NC0003417_Updated Renewal Application_20141031

DUKE
ENERGY.
PROGRESS
October 31, 2014
H. F. Lee Energy Complex
Duke Energy Progress
1199 Black Jack Church Road
Goldsboro, NC 27530
Jeff Poupart, Section Chief
Water Quality Permitting Section RECEIVEDIDENRIDWR
North Carolina Division of Water Resources ������
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Water Quallty
• Subject: Duke Energy Progress, Inc. Permitting Section
H.F. Lee Energy Complex
NPDES Permit No. NC0003417
Wayne County
Update of Renewal application originally submitted on November 20, 2012
Dear Mr. Poupart:
The current NPDES permit for the H.F. Lee Energy Complex expired on May 31, 2013. As the
subject facility made timely application for renewal of the subject NPDES Permit, consisting of
EPA Application Form 1 - General Information, EPA Application Form 2C - Wastewater
Discharge Information, all in triplicate, the site continues to operate under an administratively
extended permit.
Since almost two years have passed since the original renewal application submittal we are
providing this update to the facility's NPDES application. This update consists of:
1. An update to EPA Form 1 originally submitted November 20, 2012.
2. An updated line drawing showing water flow through the facility in accordance with
EPA Form 2C Item II -A. (An update to Attachment 3 in the November 2012
application).
3. An updated description of Flows, Sources of Pollution and treatment technologies in
accordance with EPA Form 2C Item II-B. (An update of Attachment 4 in the
November 2012 application).
4. An updated list of chemicals in accordance with EPA Form 2C Item VI. (An update to
attachment 5 of the November 2012 application).
5. A seep monitoring plan including site map, a summary of samplingTTA
ysis
conducted of seeps and a monitoring plan for seeps. - 4l .re, -p r IA,A
6. An updated ground water monitoring plan which includes a receptor survey, ,,,e
sampling & analysis plan and a flow directional map. ha I dMJ,--_Ck rI
ck Q. e-
IA
As you are aware, Duke has permanently closed the coal fired units and constructed a
combined cycle generation unit on another part of the plant property. There has been no
discharge to the Neuse River via outfalls 001, 002 or 003 in over one year.

The appropriate attachments to the facility's NPDES application are being updated to include
the following information:
1. There is the potential for chlorinated wastewater to be present in the waste stream
tributary to outfall 003. The potential for chlorinated water in this outfall comes from
the wet surface air cooler (WSAC) blowdown and from quench water used to cool
this blowdown stream. There is currently no discharge from outfall 003. Duke will
install a de -chlorination system prior to any water being released from outfall 003.
2. Duke is adding two foam control chemicals to our list of potential substances that
could be discharged that may not be covered by analysis. These chemicals may be
used to ensure we meet the requirement that no foam "in other than trace amounts"
be discharged. These chemicals would generally only be used when the plant's
reverse osmosis system for plant process water is cleaned. An updated attachment
5 with this modification is attached along with a MSDS sheet for the new chemicals.
3. The blowdown stream from the Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) is routed to
the onsite 550 acre wastewater cooling pond treatment unit. Previous
correspondence had indicated this flow could be routed to the Neuse River via outfall
003. An updated flow diagram is attached for reference.
While these updates are generally minor, we understand that they may result in some
modification of the terms of a reissued NPDES permit.
If you have any questions regarding the enclosed information please contact Shannon Langley
at [phone].
I certify, tinder penalty of law, that this document and all attachments tivere prepared cruder my direction or
supervision in accordance with a systent designed to assure that qualfedpersonnelproperly gather and evaluate
the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons
directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, trite, accurate, and complete. I ant aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fines and imprisomnent for knowing violations.
Sincerely,
lf� XX5��—
Rick Grant - Manager
H. F. Lee Energy Complex
Enclosures

cc
Ricky Miller — w/attachments
Tommy Hare, ORC — w/attachment
Shannon Langley — NC 14 — w/attachments
Water Quality
Permitting section

Update to Form submitted November 20, 2012
Please print or type in the unshaded areas only. Form Aooroveri (AMR Nn 9nen-nnaa
FORM
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1. EPA I.D. NUMBER
1
:-EPA GENERAL INFORMATION
s MA C
Consolidated Permits Program
F 0
GENERAL
(Rend the "General hrsi velions"fi fore
smiting.)
2 J 11 15
LABEL ITEMS
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
If a preprinted label has been provided, affix it in the
designated space. Review the information carefully; if any of it
I. EPA I.D. NUMBER
is incorrect, cross through it and enter the correct data in the
PLEASE PLACE LABEL IN THIS SPACE
appropriate fill-in area below. Also, if any of the preprinted data
is absent (the area to the left of the label space lists the
information that should appear), please provide it in the proper
fill-in area(s) below. If the label is complete and correct, you
III. FACILITY NAME
V. FACILITY MAILING
need not complete Items I, III, V, and VI (except VI-B which
ADDRESS
must be completed regardless). Complete all items if no label
has been provided. Refer to the instructions for detailed item
descriptions and for the legal authorizations under which this
VI. FACILITY LOCATION
data is collected.
11. POLLUTANT CHARACTERISTICS
INSTRUCTIONS: Complete A through J to determine whether you need to submit any
permit application forms to the EPA. If you answer "yes" to any questions, you must
submit this form and the supplemental form listed in the parenthesis following the question. Mark "X" in the box in the third column if the supplemental form is attached. If
you answer "no" to each question, you need not submit any of these forms. You may answer "no" if your activity is excluded from permit requirements; see Section C of the
instructions. See also, Section D of the instructions for definitions of bold-faced terms.
Mark
'X'
hiark'X'
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS
YES
NO
FORM
ATTACHED
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS
YES
NO
FORM
ATTACHED
A. Is this facility a publicly owned treatment works which
B. Does or will this facility (either existing or proposed)
results in a discharge to waters of the U.S.? (FORM 2A)
X
include a concentrated animal feeding operation or
X
aquatic animal production facility which results in a
1s
17
18
19
20
21
discharge to waters of the U.S.? (FORM 2B)
C. Is this a facility which currently results in discharges to
X �/
X �/
D. Is this a proposed facility (other than those described in A
waters of the U.S. other than those described in A or B
or B above) which will result in a discharge to waters of
X
above? (FORM 2C)
the U.S.? (FORM 2D)
22
23
24
E. Does or will this facility treat, store, or dispose of
F. Do you or will you inject at this facility industrial or
hazardous wastes? (FORM 3)
X
municipal effluent below the lowermost stratum
Xcontaining,
within one quarter mile of the well bore,
underground sources of drinking water? (FORM 4)
31
J2
33
26
29
20
G. Do you or will you inject at this facility any produced water
H. Do you or will you inject at this facility fluids for special
or other fluids which are brought to the surface in
processes such as mining of sulfur by the Frasch process,
connection with conventional oil or natural gas production,
X
solution mining of minerals, in situ combustion of fossil
X
inject fluids used for enhanced recovery of oil or natural
fuel, or recovery of geothermal energy? (FORM 4)
gas, or inject fluids for storage of liquid hydrocarbons?
(FORM 4)
34
35
1 36
I. Is this facility a proposed stationary source which is one
J. Is this facility a proposed stationary source which is
of the 28 industrial categories listed in the instructions and
which will emit 100 tons
�/
X
NOT one of the 28 industrial categories listed in the
X
potentially per year of any air
instructions and which will potentially emit 250 tons per
pollutant regulated under the Clean Air Act and may affect
year of any air pollutant regulated under the Clean Air Act
40
41
42
63
^+
5
or be located in an attainment area? (FORM 5)
and may affect or be located in an attainment area?
(FORM 5)
111. NAME OF FACILITY
111.
swP
I H. F. Lee Energy Complex
15
16 - 29
I 30
69
IV. FACILITY CONTACT
A. NAME & TITLE (last, first, & title)
B. PHONE (area code & no.)
J2c
Grant, ick. Plant Manager
( 1 ) 7 2-645
15
16
q5 68 46 49 51 52- 55
V.FACILTY MAILING ADDRESS
A. STREET OR P.O. BOX
c
3 1 99 B ack Jac Church Road
15 1 16
45
B. CITY OR TOWN
C. STATE D. ZIP CODE
c
4
Gol sboro
C
2 530
15
1 16
40 41 42 47 51
VI. FACILITY LOCATION
A. STREET, ROUTE NO. OR OTHER SPECIFIC IDENTIFIER
c
5 1 9 B Lc Jac Church Road
15 116
45
B. COUNTY NAME
Wayne
6
70
C. CITY OR TOWN
D. STATE
E. ZIP CODE
F. COUNTY CODE (irknoum)
s
G l s oro
C
2 5 0
15 1
16
40
41 42
47 51
52 -54
EPA Form 3510-1 (8-90) CONTINUE ON REVERSE

CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
VII. SIC CODES 4-di it, in order ofpriority)
A. FIRST B. SECOND
F(Spee1j,j') Electric Power Services 715 I6 19C.
THIRD D.FOURTH
h�) 7
15 16 79
VIII, OPERATOR INFORMATION
c A. NAME
B. Is the name listed in Item
a
Duke Energy Progress, Inc ,
VIII•A also the owner?
0 YES ❑ NO
15
,6
55 E6
C. STATUS OF OPERATOR (Enter the opproprinte letter into the answer box: if "Other, "spechc) D.
PHONE (urea code d no.)
S = STATE M = PUBLIC (other thanJederol orstate)
p
(spectlY)
P = PRIVATE 0 = OTHER (spectf})
A
18 19 27 22 28
E. STREET OR P.O. BOX
4 0 South i mington Street
55
ITY OR TOWN
G. STATE
H. ZIP CODE
IX. INDIAN LAND
2Rale=igh
NC
27601
Is the facility located on Indian lands?
6
❑YES ONO
52
49
41 42
47 - 51
X. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS
A. NPDES Di.rchai es to Stn• ace {later)
D. PSD dtr Emissions rout Pro osetlSourees
c
r
003417
c
9
r
P
I
D
15
i6
17 18
LB. Uncles round Injection o Fluids)
E. OTHER s eci tC
T
I
39
(spectf})Titel v air permit
901812
51
15
16
17 118
C. RC RA Hozurdotts Ifastes
E. OTHER s eei )
c
9
r
R
I
NCD000830661 (Handler ID)
c r I (P 1},) g permit for ash
5 ec1' State non discharge
9 WQ0000020 reuse
15 16 17 18 89
XI. MAP
15 t6 1 17 118
Attach to this application a topographic map of the area extending to at least one mile beyond property boundaries. The map must show the outline of the facility, the
location of each of its existing and proposed intake and discharge structures, each of its hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities, and each well where it
injects fluids underground. Include all springs, rivers, and other surface water bodies in the map area. See instructions for precise requirements.
XII. NATURE OF BUSINESS (provide a brief description)
Electric utility - This facility is an electric generating facility. Formerly, three coal fired units were on
site. The steam electric coal fired units have been retired and demolished. The site now contains five (5)
simple cycle combustion turbines and one (1), natural gas/oil fired combined cycle.
XIII. CERTIFICATION (see instructions)
I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this application and all attachments and that based on my
inquiry of those persons immediately responsible for obtaining the information contained in the application, I believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
A. NAME & OFFICIAL TITLE (t}-pe orprim)
Rick Grant
B. SIGNATURE
C. DATE SIGNED
Manager - H.F. Lee Energy Complex
/
COMMENTS FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
c
cc
15 1 16
" .� , ...., i v- 1 to-av/

Duke Energy Progress, Inc.
Attachment 3. Water Flow Line Drawing
H.F Lee Energy Complex
Collection Tanks
Wayne Co. CT Site and Drain Tanks
Plant Prxi
Sump
Wayne Co
RO System
K
s
K
V P
HRSC blowdown to
Cooling Pond
Neuse River X New Collection Sump
Outfall 003
K
Oil Water
Separator
(Sludge)
Domestic Waste &
Potable Water Drains Lee Domestic
Sewage
Residuals sent off site Treatment
System
J S
Alternate alum sludge path (rare)
B (alt)
Potential
for future
Sludge
Water treatment
H. F. Lee Energy Complex
NC0003417
OR
Residuals from
Retention
UDisposal
Basins
Other Low
Volume
Wastes
Oil Water
Separator
(Sludge) CT site secondary
containment and fuel
forwarding area SW
Storm Water Runoff
(coal side)
/S
Collection Sumps
Ash pond Neuse River via
outfall 001
Evaporation
Evaporation Neuse River & Seepage
& Seepage Outfall 002
1 M Ash sluice wastewaters and low volume waste
U Neuse River
A
HRSC Cooling Pond B
blowdown River Make-up Intake
B (alt)
R.O. E
Cleaning D
Cooling water intake N Condensers
B fait)
October 2014 Page A3-1

