NC0003425_Appx H - Background Statistical Evaluation Report_20171031

2017 Comprehensive Site Assessment Update October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
SynTerra
APPENDIX H
BACKGROUND STATISTICAL
EVALUATION REPORT

synTerra
PROPOSED BACKGROUND THRESHOLD VALUES
FOR NATURALLY OCCURRING CONCENTRATIONS
IN GROUNDWATER AND SOIL
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
1700 DUNNAWAY ROAD
SEMORA,, NORTH CAROLINA 27343
OCTOBER 2017
PREPARED FOR
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
410 S. WILMINGTON STREET / NC 15
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27601
DUKE
ENERGY ,
Jess Gilmer
Project Scientist
Craig D. Eady, NC LG 1599
Project Manager

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1-1
2.0 BACKGROUND DATASETS.................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Groundwater................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1.1 Transition Zone....................................................................................................... 2-2
2.1.2 Bedrock..................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.2 Soil...................................................................................................................................2-2
3.0
PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS..........................................................................3-1
3.1
Descriptive Statistics.....................................................................................................3-1
3.2
Management of Non -Detect Data...............................................................................3-1
3.3
Graphical Analysis........................................................................................................3-2
3.4
Screening Datasets for Outliers...................................................................................3-2
3.5
Autocorrelation.............................................................................................................
3-3
3.6
Evaluation of Dataset Distribution.............................................................................3-3
4.0 PROPOSED PROVISIONAL BACKGROUND THRESHOLD VALUES ......... 4-1
5.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................ 5-1
Page i
P: \ Duke Energy Progress.1026 \ Statistics_CAMA \ BTV Reports for CSAs \ Roxboro \ DRAFT \ Roxboro _BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Background Groundwater Sample Locations
Figure 2 Background Soil Sample Locations
Figure 3 Example of Concentration Trend
Figure 4 Example of Shifting Concentration
LIST OF TABLES
October 2017
Table 1
Chemical Parameters Analyzed in Groundwater and Soil
Table 2
Background Groundwater Results Through January 2017
Table 3
Unsaturated Background Soil Data Summary
Table 4
Statistical Analysis Results - Transition Zone
Table 5
Statistical Analysis Results - Bedrock
Table 6
Statistical Analysis Results - Background Soil
Table 7
Groundwater Provisional Background Threshold Values
Table 8
Soil Provisional Background Threshold Values
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A
Box -and -Whisker and Q-Q Plots: Transition Zone
Appendix B
Box -and -Whisker and Q-Q Plots: Bedrock
Appendix C
Box -and -Whisker and Q-Q Plots: Soil
Appendix D
Outlier Test Results: Transition Zone (ProUCL Output)
Appendix E
Outlier Test Results: Bedrock (ProUCL Output)
Appendix F
Outlier Test Results: Soil (ProUCL Output)
Appendix G
GOF Test Results: Transition Zone (ProUCL Output)
Appendix H
GOF Test Results: Bedrock (ProUCL Output)
Appendix I
GOF Test Results: Soil (ProUCL Output)
Appendix J
UTL Results: Transition Zone (ProUCL and NCSS Output)
Appendix K
UTL Results: Bedrock (ProUCL and NCSS Output)
Appendix L
UTL Results: Soil (ProUCL and NCSS Output)
Page ii
SynTerra
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CAMA
Coal Ash Management Act
CAP
Corrective Action Plan
CCR
Coal Combustion Residuals
CSA
Comprehensive Site Assessment Report
DWR
Division of Water Resources
GOF
Goodness -of -Fit
KM
Kaplan-Meir
NCDEQ
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
NCDWQ
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
NCAC
North Carolina Administrative Code
NTU
Nephelometric Turbidity Units
PBTV
Provisional Background Threshold Value
POG
Protection of Groundwater
PSRG
Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal
Q-Q
Quantile-Quantile
ROS
Regression on Order Statistics
SU
Standard Units
Site
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
USEPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
UTL
Upper Tolerance Limit
Page iii
October 2017
SynTerra
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Provisional background threshold values (PBTVs) for naturally occurring
concentrations in groundwater and soil at the Roxboro Steam Electric Plant (Roxboro or
Site) and surrounding areas in Person County, North Carolina, are presented in this
report. These PBTVs are necessary for comparison to data generated during the
Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA) of the Roxboro site.
North Carolina General Assembly Session Law 2014-122, the Coal Ash Management
Act (CAMA) of 2014, requires submittal of a Comprehensive Site Assessment Report for
each facility that has a coal combustion residuals (CCR) impoundment. Companies that
own multiple facilities with CCR impoundments must submit a CSA for each such
facility. The purposes of the CSAs are to:
,61P Characterize the extent of impact resulting from storage of coal ash at regulated
facilities
,67 Evaluate the chemical and physical characteristics of detected constituents
07 Investigate site geology and hydrogeology
07 Determine factors that are related to contaminant transport
07 Examine risk to potential receptors and exposure pathways
To meet specific North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) requirements, CSAs
were conducted in accordance with a conditionally approved Groundwater Assessment
Plan. Those requirements, defined in 15A NCAC 02L .0106(g), include an assessment of
the horizontal and vertical extent of constituents present in groundwater at
concentrations exceeding groundwater quality standards.
Regulations regarding North Carolina groundwater quality standards (T15A NCAC
02L .0202. Section (b)(3)) state the following: Where naturally occurring substances exceed
the established standard, the standard shall be the naturally occurring concentration as
determined by the Director.
That sentence underscores the importance of determining the naturally occurring
concentrations of constituents present in groundwater and soil. Such determination is
essential in fully characterizing the extent of impacts resulting from the storage of coal
ash.
Page 1-1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_ CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra
Methodology for determining background concentrations in groundwater and soil at
coal ash facilities is presented in the technical memorandum Revised Statistical Methods
for Developing Reference Background Concentrations for Groundwater and Soil at Coal Ash
Facilities (HDR Engineering, Inc. and SynTerra Corporation, May 2017). That document
was based on the US Environmental Protection Agency "Unified Guidance' report
(USEPA, 2009), USEPA's Guidance for Comparing Background and Chemical
Concentrations in Soil for CERCLA Sites (USEPA, 2002), USEPA ProUCL Technical
Guide (USEPA, 2015), and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality technical
assistance document for Evaluating Metals in Groundwater at DWG Permitted Facilities
(NCDWQ, 2012). The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)
Division of Water Resources (DWR) has conditionally approved the methodology
presented in the statistical methods memorandum/technical guidance document.
On July 7, 2017, NCDEQ provided a response letter to Duke Energy (Zimmerman to
Draovitch) requiring that background constituent concentrations (referred to herein as
provisional background threshold values [PBTVs]) in groundwater and soil at the
Roxboro Plant be determined and submitted within 30 days from receipt of the letter.
The response letter also identified groundwater and soil data appropriate for use in the
statistical determination of PBTVs for the Site.
PBTVs for the Roxboro Plant were subsequently submitted to NCDEQ on August 4,
2017 and August 28, 2017. Additionally, revised PBTVs for constituents in soil were
resubmitted to NCDEQ on September 5, 2017 (Draovitch to Zimmerman) in response to
comments from NCDEQ dated September 1, 2017 (Zimmerman to Draovitch).
This report provides documentation of the procedures, evaluations, and calculations
used to determine PBTVs for submittal to NCDEQ. All procedures were performed in
accordance with the Revised Statistical Methods for Developing Reference Background
Concentrations for Groundwater and Soil at Coal Ash Facilities (HDR Engineering, Inc. and
SynTerra Corporation, May 2017) technical memorandum.
Page 1-2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
2.0 BACKGROUND DATASETS
SynTerra
Groundwater samples have been collected from a background monitoring well, BG-01,
since 2010 and at more recently established background locations since 2015. Soil
samples were initially collected at background locations during the 2015 CSA (SynTerra
2015a). Additional soil samples were collected at background locations in 2017 to
augment the background dataset for establishing PBTVs for constituents in soil. The
following section describes background groundwater and soil datasets that were used
to establish site PBTVs. Details regarding background datasets have also been provided
in the CSA (SynTerra, 2015a), Corrective Action Plan (CAP) 1 (SynTerra 2015b), CAP 2
(SynTerra, 2016), supplemental reports, and monthly electronic data submittals.
2.1 Groundwater
Groundwater samples were collected from monitoring wells using low -flow sampling
techniques in accordance with the USEPA Region 1 Purging and Sampling Procedure for
the Collection of Groundwater Samples from Monitoring Wells (revised January 19, 2010)
and in accordance with the Groundwater Monitoring Program, Low Flow Sampling Plan,
Duke Energy Facilities, Ash Basin Groundwater Assessment Program, North Carolina (June
10, 2015). Groundwater samples were analyzed for constituents listed in Table 1.
Groundwater across the Site is unconfined and found within the ash basins and three
flow systems - residuum/saprolite, transition zone, and fractured bedrock. However,
saturated conditions are not evident within the residuum/saprolite units in background
locations due to the nature of the former natural drainage features in which the ash
basins were created. The current background monitoring well network at the Roxboro
Plant (Figure 1) consists of wells installed within two hydrogeologic flow layers:
17 Transition zone
,67 Bedrock
The background dataset for each flow layer consists of sample data pooled across
background monitoring wells monitoring that flow zone. PBTVs were statistically
determined for constituents using total (non -filtered) sample results obtained from
background wells through the first quarter of 2017. Data were omitted from the
background datasets if one or more of the following conditions were encountered:
H pH was greater than 8.5 standard units (S.U.) during the time of sample
collection, unless the regional NCDEQ office determined an alternate pH
threshold for the Site
Page 2-1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
SynTerra
167 Groundwater turbidity was greater than or equal to 10 Nephelometric Turbidity
Units (NTUs) at the time of sample collection
17 Groundwater turbidity and/or pH were not recorded at the time of sample
collection
,67 Result was identified as a statistical outlier
,67 Sample collection occurred less than 60 days after the previous sampling event
(referred to herein as autocorrelated samples)
,67 Non -detected result was greater than 15A NCAC .02L (2L) standard or Interim
Maximum Concentration (IMAC) of 15A NCAC .02L Appendix 1, April 1, 2013
The background dataset for each flow layer used to statistically determine PBTVs for
constituents in groundwater are provided in Table 2. The following sections of this
report summarize the background dataset for the transition zone and fractured bedrock.
2.1.1 Transition Zone
Three wells (BG-01, MW-15D, and MW-18D) are used to monitor background
groundwater quality within the transition zone. Through the first quarter of
2017, the background dataset for the transition zone contained more than 10
valid samples for all constituents. Additional samples were collected from BG-
01, MW-15D, and MW-18D during the second and third quarters of 2017. Those
wells will be sampled again the fourth quarter.
2.1.2 Bedrock
Six wells (BG-01BR, MW-10BR, MW-14BR, MW-15BR, MW-18BR, and MW-
19BRL) are used to monitor background groundwater quality within the
fractured bedrock. As of the first quarter of 2017, the background dataset for
fractured bedrock contained more than 10 valid samples for all constituents.
Additional samples were collected from BG-01BR, MW-10BR, MW-14BR, MW-
15BR, MW-18BR and MW-19BRL during the second and third quarters of 2017.
Those wells will be sampled again in the fourth quarter.
2.2 Soil
Discrete soil samples were collected from multiple depth intervals at background
locations during the 2015 CSA. Additional samples were collected from background
locations in 2017 to augment the background dataset for use in establishing PBTVs. Soil
sample locations are presented in Figure 2. Soil samples were analyzed for constituents
listed in Table 1. The background soil dataset for the Roxboro Plant consists of
background soil sample data pooled across varying depths and non -impacted locations.
Page 2-2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
SynTerra
Soil samples that did not meet the following criteria were omitted from the background
dataset:
,67 Sample was collected from a location impacted by CCRs or coal -associated
materials
,67 Sample was collected from a depth of less than 0.5 foot below ground surface
,67 Sample was collected from a location that was impacted by other potential
anthropogenic sources of constituents
,67 Sample was collected less than 1 foot above the seasonal high water table
elevation
H Non -detected result was greater than the North Carolina Preliminary Soil
Remediation Goal (PSRG) Protection of Groundwater (POG)
Background soil data used to statistically establish PBTVs for naturally occurring
inorganic constituents in soil are provided in Table I
Page 2-3
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra
3.0 PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS
Preliminary analysis of background datasets was performed before calculating PBTVs
for constituents in groundwater and soil at the Roxboro Plant. That preliminary analysis
included:
,67 Calculating descriptive statistics
,67 Graphical analysis
,67 Screening datasets for statistical outliers and autocorrelated sample results
07 Assessing the distribution of constituent data
3.1 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics are useful for characterizing data, increasing dataset
understanding, and assessing information quality. The following descriptive statistics
were calculated for the background groundwater and soil datasets:
07 Sample size
,67 Number of non -detects
07 Percentage of non -detects
Those statistics were calculated for constituents within each groundwater flow layer
(Tables 4 and 5). Descriptive statistics for constituents in soil are provided in Table 6.
3.2 Management of Non -Detect Data
Concentrations between the lowest achievable value that can be quantitatively obtained
by laboratory analytical procedures or technology (referred to as the reporting limit)
and zero are called non -detects. A high degree of uncertainty is associated with non -
detected values. During statistical analysis of groundwater and soil data, non -detected
values within each background dataset were adjusted accordingly using the statistics
software ProUCL version 5.1.002 (USEPA, 2015). The manner in which non -detects
were adjusted was determined by the proportion of non -detects present within a
dataset.
For cases in which datasets were comprised of 50 percent or fewer non -detects,
algorithms in ProUCL were applied using either the Kaplan-Meir (KM) method or
robust regression on order statistics (ROS) to address non -detects. If datasets contained
from 50 percent to 90 percent non -detects, PBTVs were estimated using non -parametric
statistical methods, which do not make a distinction between detected and non -detected
Page 3-1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra
concentrations. For instances in which datasets contained 90 percent or more non -
detects or less than three detected concentrations, the non -detect value with the highest
frequency of occurrence was used to represent the PBTV.
3.3 Graphical Analysis
Background groundwater data was graphically portrayed using scatter plots, box -and -
whisker plots, and quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plots, while background soil data was
illustrated using box -and -whisker plots and Q-Q plots. The use of scatter plots of
concentration versus time for constituent within each background monitoring well
assisted in identifying outliers and potential trends or seasonality within datasets. Box -
and -whisker plots and Q-Q plots were constructed for each constituent within each
background well and for each groundwater flow layer. That was done to assess dataset
distributions, identify possible outliers, and identify sub -groups. Box -and -whisker and
Q-Q plots for groundwater constituents are provided in Appendices A and B. Box -and -
whisker plots and Q-Q plots were also produced for constituents in soil to identify
outliers, assess dataset distributions, and capture any spatial variability across boring
depths. Box -and -whisker plots and Q-Q plots produced for soil are provided in
Appendix C.
Graphical analysis was also used to provide information regarding a steady-state
baseline period free of trending or shifting background concentrations (Figures 3 and
4). Graphical analysis was used to determine if background data were valid for use in
establishing PBTVs or if historical data warranted removal from the dataset due to
trending or shifting concentrations.
3.4 Screening Datasets for Outliers
Outliers are values that do not reside within the range of values that represent the bulk
distribution of a dataset. Background groundwater and soil datasets were screened for
potential outliers in accordance with methodology outlined in the Revised Statistical
Methods for Developing Reference Background Concentrations for Groundwater and Soil at
Coal Ash Facilities (statistical methods document) (HDR Engineering, Inc. and SynTerra
Corporation, May 2017) technical memorandum.
During the screening of datasets for outliers, autocorrelated values were retained to
help determine whether suspected outliers are a result of pure chance (i.e., very low
probability of occurrence) or in fact are representative of constituent concentrations at a
given point in time. Autocorrelated values represent real data representative of a given
location at a given report in time; therefore, this data should be retained for outlier
screening to strengthen decision making. Omission of autocorrelated values is
Page 3-2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
SynTerra
warranted only during the assessment of data distributions and calculation of PBTVs,
which make an underlying assumption that data are independent from one another
with respect to time.
Only extreme outliers and data resulting from laboratory, sampling, or reporting errors
were omitted from statistical evaluations. Mild outliers were retained for statistical
evaluations, as those values might be a result of "natural fluctuations and variability" in
constituent concentrations (USEPA, 2009; USEPA, 2015).
Results for quantitatively screening groundwater and soil datasets for potential outliers
using either Dixon's or Rosner's Outlier test are provided in Appendices D through F.
Statistical outliers omitted from groundwater and soil datasets prior to the estimation of
PBTVs are identified in Tables 2 and 3.
3.5 Autocorrelation
Autocorrelation occurs when measurements collected at different points in time
correlate with one another. Sources of autocorrelation in groundwater data can be
caused by seasonality, trends, or a lack of adequate time between sample collections.
For the estimation of PBTVs for constituents in groundwater and soil, NCDEQ
requested (Technical Memorandum: Zimmerman to Draovitch, April 2017) that Duke
Energy use a minimum 60-day interval between groundwater sampling events, and that
samples collected less than 60 days apart be omitted from statistical evaluations.
Sample data omitted from statistical evaluations as a result of autocorrelation are
identified in Table 2.
3.6 Evaluation of Dataset Distribution
Upon completion of screening background datasets for outliers and autocorrelated
sample results, the distribution of background groundwater and soil data were assessed
following the methodology provided in the Revised Statistical Methods for Developing
Reference Background Concentrations for Groundwater and Soil at Coal Ash Facilities
(statistical methods document) (HDR Engineering, Inc. and SynTerra Corporation, May
2017) technical memorandum. Background constituent data were evaluated for fit with
normal, lognormal, and gamma distribution models. If one of the three distribution
models did not describe the dataset adequately, non -parametric (distribution -free)
statistical methods were used.
Rather than relying only on the text statement provided in ProUCL goodness -of -fit
(GOF) test results output to determine which distribution model most accurately
described the background dataset for a constituent, the significance level (i.e.,
Page 3-3
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
SynTerra
probability level or P-value), test value, critical value, and censored and uncensored Q-
Q GOF plots were assessed. The distributions of background constituent data for
groundwater and soil are provided in Tables 4, 5, and 6. ProUCL GOF test result
outputs for groundwater and soil are provided in Appendices G through I.
Page 3-4
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
SynTerra
4.0 PROPOSED PROVISIONAL BACKGROUND THRESHOLD VALUES
PBTVs were determined by calculating the upper tolerance limit (UTL) for each
constituent. Upper and lower tolerance limits were calculated for pH. UTLs were
calculated for constituents in groundwater and soil at the Roxboro Plant using
methodology outlined the Revised Statistical Methods for Developing Reference Background
Concentrations for Groundwater and Soil at Coal Ash Facilities (statistical methods
document) (HDR Engineering, Inc. and SynTerra Corporation, May 2017) technical
memorandum. Statistical analysis software UTL outputs are provided in Appendices J
through L.
The proposed groundwater and soil PBTVs for the Roxboro Plant submitted to NCDEQ
in August 2017 and resubmitted in September 2017 are provided in Tables 7 and 8.
Page 4-1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant SynTerra
5.0 REFERENCES
NCDEQ DWR, 2012. Evaluating Metals in Groundwater at DWQ Permitted Facilities: A
Technical Assistance Document for DWQ Staff.
http://digital.ncdcr.gov/cdm/ref/collection/p 16062co119/id/251181.
SynTerra, 2015a. Comprehensive Site Assessment, Roxboro Steam Electric Plant,
September 2, 2015.
SynTerra, 2015b. Corrective Action Plan, Roxboro Steam Electric Plant, December 1,
2015.
SynTerra, 2016. Corrective Action Plan 2, Roxboro Steam Electric Plant, February, 29,
2016.
USEPA, 2002. Guidance for Comparing Background and Chemical Concentrations in
Soil for CERCLA Sites. EPA 540-R-01-003.
USEPA, 2009. Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities —
Unified Guidance, March 2009. EPA 530-R-09-007.
USEPA, 2015. Statistical Software ProUCL 5.1.002 for Environmental Applications for Data
Sets with and without Nondetect Observations. EPA/600/R07/041.
Page 5-1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
FIGURES
SynTerra
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

