NC0003433_J15060672F_20150902

+ DUKE Analytical Laboratory Page 1of31
ENERGY
Order Number:
Project Name:
Customer Name(s):
Customer Address:
Lab Contact:
Report Authorized By:
(Signature)
Program Comments:
13339 Hagers Ferry Road
Huntersville, NC 28078-7929
McGuire Nuclear Complex - MG03A2
Phone:[phone] Fax:[phone]
Order Summary Report
J15060672
CAPE FEAR - AB GW ASSESSMENT SPECIATION
Tim Hunsucker, Chris Suttell, Kathy Webb, John Toepfer
Peggy Kendall p eggY• kendalQlne:
uke-energy.com Date:
201-5.08.03
Peggy Kendall 13:29:39-04'00'
Please contact the Program Manager (Peggy Kendall) with any questions regarding this report.
Data Flags & Calculations:
8/3/2015
Any analytical tests or individual analytes within a test flagged with a Qualifier indicate a deviation from the method quality
system or quality control requirement. The qualifier description is found at the end of the Certificate of Analysis (sample results)
under the qualifiers heading. All results are reported on a dry weight basis unless otherwise noted. Subcontracted data
included on the Duke Certificate of Analysis is to be used as information only. Certified vendor results can be found in the
subcontracted lab final report. Duke Energy Analytical Laboratory subcontracts analyses to other vendor laboratories that have
been qualified by Duke Energy to perform these analyses except where noted.
Data Package:
This data package includes analytical results that are applicable only to the samples described in this narrative. An estimation of
the uncertainty of measurement for the results in the report is available upon request. This report shall not be reproduced, except
in full, without the written consent of the Analytical Laboratory. Please contact the Analytical laboratory with any questions. The
order of individual sections within this report is as follows:
Job Summary Report, Sample Identification, Technical Validation of Data Package, Analytical Laboratory Certificate of Analysis,
Analytical Laboratory QC Reports, Sub -contracted Laboratory Results, Customer Specific Data Sheets, Reports &
Documentation, Customer Database Entries, Test Case Narratives, Chain of Custody (COC)
Certification:
The Analytical Laboratory holds the following State Certifications : North Carolina (DENR) Certificate #248, South Carolina
(DHEC) Laboratory ID # 99005. Contact the Analytical Laboratory for definitive information about the certification status of
specific methods.

Sample ID's & Descriptions:
Collection
Sample ID Plant/Station Date and Time
Collected By
Sample Description
2015020258
Cape
Fear
17-Jun-15
1:05
PM
Kyle
Donovan
CTMW-8
2015020259
Cape
Fear
17-Jun-15
4:28
PM
Kyle
Donovan
CMW-1
2015020260
Cape
Fear
17-Jun-15
3:40
PM
Kyle
Donovan
CMW-8
2015020261
Cape
Fear
17-Jun-15
9:50
AM
Kyle
Donovan
MW-9BR
2015020262
Cape
Fear
17-Jun-15
9:42
AM
Kyle
Donovan
MW-10
2015020263
Cape
Fear
17-Jun-15
10:36
AM
Kyle
Donovan
MW-9
6 Total Samples
Page 2 of 31

Page 3 of 31
Technical Validation Review
Checklist:
COC and .pdf report are in agreement with sample totals Yes No
and analyses (compliance programs and procedures).
All Results are less than the laboratory reporting limits. ❑ Yes❑ No
All laboratory QA/QC requirements are acceptable.❑ Yes ❑ No
Report Sections Included:
U Job Summary Report
❑ Sample Identification
n Technical Validation of Data Package
❑ Analytical Laboratory Certificate of Analysis
❑ Analytical Laboratory QC Report
Sub -contracted Laboratory Results
❑ Customer Specific Data Sheets, Reports, & Documentation
❑ Customer Database Entries
66 Chain of Custody
[I/0] Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Sent Separately
Reviewed By: Peggy Kendall Date: 8/3/2015

Certificate of Laboratory Analysis Page 4 of 31
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order # J15060672
Site: CTMW-8
Collection Date: 17-Jun-15 1:05 PM
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF
Speciation of an Element - (Analysis Performed by Brooks Rand Labs LLC)
Vendor Parameter Complete
Sample #: 2015020258
Matrix: GW WW
Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
Vendor Method V_BRAND

Certificate of Laboratory Analysis Page 5 of 31
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order # J15060672
Site: CMW-1
Collection Date: 17-Jun-15 4:28 PM
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF
Speciation of an Element - (Analysis Performed by Brooks Rand Labs LLC)
Vendor Parameter Complete
Sample #: 2015020259
Matrix: GW WW
Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
Vendor Method V_BRAND

Certificate of Laboratory Analysis Page 6 of 31
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order # J15060672
Site: CMW-8
Collection Date: 17-Jun-15 3:40 PM
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF
Speciation of an Element - (Analysis Performed by Brooks Rand Labs LLC)
Vendor Parameter Complete
Sample #: 2015020260
Matrix: GW WW
Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
Vendor Method V_BRAND