Duke Energy Progress Inc. H. F. Lee Energy Complex
Attachment 3
Stream
Estimated Average Flow
(Lee CC site)
Comments
A
12.7 MGDI
Make-up water from Neuse River
B
12.7 MGD
Make-up water to cooling pond
D
453 MGD
Circulating Water withdrawal from cooling pond
E
453 MGD
Condenser cooling water return
I
11.3 MGDI
Cooling pond evaporation & seepage (estimated)
J
0.004 MGD
Existing Lee site Sewage treatment system
K
0.43 MGD
Treated water to reverse osmosis system and plant processes
L
Every 10-15 years
Chemical metal cleaning (fonnerly incinerated). To be pumped
and hauled.
M
Rare Occurrence
Cooling pond discharge to Neuse River (Outfall 002)
N
453 MGD
Condenser cooling water supply
P
Wayne County CT Site wastewaters from sump lift station
Q
-
Wayne County CT Site wastewaters from oil/water separator
(existing)
Qnew
2,400 gal/event
New Wayne County CC Site wastewaters from oil/water
separator (for new Combined cycle)
R
0.048 MGD
Wastewater from filter plant (eliminated September 2014).
Water is now recirculated back to clarifier.
S
12,250
Storm water runoff -- estimate based on 0.5" rainfall event
U
0.48 MGD
Raw water to filter plant (cycle makeup)
V
0.120 MGD
New WCT CC plant process drains (will this change with the
change to item "R"?
W
0.036
R.O reject stream
X
0.2MGD avg. (est.)
Outfall 003 to Neuse river
Note: "MGD" = Million Gallons per Day
1. Makeup from the Neuse River to the cooling pond varies throughout the year. Makeup volumes will equate to
losses from evaporation and seepage to maintain lake level.
A3-2 October 2014

Duke Energy Progress, Inc., H.F. Lee Energy Complex
NPDES Permit Number NC0003417
Attachment 4. Description of Operations Contributing to Wastewaters at Outfall 001, Outfall
002 and Outfall 003
The HY Lee Energy Complex has retired and demolished three coal-fired generating units and four
simple cycle combustion turbines. Commercial operation of the site's newly constructed 3 X 1
combined cycle electric generation block began on December 31St, 2012. The site now consists of five
(5) simple cycle combustion turbines and the combined cycle unit. Total electric generation capacity
for the site is be over 1800 Megawatts.
The site will continue to utilize the existing 545 acre off -stream closed -cycle cooling pond for
condenser cooling and process water. Water is withdrawn from the Neuse River, as required, to make
up evaporative, seepage, and discharge losses from the cooling pond. Makeup pumping rates are
highly variable depending upon natural weather conditions, generation load and plant operations,
quantity of water available in the river, and pond water levels. The maximum normal operating level
of the cooling pond is maintained at a safe level below the crest of the spillway gates. Discharges from
the cooling pond are rarely made, usually only during an extremely heavy rainfall event or a hurricane.
The cooling pond last discharged in 1998. Chemical constituents contained in the cooling pond
discharge are, for the most part, representative of the naturally -occurring chemical quality and quantity
of the intake water.
Upon retirement of the coal fired units, waste streams from processes which historically went to the
ash pond or the cooling pond will either no longer be generated or will be redirected to new outfall 003
to the Neuse River. More detail on these specific wastestreams is provided below.
In addition to the permitted outfalls, backwash from intake screening devices may be discharged into
the Neuse River bypass canal associated with the Neuse River pursuant to NCAC 15A 2H .0106 (f)
(2).
The combined cycle plant utilizes water from the 545 acre off -stream cooling pond as its source for
fire water. Infrequently, flushing and testing of the fire system may result in releases of the fire water.
The following is a description of wastewater streams that will be reflective of the new H.F Lee Energy
Complex:
Contributin1l Flows into the Ash Pond (NPDES outfall 001)
The coal plant has been retired and no routine flows associated with coal fired generation are sent to
the ash pond. Wastestreams from closure activities associated with the coal fired unit may still be sent
to the ash pond until closure is complete. Duke Energy Progress, Inc. wishes to maintain outfall 001 as
an active outfall to ensure permitted coverage of any incidental discharges which may occur associated
with heavy rainfall events and to facilitate any needed dewatering for future closure of the wastewater
treatment unit. Wastestreams that have been historically sent to the ash pond include:
Ash Transport System Wastewater
Fly ash and bottom ash from all three coal fired units were hydraulically conveyed by ash sluice
pipelines to the Lee Plant ash pond. (Ceased)
A4-1 October, 2014

H.F. Lee Energy Complex
Duke Energy Progress, Inc.,
NPDES Permit Number NC0003417
Precipitator and Air Pre -heater Wash Water
Water from washing the interior of the precipitators and air heaters was typically routed to the ash
pond via the ash transport system but could be routed directly or indirectly to the cooling pond. The
wastewater from the Rotamix treatment system added to Unit 3 for NOx removal was also routed to
the ash pond. (Ceased)
Filter Plant Wastewater
Blowdown and filter backwash wastewater generated in the filter plant were discharged into the ash
sluice transport system which flows to the ash pond. (To be redirected to outfall 003 or recirculated)
Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site Wastewaters
The containments around the accessory module, liquid fuel, and atomizing air modules and the wash
water drain empty into collection tanks. Once there is a quantity of liquid collected in the tanks, the
wastewater is removed by pumper truck and transported and released into the Lee Plant ash pond. This
water will be taken offsite, directed to the cooling pond or to outfall 003 in the future. The wash water
drain tanks collect the water and detergent used to clean the CT compressors. (To be redirected to
outfall 003, the cooling pond or disposed of offsite after ash pond closure)
Miscellaneous Wastes
Cooling tower basin sludge, circulating water tunnel sediment, and boiler vacuuming sediments are
sent to the ash pond. Other residuals from the low volume wastes retention basin and the coal pile
runoff retention basin and other miscellaneous low volume wastes from plant processes are also
transported to the ash pond. Storm water from the ash line trench flows to the ash pond. There may be
seepage in the vicinity of the ash pond. Some seeps may be seasonal.
Contributin Flows into the Cooling Pond (Closed Cycle) (NPDES outfall 002)
Re -circulated Condenser Cooling
This flow will provide condenser cooling water for the 3x1 combined cycle generation units. The total
flow is re -circulated into the 545 acre pond from the condensers, routed through the pond by baffle
dikes to achieve maximum surface cooling efficiency before reaching the condenser cooling water
intake to be again introduced to the condensers for cooling. Cooling of the recirculated water in the
pond is achieved primarily by evaporation from the pond surface, which is estimated to consume
approximately 3-5 MGD above natural evaporation rates during times the units are in full operation.
Some flows from stonnwater drains on the Lee plant coal site will still be directed to the cooling pond.
Sewage Treatment System (limited use
Domestic waste is treated in a septic tank and sand filter bed system. Flow from the system is
dependent upon fluctuating demand due to variations in the number of personnel on site. Residuals are
disposed of off -site by a licensed contract disposal firm. The sand in the system is periodically changed
to ensure system effectiveness is maintained. The spent sand is disinfected and disposed of in a
landfill.
Coal Pile Runoff
Until the coal pile is completely removed, runoff will still be directed to the cooling pond. The coal
A4-2 October, 2014