120
0- erd
z o 10o up'�'a�d�r
so
~ 60
N w
Z V 40
O 20
0
3/3/2010 5/11/2012 7/20/2014 9/27/2016
DATE
120
Z OZ 100 D°inward
w Q Pre
end
H Z 60 O O O
Z UJ V 40 0 0 O
Ov 20 O
., O
0
3/3/2010 5/11/2012 7/20/2014 9/27/2016
DATE
148 RIVER STREET, SUITE 220 FIGURE 3
,tip =NE8ILLE, SOUTH 64421 gggg CAROLINA29601 EXAMPLE OF CONCENTRATION TREND
ww�nr.s nterracor .com
DRAWN BY: J. GILMER DATE: October2017 ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
synTerra[PAD.le
PROJECT MANAGER C. Eady DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS LAYOUT: T. Plating , LLC
Energy Progress. 10261Statistics_CAMA\B1 SEMORA NORTH CAROLINA
Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Figures

450 — —I
400
.� 350
Z I New Background Dataset I
I
W 300
D � 250 � I
I
(A W 200
Z V I I
Ov ZO 150
V 100
I
50
� I
0 _ T --
1/1/2010 8/24/2011 4/15/2013 12/6/2014 7/28/2016
DATE
148 RIVER STREET, SUITE 220 FIGURE 4
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29601 PHONE EXAMPLE OF CONCENTRATION SHIFT
864-421 -9999
WWJJ.S nterracor .com ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DRAWN BY: J. GILMER DATE: October 2017 PROJECT MANAGER C. Eady DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
synTerra
LA: T.Rating SEMORA NORTH CAROLINA
FYOIT
\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports /r CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Figures

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
TABLES
SynTerra
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

TABLE 1
CHEMICAL PARAMETERS ANALYZED IN GROUNDWATER AND SOIL
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
FIELD PARAMETERS
pH*t
Specific Conductance*
Temperature*
Dissolved Oxygen*
Oxidation Reduction Potential*
Eh*
Turbidity*
INORGANICS
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Strontium
Thallium (low level)
Vanadium (low level)
Zinc
NOTES:
* = Indicates parameter analyzed in groundwater only.
t = Indicates parameters analyzed in soil only.
RADIONUCLIDES
Radium 226*
Radium 228*
Uranium 233, 234, 236, 238 *
ANIONS/CATIONS/OTHER
Alkalinity (as CaCO3)*
Bicarbonate*
Calcium
Carbonate*
Chloride
Magnesium
Nitrate (as N)t
Nitrate + Nitrite*
Potassium
Percent Moisturet
Methane*
Sodium
Sulfate
Sulfide*
Total Dissolved Solids*
Total Organic Carbon
Total Suspended Solids*
Metals in groundwater were analyzed for total and dissolved concentrations.
Soil pH measured at 25 degrees C.
Analysis of groundwater and soil samples for Chromium (VI) began after initial samples were collected as
part of CSA.
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\
Table 1 - Chemical Parameters analyzed in Groundwater and Soil.xlsx Page 1 of 1