Certificate of Laboratory Analysis Page 7 of 31
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order # J15060672
Site: MW-9BR
Collection Date: 17-Jun-15 9:50 AM
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF
Speciation of an Element - (Analysis Performed by Brooks Rand Labs LLC)
Vendor Parameter Complete
Sample #: 2015020261
Matrix: GW WW
Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
Vendor Method V_BRAND

Certificate of Laboratory Analysis Page 8 of 31
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order # J15060672
Site: MW-10
Collection Date: 17-Jun-15 9:42 AM
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF
Speciation of an Element - (Analysis Performed by Brooks Rand Labs LLC)
Vendor Parameter Complete
Sample #: 2015020262
Matrix: GW WW
Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
Vendor Method V_BRAND

Certificate of Laboratory Analysis
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
Order # J15060672
Site: MW-9
Collection Date: 17-Jun-15 10:36 AM
Analyte Result Units Qualifiers RDL DF
Speciation of an Element - (Analysis Performed by Brooks Rand Labs LLC)
Vendor Parameter Complete
Sample #: 2015020263
Matrix: GW WW
Page 9 of 31
Method Analysis Date/Time Analyst
Vendor Method V_BRAND

Page 10 of 31
BRO�©KS
RAND
LABS
MEANINGFUL METALS DATA
July 31, 2015
Peggy Kendall
Duke Energy Analytical Laboratory
Mail Code MGO3A2 (Building 7405)
13339 Hagers Ferry Rd.
Huntersville, NC 28078
[phone]
Project: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear (LIMS# J15060672)
Ms. Kendall,
Attached is the report associated with six (6) aqueous samples submitted for hexavalent
chromium, selenium speciation, arsenic speciation, iron speciation, and manganese speciation
analyses on June 17, 2015. The samples were received in a sealed cooler at 0.2°C on June 18,
2015. Hexavalent chromium analysis was performed by ion chromatography inductively
coupled plasma dynamic reaction cell mass spectrometry (IC-ICP-DRC-MS). Arsenic speciation
analyses were performed via ion chromatography inductively coupled plasma collision reaction
cell mass spectrometry (IC-ICP-CRC-MS). All samples requesting iron speciation analysis were
analyzed by spectrophotometry. Mn (II) and arsenic speciation analyses were performed via IC-
ICP-CRC-MS. Mn(IV) analysis were performed via digestion and subsequent analysis by
inductively coupled plasma triple quadrupole mass spectrometry (ICP-QQQ-MS). Any issues
associated with the analyses are addressed in the following report.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Maute
Project Manager
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
3958 6th Ave NW • Seattle, WA 98107 • T: 206-632-6206 • F: 206-632-6017 • www.brooksrand.com • [e-mail]

Page 11 of 31
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Report prepared for:
Peggy Kendall
Duke Energy Analytical Laboratory
Mail Code MGO3A2 (Building 7405)
13339 Hagers Ferry Rd.
Huntersville, NC 28078
Project: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear (LIMS# J15060672)
July 31, 2015
1. Sample Reception
Six (6) aqueous samples were submitted for hexavalent chromium, selenium speciation,
arsenic speciation, iron speciation, and manganese speciation analyses on June 17, 2015. All
samples were received in acceptable condition on June 18, 2015 in a sealed container at
0.2°C.
The client instructed Brooks Rand Labs to cancel selenium speciation analyses for all client
samples in this sampling event. The chain of custody form reflects selenium speciation as a
target analyte; however, no selenium speciation results were reported in accordance with the
client's instructions.
All samples were received in a laminar flow clean hood, void of trace metals contamination
and ultra -violet radiation, and were designated discrete sample identifiers. Sample fractions
requesting hexavalent chromium, selenium speciation, arsenic speciation, and iron speciation
analyses were field filtered by the client. Two containers were submitted for each client
sample requesting manganese speciation, one field filtered fraction and one unfiltered
fraction. An aliquot of each sample submitted for hexavalent chromium analysis was filtered
into a clean polypropylene tube. All hexavalent chromium sample fractions were stored in a
secure refrigerator maintained at a temperature of 4°C, until the analyses could be performed.
An aliquot of each sample submitted for arsenic speciation analysis was filtered (0.45µm)
into a polypropylene centrifuge tube; all filtrates and original bottles were then stored in a
secure, monitored refrigerator (maintained at a temperature of <6°C) until the analyses could
be performed.
The sample fractions requesting iron speciation analysis were stored in a secure, monitored
refrigerator (maintained at a temperature of <6°C) until the analyses could be performed.
An aliquot of each filtered sample submitted for manganese speciation analysis was decanted
into a polypropylene centrifuge tube for Mn(II) analysis. These fractions were stored in a