Duke Energy Progress, Inc., HT. Lee Energy Complex
NPDES Permit Number NC0003417
pile area is surrounded by a drainage ditch that is routed to a clay -bottomed, asphalt and concrete -sided
settling basin. The settling basin is sized so as to adequately store runoff and allow suspended solids to
settle before the supernatant is discharged by overflow to the cooling pond. During routine
maintenance of the basin, any solids removed will be disposed of in the ash pond.
Other
During routine maintenance, the water treatment plant clarifier may be drained to the cooling pond to
allow for inspection of the clarifier. This activity typically occurs annually but may occur more frequently.
Additionally, should the filter press not be operational, clarifier solids may temporarily be directed to the
wastewater cooling pond for a short duration until the filter press can be repaired. This is expected to be
infrequent and will not be a routine operating mode.
Wastewater associated with cleaning the plant process reverse osmosis process unit will be taken offsite or
directed to the cooling pond. If directed to the cooling pond, an antifoam chemical may be added to the
wastewater.
A blowdown stream from the combined cycle Heat Recovery Steam generator is directed to the cooling
pond.
Contributing flows to outfall 003
Filter Plant Wastewater
Existing water treatment plant clarifier blow down and filter backwash wastewater generated in the
filter plant was previously discharged into the ash sluice transport system and to the ash pond. Filter
backwash and clarifier alum solids will be treated via a gravity thickener and filter press. Filtrate from
the filter press was previously commingled with other waste streams and directed to outfall 003. This
flow has been rerouted and is now directed back to the water treatment plant clarifier. Solids from the
filter press (alum sludge) will be disposed of at an offsite location.
Existing Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site Wastewaters
Water from the cooling pond passes through a clarifier, dual media sand filters and then through a five -
micron cartridge pre -filter before entering either of two reverse osmosis (RO) units. The two RO units
may be operated in parallel or series depending on operational needs. The treated water is stored in a
tank until needed. Reject wastewater from the reverse osmosis process is sent to a sump where it will
be routed to the wastewater cooling pond or outfall 003.
In addition to the RO reject wastewater, excess evaporative cooling water, process drains, and waters
from the oil water separator previously routed to the cooling pond will be rerouted to outfall 003.
Historically, the containments around the accessory module, liquid fiuel, and atomizing air modules
empty into collection tanks. Once there is a quantity of liquid collected in the tanks, the wastewater
was removed by pumper truck and transported and released into the Lee Plant ash pond. There is also a
drain tank that collects the water and detergent used to clean the CT compressors. All of these
wastewaters will be either pumped and hauled offsite or redirected to outfall 003 after the ash pond is
no longer used.
An oil water separator treats storm water from the containment areas around the facility's fuel oil
storage tanks, the fuel forwarding pumps, and the fuel oil unloading area. Water from the oil water
A4-3 October, 2014

H.F. Lee Energy Complex
Duke Energy Progress, Inc.,
NPDES Permit Number NC0003417
separator will be conveyed to the new collection sump and routed to outfall 003. Storm water
collection containment areas around transformers and substations are examined for the presence of any
oily substance; if oily substances are not present in the water, the water is drained to the ground. If
oily substances are present nothing will be drained from the containments until that substance is
properly removed.
Outfall 003 will also contain a blowdown stream from the wet surface air cooler (WSAC).
Wastewaters from routine cleaning, fuel oil/water condensate, false start materials, equipment drains
containing potential oil, and compressor wash water may be routed to outfall 003. Any of these waters
with a potential for containing oil are routed through the oil water separator before being sent to outfall
003. Incidental leaks associated with the routine operation of the combustion turbine heat recovery
steam generator may occur and get to the ground surface. Other infrequent draining and cleaning of
various process units during operation and maintenance activities may generate wastewater that will be
routed to outfall 003.
A4-4 October, 2014

Duke Energy Progress, Inc.
H. F. Lee Energy Complex
NPDES Permit Number NC0003417
Attachment 5. Potential Discharges Not Covered By Analysis
Chemical
Estimated
Quantity
(used per ear)
Fre uenc
Purpose
NALCO Stabrex ST-70
800 gal
As required
Wet Surface Air Cooler biocide
NALCO 3D Trasar 3DT189
300 gal
As required
Wet Surface Air Cooler corrosion
control
NALCO BT 3000
1501b
As needed
Boiler corrosion inhibitor
Ammonium Hydroxide (19%)
NALCO Y302939.52
1,200 gal
As required
Boiler condensate pH control
Sodium hypochlorite, 10-16%
34,000 gal
As required
Raw water biocide
Winter alum liquid
36,000 gal
As required
Raw water treatment
Caustic, 25% tech grade
21,000 gal
Continuous
Raw water pH control
Caustic, 50% tech grade
12,000 gal
Continuous
Ash pond pH control
Soda Ash
4,000 lb
As required
Ash pond pH control
Rochem Fyrewash
280 gal
As required
Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site
Turbine compressor cleaning
NALCO PC-77
110 gal
As required
Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site
RO System membrane low pH cleaner
NALCO PC 98
400 gal
As required
Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site
RO System membrane high pH cleaner
NALCO PermaTreat PC-191
220 gal
Continuous
Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site
RO System antiscalant
NALCO 7408 (sodium bisulfite)
880 gal
As needed
Various water stream dechlorination
NALCO PC 11
variable
As required
Biocide for Reverse osmosis system
Conntect 6000 Compresser Cleaner
300 gal
As needed
Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site
Turbine compressor cleaning
Miscellaneous laboratory solutions and
reagents
2 gal
As required
Wayne County Combustion Turbine Site
RO water testing
Nalco 7465
< 1 gallon
As required
Foam Control
Nalco 7468
< 1 gallon
As required
Foam Control
A5-1 October 2014

SEEP MONITORING REPORT -
OCTOBER 2014
FOR
H.F. LEE ENERGY COMPLEX
1199 BLACK .SACK CHURCH ROAD
GOLDSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA 27530
WAYNE COUNTY
NPDES PERMIT #NC0003417
PREPARED FOR
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC.
RALEZGH, NORTH CAROLINA
(� DUKE
ENERGY...
PROGRESS
SUBMITTED: OCTOBER 2014
Howard F
A;
X PG 1328
or Manager

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
1.0 Introduction.....................................................................................................................1
2.0 Seep Monitoring.............................................................................................................. 2
2.1 Seep Identification..................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Seep Flow Measurement........................................................................................... 2
2.3 Seep Sample Collection............................................................................................. 3
3.0 Recommendations...........................................................................................................5
List of Figures
Figure 1— Site Location Map
Figure 2 — Identified Seeps and Water Quality Sample Locations -Inactive Ash Basin
Figure 3 — Identified Seeps and Water Quality Sample Locations -Active Ash Basin
Figure 4 — Potential Seep Locations — Cooling Pond
List of Tables
Table 1— Seep Locations and Descriptions
Table 2 — Seep Flows and Analytical Results
Table 3 — Analytical Parameters/Methods
List of Appendices
Appendix A — Analytical Sample Handling, Preservation and Holding Time
Requirements
Page i
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables\ Lee \Seep Monitoring\ Reports\ 2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030.docx