Sample ID
nsition Zone
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
BG-01
MW-15D
MW-15D
MW-15D
MW-15D
MW-15D
MW-15D
MW-15D
MW-18D
MW-18D
MW-18D
MW-18D
TABLE 2
BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER RESULTS THROUGH JANUARY 2017
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Bi- Carbonate Chromium
Analytical Parameter pH Turbidity Alkalinity Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium carbonate Boron Cadmium Calcium Alkalinity (VI) Chloride Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury
Alkalinity
Reporting Units S.U. NTUs mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L
15A NCAC 02L Standard 6.5-8.5 NE NE NE 1* 10 700 4* NE 700 2 NE NE 250 10 10 1* 1000 300 15 NE 50 1
Sample Field Parameters
Collection Date
Analytical Results
11/30/2010
6.8
8.56
-
713
<0.5
<5
69.7
-
-
<50
<0.08
-
-
14.2
-
11.1
-
11.2
881
<3
-
27.2
<0.2
04/20/2011
6.4
9.92
-
330
<0.5
<5
73.1
-
-
<50
<0.08
-
-
13.4
-
15
-
11.4
499
<3
-
18.5
<0.2
07/13/2011
6.4
9.58
-
<100
<0.5
<5
84 B
-
-
<50
<0.08
-
-
12.7 B
-
42.7z
-
<5
752
<3
-
25.8 B
<0.2
11/02/2011
6.6
9.42
-
201
<0.5
<5
75.6
-
-
<50
<0.08
-
-
13.4
-
16.8
-
<5
307
<3
-
7.8
<0.2
04/02/2012
6.4
9.8
-
301
<0.5
<5
72.3
-
-
<50
<0.08
-
-
15.5
-
8.8
-
<5
286
<3
-
6.5
<0.2
07/11/2012
6.3
8.57
-
734
<0.5
<5
81
-
-
<50
<0.08
-
-
14.5
-
<5
-
6.4
866
<3
-
18.7
<0.2
11/06/2012
6.4
7.91
-
438
<0.5
<5
84.2
-
-
<50
<0.08
-
-
15
-
16.1
-
<5
532
<3
-
11.1
<0.2
04/08/2013
6.3
5.24
-
110
<1
<1
79
-
-
<50
<1
-
-
14
-
<5
-
<5
113
<1
-
5
<0.05
07/08/2013
6.3
6.79
-
300
<1
<1
83
-
-
<50
<1
-
-
15
-
10
-
<5
368
<1
-
9
<0.05
11/11/2013
6.4
9.8
-
438
<1
<1
83
-
-
<50
<1
-
-
14
-
7
-
<5
507
<1
-
11
<0.05
04/03/2014
6.4
6.6
-
311
<1
<1
86
-
-
<50
<1
-
-
17
-
6
-
<5
370
<1
-
8
<0.05
07/15/2014
6.3
4.4
-
205
<1
<1
81
-
-
<50
<1
-
-
16
-
<5
-
<5
218
<1
-
6
<0.05
11/12/2014
6.5
7.45
-
373
<1
<1
87
-
-
<50
<1
-
-
16
-
6
-
<5
437
<1
-
9
<0.05
04/16/2015
6.6
7.86
209
278
<1
<1
95
<1
209
<50
<1
46.7
<5
16
-
13
-2-34
<5
283
<1
25.9
54
<0.05
09/16/2015
6.5
9.81
220
801
<1
<1
91
<1
220
<50
<1
40.4
<i9
16
-
6.77
<1
3.19
811
<1
24.5 M4
21
<0.05
-_, -_, _--_
6-.4
9-3
2-28
319
�9.5
<E9.S
46
<-0-2
228
<58
F0:08
44.2
<3
6-2
3-.6
9.62
3
369
<-0-1
254
<0.2
01/05/2016
6.4
8.46
231
434
<1
<1
91
<1
231
<50
<1
43.4
<5
18
4.5
9.02
<1
2.49
484
<1
20.6
17
<0.05
04/07/2016
6.5
8.12
233
i559
<1
<1
97
<1
233
<50
<1
44.6
<5
21
10.2
18
i.85
10
i769
<1
26.1
34
<0.05
07/12/2016
6.3
9.78
243
323
<1
<1
90
<1
243
<50
<1
43.8 Bl
<5
20
6.1 M6
6
<1
<5
322
<1
27.2
9
<0.05
09/08/2016
6.5
8.68
229
830
<1
<1
91
<1
229
<50
<1
41.7
<5
18
7.6
8.46
<1
3.94
766
<1
24.9
14
<0.05
11,91,2916
6.8S
6..-
2-3-7
4-&
-<4-
S9
2-3-7
<38
-<-I-
4z`-4
<3
-
4
<4
<3
333
<4
2-5-.3
ze.05
11/10/2016
6.6 S
9.85
235
346
<1
<1
87
<1
235
<50
<1
42.5
<5
18
4.4
7.24
<1
2.87
356
<1
23.4
13
<0.05
11/16/2016
6.4
8.73
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
01/26/2017
6.6
4.49
244
224
<1
<1
91
<1
244
<50
<1
43.1
<5
19
13.1
8.74
<1
1.8
227
<1
25.1 M4
5
<0.05
05/30/2015
6.4
2.57
230
121
<1
<1
10
<1
230
<50
<1
67.8
<i9
43
-
1.26
4.91
<1
163
<1
26.6
316
<0.05
09/12/2015
7.1
6.59
240
588
<1
<1
9
<1
240
<50
<1
66.6
<4B
43
-
2.4
1.11
1.42
671
<1
27.7
80
<0.05
-_, __, __-_
6_.7z
9.z4
<5
<i98
ge.5
ge.5
ge.-2
<5
<54
f9-93
66
<5
44-.2
3.4
44
ge.5
-.4
5&
go.!
26.6
4-5
E9.2
01/05/2016
6.4
3.29
233
201
<1
<1
8
<1
233
1 <50
<1
60.4
<5
40
1.5 M6
1.77
<1
<1
240
<1
24.3
48
<0.05
06/23/2016
6.6
3.04
237
45
<1
<1
7
<1
237
<50
<1
65.5
<5
44
2.7
2.56
<1
<1
48
<1
28
23
<0.05
n 6
yy
3.25
2-54
36
<4
<i
<4
2-54
-<59
<4
68.1
<5
46
2-5
-2-.-8
<4
<4
43
<4
2-8-.7
2-;L
Q.05
09/08/2016
6.9
3.46
240
125
<1
<1
6
<1
240
<50
<1
63.7
<5
44
2.7
2.81
<1
<1
146
<1
26.7
18
<0.05
11/09/2016
6.6
8.87
240
331
<1
<1
7
<1
240
<50
<1
63.1
<5
46
9.4
4.53
<1
1.66
371
<1
25.6
18
<0.05
01/25/2017
6.6
1.27
233
55
<1
<1
6
<1
233
<50
<1
65.8
<5
45
2.8
2.66
<1
<1
72
<1
27.7
8
<0.05
12/06/2015
_.4
7.16
213 P41,R1
29G
0.64
<045
Q.2
24-3
<59
Q.08
103 �,o
_<5
i8i P46
54
9.56
-1-.3
499
9A1
49.6 M,
82B
<0.2
01/05/2016
7.2
1.25
237
31
<1
<1
19
<1
237
<50
<1
85.3
<5
170
0.78
2
<1
<1
334
<1
42.3
978
<0.05
nc 6
_7�4
6r.43
2 -G
71
<4
<4
-<-I-
24-8
<5B
<4
42
<5
339
3i.2
i9.5
<4
<4
456
<4
4i.9
io Q
Q 05
07/14/2016
7.4
9.71
275
21
<1
<1
33
<1
275
<50
<1
106
<5
150
0.26
5.42
<1
1.57
298
<1
44.5
632
<0.05
09/13/2016
7.6
2.44
226
38
<1
<1
45
<1
226
<50
<1
104
<5
150
2.1
7.73
<1
<1
186
1 <1
40.4
405
<0.05
01/25/2017
6.9
0.63
198
60
<1
<1
29
<1
198
<50
<1
108 M4
<5
190
12.2
14.8
<1
1.13
193
1 <1
1 39.7 M4
305
<0.05
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTVReports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\Table 2- Background Groundwater Dataset_ROX.xlsx Page 1 of 6

Analytical Parameter
Methane
Molybdenum
Nickel
Reporting Units
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
15A NCAC 02L Standard
NE
NE
100
Sample ID
Sample
Collection Date
Transition Zone
BG-01
11/30/2010
-
-
<5
BG-01
04/20/2011
-
-
17.4
BG-01
07/13/2011
-
-
45.5 -
BG-01
11/02/2011
-
-
12
BG-01
04/02/2012
-
-
<5
BG-01
07/11/2012
-
-
<5
BG-01
11/06/2012
-
-
6.2
BG-01
04/08/2013
-
-
<5
BG-01
07/08/2013
-
-
6
BG-01
11/11/2013
-
-
<5
BG-01
04/03/2014
-
-
<5
BG-01
07/15/2014
-
-
<5
BG-01
11/12/2014
-
-
7
BG-01
04/16/2015
-
3.04
<5
BG-01
09/16/2015
<10
<1
1.96
BG 01
12/es/291-5 ----
<}B
9.65
33
BG-01
01/05/2016
<10
<1
2.96
BG-01
04/07/2016
<10
<1
5
BG-01
07/12/2016
<10 P2,CL
<1
<5
BG-01
09/08/2016
<10
<1
1.91
BGG 91
--• --• 29--
-
f1
<5
BG-01
11/10/2016
<10 N2
<1
2.59
BG-01
11/16/2016
-
-
-
BG-01
01/26/2017
<10 N2
<1
1.61
MW-15D
05/30/2015
<10
1.11
20.8
MW-15D
09/12/2015
<10
<1
16.7
--•__,-___
ge.5
i3..3
MW-15D
01/05/2016
<10
<1
15.2
MW-15D
06/23/2016
<10
<1
11.5
,- W 15o
^ v
�B
E1
ii.9
MW-15D
09/08/2016
<10
<1
10.9
MW-15D
11/09/2016
<10 N2
1.56
11.1
MW-15D
01/25/2017
<10 N2
1.78
9.12
Mw i8D
12/06/2015
E1B
8.4
4
MW-18D
01/05/2016
<10
6.08
<1
w i8D
06/23/2919
�1B
7.03
2.96
MW-18D
07/14/2016
<10
1.44
4.13
MW-18D
09/13/2016
<10
4.17
<1
MW-18D
01/25/2017
<10 N2
34.9
<1
TABLE 2
BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER RESULTS THROUGH JANUARY 2017
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Nitrate + Potassium Selenium Sodium Strontium Sulfate
Nitrite
mg-N/L mg/L ug/L mg/L ug/L mg/L
11 NE 20 NE NE 250
Analytical Results
Total
Total Organic
Sulfide
Thallium
Dissolved
Carbon
Vanadium
Zinc
Solids
mg/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
NE
0.2*
500
NE
0.3*
1000
Radium
(Total)
pCi/L
NE
Uranium
(Total)
ug/mL
NE
-
-
-
-
12.5
-
<0.1
299
-
-
12.3
---
---
-
11.7
-
<0.1
282
-
-
i .9
---
---
-
11.6 B
-
<0.1
248 B
-
-
<10
---
---
-
-
F1B
-
-
12.4
-
<0.1
263 B
-
-
<10
---
---
-
-
f1B
-
-
11.7
-
<0.1
298
-
-
<10
---
--
-
-
F14
-
-
14.2
-
<0.1
312
-
-
<10
---
---
-
-
14.3
-
<0.1
300
-
-
<10
---
---
-
-
<1
-
-
11
-
<0.2
310
-
-
<5
---
---
-
-
<1
-
-
12
-
<0.2
330
-
-
<5
---
---
-
-
<1
-
-
12
-
<0.2
320
-
-
12
---
---
-
-
<1
-
-
13
-
<0.2
320
-
-
<5
---
---
-
-
<1
-
-
14
-
<0.2
330
-
-
<5
---
---
-
-
<1
-
-
13
-
<0.2
310
-
-
11
---
---
-
3.44
3.57
35.4
-
40
-
<0.2
370
-
-
7
---
---
1.9
1.52
1.44
30.5
414
27
<0.1
9.23i
320
0.672
22.7
14
---
---
23
<5
3:2
32. i
449
29%
< 1
re.1
331
<4
445
-<-1B
2.6
1.87
1.01
31.6
445
23
<0.1
<0.2
350
0.579
17.5
<5
---
---
2.7
1.65
1.78
31.5
436
24
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.704
24.4
<5
5.45
0.000661
2.6
1.94
<1
31.8
442
21
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.682
18.3
<5
2.23
0.000674
2.6
1.79
<1
30.4
443
19
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.73
19.8
6
2.14
0.000637
-
4-86
32. i
442
29
-
�0.2
349
-
38.8
-
-
2.3
1.92
<1
30.3
457
19
<0.1
<0.2
340
0.764
15.8
<5
---
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
0.000624
2.4
1.81
<1
30.8
456
18
<0.1
<0.2
320
0.735
18.7
<5
2
0.00035
2.9
1.09
<1
28.4
243
29
<0.1
<0.2
410
1.1
4.96
<5
---
---
3.4
1.11
<1
29.2
241
28
<0.1
<0.2
400
0.925
7.66
<5
---
---
33
<5
<e.5
29.2
24B
24.3
E9.1
<0.1
424
4.1
6 5-
3
<1
<1
26.3
231
24
<0.1 M1
<0.2
430
0.935
8.03
<5
---
---
3.6
1.05
<1
28.9
239
29
<0.1
<0.2
430
1.1
9.15
<5
2
0.000823
3-5
3$8
<--l-
30.4
24 &
31
E-0.1
Q.2
428
4-1
9.56
<5
0.000855
3
1.04
<1
28.1
241
29
<0.1
<0.2
410
1
9.36
<5
3.762
0.000831
3.2
1.02
<1
27.1
242
30
<0.1
<0.2
400 H1
1
9.73
<5
1.773
0.000915
3.4
1.11
<1
28.4
246
29
<0.1
<0.2
420
1.1
9.4 132
<5
1.221
0.000898
0.2-7
5.48 !
1-.-2
32.6
578
45.1
<0.1
<.1
554
2.1 R4
4-.7
-- a
-
-
0.198
2.96
1.64
21.9
629
39
<0.1
<0.2
610
2.4
1.1
8
---
---
0.207
4.12
1.25
27.5
7-6-7
37
Q.1
<.2
64G
3.8
3.33
2i.2
0.00449
0.102
4.28
<1
27.9
730
37
<0.1
<0.2
540
1.9
0.551
<5
3.36
0.00516
0.125
3.87
<1
25.8
760
31
<0.1
<0.2
540
1.7
1.23
<5
2.183
0.00396
0.209
4.13
<1
28.3
767
33
<0.1
<0.2
600
1.7
1.35 132
<5
1.535
0.00402
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTVReports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\Table 2- Background Groundwater Dataset_ROX.xlsx Page 2 of 6