Page 12 of 31
secure, monitored refrigerator (maintained at a temperature of <6°C) until the analyses could
be performed. Subsequently, the original bottles (filtered and unfiltered fractions) intended
for Mn speciation were preserved to pH < 2 with concentrated HNO3 and then stored in a
secure polyethylene container, known to be free from trace metals contamination, until the
digestion could be performed.
2. Sample Preparation
All sample preparation is performed in laminar flow clean hoods known to be free from trace
metals contamination. All applied water for dilutions and sample preservatives are
monitored for contamination to account for any biases associated with the sample results.
Hexavalent Chromium Analysis by IC-ICP-DRC-MS Prior to analysis, an aliquot of each
sample was filtered with a syringe filter (0.45µm) and injected directly into a sealed
autosampler vial. No further sample preparation was performed as any chemical alteration of
a sample may shift the equilibrium of the system, resulting in changes in speciation ratios.
Arsenic Speciation Analysis by IC-ICP-CRC-MS An aliquot of each sample was filtered
directly into a sealed autosampler vial. No further sample preparation was performed as a
buffered EDTA solution was provided by Brooks Rand Labs for field -preservation of the
submitted samples.
Iron Speciation Analysis by Spectrophotometrx No sample preparation was required as a de -
gassed HCL solution was provided by Brooks Rand Labs for field -preservation of the
submitted samples.
Manganese Mn(II) Analysis by IC-ICP-CRC-MS An aliquot of each sample was filtered
(0.45µm) directly into an autosampler vial for Mn(II) analysis. No additional sample
preparation was performed as any chemical alteration of the samples may shift the
equilibrium of the system resulting in changes in speciation ratios.
Manganese Mn(17 Analysis by ICP-QQQ-MS Each filtered and unfiltered sample submitted
for Mn speciation analysis was preserved with 1 % HNO3 (v/v) upon sample receipt. Each
sample fraction was then further digested on a hotblock apparatus with aliquots of 50%
HNO3 (v/v) and 50% HCl (v/v), in accordance with the digestion procedure specified in EPA
Method 200.8. All resulting sample digests were analyzed for total manganese via
inductively coupled plasma triple quadrupole mass spectrometry (ICP-QQQ-MS).
I Sample Analysis
All sample analysis is preceded by a minimum of a five -point calibration curve spanning the
entire concentration range of interest. Calibration curves are performed at the beginning of
each analytical day. All calibration curves, associated with each species of interest, are
standardized by linear regression resulting in a response factor. All sample results are

Page 13 of 31
instrument blank corrected to account for any operational biases associated with the
analytical platform.
Prior to sample analysis, all calibration curves are verified using second source standards
which are identified as initial calibration verification standards (ICV).
Ongoing instrument performance is identified by the analysis of continuing calibration
verification standards (CCV) and continuing calibration blanks (CCB) at a minimum interval
of every ten analytical runs.
Hexavalent Chromium Analysis by IC-ICP-DRC-MS Each sample for hexavalent chromium
analysis was analyzed by ion chromatography inductively coupled plasma dynamic reaction
cell mass spectrometry (IC-ICP-DRC-MS) on June 23, 2015. An aliquot of each sample is
injected onto an anion exchange column and mobilized by a basic (pH > 7) gradient. The
eluting chromium species are then introduced into a radio frequency (RF) plasma where
energy -transfer processes cause desolvation, atomization, and ionization. The ions are
extracted from the plasma through a differentially -pumped vacuum interface and travel
through a pressurized chamber (DRC) containing a reaction gas which preferentially reacts
with interfering ions of the same target mass to charge ratios (m/z). A solid-state detector
detects ions transmitted through the mass analyzer and the resulting current is processed by a
data handling system.
Retention times for each eluting species are compared to known standards for species
identification.
Arsenic Speciation Analysis by IC-ICP-CRC-MS Each sample was analyzed for arsenic
speciation via ion chromatography inductively coupled plasma collision reaction cell mass
spectrometry (IC-ICP-CRC-MS) on June 27-28, 2015. Aliquots of each sample are injected
onto an anion exchange column and eluted isocratically. The eluting arsenic species are then
introduced into a radio frequency (RF) plasma where energy -transfer processes cause
desolvation, atomization, and ionization. The ions are extracted from the plasma through a
differentially -pumped vacuum interface and travel through a pressurized chamber (CRC)
containing a specific collision gas. Polyatomic interferences, due to their inherently larger
size, collide more frequently with the collision gas and therefore may be separated from the
analyte of interest via kinetic energy discrimination (KED). A solid-state detector detects
ions transmitted through the mass analyzer on the basis of their mass -to -charge ratio (m/z),
and the resulting current is processed by a data handling system.
Retention times for each eluting species are compared to known standards for species
identification.
Iron Speciation Analysis by Spectrophotometry All samples submitted for Fe speciation
quantification were analyzed for Fe(II) on June 18, 2015. The samples were analyzed for
total recoverable iron on July 14, 2015. Iron speciation analysis was completed in
accordance with the scientifically accepted method outlined by:

