 I 20
Matrix Spike(B0G0179-MS1) Source:0070229-01
Copper 0.207 0.002 mg/L 0.200 ND 104 70-130
Matrix Spike(B0G0179-MS2) Source:0070229-20
Copper 0.314 0.002 mg/I, 0.200 0.120 97 70-110
Post Spike(B0G0179-PSI) Source:0070229-01
Copper 0.271 mg/L 0.250 NO 108 75-125
Post Spike(B0G0179-PS2) Source:0070229-20
Copper 0.372 mg/L 0,250 0.120 tOt 75-125
Batch BOG0180-EPA 200.8
Blank(BOGOI8O-BLt(1)
Copper ND 0,002 mgfI
LCS(B0G0180-BSI)
Copper 0.211 0.002 mg/L 0.200 105 85-115
—
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 mlal 864.232,1556 fax [phone] rogersandcallcott.com
an eml/oyee-osrnerl-ompany,
07/f 6/2020 16.33 Thu report may nor be reprnrluced,except in j+rll,without written perrrrdsnon,/mrn Rogers&Cal/con.Inc. Page 10 of 17

Rogers &Callcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Total Metals
Quality Control Summary
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Parameter Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Flags
Batch BOG0180-EPA 200.8
LCS Dup(BOGOISO-BSDI)
Copper 0.21E 0,002 mg/L 0.200 106 85-115 0.4 200
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 m n 66..1232 1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
ter employae-owned company
07/16/2020 /6r33 This report may not he r'eprndrrcc'd,creep/in frill,without Written permission from Rogers&Collcott.Jnc. Page 11 of 17

., Rogers &Callcott
,' ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
331 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
Asheville,NC 28801-4310 Reported: 07/16/20 16:33
Sample Preparation Data
Parameter Batch Sample ll) Prepared Analyst
EPA 200.8 Metal Digestion
EPA200.8 B000179 0070229-01 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR 11
EPA 200.8 B000179 0070229-02 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 B000179 0070229-03 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 B0G0179 0070229-04 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 00G0179 0070229-05 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200,8 8000179 0070229-06 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 00G0179 0070229-07 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000179 0070229-08 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000179 0070229-09 07/07/2020 0955 MLR
EPA200.8 13000179 0070229-10 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000179 0070229-11 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR.
EPA200.8 BOG0179 0070229-12 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 8000179 0070229-13 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000179 0070229-14 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000179 0070229-15 07/07/2020 09:55 lv1LR
EPA200.8 8000179 0070229-16 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000179 0070229-17 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 8000179 0070229-18 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 8000179 0070229-19 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000179 0070229-20 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 0000180 0070229-21 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 13000180 0070229-22 07/07/2020 09;55 MLR
EPA 200.8 0000180 0070229-23 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 8000180 0070229-24 07/07/2020 09:53 MLR
EPA 200.8 0000180 0070229.25 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA 200.8 0000180 0070229-26 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 8000180 0070229-27 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
EPA200.8 8000180 0070229-28 07/07/2020 09:53 MLR
EPA 200 8 6000180 0070229-29 07/07/2020 09:55 MLR
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 m;,tr2 864.232.1556 tax 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
der emldsry:?e.own t^rl.armpany
07/16/2O20 16 33 This report may not be reproduced,except in lull,without written permission from Rogers&Coficmt.Ine. Page 12 of 17

Rogers &Cattcott
ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
351 Depot St. Work Order: 0070229
v' _q
Asheville,NC 2$$O1 310 Reported: 07I16J20 16:33
Data Qualifiers and Definitions
ND Analyte NOT DETECTED at or above the reporting limit
NR Not reported
RED Relative Percent Difference
PO Box 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforest Way Greenville,SC 29607 main 864,232.1556 flx 864-232.6140 rOgersandcallcott.com
an employer-trained company
07/1613020 16:33 This report May not be reproduced,except in full,without tt tten permission from Rogers&Calleott,Inc. Page 13 of 17