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following report summarizes an evaluation of the former H.F. Lee Steam Electric
Plant (Lee Plant) seepage flow surrounding the ash basins toward the Neuse River. The
evaluation included site reconnaissance to identify potential seeps followed by the
collection of flow measurements and representative water quality samples at select
locations. Site reconnaissance was conducted during March and October of 2014.
Representative seep locations were evaluated for water quality and flow rates on
August 20 and 21, 2014 and October 21, 2014.
Wastewater discharges from the active ash basin are permitted by the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Water
Resources (DWR) under National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Permit NC0003417. The purpose of the evaluation was to determine additional
potential outfalls for inclusion within the permit.
Twenty-six surface water and seep sample locations were evaluated around the ash
basins at the Lee Plant. One seep channel located along the east side of the active ash
basin flows toward the Neuse River. A seep channel located along the north and west
side of the active ash basin did not flow to the Neuse River during the August 2014
evaluation. In addition, six seeps along the south side of the active ash basin flow
toward the Neuse River. Halfmile Branch flows through the inactive ash basin area and
upgradient and downgradient samples (with respect to the ash basins) were collected.
No individual seeps were observed in the vicinity of the inactive basins.
Potential seeps were also identified around the cooling pond during reconnaissance in
October 2014. Those seeps have yet to be evaluated. Duke Energy is planning to
evaluate the potential seeps around the cooling pond. The evaluation will be similar to
that conducted for seeps identified around the ash basins; samples will be collected for
water quality analysis and flow volumes will be measured.
The low volume of water characteristic of the seeps coupled with the relatively low
constituent concentrations in the samples, suggest that there is little potential to
influence water quality of the Neuse River. If reasonable potential analyses
demonstrate that there is no potential to exceed water quality standards, then Duke
Energy proposes to re-evaluate the seep locations listed in this document annually over
the next 5-year permit cycle. These annual evaluations would be documented and
would verify the condition of the existing seeps and determine the presence of new
seeps. The DWR will be promptly notified if any new seeps are identified or any
significant changes are observed for the existing seeps. If any existing or newly
Page ii
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables \Lee\ Seep Monitoring \Reports\ 2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030.docx

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
identified seeps are determined to reach the Neuse River and the seepage has
reasonable potential to exceed a water quality standard, Duke Energy will take
measures to either (1) stop the seepage, (2) capture and route the seep so that it is
discharged through a NPDES permitted outfall, or (3) address the seep using Best
Management Plans approved by DWR.
Page iii
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables \Lee\ Seep Monitoring\ Reports \2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030.docx

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy) owns and operates the H.F. Lee Energy
Complex (Lee Plant) site. The Lee Plant is located at 1199 Black jack Church Road,
Goldsboro, North Carolina. The property encompasses approximately 2,100 acres,
including the 314-acre ash basins (171-acre inactive ash basins and 143-acre active ash
basin). The property includes a cooling pond, located to the east of the plant operations
area. The Neuse River flows through the property as shown on Figure 1.
The Lee Plant began operations in 1951. Additional coal units were added in the late
1950s and early 1960s, and four oil -fueled combustion turbine units in the late 1960s and
early 1970s. The three coal-fired units were retired in September 2012 followed by four
oil -fueled combustion turbine units in October 2012. In December 2012, the H.F. Lee
Combined Cycle Plant was brought on-line. The Combined Cycle Plant applies two
sources of energy — combustion and steam turbines — to convert natural gas to
electricity. The Lee Plant also has five active simple cycle combustion turbines.
Coal combustion residuals have been managed in the Lee Plant's on -site ash basins,
which includes three inactive ash basins located to the west of the plant operations area
and an active ash basin northeast of the operations area (Figure 1). The inactive ash
basins were built as three cells in approximately the late 1950s and early 1960s. The
active ash basin was constructed in the late 1970s. Sluicing fly ash and bottom ash at
the active basin was discontinued in late 2012 to early 2013 due to the plant no longer
generating coal combustion residuals. The inactive and active ash basins are shown on
Figures 2 and 3, respectively. Wastewater discharges from the ash basins are permitted
by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR)
Division of Water Resources (DWR) under National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit NC0003417.
This report summarizes an evaluation of seepage flows around the inactive and active
ash basin areas and outlines a plan to evaluate the seeps identified around the cooling
pond. The evaluation included site reconnaissance to identify potential seeps, flow
measurements of identified seeps, and collection of seep water and other surface water
samples for chemical analysis. The site reconnaissance was conducted in March and
October 2014. Seep sampling and flow measurements were performed on August 20
and 21, and October 21, 2014.
Page 1
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables\ Lee \Seep Monitoring\ Reports\ 2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030.docx

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
2.0 SEEP MONITORING
2.1 Seep Identification
Reconnaissance of the outside perimeter of the inactive and active ash basins at the Lee
Plant was conducted in March and October 2014 for the purpose of identifying and
locating potential seeps originating from the ash basins. Identified seeps were
described, photographed, noted on a field map, and surveyed as to location using GPS
(Table 1). Identified seeps were further evaluated on August 20 and 21, and October
21, 2014. During the August evaluation, it was observed that some of the seeps
identified in March 2014 were dry, reflecting an intermittent or seasonal nature.
Additional seeps, not identified in March 2014, were also sampled as part of the August
event.
During the October evaluation, the Neuse River stage was lower than during the
August evaluation the reconnaissance, based on visual observation and review of
United States Geological Survey data from a river stage gaging station (02089000) near
Goldsboro, in the vicinity of (downstream) the Lee Plant. As a result, an additional seep
was identified along the bank of the Neuse River south of the active ash basin. This
seep was submerged during previous reconnaissance. The locations of seeps and
surface water samples collected are presented on Figures 2 and 3.
Potential seeps were also identified around the cooling pond during reconnaissance in
October 2014. Those seeps have yet to be evaluated. Duke Energy is planning to
evaluate the seeps around the cooling pond similar to that conducted for seeps
identified around the ash basins; samples will be collected for water quality analysis
and flow volumes will be measured. The potential seep locations associated with the
cooling pond are shown on Figure 4.
2.2 Seep Flow Measurement
Flow measurements were made at water -bearing seep locations using either a Son-Tek
F1owTracker ® Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter or the timed -volumetric method. The
F1owTracker® measures stream velocity and discharge using sound waves. The timed -
volumetric method was used at four locations where the flow was constrained in a
location that prevented the F1owTracker® from recording a signal without interference.
The timed -volumetric method was employed by collecting a volume of water from the
discharge of the seep directly into an appropriately sized container (graduated cylinder
or bucket). The entire seep flow was routed to the container. The amount of time (in
seconds) required to collect a known volume of water was recorded. Five timed
Page 2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables\Lee\Seep Monitoring\ Reports\ 2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030.docx