Page 14 of 31
Stookey, L.L., (1970). "Ferrozine - A new spectrophotometric reagent for iron",
Anal.Chem., 42:779-81.
Manganese Mn�I Analysis by IC-ICP-CRC-MS All samples for Mn(II) analysis were
analyzed by ion chromatography inductively coupled plasma collision reaction cell mass
spectrometry (IC-ICP-CRC-MS) on June 30, 2015. Aliquots of each sample are injected
onto an anion exchange column and mobilized by an acidic (pH < 7) gradient. An ion
pairing agent provides a dynamic ion exchange mechanism for the cationic manganese
species on the chromatographic column. The differences in the affinity of manganese species
towards the ion pair agent and the column results in separation. The eluting selenium species
are then introduced into a radio frequency (RF) plasma where energy -transfer processes
cause desolvation, atomization, and ionization. The ions are extracted from the plasma
through a differentially -pumped vacuum interface and travel through a pressurized chamber
(CRC) containing a reaction gas which preferentially reacts with interfering ions of the same
target mass to charge ratios (m/z). A solid-state detector detects ions transmitted through the
mass analyzer and the resulting current is processed by a data handling system.
Retention times for each eluting species are compared to known standards for species
identification.
Manganese Mn(II Analysis by ICP-QQQ-MS All samples submitted for Mn speciation
quantitation were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma triple quadrupole mass
spectrometry (ICP-QQQ-MS) on July 16, 2015. Aliquots of each sample digest are
introduced into a radio frequency (RF) plasma where energy -transfer processes cause
desolvation, atomization, and ionization. The ions are extracted from the plasma through a
differentially -pumped vacuum interface and travel through an initial quadrupole (Q1), which
filters the target masses prior to their entrance into a second chamber. The second chamber
contains specific reactive gasses or collision gasses that preferentially react either with
interfering ions of the same target mass to charge ratios (m/z) or with the target analyte,
producing an entirely different mass to charge ratio (m/z) which can then be differentiated
from the initial interferences. The ions then exit the collision/reaction cell into and additional
quadrupole (Q2). A solid-state detector detects ions transmitted through the mass analyzer,
on the basis of their mass -to -charge ratio (m/z), and the resulting current is processed by a
data handling system.
4. Analytical Issues
With the exceptions noted below, all quality control parameters associated with the samples
were within acceptance limits.
Mn(II) results for the client samples, MW-10 and MW-9, were inconsistent with the
associated dissolved manganese results, which should be sampled from the same containers.
Two containers were submitted for each client sample requesting manganese speciation, one
field filtered fraction and one unfiltered fraction. An aliquot of each filtered sample
submitted for manganese speciation analysis is decanted into a polypropylene centrifuge tube

Page 15 of 31
for Mn(II) analysis. The Mn(II) fractions for samples MW-10 and MW-9 appeared to be
swapped; the Mn(II) fractions were analyzed for total manganese for confirmation. An
analysis of the total metals results for several analytes was conducted and these results were
directly compared to dissolved metals results. The component analysis revealed that these
two Mn(II) fractions, MW-10 and MW-9, were mislabeled and were likely swapped at
sample reception when the Mn(II) fractions were decanted into new vessels for subsequent
Mn(II) analysis. Since Brooks Rand Labs is confident that the sample containers were
mislabeled, Mn(II) results for the client samples MW-10 and MW-9 were corrected to
account for the confirmed sample ID discrepancy. The raw instrument data indicates Mn(II)
results of 556 µg/L (sample MW-10) and 13400 µg/L sample MW-9). Whereas in this report
Mn(II) results of 13400 µg/L (sample MW-10) and 556 µg/L (sample MW-9) are used.
For Mn(II) analysis the client sample, identified as CMW-8, was analyzed as the quality
control sample. Mn(II) results were greater than the value of the associated high calibration
standard. A linear range verification standard was analyzed at 2000 µg/L. The Mn(II)
recovery for the linear range verification standard was acceptable, at 105.1 %, demonstrating
that the linear range of the analytical platform extended to 2000 µg/L for Mn(II). All
reported Mn(II) results were less than 2000 µg/L with the dilutions at the instrument
factored in, and thus were within the linear range demonstrated by the linear range
verification standard. No corrective actions were necessary and no qualification of data was
necessary.
The matrix spike duplicate sample (MSD) spike recovery for Mn(II) was below the lower
control limit of 75%, at 62.1%. The native Mn(II) concentration in the quality control
sample was significantly greater than the spiking level. Acceptable spike recoveries are often
not realized when the ambient level analyte concentration is greater than the spiking level.
No qualification of data was necessary.
Mn(IV) is quantified by analyzing the water samples for total Mn and dissolved Mn. Mn(IV)
is operationally defined as the difference between the filtered and unfiltered total Mn
concentrations, since it is thermodynamically favored to be in the form of a precipitate.
Total and dissolved manganese results for the client samples, identified as CMW-8 and
MW-10, were greater than the value of the associated high calibration standard. A linear
range verification standard was analyzed at 2000 µg/L. The manganese recovery for the
linear range verification standard was acceptable, at 100.0%, demonstrating that the linear
range of the analytical platform extended to 2000 µg/L for manganese. Total and dissolved
manganese results for CMW-8 and MW-10 were less than 2000 µg/L with the dilutions at the
instrument factored in, and thus were within the linear range demonstrated by the linear
range verification standard. No corrective actions were necessary and no qualification of
data was necessary.
The estimated method detection limit (eMDL) for hexavalent chromium is generated from
replicate analyses of the lowest standard in the calibration curve.