TABLE 2
BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER RESULTS THROUGH JANUARY 2017
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Analytical Parameter
pH
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Bi-
carbonate
Alkalinity
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Carbonate
Alkalinity
Chloride
Chromium
(VI)
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Reporting Units
S.U.
NTUs
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
15A NCAC 02L Standard
6.5-8.5
NE
NE
NE
1*
10
700
4*
NE
700
2
NE
NE
250
10
10
1*
1000
300
15
NE
50
1
Sample ID
Sample
Collection Date
Field Parameters
Analytical Results
Bedrock
BG-01BR
06/10/2015
6.8
8.4
240
174
<1
<1
21
<1
240
<50
<1
65.5
<10
15
-
<1
1.44
<1
225
<1
16.8
690
<0.05
BG-01BR
07/09/2015
6.9
5.6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
BG-01BR
09/12/2015
7.0
2.3
230
19
<1
<1
27
<1
230
<50
<1
58.1
<10
13
-
<1
<1
<1
374
<1
14.4
614
<0.05
BG 0113
12 9:5 ----
8
5.83
234
B8
<9.5
30
�EO.2
234
<39
FB:98
39.3
<3
ii.7
FB:93
8.71
�E 9. S
_<4
389
�Ee.f
34.6
429
EO.2
BG-01BR
01/05/2016
6.8
7.91
227
118
<1
<1
33
<1
227
<50
<1
58.2
<5
12
<0.03
1.96
<1
<1
375
<1
13.5
445
<0.05
BG-01BR
04/07/2016
6.9
9.86
259
19
<1
<1
29
<1
259
<50
<1
60.3
<5
13
0.035
<1
<1
<1
139
<1
14.3
398
<0.05
BG-01BR
07/14/2016
6.9
9.78
236
181
<1
<1
37
<1
236
<50
<1
61.3
<5
14
<0.03
2.15
<1
1.27
460
<1
13.8
473
<0.05
96 BI BR
0 0
Fro
8.68
2-3-5
74
-<4-
�
-33
23-S
<S9
-<4-
.7 P4 4
<S
4-2
0.864
3.89
�
_<4-
493
_<4-
34.3
43-1
Q.05
5
BG-01BR
11/09/2016
6.8
9.51
235
19
<1
<1
31
<1
235
<50
<1
58.9
<5
13
4 2
<1
<1
<1
52
<1
14.5
341
<0.05
13G-0113R
01/25/2017
6.9
4.77
250
12
<1
<1
33
<1
250
<50
<1
60.9
<5
13
0.086
<1
<1
<1
43
<1
15.3
369
<0.05
MW-1013R
05/27/2015
7.1
2.5
240
24
<1
<1
93
<1
240
<50
<1
60
<10
17
-
<1
8.2
4. r57
33
<1
20.6
478
<0.05
MW-1013R
09/12/2015
7.0
1.18
260
25
<1
<1
107
<1
260
<50
<1
58.6
<10
16
-
<1
5.97
<1
46
<1
20.8
840
<0.05
12 _ , _--_
7.4
9.65
2-54
43
E4-
4&-7
234
<59
EI-
57.f
E5
-
E9.93
<4
S. i 5
-.4
6§
E}
49
834
Q.05
MW-1013R
01/06/2016
6.8
0.61
250
8
<1
<1
120
<1
250
<50
<1
57.7
<5
18
<0.03
<1
6.38
<1
87
<1
19.8
752
<0.05
MW-1013R
04/07/2016
7.0
0.39
268
6
<1
<1
112
<1
268
<50
<1
52.4
<5
18
<0.03
<1
6.45
<1
91
<1
18.1
481
<0.05
MW-1013R
07/14/2016
7.1
0.61
264
<5
<1
<1
131
<1
264
<50
<1
57.4
<5
19
<0.03
<1
6.4
<1
50
<1
19.7
518
<0.05
MW-10BR
09/14/2016
7A S
1.99
240
6
<1
<1
135
<1
240
<50
<1
52.6
<5
18
0.096 M1
<1
33-8
<1
54
<1
18.3
446
<0.05
. r., 10B
'pro
7,2
3.73
236
8
<47
<47
42B
236
<S9
<47
49.6
<3
49
4_1
<47
i3 1
<47
34
<47
37.7
36--2
<0.05
MW-10BR
01/26/2017
7.0
0.43
249
7
<1
<1
145
<1
249
<50
<1
51
<5
18
0.15
<1
33-3
<1
17
<1
18.1
333
<0.05
MW-14BR
06/10/2015
7.0
4
250
12
<1
<1
32
<1
250
<50
<1
71.2
<10
40
-
<1
1.1
1.69
898
<1
29.3
328
<0.05
12 -_, _--_
7.4
6.28
246
E}$9
EB:S
EB:S
34
2-7-6
E69
EB 98
74.3
E3
4i.9
Q.93
2-8
9.94
4-9
2299
EBB
z�.8
44B
E9.2
MW-14BR
01/06/2016
7.0
6.18
269
57
<1
<1
38
<1
269
<50
<1
67.6
<5
43
<0.03
1.98
1.25
2.16
1780
<1
27.2
291
<0.05
MW-14BR
04/08/2016
7.2
8.75
273
15
<1
<1
32
<1
273
<50
<1
65.3
<5
41
<0.03 M1
2.11
1.86
<1
1160
<1
29.4
286
<0.05
MW-14BR
07/14/2016
7.3
9.5
293
53
<1
<1
37
<1
293
<50
<1
69.2
<5
42
<0.03
4&-9
<1
<1
1150
<1
28.6
281
<0.05
9,98,29-6
7.2
8.;Z8
272
69
<4
33
272
E39
<4
64.6
<5
41-
E9.93
3.41
3.89
4:69
4969
E4
273
339
Q.05
MW-14BR
11/10/2016
7A S
5.88
273
19
<1
<1
34
<1
273
<50
<1
64.4
<5
40
43
4.16
3.13
<1
1340
<1
26
348
<0.05
MW-14BR
01/26/2017
7.2
3.75
282
16
<1
<1
33
<1
282
<50
<1
66.7
<5
41
0.22
<1
2.02
<1
1220
<1
29.7
304
<0.05
MW-15BR
09/12/2015
8.3
3
170
377
<1
<1
19
<1
170
<50
<1
48.7
<10
34
-
<1
<1
<1
456
<1
10.6
30
<0.05
-2-_,_--_
83
249
449
299
EB:S
9.5
46
E .2
444
E69
E9$$
4i.4
E3
33-.2
E9$3
E9.6
Q.5
<4
EE}4
8.52
49
E9.2
MW-15BR
01/05/2016
7.6
2.26
145
164
<1
<1
16
<1
145
<50
<1
38
<5
34
<0.03
<1
<1
<1
262
<1
7.76
10
<0.05
MW-15BR
04/07/2016
7.7
7.3
178
343
<1
<1
18
<1
178
<50
<1
48.1
<5
37
<0.03
1.01
<1
<1
637
<1
8.44
29
<0.05
MW-15BR
07/12/2016
8.0
2.15
168
131
<1
<1
15
<1
168
<50
<1
46.5
<5
37
0.038
3.62
<1
<1
399
<1
8.71
25
<0.05
_, _ _, _ _ - _
713
;Z.93
489
48
<4
46
484
E39
<4
343
<5
_37z
9.933 pqj
-<4
-<4
-.4
369
E4
49.8
3-5
Q.05
MW-15BR
11/09/2016
7.7
4.66
243
169
<1
<1
19
<1
240
<50
<1
70.8 M4
<5
38
0.67
1.49
<1
<1
982
<1
16.6
47
<0.05
MW-15BR
01/25/2017
7.6
4.16
217
146
<1
<1
20
<1
217
<50
<1
65.5
<5
39
0.19
1.07
<1
<1
838
<1
15.2
49
<0.05
MW-18BR
06/02/2015
7.5
9.6
180
55
<1
<1
77
<1
180
<50
<1
95.4
<10
120
-
<1
2&4
<1
95
<1
19.7
789
<0.05
MW-18BR
09/14/2015
8.0
6.55
140
44
<1
<1
52
<1
140
<50
<1
82
<10
130
-
2.23
1.03
<1
363
<1
19.5
475
<0.05
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTVReports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\Table 2- Background Groundwater Dataset_ROX.xlsx Page 3 of 6