Ir-
a Rogers & Callcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER 00-707.2..01
�-,--,- ENVIRONMENTAL Filtered�e/S N
Malting PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Falrforest Way 2150 Stonerldge Drive Cooled(Yes/g. f
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,SC 29210 Container Type(_IP a8 1c IGlass)
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone] /
Client Name Container Volume(mL) 250
Address I .1 1` _ Sample Type(�rab/ omposite)
/ / c C IN Sample Source GW,OW,SW,S, Other)
ca
Report To: o Preservation Code(s)
U
Email Address o -a A—None E—HCI I—ZnAcetate
v
v B-HNO3 F—Na2S20a J—H3PO4
Telephone# E a C—H2SO4 G—Boric Acid K-MCAA
PO#t Project# z : D—NaOH H—Ascorbic Acid L-
J v
R&C YR_ Fa 2:2
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION °-
r--. COMMENTS
-D) Up ,70 113° D: (ukc-&/ - Q t 4 tz LT . (qC
-07. 1 Labwod--_er �. I 1
-03 Q-► t d SU I" (A) 'z
—oLt i�
-ems II Lf _PL d
-ci`i } 2,�rt, t1
1 b u,,, I , . ,
to I Liel
SAMP R-RE NOUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
1. r- ,� CYO 3e► '0 Composite Start Date:
RELI QUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3 -MIA) 17),11-) 4- h. -7.I..to ti-,i 0 Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
5 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection °C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt iD 'C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: I ]Non-Hazard l Flammable skin Irritant Poison (Unknown FlOther Form Revised July,2014 Page F
1 Page 14of17

, pi__ ,3
` ' Rogers &Callcotti�
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER Q� Z O
ENVIRONMENTAL Filtered Y No}
Mailing PO Box 5655 Shipping 426 Falrforest Way2 Cooled(Yes/i(o)
159 StonPridge Drive .
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address: Greenville,SC 29607 Columbia,SC 29210 Container Type asti Glass)
Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone]
- t(_
Container Volume(mL) '2. )
Client Name
Address Sample Type(G ab/_ mposite)
/► ..
' 2( C c Sample Source( , W,OW,SW,S, Other)
Report To: a Preservation Code(s)
Email 0 -7 A—None E—NCI I—ZnAcetate
B—HNO3 F—NazSzOs 1—H3PO4
Telephone# a C—H,SO4 G—BoricAdd K-MCAA
E
PO# Pro eCt# z u D—NaOH H—Ascorbic Add L-
1E
R&C YR Y° m
o 'T)
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION )-- a-
COMMENTS
_ %
U
"
IS I
_ i, ''(mil
—1b , 1m liwAni £4
-17 yq i , - , I
-t9.. /5
-tc`i 15 41'Wti el „
10 •
s
SAMPLER/-RELINQ ISHFD BY: DATE/TIME: ZECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
O
1. (a Fr„II, „ 0(03024 Composite Start Date:
R IJ JQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3 eak.. 00 1 1.10 i31° 4 ?.as) 1310 Time or Flow (Circle one) Initials:
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: fr DATE/TIME:
S 6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection •C
7. 8. At time of lab receipt 25¶ -C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: nNon-Hazard ❑Flammable nskin Irritant Poison I nknown [}Other Form Revised July,2014 Page of
Page 15 of 17