Page 16 of 31
The eMDL values for arsenite, arsenate, and dimethylarsinic acid are generated using the
standard deviation of replicate analyses of the lowest standard in the calibration curve. The
eMDL for monomethylarsonic acid is calculated from the average eMDL of the three arsenic
species contained in the calibration (i.e., arsenite, arsenate, and dimethylarsinic acid); the
calibration and CCVs do not contain monomethylarsonic acid due to impurities in this
standard which would bias the results for other arsenic species.
The eMDL values for Fe(II) and total recoverable Fe were set at 5 based on the sensitivity of
the instrument.
The eMDL for Mn(II) has been generated from replicate analyses of the lowest standard in
the calibration curve.
The eMDL values for Mn(IV) been calculated using the standard deviation of the method
blanks prepared and analyzed concurrently with the submitted samples.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Maute
Project Manager
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC

Page 17 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Sample Results (1
Sample ID
Cr(VI)
CTMW-8
ND (< 0.005)
CMW-1
ND (< 0.005)
CMW-8
ND (< 0.005)
MW-9BR
ND (< 0.005)
MW-10
0.007
MW-9
0.014
All results reflect the applied dilution and are reported in pg/L
ND = Not detected at the applied dilution

Page 18 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Sample Results (2)
Unknown As
Sample ID
As(III)
As(V)
MMAs
DMAs
Species
CTMW-8
3.67
1.42
ND (<0.053)
ND (<0.083)
ND (<0.053)
CMW-1
0.604
0.077
ND (<0.053)
ND (<0.083)
ND (<0.053)
CMW-8
0.201
ND (<0.028)
ND (<0.053)
ND (<0.083)
ND (<0.053)
MW-9BR
0.070
ND (<0.028)
ND (<0.053)
ND (<0.083)
ND (<0.053)
MW-10
0.071
ND (<0.028)
ND (<0.053)
ND (<0.083)
ND (<0.053)
MW-9
0.102
0.055
ND (<0.053)
ND (<0.083)
ND (<0.053)
All results reflect the applied dilution and are reported in Ng/L
MMAs = monomethylarsonic acid
DMAs = dimethylarsinic acid
Unknown As Species = Total concentration of all unknown As species observed by IC-ICP-MS

Page 19 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Sample Results (3
Sample ID
Fe(II)
Fe(III)*
Mn (II)
Mn(IV)**
CTMW-8
7620
ND (<500)
1270
ND (<0.19)
CMW-1
52600
ND (<500)
1170
ND (<0.19)
CMW-8
34000
1000
12000
ND (<0.19)
MW-9BR
431
ND (<5.0)
908
ND (<0.19)
MW-10
771
ND (<5.0)
13400
ND (<0.19)
MW-9
376
26.3
556
ND (<0.19)
All results reflect the applied dilution and are reported in pg/L
ND = Not detected at the applied dilution
*Fe(III) operationally defined as the difference between total recoverable Fe and Fe(II)
*Mn(IV) operationally defined as the difference between total and dissolved Mn

Page 20 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Quality Control Summary - Preparation Blank Summary (1)
Analyte (Ng/L) PBW1 PBW2 PBW3 PBW4 Mean StdDev eMDL* eMDL 5x RL 5x
Cr(VI) 0.004 0.000 0.001 -0.001 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.005 0.050
eMDL = Estimated Method Detection Limit; RL = Reporting Limit
*Please see narrative regarding eMDL calculations
Quality Control Summary - Preparation Blank Summary (2)
Analyte (Ng/L)
PBW1
PBW2
PBW3
PBW4
Mean
StdDev
eMDL*
eMDL 10x
RL 10x
As(III)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.005
0.049
0.20
As(V)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.028
0.20
MMAs
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.005
0.053
0.20
DMAs
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.083
0.21
eMDL = Estimated Method Detection Limit; RL = Reporting Limit
*Please see narrative regarding eMDL calculations