TABLE 2
BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER RESULTS THROUGH JANUARY 2017
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Analytical Parameter
Methane
Molybdenum
Nickel
Nitrate +
Nitrite
Potassium
Selenium
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfate
Sulfide
Thallium
Total
Dissolved
Solids
Total Organic
Carbon
Vanadium
Zinc
Radium
(Total)
Uranium
(Total)
Reporting Units
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg-N/L
mg/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
pCi/L
ug/mL
15A NCAC 02L Standard
NE
NE
100
11
NE
20
NE
NE
250
NE
0.2*
500
NE
0.3*
1000
NE
NE
Sample ID
Sample
Collection Date
Analytical Results
Bedrock
BG-0113R
06/10/2015
<10
16.5
1.86
8333
5.36
<1
36.4
183
28
<0.2
<0.2
350
1.3
1.94
---
---
13G-0113R
07/09/2015
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.41
0.00137
BG-0113R
09/12/2015
<10
5.36
1.3
0.089
5.51
<1
24.6
160
20
<0.1
<0.2
300
1
0.425
23
---
---
BG 0113
__• __• ____
E}B
3.2
4-
9.34
543
�E-&§
2-3
3-68
33
f
E0.1
297
33.6
-<4
BG-0113R
01/05/2016
<10
9.26
2.1
0.295
5.09
<1
21.9
163
21
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.693
1.25
---
- -
BG-01BR
04/07/2016
29.6
7.42
1.45
0.192
5.18
<1
23.5
166
20
<0.1
<0.2
300
0.703
1.23
6
346
0.001082
BG-01BR
07/14/2016
1120
4.18
1.08
0.229
5.54
<1
20.5
162
20
<0.1
<0.2
300
0.795
1.67
7
2
0.001111
BG 01B
0 08/20iv
618
7.38
33AS
0.39
5.23
22.4 r 4
ill
-20
<0.1
Q.2
2-619
8777
-1-.7
<-
2
0�4�73
BG-01BR
11/09/2016
569 N2
5.11
1.34
0.381
5.1
<1
21.8
169
19
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.773
1.79
<5
2.09
0.00099
13G-0113R
01/25/2017
367 N2
7.57
1.1
0.43
5.29
<1
24.2
183
19
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.849
2.34 132
<5
2
0.00137
MW-lOBR
05/27/2015
<10
24.1
2.44
0.225
9.05
<1
36.5
194
40
<0.1
<0.2
350
1.1
2.09
<5
---
---
MW-10BR
09/12/2015
<10
24.3
<1
0.083
9.28
<1
37.6
201
40
<0.1
<0.2
350
1
1.34
<5
---
---
_ _• _ • _ _ _ _
E1B
233
Fl
9. 97z9
329
32•.3
496
44
E 9.2
E 0.2
339
9.992
4�3
F
-
MW-10BR
01/06/2016
<10
22.7
<1
0.049
9.21
<1
36.7
196
42
<0.1
<0.2
370
0.902
1.28
<5
---
---
MW-10BR
04/07/2016
<10
19
<1
0.136
8.41
<1
37.2
181
41
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.952
1.51
33
3.771
0.00324
MW-10BR
07/14/2016
<10
19.2
<1
0.082
10
<1
40
191
41
<0.1
<0.2
340
0.993
1.68
<5
2.49
0.00316
MW-10BR
09/14/2016
<10
18.4
<1
0.152
9.11
<1
36.7
188
41
<0.1
<0.2
3229
1.1
2.04
<5
1.621
0.00293
W 10B/^9'2()
9
<10 N2
19.6
El
0.2-51
7.5l
Fl
35.6
3-&9
42
<0.1
.2
238
0.992
2.68
<3
3.736
0.08383
MW-10BR
01/26/2017
<10 N2
16.3
<1
0.213
8.1
<1
37
176
40
<0.1
<0.2
330
0.966
2.91
<5
2
0.00324
MW-14BR
06/10/2015
<10
1.43
<1
<0.01
5.52
<1
22
165
15
<0.1
<0.2
370
1
0.444
34
---
---
--•__•-_-_
22.8
4-
23
E9.92
7.93
g&5
23-4
484
3i.3
E9.1
E9.1
338
4.4
fl
44
-
-
MW-14BR
01/06/2016
25.8
1.44
1.8
0.014
7.19
<1
22.1
175
12
<0.1
<0.2
390
0.943
0.362
45
---
---
MW-14BR
04/08/2016
<10
1.39
2.72
<0.01
6.53
<1
22.2
159
13
<0.1
<0.2
380
0.944
<0.3
5
s'-
0.000298
MW-14BR
07/14/2016
<10
4.84
<1
<0.01
8.52
<1
24.7
181
11
<0.1
<0.2
360
1.1
0.745
12
3.01
0.000313
_ • _ _• _ _ _ _
446
3:49
2.96
E 9.91
7.2-3
22.7
326
43
E9.1
Q.2
364
4-4-
9-423
42
8 B89398
MW-14BR
11/10/2016
129 N2
1.44
4.92
<0.01 M2
6.7
<1
21.6
175
12
<0.1
<0.2
360
1 132
<0.3
7
2.18
0.0003
MW-14BR
01/26/2017
71.3 N2
1.53
1.57
<0.01
6.52
<1
22.2
165
13
<0.1
<0.2
350
1.1
0.43
<5
2.076
0.000332
MW-15BR
09/12/2015
<10
10.8
1.42
0.027
7.88
<1
32.9
110
26
<0.1
<0.2
300
1.6
0.369
<5
---
---
12,195,129475
E1B
4�
9.61
Q.92
844
g9.5
364
99
i9.7
9.428
E9.1
23�
4-.;L
-<1-
MW-15BR
01/05/2016
<10
13.8
<1
0.01
7.58
<1
35.3
92
22
<0.1
<0.2
280
0.694
<0.3
<5
---
---
MW-15BR
04/07/2016
<10
9.14
1.24
<0.01
6.05
<1
34.1
72
25
<0.1
<0.2
300
0.755
0.441
<5
3.64
0.00062
MW-15BR
07/12/2016
<10
20.9
<1
<0.01
5.51
<1
41.9
64
30
<0.1
<0.2
300
0.77
0.354
<5
2
0.000435
_ • _ _, _ _ - _
1B
9 q;z
� 1
f .91
5.03
32.6
2g
22
9.36
Q.2
33A
&753
Q.3
2
9-999633
MW-15BR
11/09/2016
<10 N2
16.8
1.86
<0.01
4.59
<1
24.9
140
28
<0.1
<0.2
360
0.782
0.488
<5
2.16
0.000895
MW-15BR
01/25/2017
<10 N2
11.4
1.18
<0.01
5.03
<1
28.2
141
29
<0.1
<0.2
350
0.776
0.456 132
<5
1.611
0.000685
MW-18BR
06/02/2015
14
7.62
<1
<0.01
4.59
<1
19
224
16
<0.1
<0.2
530
1.7
0.931
---
---
MW-18BR
09/14/2015
21
10.5
<1
<0.01
5.75
<1
20
209
3.7
-*G-2
<0.2
540
11
<0.3
<5
---
---
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTVReports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\Table 2- Background Groundwater Dataset_ROX.xlsx Page 4 of 6

TABLE 2
BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER RESULTS THROUGH JANUARY 2017
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Analytical Parameter
pH
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Bi-
carbonate
Alkalinity
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Carbonate
Alkalinity
Chloride
Chromium
(VI)
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Reporting Units
S.U.
NTUs
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
15A NCAC 02L Standard
6.5-8.5
NE
NE
NE
1*
10
700
4*
NE
700
2
NE
NE
250
10
10
1*
1000
300
15
NE
50
1
Sample ID
Sample
Collection Date
Field Parameters
Analytical Results
Bedrock Continued
--• -_, _--_
1L. 9
7Z.64
4-68
49Q
E0.5
49
E9.2
4-69
ESA
Q.98
89.9999i
F5
4-24
E9.93
9.99
4-3
E}
<94
-28
6H9
EO%
MW-18BR
01/05/2016
7.6
5.56
195
71
<1
<1
62
<1
195
<50
<1
94.5
<5
120
<0.03
4.24
1.63
<1
1260
<1
21.7
874
<0.05
MW-18BR
04/08/2016
8.3
4.68
191
10
<1
<1
51
<1
191
<50
<1
89.3
<5
120
<0.03
<1
<1
<1
1060
<1
22.7
819
<0.05
MW-18BR
11/09/2016
7.7
1.26
211
7
<1
<1
47
<1
211
<50
<1
97.2
<5
120
4:4
<1
<1
<1
1510
<1
22.1
871
<0.05
MW-18BR
01/25/2017
7.7
0.88
183
9
<1
<1
50
<1
183
1 <50
<1
89.7
<5
140
<1
I <1
<1
1250
<1
22.9
902
<0.05
MW-19BRL
06/16/2016
7.5
6.34
190 M1
120
<1
1.39
79
<1
190
<50
<1
58.1
<5
59
<0.03
<1
2.03
<1
2890
<1
13
1180
<0.05
PqW igBnz
•- •----
1L.2
9.98
2-34
4€4
_ 4
-2-Ej
$5
2-34
EBB
-<4
654 Bi
E5
43
E9.93
-<4
4.z�
i.ei
5939
E4
i4
42$B
Q.95
MW-19BRL
09/28/2016
7.2
7.18
244
225
<1
2.39
73
<1
244
<50
<1
73.8 M4
<5
68
.3
<1
1.33
<1
6220
<1
14.3 M4
1050
<0.05
-, - -, _ - - _
-7-.2
r. S
47L6
4.5
E4-
2.77Z
§✓
2-7-6
E4G
EI-
7Z8.7Z Bi
E5
4$
Q.5 93
4. B4
E}
E}
S(}
E}
}S-Bi
4$iB
Q.9 5
MW 19BRL
01/26/2017
7.2
2.64
284
44
<1
2.9
60
<1
284
<50
<1
92.3
<5
74
0.
<1
<1
<1
5570
<1
17
1110
<0.05
Prepared by:JHG Checked by: RHJ
Notes:
34 Indicates value omitted from dataset.
- Indicates parameter not measured or analyzed.
Indicates data removed/identified as an outlier
Indicates data removed due to autocorrelation
< - concentration not detected at or above the adjusted reporting limit. pCi/L - picocuries per liter
mg - N/L - Milligrams nitrogen per liter S.U. - Standard Unit
mg/L - Milligrams per liter ug/L - Micrograms per liter
NE - Not established ug/mL - micrograms per milliliter
NTU - Nephelometric turbidity unit
* - Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations (IMACs) of the 15A NCAC 02L Standard, Appendix 1, April, 1, 2013.
B - Target analyte detected in method blank at or above the reporting limit. Target analyte concentration in sample is less than 10X the concentration in the method blank. Analyte concentration in sample could be due to blank contamination.
Bl - Target analyte detected in method blank at or above the reporting limit. Target analyte concentration in sample was greater than 10X the concentration in the method blank. Analyte concentration in sample is not affected by blank contamination.
132 - Target analyte was detected in blank(s) at a concentration greater than 1/2 the reporting limit but less than the reporting limit. Analyte concentration in sample is valid and may be used for compliance purposes.
CH - The continuing calibration for this compound is outside of Pace Analytical acceptance limits. The results may be biased high.
CL - The continuing calibration for this compound is outside of Pace Analytical acceptance limits. The results may be biased low.
D3 - Sample was diluted due to the presence of high levels of non -target analytes or other matrix interference.
H1 - Analysis conducted outside the EPA method holding time.
j - Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit.
L3 - Analyte recovery in the laboratory control sample (LCS) exceeded quality control (QC) limits. Analyte presence below reporting limits in associated samples. Results unaffected by high bias.
M1 - Matrix spike recovery was high: the associated Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) was acceptable.
M2 - Matrix spike recovery was Low: the associated Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) was acceptable.
M4 - The spike recovery value was unusable since the analyte concentration in the sample was disproportionate to the spike level. The associated Laboratory Control Spike recovery was acceptable.
M6 - Matrix spike and Matrix spike duplicate recovery not evaluated against control limits due to sample dilution.
N2 - The lab does not hold accreditation for this parameter.
P2 - Re -extraction or re -analysis could not be performed due to insufficient sample amount.
RI - Relative Percent Difference (RPD) value was outside control limits.
S - Associated calibration check did not meet specified criteria.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTVReports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\Table 2- Background Groundwater Dataset_ROX.xlsx Page 5 of 6