r;-- , A303
0). - -1 Rogers &Caltcott CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD WORK ORDER Oo702"/51
,_,• -{ 4:1 ENVIRONMENTAL Faltered bs 1O
MailingPO Box 5655 ShippingCooled(Yes/ o)426 Fairforest Way 2158 Stoneridge Drive
Address: Greenville,SC 29606 Address; Greenville,SC29607 Columbia,SC 29210 Container Type stl Glass)Phone[phone] Fax[phone] Phone[phone]
Container Volume mL
Client Name { } 2�
IIIMIIIIIIIIIIII Sample Type ab mposite)
Address t00
A t/r Sample Source ,GW,DW,SW,S, Other)
�I l`I v c
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Report To: o Preservation Code(s)
Email Address a -3 A—None E—HCI I—ZnAcetate
a B—HNOa F—NazSzOa 1—H3POa
Telephone# E C H2SO4 G—Boric Acid K-MCAA
D—NaOH H—Ascorbic Geld L-
PO# Project# Z E
R&C VR o A
a.
WORK ORDER DATE TIME SAMPLE DESCRIPTION i— COMMENTS
—72 01,3M) 12.3D 5 e(y7 Sheet n iwIE,ciL, L. C s-. , QC
_ ill .flW7td . s U fur, Loot--
, IMMO
•. ;-t-, .
sq.. Ita3
--2" 1 ► U,SU...ei
SAMPLER—RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEI�D BY: DATE/TIME:
1. �� 6.D5 V b r' ,,, 2i] 2: 1-- dt ,o 0( 30 Composite Start Date:
RELIN ISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: Composite Start Time:
3. /e ` -1,7.0 t'?,i la ¢• "tivipc ' �I`
RELINQUISHED BY ' " ""' l ll� Time or Flow (Circle ones Initials:DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME:
S.
6. Temperature of blank or representative sample
RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME: RECEIVED BY: DATE/TIME: At time of collection aC
?• 8• At time of lab receipt 25•$ • ®C
Possible Hazards associated with samples: El Non-Hazard Flammable Skin Irritant I I Poiso Unknown I Other Farm Revised July,2014 Page f
Page 16 of 17

Rogers & aUc1Ott
O,„r
I-i"-- EI V(kd 1r1ENTAL
Sample Receipt Verification
Date �},� Work
Client: 2,m Received: 1'1* ) Order: 0010` ,2,
Carrier Name: Client FedEx UPS US Mail Courier Field Services Other:
Tracking Number: L4 6 it SS11 SO'-
Y N N
Receipt Criteria a Comments
o A
s
Shipping container/cooler intact? x Damaged Leaking Other:
Custody seals intact? h
COC included with samples?
COC signed when relinquished and received? Y.
Sample bottles intact? X Damaged Leaking Other:
Sample ID on COC agree with label on bottle(s)?
Date/time on COC agree with label on bottle(s)? X
Number of bottles on COC agrees with number of bottles received? X
Samples received within holding time?
Sample volume sufficient for analysis? X
VOA vials free of headspace(<6mm bubble)? h/
Samples cooled? Temp at receipt recorded on COC x Ice Cold Packs Dry Ice ` e->
Temp measured with IR thermometer-SN:97050067
Samples requiring pH preservation at proper pH?
Note: Samples for metals analysis may be preserved upon receipt in the lab.
Note: Samples for O&G and VOA analysis—preservation checked at bench.
Samples dechlorinated for parameters requiring chlorine removal at
the time of sample collection? K
Note: Chlorine checked at bench for samples requiring Bacterial,VGA,and HAA
analysis.
If in-house preservation used — record Lot#
HCL H3PO4
H2SO4 NaOU
FLNO, Other
Comments:
Were non-conformance issues noted at sample receipt? Yes or Na
Non-Conformance issue other than noted above:
Revised February 2018 Completed by:
Page 17 of 17

C A. ••OF- UST / Ana ytica u t
off!
St
Client Name: l.'(j I. ii• C..
Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: _y 1,..1 WE — Cy` Re uested Analyses
Project Number: INIINIIIIII0111111111111111EIMIZEI
ir �j� Ch F 0,2 me Upon Receipt
_ _ Preservatives
1
6.
Sample Identification •�• I
J J pa G ..l :J ?'j :.I�, ° f U o.24 f •s b 4n T `r C H t.1 / Ptelcl.v a+ •� wT �r
Z WA�.rC. — V„IZ & •UB,?�- Vl II1
Temp.( Comments
LAb WAT'Qi... Xliii
MN
in v-k &- tt0e2S 0. 1 1 /IIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIMIIIIII
6 .
Sax)ple c ii le� apt IR
Temperature("C) p- 1� E 6.-30.1' 1 tIO � 00 /24
Received on Ice: Y N 11111111111111111111
f
Sealed Cooler: Y N 1111111111111111
Samples Intact: ! N
Additional Comments: OaniplerV aot g> 1_ ,: -
Printed Name of Sampler: -0 UQ-ail,_ 3D to
M Q�'
Signature of Sampler: dt..----------- 1