Page 21 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Quality Control Summary - Preparation Blank Summary (3)
Analyte (lag/L)
PBW1
PBW2
PBW3
PBW4
Mean
StdDev
eMDL**
eMDL 1x
RL 1x
eMDL 100x
RL 100x
Fe(I1)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
5.0
20
500
2000
Total Fe
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
5.0
20
500
2000
eMDL = Estimated Method Detection Limit; RL = Reporting Limit
**Please see narrative regarding eMDL calculations
Quality Control Summary - Preparation Blank Summary (3)
Analyte (lag/L)
PBW1
PBW2
PBW3
PBW4
Mean
StdDev
eMDL* eMDL 100x RL 100x eMDL 25x RL 25x
Mn (II)
-0.29
-0.25
-0.28
-0.30
-0.27
0.02
0.026 2.6 50 - -
Total Mn
-0.63
-0.74
-0.74
-0.77
-0.70
0.06
0.008 - - 0.19 1.0
Diss Mn
-0.774
-0.826
-0.824
-0.805
-0.808
0.024
0.003 - - 0.072 1.0
eMDL = Estimated Method Detection Limit; RL = Reporting Limit
*Please see narrative regarding eMDL calculations

Page 22 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Quality Control Summary - Certified Reference Materials (1
Analyte (lag/L)
CRM
True Value
Result
Recovery
Cr(VI)
LCS
2.002
1.967
98.2
Quality Control Summary
- Certified Reference Materials (2)
Analyte (lag/L)
CRM
True Value
Result
Recovery
As(III)
LCS
5.00
5.04
100.9
As(V)
LCS
5.00
4.58
91.6
MMAs
LCS
5.07
5.73
113.0
DMAs
LCS
3.63
3.51
96.8
Quality Control Summary
- Certified Reference Materials (3)
Analyte (lag/L)
CRM
True Value
Result
Recovery
Fe(II)
ICV
500.0
514.3
102.9
Total Fe
TMDA-70
369
402.5
109.1
Mn (II)
LCS
10.00
10.26
102.6
Total Mn
TMDA-70.2
312
310.2
99.4
Diss Mn
TMDA-70.2
312
302.6
97.0

Page 23 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Quality Control Summary - Matrix Duplicates (1)
Analyte (pg/L) Sample ID Rep 1 Rep 2 Mean RPD
ND = Not detected at the applied dilution
NC = Value was not calculated due to one or more concentrations below the eMDL
Quality Control Summary - Matrix Duplicates (2)
Analyte (pg/L)
Sample ID
Rep 1
Rep 2
Mean
RPD
As(III)
Batch QC
0.135
0.075
0.105
56.9*
As(V)
Batch QC
ND (<0.028)
ND (<0.028)
NC
NC
MMAs
Batch QC
ND (<0.053)
ND (<0.053)
NC
NC
DMAs
Batch QC
ND (<0.083)
ND (<0.083)
NC
NC
ND = Not detected at the applied dilution
NC = Value was not calculated due to one or more concentrations below the eMDL
*Results associated with RPD outlier are less than the reporting limit.

Page 24 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Qualitv Control Summary - Matrix Duplicates (3
Analyte (pg/L)
Sample ID
Rep 1
Rep 2
Mean
RPD
Fe(II)
Batch QC
185.7
195.2
190.5
5.0
Total Fe
Batch QC
177.4
177.4
177.4
0.0
Mn (II)
CMW-8
12040
12200
12120
1.3
Total Mn
MW-9
518.4
510.1
514.3
1.6
Diss Mn
MW-9
615.0
600.7
607.8
2.4
ND = Not detected at the applied dilution
NC = Value was not calculated due to one or more concentrations below the eMDL

Page 25 of 31
Speciation Results for Duke Energy
Project Name: Duke Energy Progress Cape Fear
Contact: Peggy Kendall
LIMS# J15060672
Date: July 31, 2015
Report Generated by: Jeremy Maute
Brooks Rand Labs, LLC
Qualitv Control Summary - Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate 0
Analyte (lag/L)
Sample ID
Spike Conc
MS Result
Recovery
Spike Conc
MSD Result
Recovery
RPD
Cr(VI)
MW-9
5.000
4.582
91.4
5.000
4.706
93.9
2.7
Qualitv Control Summary - Matrix Spike/Matrix
Spike Duplicate
(2)
Analyte (lag/L)
Sample ID
Spike Conc
MS Result
Recovery
Spike Conc
MSD Result
Recovery
RPD
As(III)
As(V)
DMAs
Batch QC
Batch QC
Batch QC
20.00
20.00
20.98
18.53
18.22
18.31
92.1
91.1
87.3
20.00
20.00
20.98
18.34
18.71
17.58
91.2
93.5
83.8
1.1
2.7
4.1
Quality Control Summary - Matrix Spike/Matrix
Spike Duplicate
(3)
Analyte (lag/L)
Sample ID
Spike Conc
MS Result
Recovery
Spike Conc
MSD Result
Recovery
RPD
Fe(II)
Total Fe
Batch QC
Batch QC
500.0
500.0
714.3
650.3
104.8
94.6
500.0
500.0
721.4
659.4
106.2
96.4
1.0
1.4
Mn (II)
Total Mn
Diss Mn
CMW-8
MW-9
MW-9
500.0
1000
1000
12630
1503
1389
102.0*
98.9
78.1
500.0
1000
1000
12430
1584
1668
62.1*
106.9
106.0
0.8
5.2
18.3
*Ambient analyte concentration greater than spiking level. See case narrative