TABLE 2
BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER RESULTS THROUGH JANUARY 2017
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Analytical Parameter
Methane
Molybdenum
Nickel
Nitrate +
Nitrite
Potassium
Selenium
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfate
Sulfide
Thallium
Total
Dissolved
Solids
Total Organic
Carbon
Vanadium
Zinc
Radium
(Total)
Uranium
(Total)
Reporting Units
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg-N/L
mg/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
pCi/L
ug/mL
15A NCAC 02L Standard
NE
NE
100
11
NE
20
NE
NE
250
NE
0.2*
500
NE
0.3*
1000
NE
NE
Sample ID
Sample
Collection Date
Analytical Results
Bedrock Continued
--• -_, _-__
i2.3
63
8.4
E9.92
_3
.5
444
2-3G
E1-
E94
443
8.4
_<4
f1G
-
-
MW-18BR
01/05/2016
11.7
4.92
2.11
<0.01
4.52
<1
18.8
232
5
<0.1
<0.2
530
3
<0.3
7
---
---
MW-18BR
04/08/2016
<10
2.98
<1
<0.01
10.4
<1
20.3
213
11
<0.1
<0.2
480
3.6
<0.3
<5
6.14
0.000574
MW-18BR
11/09/2016
17.7 N2
3.23
<1
<0.01
6.1
<1
17.4
249
13
<0.1
<0.2
530
1.8
<0.3
<5
1.703
0.001134
MW-18BR
01/25/2017
173 N2
4.67
<1
<0.01
8.74
<1
1 19.9
252
4.5
<0.1
<0.2
460
3.1
<0.3 132
1<5
1.344
0.00032
MW-19BRL
06/16/2016
-584
5.08
<1
<0.01
6.49
<1
36.7
189
7.7
<0.1
<0.2
380
-2-9
0.602
<5
2.39
0.000482
pqW 19BR6
• - • ----
5.98
�
fB 91
;Z.31
34
442
9.83
E94
Q.2
388
�6
8.74
4
8 888234
MW-19BRL
09/28/2016
37200
5.41
<1
<0.01
6.46
<1
34.1
200
0.18
<0.1
<0.2
430
9.6
0.75
<5
1.517
0.00035
--• --, _--_
8.54
-*4-
fB 92
3.96
39.2 B2
2-14
23
1 Q.1
9.2
44B
3.3
9.488
i.68
8-898387Z
MW-19BRL
01/26/2017
7.39
<1
<0.01
6.28
<1
31.1
1 230
1 5
1 <0.1
<0.2
440
1.9
<0.3
<5
2.84
0.00035
Prepared by: JHG Checked by: CDE
Notes:
34 Indicates value omitted from dataset.
- Indicates parameter not measured or analyzed.
Indicates data removed/identified as an outlier
Fmm� Indicates data removed due to autocorrelation
< - concentration not detected at or above the adjusted reporting limit. pCi/L - picocuries per liter
mg - N/L - Milligrams nitrogen per liter S.U. - Standard Unit
mg/L - Milligrams per liter ug/L - Micrograms per liter
NE - Not established ug/mL - micrograms per milliliter
NTU - Nephelometric turbidity unit
* - Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations (IMACs) of the 15A NCAC 02L Standard, Appendix 1, April, 1, 2013.
B - Target analyte detected in method blank at or above the reporting limit. Target analyte concentration in sample is less than 10X the concentration in the method blank. Analyte concentration in sample could be due to blank contamination.
Bl - Target analyte detected in method blank at or above the reporting limit. Target analyte concentration in sample was greater than 10X the concentration in the method blank. Analyte concentration in sample is not affected by blank contamination.
132 - Target analyte was detected in blank(s) at a concentration greater than 1/2 the reporting limit but less than the reporting limit. Analyte concentration in sample is valid and may be used for compliance purposes.
CH - The continuing calibration for this compound is outside of Pace Analytical acceptance limits. The results may be biased high.
CL - The continuing calibration for this compound is outside of Pace Analytical acceptance limits. The results may be biased low.
D3 - Sample was diluted due to the presence of high levels of non -target analytes or other matrix interference.
H1 - Analysis conducted outside the EPA method holding time.
j - Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit.
L3 - Analyte recovery in the laboratory control sample (LCS) exceeded quality control (QC) limits. Analyte presence below reporting limits in associated samples. Results unaffected by high bias.
M1 - Matrix spike recovery was high: the associated Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) was acceptable.
M2 - Matrix spike recovery was Low: the associated Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) was acceptable.
M4 - The spike recovery value was unusable since the analyte concentration in the sample was disproportionate to the spike level. The associated Laboratory Control Spike recovery was acceptable.
M6 - Matrix spike and Matrix spike duplicate recovery not evaluated against control limits due to sample dilution.
N2 - The lab does not hold accreditation for this parameter.
P2 - Re -extraction or re -analysis could not be performed due to insufficient sample amount.
RI - Relative Percent Difference (RPD) value was outside control limits.
S - Associated calibration check did not meet specified criteria.
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTVReports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\Table 2- Background Groundwater Dataset_ROX.xlsx Page 6 of 6

TABLE 3
UNSATURATED BACKGROUND SOIL DATA SUMMARY
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Analytical Parameter
pH
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
itrate N)
Potassium
Selenium
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfate
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Reporting Units
S.U.
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
PSRG Protection of Groundwater
NE
NE
0.9
5.8
580
63
45
3
NE
NE
360000
0.9
700
150
270
NE
65
1
NE
130
NE
NE
2.1
NE
NE
NE
0.28
6
1200
Sample ID
Sample
Collection Date
Analytical Results
MW-08 (14-16)
04/27/2015
7.6
4110
---
ESz
49.3
0.23 j
E13.1
E0-63
1830
E263
0.82 j
4.6 j
2.4
10200
<5.2
2910
222
<0.0086
<2.6
1.4
E26.3
836
---
221 j
13.7
E263
---
21.6
41.4
MW-08(21-23)
04/27/2015
7.3
14800
---
F5.7
128
i-4-
E142
E9.63
ii200
E283
il-4
0.78j
20500
6
<0.0092
<2.8
34-7
5680
---
211j
E283
---
43.1
MW-13BR (22-24)
03/04/2015
8.0
6730
---
E1.2
102
0.14
L 9-'
E814
3898
E299
8.7
8.1
41
13100
<1.2
4020
132
<0.01
<0.6
4.4
E29.4
2320
389
13.2
E299
---
59.3
25.1
MW-14BR(1-1.25)
02/25/2015
-::
11000
---
71.3
0.14j
<3.1
E9.15
593
E300
4.1
5.3
11.1
16100
4.8
4960
79.4
0.011
<0.62
3.4
E30
1110
183
20.4
E300
---
45.2
26.6
MW-14BR(31-31.5)
02/25/2015
8.8
8590
---
<1
170
0.11j
<2.6
E812
2810
E254
9
8.6
23.1
12600
<1
6490
238
<0.0084
<0.51
6.5
E25..4
4830
<1
383
22.4
E254
---
31
37.9
MW-14BR(37.5-38)
02/25/2015
8.0
12300
---
<1.1
198
0.25
<2.8
E0:}3
6340
E286
54
17.7
15200
<1.1
290
<0.0089
<0.55
5-33.7
E28.6
3860
<1.1
174
E286
---
33.3
49.6
MW-17 (29-31)
04/21/2015
8.4
8530
---
84.3
0.32
E861
5300
E250
4.8
5.7
5.7
19800
<5.1
5920
315
<0.0081
<2.5
7.9
E25
857
---
183 j
18.8
E258
---
23
56.4
MW-18 (31-33)
05/16/2015
7.3
3420
---
---
31.3
0.22 j
E0.2
581
E292
1.9
---
4.8
7000
<6
686
353
<0.0092
<3
<1.5
E29.2
731
---
222 j
8
E292
---
3.1 j
18.7
MW-18 (37-38)
05/16/2015
7.3
3600
---
---
18.4
0.18 j
F<2.:5
Eg,�3
670
1.3 j
---
22.4
3410
<6.1
708
175
<0.0098
<3.1
<1.5
E29.6
486
---
<306
6.7
E296
---
---
16.2
BGSB-02(4-5)
07/18/2017
6.78
31000 M
<0.48 M
1.1
110 M
0.51
<0.024
2000 M
3j
39-P9
74
-.
5.1
ttd09
200 M
<0.092
0.63 j,M
i8-M
0.16j
1900 M
1.2j
790
29 M
<11
0.093j
51 M
BGSB-02(7-8)
07/18/2017
7.43
9000
<0.44
0.5
33
0.29
<0.022
460
7.2j
4.5
5.5
11
7100
2.3
1600
46
<0.087
<2
2.1
0.12j
540
0.3j
220j
7.9
<11
0.062j
31
11
BGSB-14(2-3)
07/19/2017
6.03
25000
<0.53
1.1
48
0.4
2.7
<0.026
720
6j
22
3.9
15
21000
960
78
0.03j
0.58j
3.3
0.32
260j
0.31j
E530
11
64
19
BGSB-14(4-5)
07/19/2017
5.4
27000
<0.53
0.39j
97
0.26
1.2j
<0.026
590
9
6.6
69
22000
4.5
5100
97
<0.084
0.61j
4.2
0.47
1600
0.53j
180j
16
IL
0.049j
54
31
BGSB-14(7-8)
07/19/2017
6.1
24000
<0.52
0.45j
160
0.34
1.1j
<0.026
1100
2.8j
7.4
8.5
32
19000
2.1
5400
120
<0.089
<2
4.4
0.066j
3000
0.57j
320
31
<11
0.1j
48
31
BGSB-14(9-10)
07/19/2017
6.54
13000
<0.47
0.13j
110
0.59
<2.1
<0.024
2000
2.2j
3.8
8
69
15000
1.1
4300
110
<0.084
<1.7
3.4
0.095j
2300
0.74j
330
29
<10
0.04j
45
34
BGSB-18(2-3)
07/19/2017
7.18
18000
<0.5
0.91
48
0.31
<2.7
<0.025
610
7.1j
i5
5
14
15000
5.3
1800
47
<0.08
<2.1
4
0.28
440
0.65j
110j
9.9
7.6j
0.1j
47
23
BGSB-18(4-5)
07/19/2017
7.11
9300
0.21 j,B
0.49
23
0.37
<1.9
<0.019
230
1.8j
6.9
2.2
10
9700
3.6
950
39
<0.086
<1.5
1.3j
0.057j
430
0.37j
120j
4.6
<11
0.055j
19
16
BGSB-18(7-8)
07/19/2017
6.98
11000
0.096 j,B
0.58
29
0.55
<2.9
<0.02
580
2.2j
4.3
3.3
13
12000
5
1400
82
<0.088
<2.3
1.6j
0.071j
560
0. 38j
210j
9
<12
0.05j
20
39
BGSB-18(9-10)
07/19/2017
7.69
8400
<0.47
0.71
22
<2.4
<0.024
660
5.3j
5.2
4.3
19
9900
3.4
960
73
<0.076
<1.9
1.8j
0.14j
360
0.74j
270
8.6
<11
0.045j
30
40
BGSB-18 (12-13)
07/19/2017
8.76
4600
<0.4
0.24 j
26
0.4
<2.1
<0.02
480
2.7 j
1.8
1.6
5.6
7200
2.7
980
61
<0.084
<1.7
<1.7
0.065 j
600
1
150 j
10
<10
0.03 j
9.6
27
BGSB-112(2-3)
07/19/2017
5.53
28000
<0.59
0.44j
130
0.5
1.4j
<0.03
160j
7.9j
4.3
4.6
38
21000
3.8
4000
160
<0.1
0.62j
1.7j
0.47
3000
0.35j
91j
7.7
13
0.1j
43
53
BGSB-112(4-5)
07/19/2017
5.65
31000
<0.56
0.6
120
0.57
1.3j
<0.028
250j
llj
4.1
29
21000
5.6
4100
360
<0.097
<2.1
1.9j
0.08j
2500
1.1j
130j
10
<12
0.083j
36
54
BGSB-112(7-8)
07/19/2017
5.3
16000
0.27 j,B
0.4j
77
<2.4
<0.024
460
45
4.1
8.7
60
14000
2.4
2700
110
<0.091
<1.9
2
0.35
1400
1.1j
98j
14
<11
0.047j
39
23
BGSB-112(9-10)
07/19/2017
7.63
21000
<0.56
0.42j
220
0.74
1.2j
<0.028
1100
5.5j
2
_.
23000
1.9
5900
310
<0.095
<2.2
<2.2
0.064j
5500
0.99j
90j
21
<12
0.12j
36
43
BGSB-112(14-15)
07/19/2017
7.55
19000
<0.54
0.12j
130
0.71
<2.8
<0.027
1200
3.9j
7.3
8.9
6.6
17000
1.4
6600
230
<0.095
<2.2
3.3
0.054j
6500
0.33j
100j
23
<12
0.1j
37
36
BGSB-112 (19-20)
07/19/2017
6.42
14000
<0.43
0.2j
130
0.54
0.98j
<0.022
850
1.3j
3
7.1
2.5
15000
1.2
5000
270
<0.083
<1.8
2.2
0.038j
5300
0.49j
96j
18
<11
0.11
32
35
Prepared by: JHG Checked by: BDR
Notes:
54 - Indicates values omitted from dataset.
--- - Value removed; non -detect concentration exceeding PSRG Protection of Groundwater.
- Indicates data removed /identified as an outlier.
< - concentration not detected at or above the adjusted reporting limit.
B - Target analyte detected in method blank at or above the reporting limit. Target analyte concentration in sample is less than 10X the concentration in the method blank. Analyte
concentration in sample could be due to blank contamination.
j - Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit.
M - Matrix spike / matrix spike duplicate failure
mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram
NE - Not established
PSRG Protection of Groundwater - NCDEQ IHSB Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals Table - October 2016
S.U. - Standard Units
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\Table 3 - Background Soil Dataset_ROX.xlsx Page 1 of 1