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
volumes were recorded and the flow rate for the seep was calculated based on an
average of the timed volume measurements.
The F1owTracker® was used to measure seep flows at the majority of sample locations.
The method is designed for streams that can be waded following established
procedures such as the U.S. Geological Survey standards. Use of the F1owTracker® was
generally limited to channels of sufficient width (approximately 0.5 feet or greater) and
depth (approximately 0.17 feet or greater). Flow measurements (water velocity and
depth) within quality control bounds of the instrument were recorded manually for
estimation of discharge at a seep.
Locations were selected where channel banks were fairly parallel. The channel width
was measured at the water line and recorded. If the channel width was less than one
foot, the average depth was recorded and three velocity measurements were taken. The
average of the three velocity measurements and the channel volume (depth and width)
were used to calculate the flow at a given location.
If the channel width at the water line was between 1.0 and 2.5 feet, velocity and depth
were recorded at a minimum of three locations spaced evenly across the channel. If the
channel width was between 2.5 and 5 feet, velocity and depth were recorded at a
minimum of five evenly spaced locations. Flow rates were not collected within the
Neuse River due to the size of the water body.
Consistent with USGS methodology, velocity measurements were collected at 60% of
water depth.
The averages of the calculated flows (in MGD) for seeps with measurable flow are
included in Table 2. Seepage flow is generally variable. Flow may increase or decrease
depending on the amount of rainfall, groundwater levels, weather conditions, and other
variables.
2.3 Seep Sample Collection
Seep locations were sampled around the active ash basin. No distinct seeps were
observed around the inactive ash basins. Halfmile Branch was sampled upstream and
downstream of the inactive ash basins area. Six surface water samples were collected
from the Neuse River upstream to downstream of the ash basin areas. The sample
locations are described in Table 1 and shown on Figures 2 and 3.
Seep sample collection targeted base -flow conditions. For the week preceding the
August sample collection, only 0.08 inches of rain fell in the area as recorded at the
Page 3
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables\ Lee\ Seep Monitoring\ Reports\ 2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030docx

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
Wayne Executive Jetport, located approximately six miles northeast of the Lee Plant
(National Climate Data Center). For the week preceding the October 21, 2014
evaluation, 1.16 inches of rain fell between October 14 and 15, with no other rainfall
recorded in the area on subsequent days prior to sampling.
Samples were collected from the seeps directly into sample containers. Care was taken
to avoid disturbing and entraining particulate soil and sediment. During sample
collection, in -situ field parameters (temperature, pH, and specific conductance) were
measured utilizing a YSI Pro Plus multi -function meter. Turbidity was also measured
in the field using a Hach 2100P turbidimeter.
The Neuse River surface water samples were collected at a midstream location as a grab
sample from a depth of approximately one meter. The two samples from Halfmile
Branch were taken as grab samples from midstream.
Laboratory analyses were conducted by Duke Energy Laboratory Services and Pace
Analytical Laboratories (NC Wastewater Certifications #248 and #12, respectively). A
summary of the laboratory and field data is provided in Table 2. A listing of analytical
parameters and associated methods are included in Table 3. Sample handling, storage,
and preservation methods are summarized in Appendix A.
Page 4
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables\ Lee\ Seep Monitoring\ Reports\ 2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030.docx

Seep Monitoring Report October 2014
H.F. Lee Energy Complex, NPDES Permit # NC0003417 SynTerra
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The very low discharge of water characteristic of each seep location coupled with the
relatively low constituent concentrations including a number of seep locations that
only flow during periods of wet weather, suggests minimal potential for the seeps to
influence water quality in the Neuse River. If ongoing analyses demonstrates that there
is no potential to exceed water quality standards, Duke Energy proposes to re-evaluate
the identified seep locations listed in this document annually over the next five-year
permit cycle. These annual evaluations would be documented and verify the condition
of the existing seeps and determine the presence of any newly developed seeps. The
DWR will be promptly notified if new seeps are identified or any significant changes
are observed for the existing seeps. If any existing or newly identified seeps are
determined to reach the Neuse River and the seepage has reasonable potential to
exceed a water quality standard, Duke Energy will take measures to either (1) stop the
seepage, (2) capture and route the seep so that it is discharged through a NPDES
permitted outfall, or (3) address the seep using Best Management Plans approved by
DWR.
Duke Energy is planning to evaluate the potential seeps around the cooling pond. The
evaluation will be similar to that conducted for seeps identified around the ash basins;
samples will be collected for water quality analysis and flow volumes will be measured.
The information will be reported to DWR when available.
Page 5
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables \Lee\ Seep Monitoring\ Reports \2014-
10-30 Report\Lee Seep Monitoring Report 20141030.docx