0
U y
H N 0 0 6J
co
C O 0
00
C U ® m d N
�°,-
0 0 -t ®`
yNj •O � d
cn
O � •• Q
U � O N y
z 0u; °z
CC o o o o c�
o
Uu Li
4. .. a
0
O 0
fA _
cry _ m d N
= c c c Q Z N p p o
0 2 A Z Z Z 0 Z Z Z
Z � Z
o
j
rr6 rF
a ( � tvr` c J' N` M f,,, rr• .vim � � � �
00
L� ti
`®l ij
N
ai ii u >
Q U � cz Q
O
C
J
Page aB of 31

0
W � T
00
N W Y
c
C
O C
v
-0
M
00
c u y
m
m
m
m
o
o
C u
®
jD
C
N
0
y O g
cto
y
N
•O � d
v
cd
w
o
Y
u O
.U,
y 9
0
� C
Fcd
a
d
00 O
cpa
cd
N D d
p q
O
c
0
°° Ct1
abo .
cn o
Q)
O d
C C
QIV u-I2I2Icn IQIUI�I�I�I11)
�
6J7
;
a�i v p
a
~
m
5
U
U
il v,
rlN
� J
u
C
Z a
�o ob
x���o
_
c c c
S 0 Z Z Z
� w Z. �
N
tc
w
U a
:)R- 1` P Qom-• w
� 1
In
Su
-6 r c cl) .,q z- p
CIO-
�_nnCC��� c M
1 ,1 4 '1' 1
-Z
3�333�
Page 17 of 31
r
u

&
P
ge28of3
ca
C O O
V
w
3
w
w
w
c0
;c-�
7
;(D
ca
y C •.
c�1
r
(d 0 00
0 V� x v
v
E a
E a
v
v Q 3
E E
E E
O v v
U (D
U U
ca ^� -C
cc
U
d)
Q
0V
C CQw u0 N
o
A
N
•-J
N
I
Q
N
^
N
0)
N
G�
(n
fn
(n
(n
(�
U)fn
CO
U)
X �^ C G
°
u
M
Q
rn
C
U
aD
LL
C
c
(D
U)Q
U)
U
ti
c
c
y
U)
O O
v
C�
Q.-C �o
c
�
E o o
h i+ V
o
3.a
o
z
cd
W CL V >
!
V
CL
�
Cf'
t+
O 0 C
7
ZVa
C
o
v
�
w
cc'' c 3 x
x
CU
U
p L
C)
C)2
2
Q
dl C
c
c
Q
Z
c
c
c
.S
v
p
T.
�'Z
Z
Z
p
�
2
Z
Z
i
E
m
Q%
(n
r,6
ro
�
G
V^
ca
1V
1
0 N
J
�
C
a
C
a
o
L
U
.6
R
9
��
^
n
n
d
C0-
cm
v Im
0
.
in-
T
T
z
Z
z
to -0
N _0
0

18804 Northcreek Parkway Phone [phone]Fix
t o ?) Bothell, WA 98011
Maute
agrees to all terms an —
...........x.,..+.•� By submitting of samples the client If you are not familiar
NacrK: in the quotation provided by the BRI, project manager•
(.�+ `b "> `' ` 9 conditions associated with your Protect, please contact your
Pets ' ; .:-%V Ile with the term and
kddrm: ''
1'� t �° ' ? BRL re resentative as soon as ssible 42- 483-3300.
s
^� Re uested Turn Aroma Tom-
phadx Nurnbec � 7 - Method of le Deity
Fssc Number. . t ` Con--;--,'rac Number:
L arum +a le R don: Ij iC3 ® NO
� � � ConE,rmadon of Same �eP
Nsr+se Comments
Nt> 1217608 Iniitisls Re nested sand Methods
N Matrix Vohune Preservative AS S field filtered
Bottle ID Date and 1"tme EDTA -1 f�' 't` ' 3
o�J.�� '7 9 field filtered
ID
Cr 1
NH40HMH4SO4 Fe S field fettered
ssed HCl Mn S field filtered
e None unflltered
Ti 5s' U `17 Mn S
C w ` c None Se S field Filtered
None
7Y As S field filtered
EDT - Cr VI field filtered
C.. w - NH40HINH4SO4 Fe S field filtered
a t assed HCI Mn S c field filtered
' A - 11 s None Mn S ec unfiltered
-R Uy' - j r
+1 LA./- [ ► ; None Se S field filtered
None
Cornrnwts:
Dater ime:=_______—
Relinquished by: (sign) I� DateRime: t 7emp:
(print) � Comments:
Received W (sign)
Date/Time:_—
(print) Temp:
Relinquished by: (sign) Date/I ime:_ _--___--
(print)
Received b : (sign) purposes.
►e bottle as a se rate line item`f t`veant�ea(Ww)' soil (SI,), sediment (;;D), tissue (l�), product p'), other (0)
Pe
Please account for each camp groundwater (GW),
Air, Freshwater WW), seawater ($V�, fir -
Matru: Rcv i.t (Apt �5)
0 C-