0
* CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
Client Name: (-7)---c /
Address:
Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: 1,..Tcco..1-v3E_R... CiA,_ IRe(nested Analyses
Project Number: . ----aVL----S310
74. / pll Checked Upon Receipt
CI,<0.2 nwl Upon Receipt
1 Pr2servatives
I , 7
_
4., a 7.:: — Ti f~
17 Sample Identification "g ., 2 .7 ...,-; .-- z 8
.i; ?:-. ;-..1 ,0' 2 ? .:-'
.i. 0 -: 9,
L'.; :z... C? 7 .-. r, -, , 6,
$4 7 24 -:.; c3 §. 9., i L-.? c-,,,,. '',/, ty
/ /Field
M S E::: 7-....."- :..., -..7, -.7_.' = = .;--:: 2 Temp.cc) Comments
uNEmes-k-eit..
—6 c‘vreAm G- ,,i$;#2.4; 04) 01.-30-1-o rty) t \ )1- IIIII
.......
, —
5/_ f% .-re4/1.' C7 t200636 4)0 1 k \ )4
'A 4)
G. e20083) .) \ \ .>‘' 11111
LIS
\ \ IIIIIIII
111!11111:11111111 C3 IC("33 v) i ‘1 \ \ IIIIII
SampieConclitionthinn ite4int,11414k'taiT-_-:iI,„,,,,,,;;ICqf/iWtLlafZ-Dirrr.;T.tt:'riWkA)Stkvtol -74- :::AAlti7W-XZAftrXsl:-Tb'io
Temperature(CC) A j/4
W .CS 0(a* O*10 CLIO 1A---- t:_ 010302a I 2)4 0
Received on Ice' Y i 01
Sealed Cooler: Y I 01
Samples Intact: V / N
Additional Comments: -0,,,vifitifilit , .,,,..,,,..,,,,, ,--„,, ,,,,,,,,i;n"..,",if,'-'NO' ;,'
Printed Name of Sampler:
Z-S‘)VAIJeld— 04'30-10
Signature of Sampler:

' Ur J
CIA •OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
�
= Client Name: CNS it.( ,
t
Address:
.' Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc. Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone],Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: S,cp,J LI3E& C,,.., Re nested Anal ses
Project Number: 0200 41,3353(p pH Checked I Ipan Receipt
CI <62 meft Upon Receipt
Preservatives
G ,, JS 0
Sample Identification U it Q 4
e U a c 5 , = y
a a C c Q `:
Z i s ke Ue UL -2 o 97
E a E t � e c a O O sn Reid
2, ti * A 2 F -- :3 4' z -2 Temp.CC) Comments
I -IS - Ft cr tt€b Fr 260e3t1 d.-33.to two ‘ \ �C
,,ti, Cx- 0003S obi I t
t
4 it.i rite M 4q 4 atOen >la ‘ 1 )<
5 4' F‘vratt CI- tztoew 0 t
{ rr 2 4'1) N., \ \ k
Sample Condition Upon Receipt 'Relinquished By !Company Date (..,..;Tune' 'Accepted By 'Compaq}` I Data 1 rime
N.A. ,/mot
Temperature(°C) f
(:).-- ET.S Ot.-31r1p alb I Oi Zt i2 c)
Received on Ice: Y /
Sealed Cooler: rV /,'D
Samples Intact: ty.) / N
Additional Comments: Sampler Name and Signature I Date
Printed Name of Sampler:
3SJ M t 0b—.3a• ,
Signature of Sampler.
I-0N._