TABLE 4
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS - TRANSITION ZONE
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Parameter
Reporting Unit
Nuber of
Background
Wells
Number of
Samples
Number
of NDs
Percent
NDs
Distribution
Coverage
(%)
Confidence
Level
(%)
UTL
PH
S.U.
3
33
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
6.3 - 7.6
Alkalinity
mg/L
3
19
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
244
Aluminum
pg/L
3
31
1
3
Normal
95
95
807
Antimony
pg/L
3
32
32
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Arsenic
pg/L
3
25
25
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Barium
pg/L
3
32
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
91
Beryllium
pg/L
3
19
19
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Bicarbonate
mg/L
3
19
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
244
Boron
pg/L
3
32
32
100
NA
NA
NA
50
Cadmium
pg/L
3
32
32
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Calcium
mg/L
3
19
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
106
Carbonate
mg/L
3
16
16
100
NA
NA
NA
5
Chloride
mg/L
3
32
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
150
Chromium (VI)
pg/L
3
15
0
0
Normal
95
95
16.1
Chromium
pg/L
3
31
3
10
Normal
95
95
18.1
Cobalt
pg/L
3
16
15
94
NA
NA
NA
1
Copper
pg/L
3
32
19
59
Non -Parametric
85
95
10
Iron
pg/L
3
31
0
0
Gamma
95
95
1173
Lead
pg/L
3
25
25
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Magnesium
mg/L
3
19
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
42.3
Manganese
pg/L
3
32
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
405
Mercury
pg/L
3
32
32
100
NA
NA
NA
0.05
Methane
pg/L
3
18
18
100
NA
NA
NA
10
Molybdenum
pg/L
3
18
11
61
Non -Parametric
85
95
4.17
Nickel
pg/L
3
31
12
39
Normal
95
95
5.22
Nitrate + Nitrite
mg-N/L
3
18
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
3.4
Potassium
mg/L
3
19
1
5
Normal
95
95
4.69
Selenium
pg/L
3
25
20
80
Non -Parametric
85
95
1.78
Sodium
mg/L
3
19
0
0
Normal
95
95
36
Strontium
pg/L
3
18
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
760
Sulfate
mg/L
3
32
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
37
Sulfide
mg/L
3
18
18
100
NA
NA
NA
0.1
TDS
mg/L
3
32
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
540
Thallium
pg/L
3
31
31
100
NA
NA
NA
0.2
TOC
mg/L
3
18
0
0
Lognormal
95
95
2.72
Vanadium
pg/L
3
18
0
0
Normal
95
95
30.2
Zinc
pg/L
3
31
24
77
Non -Parametric
85
95
12
Radium (Total)
pCi/L
3
12
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
5.45
Uranium (Total)
pg/mL
3
12
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
0.00516
Prepared by:JHG Checked by:
Notes:
Background wells: BG-1, MW-15D, and MW-18D
S.U. =
Standard Units
mg/L = milligrams per liter
TDS =
Total Dissolved Solids
mg - N/L = Milligrams nitrogen per liter
TOC =
Total Organic Carbon
NA = Not applicable; dataset contains >90 percent NDs
pg/L =
micrograms per liter
NO = Non -detect concentration
pg/mL
= micrograms per milliliter
pCi/L = picocuries per liter
UTL =
Upper Tolerance Limit
Radium (Total) = Radium-226 and Radium-228 combined
Uranium (Total) = Uranium-233, Uranium-234, Uranium-236, and Uranium-238 combined
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\
Table 4 - Statistical Analysis Results - Transition Zone_ROX.xlsx Page 1 of 1

TABLE 5
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS - BEDROCK ZONE
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Parameter
Reporting Unit
Number of
Background
Wells
Number of
Samples
Number
of NDs
Percent
NDs
Distribution
Coverage
(%)
Confidence
Level
(%)
UTL
pH
S.U.
6
36
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
6.8 - 8.3
Alkalinity
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Normal
95
95
317
Aluminum
pg/L
6
35
1
3
Gamma
95
95
378
Antimony
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Arsenic
pg/L
6
35
32
91
NA
NA
NA
1
Barium
pg/L
6
35
0
0
Lognormal
95
95
185
Beryllium
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Bicarbonate
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Normal
95
95
317
Boron
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
50
Cadmium
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Calcium
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Gamma
95
95
102
Carbonate
mg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
5
Chloride
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
120
Chromium (VI)
pg/L
6
20
13
65
Non -Parametric
85
95
0.19
Chromium
pg/L
6
34
23
68
Non -Parametric
85
95
3.61
Cobalt
pg/L
6
32
17
53
Non -Parametric
85
95
6.4
Copper
pg/L
6
34
31
91
NA
NA
NA
1
Iron
pg/L
6
34
0
0
Gamma
95
95
4268
Lead
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Magnesium
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Normal
95
95
31.5
Manganese
pg/L
6
35
0
0
Normal
95
95
1198
Mercury
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
0.05
Methane
pg/L
6
32
20
63
Non -Parametric
85
95
367
Molybdenum
pg/L
6
35
0
0
Gamma
95
95
35.2
Nickel
pg/L
6
34
18
53
Non -Parametric
85
95
2.11
Nitrate + Nitrite
mg-N/L
6
34
18
53
Non -Parametric
85
95
0.295
Potassium
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
9.28
Selenium
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
1
Sodium
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
37.6
Strontium
pg/L
6
35
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
232
Sulfate
mg/L
6
35
0
0
Gamma
95
95
73.5
Sulfide
mg/L
6
34
34
100
NA
NA
NA
0.1
TDS
mg/L
6
34
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
530
Thallium
pg/L
6
35
35
100
NA
NA
NA
0.2
TOC
mg/L
6
34
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
3.6
Vanadium
pg/L
6
35
9
26
Normal
95
95
2.5
Zinc
pg/L
6
29
22
76
Non -Parametric
85
95
7
Radium (Total)
pCi/L
6
21
0
0
Lognormal
95
95
5.21
Uranium (Total)
pg/mL
6
23
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
0.00324
Notes:
Background wells: BG-1BR, MW-10BR, MW-14BR, MW-15BR, MW-18BR, and MW-19BRL
mg/L = milligrams per liter
mg - N/L = Milligrams nitrogen per liter
NA = Not applicable; dataset contains >90 percent NDs
NO = Non -detect concentration
pCi/L = picocuries per liter
Radium (Total) = Radium-226 and Radium-228 combined
Uranium (Total) = Uranium-233, Uranium-234, Uranium-236, and Uranium-238 combined
Prepared by:JHG Checked by:
S.U. =
Standard Units
TDS =
Total Dissolved Solids
TOC =
Total Organic Carbon
pg/L =
micrograms per liter
pg/mL
= micrograms per milliliter
UTL =
Upper Tolerance Limit
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\
Table 5 - Statistical Analysis Results - Bedrock_ROX.xlsx Page 1 of 1

TABLE 6
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS - BACKGROUND SOIL
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Parameter
Reporting Unit
Number of
Samples
Number of
NDs
Percent
NDs
Distribution
Coverage
(0/0)
Confidence
Level
(%)
UTL
PH
S.U.
25
0
0
Normal
95
95
4.4 - 9.7
Aluminum
mg/kg
26
0
0
Normal
95
95
34,353
Antimony
mg/kg
17
14
82
NA
NA
NA
0.56
Arsenic
mg/kg
19
2
11
Gamma
95
95
1.56
Barium
mg/kg
26
0
0
Normal
95
95
222
Beryllium
mg/kg
23
0
0
Normal
95
95
0.801
Boron
mg/kg
19
12
63
Non -Parametric
85
95
2.9
Cadmium
mg/kg
17
17
100
NA
NA
NA
0.024
Calcium
mg/kg
22
0
0
Gamma
95
95
3,113
Chloride
mg/kg
15
0
0
Normal
95
95
11.8
Chromium
mg/kg
21
0
0
Normal
95
95
10.7
Cobalt
mg/kg
19
0
0
Normal
95
95
11.3
Copper
mg/kg
25
0
0
Gamma
95
95
114
Iron
mg/kg
25
0
0
Normal
95
95
27,147
Lead
mg/kg
25
7
28
Normal
95
95
6.89
Magnesium
mg/kg
23
0
0
Non -Parametric
85
95
6,490
Manganese
mg/kg
25
0
0
Gamma
95
95
532
Mercury
mg/kg
26
24
92
NA
NA
NA
0.084
Molybdenum
mg/kg
26
22
85
Non -Parametric
85
95
2.8
Nickel
mg/kg
23
4
17
Normal
95
95
6.87
Nitrate (as N)
mg/kg
17
0
0
Lognormal
95
95
0.945
Potassium
mg/kg
26
0
0
Gamma
95
95
9,465
Selenium
mg/kg
19
2
11
Gamma
95
95
1.63
Sodium
mg/kg
24
1
4
Gamma
95
95
456
Strontium
mg/kg
24
0
0
Gamma
95
95
39.2
Sulfate
mg/kg
15
13
87
NA
NA
NA
11
Thallium
mg/kg
16
0
0
Normal
95
95
0.148
Vanadium
mg/kg
24
1
4
Normal
95
95
68.7
Zinc
mg/kg
25
0
0
Normal
95
95
63.4
Prepared by: ]HG Checked by:
Notes:
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not applicable; dataset contains <4 detected concentrations
ND = Non -detect concentration
S.U. = Standard Unit
UTL = Upper Tolerance Limit
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\
Table 6 - Statistical Analysis Results_Soil_ROX.xlsx Page 1 of 1