.onV iy Name:
:ontact Person:
Wdttss:
'hone Number ` .4 7
as Number -
Email Address:
Proiect Narne:
PO Numb —
Sam le
�1 w -y6R
,MW-9FSR
Myr/ -j134
raw .q 5k
1X'
18804� ck Parkway Phone (40§�4M �f3W
Bothell, WA 98011 Fix [phone]
BRL Pro ect nnan
to all terms and conditions set forth
By submitting of samples the client agrees
by the BRL project manager. If you are not familiar
_ - L/ •
in the quotation provided please contact your
the term and conditions associated
ble 425 483f 3300ect,
with
BRL re resentative ass( as
L-`sir �i
uested'I'um Around Time:
Method of SanVLc Delivc
courier -rracking Number.13 11w
Yes
:e- rx_--
Confirmation of Sample Reception: �
1217608
I>utials Re uested tes and Methods Comments
J Bottle ID
Date d Time Matrix
an
Volume Preservative
EDTA -1
i K As S field ftttered
field filtered
t
N1i40HINH4SO4
C
field filtered
Fe S c
HCI t
Mn S field filtered
None
Mn S unflite,
None
field fettered
(? ,
Y{
None
Se S c
Se
As S field filtered
CsW
!i' EDTA -1
12 K c C, I field filtered
t'y1:t.77
r'
NH40H/NH4SO4 field filtered
De assed HCI
Fe S
field filtered
None
Mn S
unfiltered
None
field filtered
i =
Se S
None
Dateffirne:
Relinquished by: (sign) Date/Time:
- c.�
(print)
Received by: (sign)
Date/Time:___.---
Relinquished by: (sign) (print) Dateffime:
(print)
Received b : (sign)
Please account Eor each sample bottle as a seperatc line itetn for veti6ca(w t?'rrP SiCS sediment (St)), tissue (I S}, product (�, otl'u (0)
•Matrix: Air, Freshwater OINAO, seawater W, groundwater ((;W ,wastewater ( )
0.ZC_
Rev 1.1 (April 2005)

Page 31 of 31
str'!?4 Nor-hcil i is P:. .w, v Phone [phone]
Com un Name:
BRL Project Rianr. _Icrcmy Maute
Contact Person: t-,
By submitting of samples the client agrees to all terms and conditions set forth
in the quotation provided%y the BRL project manager. If you are not familiar
with the term and conditions associated with your project, please contact your
BRL representative as soon as possible 425 483-3300.
Address: I4' �+ 1= S , , �. r. . � �,
Phone Number: `- - ?" 1
1'ax Nwnixr
Requested `I'um Around Time:
limail Address:
Method of Sample Delivery:
Protect Name:
- s ,' < ¢ cs
Courier Tra Number -
Project Number: i `�'
Confr*mation of Sample Reception: Y� 13 No
_
PO Numf,er: 1217608
gam k ID,/ 4Ap,Jg 'Z
Bottle ID
Date and Time
Maw*
Volume
Preservative
Initials
Requested Anal tes and Methods
Comments
'2
ED fA -1
--
-! As :spec
field Atered
NH401-1/1:114SO4
C (VV
field filtered
L
Degassed HCI
! Fe Spec
Mn Spec
field filtered
field filtered
w t o
_
None
M " / L'
'
None
Mn Spec
unfiltered -�
I C
None
Se Sp2c
field filtered
-
,h I I,v
>
t a5' r, t
EDTA - 1
As Spec
field filtered
t3 r
NH40H/NH4SO4
Cr VI
field filtered
(A,' 7
Dagassed HCl
Fe Spec
feld filtered
None
Mn Sper-
field filtered
I
None
None
Mn Spec
Se Spec Ifield
unfiltered
filtered
_
Relinquished by (sign) (print) . =-r)ovc. Date(Tinte:! s'//S Comments:
Received by: (sign) _ _ (print) 6zJU Vwtal 6+6, Daterrime % t t t it e,0
Temp: 2-
Comments:
Relinquished by (sign) (print) Datelrime:
Received by (sign) (print) DateJTime Temp:
Please account for each sample bottle as a seperate line item for verification purposes.
Matrix: Air, Preshwa►er (hl�, seawater (S%), groundwater ((.Vt7, wastewater (\XNV), soil (Sl.), sediment (SD;: tissue (I'S), product (13), other (0)
Rev 1.1 ( April ZIM)