FIGURES

TABLES

Table 1
Seep Locations and Descriptions
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. - H.F. Lee Energy Complex
Goldsboro, North Carolina
Sample ID
Flow
(August 2014
Latitude
Longitude
'Description
Description
sample description, if present)
S-01 (Active Ash Basin)
35.386858
-78.073453
Intermittent
Small channel north of the active ash basin at the toe of the dike. Flows west. Stagnant, no flow observed during August sampling event. Located upstream of S-02 and S-03.
S-02 (Active Ash Basin)
35.384001
-78.081383
Continuous
Small channel north of the active ash basin at the toe of the dike. Flows west. Originates at S-01 and flows to S-03.
Channel on the west side of the active ash basin that flows underneath the road through a 4' concrete culvert. Receives flow from S-01 and S-02. Flows toward S-03A. At confluence of
S-03 (Active Ash Basin)
35.382666
-78.084374
Continuous
Nuese River S-03A was dry during August 2014 sampling event.
S-03A (Active Ash Basin)
35.381806
-78.084052
Intermittent
Channel downgradient of S-1, S-2 and S-3 at confluence of Neuse River. Dry during August 2014 sample event.
S-04 (Active Ash Basin)
35.381993
-78.078784
Intermittent
Ponded w e inland from river terrace. Sagnant, no flow observed during the August 2014 sampling event.
S-05 (Active Ash Basin)
35.379045
-78.070293
Intermittent
Riprap area on the south side of the southeast corner of the active ash basin. No flow or wetness was observed during the August 2014 sampling event.
S-06 (Active Ash Basin)
35.386968
-78.071942
Continuous
Small channel east of the active ash basin at the toe of the dike. Flows south. Insufficient flow to monitor during August sampling event. Flows toward S-07 and S-09.
S-07 (Active Ash Basin)
35.382767
-78.069655
Continuous
Small channel east of the active ash basin at the toe of the dike. Flows south. Receives flow from S-06 and flows toward S-09.
S-08 (Active Ash Basin)
35.380510
-78.068532
Intermittent
Riprap area on the east side of the southeast corner of the active ash basin. No flow or wetness was observed during the August 2014 sampling event.
Channel on the east side of the ash basin at the toe of the dike. Flow originates from S-06 and S-07 and appears to flows towards the Neuse River. Channel highly incised and full of
S-09 (Active Ash Basin)
35.379492
-78.067718
Continuous
woody debris. Sample collected inland prior to apparent backflow from the Neuse River.
S-18 (Inactive Ash Basins)
35.379222
-78.101206
Ponded Water
Ponded water inland from river terrace. No seep origin or flow observed during the August 2014 sampling event.
S-19 (Inactive Ash Basins)
35.381790
-78.097649
Ponded Water
Ponded water inland from river terrace. No seep origin or flow observed during the August 2014 sampling event.
S-20 (Inactive Ash Basins)
35.382406
-78.082051
Continuous
Seep near well CMW-10, along the south side of the active ash basin. Two distinct seep heads that form a singular channel that flows towards the Neuse River.
Seep along the south side of the active ash basin. Stagnant, no flow was observed during the August 2014 sampling event. Water from the seep reinfiltrated prior to discharging to the
S-21 (Active Ash Basin)
35.382151
-78.080376
Intermittent
Neuse River.
S-22 (Active Ash Basin)
35.381466
-78.077819
Continuous
Seep along the south side of the active ash basin. Water from the seep head flows approximately 100' towards the Neuse River.
S-23 (Active Ash Basin)
35.381175
-78.077136
Continuous
Seep along the south side of the active ash basin in the floodplain of the Neuse River. Water from the seep head flowed approximately 75' towards the Neuse River.
Seep along the south side of the active ash basin in the floodplain of the Neuse River. Seep head at the base of a steep bank. Water from the seep head flowed approximately 50'
5-24 (Active Ash Basin)
35.381063
-78.076431
Continuous
towards the Neuse River.
S-25 (Active Ash Basin)
35.380922
-78.076001
Continuous
Seep along the south side of the active ash basin. Seep head diffuse and formed a set of five braided channels, which flowed approximately 15' towards the Neuse River.
Seep within the Neuse River bank downgradient of the the south side of the active ash basin. Seep head was approximately 2.5 feet above the water level (at the time of sampling on
S-26 (Active Ash Basin)
35.381640
-78.078322
Continuous
October 21, 2014) within a steep bank that slopes toward the river. Seep was within a small drainage channel that appears to drain overflow from a ponded area along the floodplain
between the ash basin and the river; no flow in the channel above the see was observed on October 21 2014.
Sartpple ID
Flow
(August 2014
Latitude
Longitude
Description
Description
sample description, if present)
S-10 (Active Ash Basin)
35.381097
-78.088737
Upstream
Neuse River upstream of the active ash basin.
Surface Water
S-11 (Active Ash Basin)
35.379131
-78.067421
Downstream Surface
Neuse River downstream of the active ash basin.
Water
S-12 (Active Ash Basin)
35.380910
-78.08974
Upstream
Bypass canal upstream of the plant.
Surface Water
S-13 (Active Ash Basin)
35.360761
-78.077689
Downstream Surface
Neuse River downstream of where the bypass canal passes by the plant and re-enters the river.
Water
S-14 (Inactive Ash Basins)
35.383346
-78.108965
Upstream
Halfmile Branch upstream of the inactive ash basin.
Surface Water
S-15 (Inactive Ash Basins)
35.377430
-78.104218
Downstream Surface
Halfmile Branch downstream of the inactive ash basin.
Water
S-16 (Inactive Ash Basins)
35.372416
-78.102819
Upstream
Neuse River upstream of the inactive ash basin.
Surface Water
S-17 (Inactive Ash Basins)
35.382494
-78.09514
Downstream Surface
Neuse River downstream of the inactive ash basin and upstream of Beaverdam Creek.
Water
Prepared by: AJY Checked by: KW/TP
SynTerra Corporation
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables\Lee\Seep Monitoring\Reports\Tables\Table 1 - Seep Locations and Descriptions 2014-10-28 Page 1 of 1