TABLE 7
GROUNDWATER PROVISIONAL BACKGROUND THRESHOLD VALUES
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Parameter
Reporting Unit
NCAC 02L Standard
Provisional Background Threshold Values
Transition Zone
Bedrock
PH*
S.U.
6.5-8.5
6.3 - 7.6
6.8 - 8.3
Alkalinity
mg/L
NE
244
317
Aluminum
lag/L
NE
807
378
Antimony
lag/L
18
1
1
Arsenic
lag/L
10
1
1
Barium
lag/L
700
91
185
Beryllium
lag/L
48
1
1
Bicarbonate
mg/L
NE
244
317
Boron
lag/L
700
50
50
Cadmium
lag/L
2
1
1
Calcium
mg/L
NE
106
102
Carbonate
mg/L
NE
5
5
Chloride
mg/L
250
150
120
Chromium (VI)
lag/L
10
16.1
0.19
Chromium
lag/L
10
18.1
3.61
Cobalt
lag/L
18
1
6.4
Copper
lag/L
1000
10
1
Iron
lag/L
300
1173
4268
Lead
lag/L
15
1
1
Magnesium
mg/L
NE
42.3
31.5
Manganese
lag/L
50
405
1198
Mercury
lag/L
1
0.05
0.05
Methane
lag/L
NE
10
367
Molybdenum
lag/L
NE
4.17
35.2
Nickel
lag/L
100
5.22
2.11
Nitrate + Nitrite
mg-N/L
NE
3.4
0.295
Potassium
mg/L
11
4.69
9.28
Selenium
lag/L
20
1.78
1
Sodium
mg/L
NE
36
37.6
Strontium
lag/L
NE
760
232
Sulfate
mg/L
250
37
73.5
Sulfide
mg/L
NE
0.1
0.1
TDS
mg/L
500
540
530
Thallium
lag/L
0.2°
0.2
0.2
TOC
mg/L
NE
2.72
3.6
Vanadium
lag/L
0.3°
30.2
2.49
Zinc
lag/L
1000
12
7
Radium (Total)
pCi/L
NE
5.45
5.21
Uranium (Total)
lag/mL
NE
0.00516
0.00324
Notes:
* - Upper and lower tolerance limits calculated for parameter
t, - Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations (IMACs) of 15A NCAC .021 Standard, Appendix 1, April 1, 2013
mg/L - milligrams per liter
mg - N/L - Milligrams nitrogen per liter
NE - Not Established
pCi/L - picocuries per liter
Radium (Total) - Radium-226 and Radium-228 combined
Uranium (Total) - Uranium-233, Uranium-234, Uranium-236, and Uranium-238 combined
Prepared by: JH(, Checked by: MC:M
S.U. - Standard Unit
TDS - Total Dissolved Solids
TOC - Total Organic Carbon
pg/L - micrograms per liter
pg/mL - micrograms per milliliter
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Tables\
Table 7 - Provisional Background Groundwater Threshold Values_ROX.xlsx Page 1 of 1

TABLE 8
SOIL PROVISIONAL BACKGROUND THRESHOLD VALUES
ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC, SEMORA, NC
Parameter
Reporting Unit
PSRG Protection of
Groundwater
BTV
pH*
S.U.
NE
4.4 - 9.7
Aluminum
mg/kg
NE
34353
Antimony
mg/kg
0.9
0.56
Arsenic
mg/kg
5.8
1.56
Barium
mg/kg
580
222
Beryllium
mg/kg
63
0.801
Boron
mg/kg
45
2.9
Cadmium
mg/kg
3
0.024
Calcium
mg/kg
NE
3113
Chloride
mg/kg
NE
11.8
Chromium
mg/kg
3.8
10.7
Cobalt
mg/kg
0.9
11.3
Copper
mg/kg
700
114
Iron
mg/kg
150
27147
Lead
mg/kg
270
6.89
Magnesium
mg/kg
N E
6490
Manganese
mg/kg
65
532
Mercury
mg/kg
1
0.084
Molybdenum
mg/kg
NE
2.8
Nickel
mg/kg
130
6.87
Nitrate (as N)
mg/kg
NE
0.945
Potassium
mg/kg
NE
9465
Selenium
mg/kg
2.1
1.63
Sodium
mg/kg
NE
456
Strontium
mg/kg
NE
39.2
Sulfate
mg/kg
NE
11
Thallium
mg/kg
0.28
0.148
Vanadium
mg/kg
6
68.7
Zinc
mg/kg
1200
63.4
Prepared by: ]HG Checked by: MCM
N otes
* - Upper and lower threshold values calculated for parameter
BTV - Background Threshold Value
mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram
NE - Not Established
PSRG Protection of Groundwater - NCDEQ IHSB Preliminary Soil Remediation Soil Remediation Goals Table — October 2016
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics_CAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFTJables\Table 8 -Provisional Background Soil Threshold Values_ROX.xlsx Page 1 of 1

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
APPENDIX A
SynTerra
BOX AND Q-Q - PLOTS TRANSITION ZONE
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
Normal Probability Plot Section
8.0
•
7.5
•
•
7.0 CL
6.5
6.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
280
•
260
240 ••• •
•
c
M
Q 220
•
200 •
180
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
2000
1500 • •
E
.E
1000
Q ••
•
500 Ono
0 ••
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 «N ��••• • • • •
0.9
>, 0.8
O
E
c
Q 0.7
0.6
0.5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
5-
4-
3-
2-
0-
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
100
s0
r
•
60
E
m 40
•
•
20
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 • • • ••••• •• • • • • •
0.8
0.6
a�
m
0.4
0.2
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
280
•
260
•
240 ••�
m
220
•
200 •
180
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
51.0
50.5
c
0 50.0 f
m
49.5
49.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 �••• • • • •
0.8
E 0.6
.E
U 0.4
0.2
0.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
120
•
•
•
100
•
E •
z
80
C)
N•
60
•
• •• •
40
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
10 • • •
9
$
c�
L
U 7-
6-
5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
200
150 ••• •
as
.p 100
t
U
50
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
15
•
•
•
_ 10 •
> •
EI
.E
O
L •
V 5 •
•
0 •
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
50
40
E 30
.E
0
V 20
10 i
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
5-
4-
•
•
3-
�a
0
2
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
15
10 ••
CL
CL
U •
5
•
•
•
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
2000
1500
0 1000
•
500
0 • ••
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
5 •••• • • •
4
3
M
J
2-
0-
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
50
•
•
45
• •
40
••
E
.N
= 35
c�
30
•
25
• • •••
•
20
•
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
1500
1000 • •
as
as
ca
500
•
•
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
0.20 •.•••• • • •
0.15
v
m
0.10
0.05
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
11.0
10.5
m
c
s 10.0 f
9.5
9.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
15 ,
10
E
as
o • •
� 5
•
•
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
50
40
30
v
Z
20 •
•
10•
0 • • • ••
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
4
•
•
•
•
3 •
•
Z
�I 2-
0
•
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
6
•
5 •
•
E 4 ••
.N •
cNa •
a 3
2 •
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
10 N• • • • •
E 6
._
as
m
W 4
2 •
r
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
40
•
35 •
E
30
Cnn
25
•
20
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
800
•
700
•
600
E
500
400
300
200
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
50
•
40
•
30
� w
•
20
w
10 •
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
0.20
0.18
0.16
a�
0.14
0.12
0.10
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
0.25
0.20 •• • •
E
t
H
0.15
0.10
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
800
700
•
600 • •
•
N
p 500
H
N~
400 N~
•
300 •••
•
•
•
200
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
2.5
•
•
2.0
•
C)
p 1.5 •
H
1.0 •••
N
•
0.5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
30
25 •
•
20
15 N
10
5 •
0-
1Ll
5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
20
•
15
•
v
N ••
•
10
•
•
•
5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
25
20 to
• •
N 15
NI
E
M 10
5
• •
•
•
0-
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
2.0
1.5
00
N
NI
E
_M
•
0.5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 '/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
25
20
�a
0 15
~I
E
10
5 • •
• • • ••
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
1.0
0.8
M
N 0.6
EI
M
7
CT 0.4
0.2
0.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
1.0
0.8
N 0.6
EI
M
7
'T 0.4
0.2
0.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0.4 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
1.0
0.8
cc
N 0.6
EI
M
7
'T 0.4
0.2
0.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
0.006
0.005 •
•
0.004
00 • •
M •
NI
0.003
M
0.002
0.001
•
0.000
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX A
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 12:59:11 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_TZ_no ND column.NCSS
0.006
0.005 •
•
0.004 • •
H
EI 0.003
0.002
0.001
•
0.000
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

Proposed Background Threshold Values for Naturally Occurring
Concentrations in Groundwater and Soil October 2017
Roxboro Steam Electric Plant
APPENDIX B
BOX AND Q-Q PLOTS - BEDROCK
SynTerra
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\Statistics LAMA\BTV Reports for CSAs\Roxboro\DRAFT\Roxboro_BTV Report
Text_CSA2_DRAFT.docx

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
Normal Probability Plot Section
8.5
•
8.0 •••
Q 7.5
•
•
1�
7.0
6.5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
300
•
•
250
SIP
200 �
150 •
•
100
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PI\
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
400
•
•
300
E
200 •
Q ••
•
100 �r
I
•
0 • • •••
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 ••«�••• • • • •
0.9
>, 0.8
_
0
E
Q 0.7
0.6
0.5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
3.0
2.5 • • t
•• t
2.0
v
.(D 1.5
L • •
Q
1.0 •
•
0.5 • • •
0.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
150
•
•
•
•
100 •
•
E
M
m �
50
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 ••«�••• • • • •
0.8
E
0.6
aD
m
0.4
0.2
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
300
•
•
250
as 1
c
200
v �
150 •
•
100
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 nign17 1-a3:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
51.0
50.5
0 50.0 t
0
m
49.5
49.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 ••« ---- • • • •
0.8
E 0.6-ZZ
.E
U 0.4
0.2
0.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
120
100 •
•
•
••••
80 •
�a
V 60
• ••
•
40 •
•
20
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
10 «"• • • • •
9-
8-
0
L
U
7-
6-
5-
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
150
•
•
•
100
(D •
L
_o
V •
•
50
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
2.0
1.5
>I •
E •
.E
1.0
0
t
t�
0.5
•
r
0.0 • • ••
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
15
10
E
0
L
U
5
•
•
•
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
25
20 • •
15 • •
�a
• •
0
U
10
5 M •
•
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
5
4
L
CCL 3
0
U
2 • •
1
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
8000
6000 • •
•
o 4000
2000
•
•
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 ••« ---- • • • •
0.8
0.6
c�
CD
J
0.4
0.2
0.0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
30 •
•
M•
•
25
20
E
'N
= 15
ca
5.
10
•
5
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
1500
•
1000 : ••
as •
� M•
500 •
0 • • ••~
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0. 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
0.20 • • • •
0.15
L
C�
G
0.10
0.05
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
30000
25000 • •
20000 • •
t 15000
5
10000
5000
•
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM �T
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
30
25
•
20 ••
•
c �
15
0
10
map
•
5
0
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
5 • •
4
3 • •
m •
v ••
Z
2-
0-
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
0.60 •
0.45
•
L
4)I 0.30 •
c�a •
Z i
0.15 •
•
•
0.00 • • • ••
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
12
10 •
E
.� 8
•
0
a
6
•
4
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
1.0 ••«�••• • • • •
0.9
E 0.8
m
a�
U) 0.7
0.6
0.5
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
50
•
40 • •
•
•
E •
30 •
0
20
•
10
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
300
250 • •
E 200
c
0
L
Cl) 150
N
•
100
50
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.' 7/10/2017 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
50
40 «�••• • •
•
30
m
Cn 20 •
10
•
0 • ••
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data

ROXBORO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT APPENDIX B
NCSS 11.0.4 7/1 n/gel 7 1:43:43 PM
Normal Probability Plots
Dataset ...\Roxboro_BG GW Analytical Results thru 2017-06_Bedrock_no ND column.NCSS
0.5
0.4
aD
0.3
U)
0.2 •• • •
0.1
1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99
Percent of Data