• _ . . . �� 5
)
• A - '- / A ical R e Request
Client Name: 1t3 C
{, Address:
. Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville,NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: j d'+..) WEe, t t Requested Analyses
Project Number: / /
prt cn��t;ed upon kept
Ct,-02 mkt Upon:ce:it
Preservatives
I.
C
r
a Sample Identification _ 'r ;n -
1. "•�• j .�. (rl �.•�',.' �,�} C+ •� -, r:
c0 „ = m n W ., (.J C U O �: Field
= 'Temp.("C) Comments
i s,MSTVAK is- Ftv ett! G.- 02606Nt� t. o
moto061/44) ,).)
\ \ x IN
3 ttb F•ij..\-eltesb ( - oZOa42 �� ‘ \ X 4< ,lq }v013 ,,,.) \
-- Xr
0 v 2.-I5 cr 2OO61 ' ,p , `
K
,S unplc.Conditiu„Upon Receipt IRGelinquished Cs} : iCatnpanY I Date Time IAcceptid r .,_ .:: ; '. "
Temperature(°C)
Ni9 �.q._- Ems, 04.39-70 MO t c 3(1 2u ZVO
Received on Ice: Y /
Sealed Cooler: Y 1'.y���� C�
Samples Intact: I N
Additional Comments: fitir.n;
4 4� r „ ."'- °Id
Printed Name of Sampler:
Signature of Sampler: '

( oc )
CHA -OF-CUSTODY / Analytical Request
Client Name: V ` 0.3C
Address:
4g Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Report to:
PO Box 7565,Asheville, NC 28802 Phone: Fax:
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone] PO Number:
Project Name: V WE Ckwe_ )
Re rested Analyses
Project Number: U
/ / p}I Checked Upon Receipt
Ch<0.2 melt Upon Receipt
Preservatives
E. .. -7 J
Sample Identification 5. 1.. >.
Il f n a E = L, z u ° `p V� yield
u :n I z A v i s 3L 3 = z z Temp.CC) Comments
1 S t NS' A r F'i� N i0 x
+� r�G o�,4f� � at.... -to n.3 \ \
Lk t; ti0v8�t v),) \ \ X
423 5,>s� , (r bl°°818 j 1
X
5 IoSO Flt-ree ff 2OOgSD sA4) ; \ `
5 l �C
at
Sample Condition Upon.Receipt Rclitxtuishec U Company; Date Accented ' p._
Y � � � Time � � Y CCoriSpah)` � Mlle I• rime
Temperature(DC) �,{�-� (:).----"---- ,\ S , p 0011i1P t,., a e-r)s o l Z�J
Received on Ice: Y / /N1 `
Scaled Cooler: Y /��/
Samples Intact- ' .J N
Additional Comments:
sSEIMPIstlV e-ili _ ., „i, ; Dale
Printed Name of Sampler:
Q1-t+-e/2_ 01.:0•2o
Signature of Samplercy...------:
r

Rogers &Cattcott :` I
ENVIRONMENTAL "
Laboratory Report
Client Environmental Testing Solutions Project: ETS Inc
Kelley E.Keenan Work Order: 0070466
351 Depot St. Received: 07/07/2020 12:45
Asheville,NC 28801-4310
Dear Client:
Rogers and Callcott appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you. The attached laboratory services report includes analytical results and chain of
custody for samples that were received on duly 07,2020. Rogers and Callcott maintains a formal QA'QC program. Unless otherwise noted,all analyses
performed under NELAP certification have complied with all the requirements for the TNI standard The analyses met the QA/QC confidence interval
for each test method unless otherwise qualified. Estimated uncertainty is available upon request.
Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this report and is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee,or
the person responsible for delivering to the person addressed,you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone else. If you receive this message by
mistake,please notify Rogers and Callcott immediately.
We strive to provide excellent service to our clients. Please contact Lauren Hollister. your Project Manager,at [e-mail],
(864)-232.1556 if you have any questions about this report.
•
Report Approved By:
cz'avitaktgeutt
Lauren Hollister
Project Manager
This report may not be reproduced.except in fid!,without uriuen permission from Rogers&Callcoa.Inc.
PO Cox 5655 Greenville,SC 29606 426 Fairforesc Way GreerivilL.SC 29607 rrn n 864.232.1556 to 864.232.6140 rogersandcallcott.com
an employ'employw owned company
Page 1 of 10