Table 2
Seep Flows and Analytical Results
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. - H.F. Lee Energy Complex
Goldsboro, North Carolina
Map ID
S-01
S-02Jmh
sr ' � �, ...
075
5-03
S-04
rT�, � 4 �r xi ,
x-ll
S-OStl8119
5-08
S�d
8 3U
.,
12
Y3,
>
-
,
Sample
Channel Active
Channel
Active
.f�f fit n:
-< ln
Chan
dill Active
Ponded Terrace
Back water Active
�yJ``l',
„r. t,
Active Ash
Seep A
Channel Active
Chan -
ai Aztiv�
Seep Active Ash
Channel Active
IJ tSr R1Vet "` N ti eAlter
. ,Act}�ej
t%t x�.,,-: 2ibWYrfittalt
8ypassifipa
- i}8ussltiyr3T ,;`
C�oNtfis�8m8i.;
Description
Ash Basin
Ash Basin,f'�
�it
Ash Basin
Ash Basin
-
Basin
Ash Basin
Ash B83ifl
Basin
Ash Basin
Ut
Sample Date
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
Aug-14
CIO
MGD
N�"
0.161�9 "
0,16
�,�1:i7�
0.17235
N�
0.03708
Nl�
f11�T
�18iN Ibc�§uFdii �r#1�I fhod'
AW;:
�AV
�AV
AV
AV
Oil & Grease
mg/L
<
5.0
<
5.0
< 5.0
<
5.0
< 5.0
< 5.0
NS
e
5.0
oz
10
NS
a &0
< id
COD
mg/L
53
<
20
< 20
<
2
< 20
< 20
NS
67
35
NS
22
Chloride
mg/L
15
24
24
22
21
21
NS
13
23+
NS
27
..,.` 11"�,.....
..w....� ,...,..,.,
,.,I
Fluoride
mg/L
<
0.1
0.32
0.32
0.30
0.54
0.54
NS
0110
0,37
NS
0.51
0 13
lF 13
i3 3
.
it
Sulfate
mg/L
10.0
23
23
26
67
66
NS
419
35
NS
41
6 9
7 Q
536
6 3:
Mercury (Hg)
µg/L
<
0.05
<
0.05
< 0.05
<
0.05
< 0.05
< 0.05
NS
br05
0,05
NS
< 0.05?OiJS
OS
i�'155
Aluminum (Al) i
mg/L
0.959
0.243
0.241
0.265
0.438
0.144
NS
1,20
0,2$1
NS
0,262
Barium (Ba)
mg/L
0.099
0.219
0.213
0.179
0.274
0.202
NS
U54
01128
NS
0,136
iY
Boron (B)
mg/L
0.062
0.868
0.848
0.742
1.21
1.21
NS
005
2,10
NS
2.53
Calcium (Ca)
mg/L
5.68
50.9
49.7
42.1
74.3
68.1
NS
3,21
53,7
NS
66.7
'=5r6141
Hardness
mg/L (CaCO3)
24.2
161
157
135
215
199
NS
15,1
ISO
NS
226
'->
Iron (Fe)
mg/L
13.6
4.95
4,66
3,33
22.7
4.08
NS
2,83
-
--
4,42
NS
76
Magnesium (Mg)
mg/L
2.42
8.29
8.11
7.17
7.10
7.04
NS
1.72
11.3
NS
14.4
2 2
Manganese (Mn)
mg/L
0.087
0.313
0.306
0.248
0.753
0.472
NS
0,051
0.0366
NS
0,455
Zinc (Zn)
mg/L
0.008
<
0.005
< 0.005
<
0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
NS
0.09
01005
NS
< 0,005
0 01p
0 008
0i1b
0 Oi3 ''
Antimony(Sb )
pg/L
<
1
<
1
< 1
<
1
< 1
< 1
NS
<
1
<
1 `
NS
<
Arsenic (As)
µg/L
2.56
126
125
89.6
1470
369
NS
133
9017
NS
91.6
Cadmium (Cd)
µg/L
<
1
<
1
< 1
<
1
< 1
< 1
NS
<
7
<
1
NS
< 1
Chromium (Cr)
µg/L
1.21
<
1
< 1
<
1
< 1
< 1
NS
NS
<
Copper (Cu)
µg/L
1.09
<
1
< 1
<
1
1.25
< 1
NS
1a35
t
1
NS
<
2
Pb Lead
(Pb)
pg/L
1.31
<
1
< 1
<
1
< 1
< 1
NS
1.8
<'
1
NS
Molybdenum (Mo)
µg/L
<
1
16.8
17.5
18.3
48.1
45.7
NS
<
53.2
NS
76,6
Nickel (Ni)
µg/L
<
1
<
1
< 1
<
1
< 1
< 1
NS
137
1.26
NS
1,27
152
Selenium (Se)
pg/L
<
1
<
1
< 1
<
1
< 1
< 1
NS
<
1
<
1
NS
< 1777
Thallium (TI) Low'Level
µg/L
<
0.2
<
0.2
< 0.2
<
0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
NS
¢
0;2
<
0.2
NS
< 0.2
TDS
mg/L
110
260
260
240
320
320
NS
120
310'
NS
360
TSS
mg/L
24
10
11
8.0
22
23
NS
48
<
5
NS
127-7
pH
S.U.
5.9
6.6
6.6
7.1
_.7.2
7.2
NS
--
611'
7,0
- - --------------
NS._
7.5
Temperature
°C
23
23
23
26
28
28
NS
24'
22
NS
22
Specific conductance
PS/cm
115
305
305
362
488
488
NS
90,14
NS
547".�}6
9 -
S02""
Turbidity
NTU
47.1
26.3
26.3
18.8
14.8
14.8
NS
19,8
14,8''
NS
21,7
43;0
�:26:1;
50,6
NF - Streamflow not present during sampling event or too low to be measured.
NM - Not measured
NS - No surface water present during this sampling event. Evidence of seasonal wetness.
TV - Timed Volume
AV - Area Velocity
MGD - Million Gallons Per Day
Seep appears to flow towards the Neuse River
Upstream/downstream sample from Neuse River
Prepared by: A)Y Checked by: KW RBI
SynTerra Corporation
Page 1 of 2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Del iverabl es\Lee\Seep Monitoring\Reports\2014-10-30 Report\Tables\Table 2 - Seeps Analytical Results 2014-10-28

Table 2
Seep Flows and Analytical Results
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. - H.F. Lee Energy Complex
Goldsboro, North Carolina
NF - Flow not present during this sampling event or too low to be measured. SynTerra Corporation iTerra Corporation
NM - Not measured
NS - No surface water present during this sampling event. Evidence of seasonal wetness.
TV - Timed Volume
AV - Area Velocity
MGD - Million Gallons Per Day
Seep Appears to flow to Neuse River
Upstream/downstream sample from Neuse River
Page 2 of 2
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Del ivera bl es\Lee\Seep Monitor! ng\Reports\2014-10-30 Report\Tables\Table 2 - Seeps Analytical Results 2014-10-28

Table 3
Seep Analytical Methods
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. - H.F. Lee Energy Complex
Goldsboro, North Carolina
Parameter
Method
Reporting Limit
Units
Lab
COD
HACH 8000
20
mg/L
Duke Energy
Aluminum (Al)
EPA 200.7
0.005
mg/L
Duke Energy
Antimony (Sb)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Arsenic (As)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Barium (Ba)
EPA 200.7
0.005
mg/L
Duke Energy
Boron (B)
EPA 200.7
0.05
mg/L
Duke Energy
Cadmium (Cd)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Calcium (Ca)
EPA 200.7
0.1
mg/L
Duke Energy
Chloride
EPA 300.0
5
mg/L
Duke Energy
Chromium (Cr)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Copper (Cu)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Fluoride
EPA 300.0
1
mg/L
Duke Energy
Hardness
EPA 200.7
0.19
mg/L (CaCO3)
Duke Energy
Iron (Fe)
EPA 200.7
0.01
mg/L
Duke Energy
Lead (Pb)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Magnesium (Mg)
EPA 200.7
0.05
mg/L
Duke Energy
Manganese (Mn)
EPA 200.7
0.005
mg/L
Duke Energy
Mercury (Hg)
EPA 245.1
0.05
ug/L
Duke Energy
Molybdenum (Mo)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Nickel (Ni)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Oil and Grease
EPA 1664E
5.0
mg/L
Pace Analytical
Selenium (Se)
EPA 200.8
1
ug/L
Duke Energy
Sulfate
EPA 300.0
5
mg/L
Duke Energy
TDS
SM2540C
25
mg/L
Duke Energy
Thallium (TI) Low Level
EPA 200.8
0.2
ug/L
Duke Energy
TSS
SM2540D
5
mg/L
Duke Energy
Zinc (Zn)
EPA 200.7
0.005
mg/L
Duke Energy
Prepared By: RBI Checked By: KWW
SynTerra Corporation
P:\Duke Energy Progress.1026\ALL NC SITES\NPDES Permit Deliverables\Lee\Seep Report\Tables\Table 3 - Analytical Methods Page 1 of 1