ML12166A068

Estimates of Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant at Tennessee River Mile 528 from March 2010 Through March 2011

ML12166A068
Person / Time
Site:	Watts Bar
Issue date:	06/11/2012
From:	Hruby R Tennessee Valley Authority
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC MD8203
Download: ML12166A068 (55)

Text

Tennessee Valley Authority, Post Office Box 2000, Spring City, Tennessee 37381-2000 June 11, 2012 10 CFR 51.53(b)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2 Docket No. 50-391

Subject:

Estimates of Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant at Tennessee River Mile 528 from March 2010 through March 2011 (TAC No. MD8203)

Reference:

TVA letter dated April 9, 2010, "Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN) Unit 2 -

Response to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Additional Information Regarding Environmental Review (TAC No.

MD8203)"

The purpose of this letter is to provide a report entitled, "Estimates of Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant at Tennessee River Mile 528 from March 2010 through March 2011," dated May 2012. As discussed in Reference 1 Question AE-7, TVA planned to perform additional aquatic monitoring during 2010-2011 in the Watts Bar and Chickamauga Reservoirs in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant.

The enclosed report presents the results of the ichthyoplankton monitoring conducted during 2010-2011 to describe taxonomic composition, abundance, and temporal and spatial distribution in the vicinity of WBN and to estimate entrainment of fish eggs and larvae at the WBN Intake Pumping Station (IPS) and Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake due to the proposed operation of Unit 2 at the plant site. The monitoring began March 2010 and updates and verifies historical monitoring conducted in 1996 and 1997. As stated in Reference 1, additional monitoring will be undertaken after Unit 2 begins operation.

There are no new commitments made in this letter.

If you have any questions, please contact Gordon Arent at (423) 365-2004.

tu(L0

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 June 11, 2012 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the 1 1th day of June, 2012.

Respectfull Raymond A. Hruby, Jr.

General Manager, Technical Services Watts Bar Unit 2

Enclosure:

Estimates of Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant at Tennessee River Mile 528 from March 2010 through March 2011 cc (Enclosure):

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-1257 NRC Resident Inspector Unit 2 Watts Bar Nuclear Plant 1260 Nuclear Plant Road Spring City, Tennessee 37381

ENCLOSURE Estimates of Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant at Tennessee River Mile 528 from March 2010 through March 2011 E-1

Estimates of Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant at Tennessee River Mile 528 from March 2010 through March 2011 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Engineering, Environment & Support Services MAY 2012

Table of Contents Table of Contents...........................................................................................................................................

i List of Figures...............................................................................................................................................

ii List of Tables...............................................................................................................................................

iii Abbreviations and Acronym s......................................................................................................................

iv Introduction...................................................................................................................................................

1 Location and General Site Characteristics................................................................................................

1 Plant Description.......................................................................................................................................

1 Intake Pum ping Station.........................................................................................................................

2 Supplem ental Condenser Cooling W ater Intake System.................................................................

3 M aterials and M ethods..................................................................................................................................

4 Data Collection..........................................................................................................................................

4 Laboratory Analysis..................................................................................................................................

5 Data Analysis............................................................................................................................................

6 Results and Discussion.................................................................................................................................

7 Chickamauga Reservoir transect and WBN Intake Pumping Station...................................................

7 Fish Eggs...............................................................................................................................................

7 Fish Larvae..................................................................................

8 Clupeidae.........................................................................................

................................................ 9 Centrarchidae........................................................................................................................................

9 M oronidae........................................................................................................................................

9 Sciaenidae...........................................................................................................................................

10 Incidental Fam ilies Collected.................................................................

.............. 10 Estim ated Entrainm ent at the W BN IPS.........................................................................................

10 W atts Bar Reservoir transect and SCCW Intake................................................................................

11 Fish Eggs.............................................................................................................................................

11 Fish Larvae..........................................................................................................................................

12 Clupeidae..........................................................................................................................................

12 Centrarchidae......................................................................................................................................

12 M oronidae.........................................................................................................................................

13 Sciaenidae.......................................................................................................................................

13 Incidental Fam ilies Collected..........................................................................................................

13 Estim ated Entrainm ent at W BN SCCW.........................................................................................

14 Comparison with Historical Data (1996 and 1997)...............................................................................

14 Estim ated Entrainm ent with W BN Unit 2.............................................................................................

15 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................................

16 References...................................................................................................................................................

18

List of Figures Figure 1. Locations of sampling stations at the WBN Intake Pumping Station channel (TRM 528),

Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water intake (TRM 529.9), and reservoir transects in Chickamauga Reservoir (TRM 528.5) and Watts Bar Reservoir (TRM 530.2) used to collect ichthyoplankton (fish eggs and larvae) from March 2010 through March 2011 in the vicinity of W atts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN.............................................................................

20 Figure 2. Densities of fish eggs collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

21 Figure 3. Densities of fish eggs collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

22 Figure 4. Densities of fish larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

23 Figure 5. Densities of fish larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

24 Figure 6. Densities of Clupeidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

25 Figure 7. Densities of Clupeidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011........................

26 Figure 8. Densities of Centrarchidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

27 Figure 9. Densities of Centrarchidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011............. 28 Figure 10. Densities of Moronidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

29 Figure 11. Densities of Moronidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011............. 30 Figure 12. Densities of Sciaenidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011..............................

31 Figure 13. Densities of Sciaenidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011............. 32 11

List of Tables Table 1. Comparison of maximum average velocity at entrance of intake pumping system, approach velocity entering wet well for traveling water screens, through-screen velocity, and flow rate and percent hydraulic entrainment (percent of river flow) past the Watts Bar Nuclear intake pumping station (IPS) and Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake at summer and winter pool elevations and during operation of Unit 1 only and expected values during operation of Units 1 and 2 combined. SCCW values represent those for Unit 1 only and Units 1 and 2 combined.

Calculations presented in TVA, 201 lb. (msl = mean sea level)..............................................

33 Table 2. Total volume of water filtered by sample period from March 2010 through March 2011 at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) near Watts Bar Nuclear Plant to estimate densities and entrainment of fish eggs and larvae.........................................................................................

34 Table 3. List by family of fish eggs and larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) near Watts Bar Nuclear Plant from March 2010 through March 2011, and lowest level of taxonomic resolution for each fam ily.........................................................................................................

35 Table 4. Actual numbers and percent composition of fish eggs and larvae collected in entrainment samples at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9),

and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through March 2011 in the vicinity of W atts Bar Nuclear Plant.........................................................................................

36 Table 5. Average densities (number/1,000 M3) by sample period and family of fish eggs and larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9),

and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through February 2011 at Watts B ar N uclear Plant...........................................................................................................................

38 Table 6. Densities (number/i,000 m3) by family of fish eggs and larvae during day and night collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through February 2011 at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant. *Intake densities are averages of four samples...............................................................

40 Table 7. Estimated entrainment by sample period of fish eggs and larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through February 2011 at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant including intake and reservoir flow and average densities.........................................................................................

42 Table 8. Estimated entrainment of fish eggs and larvae during April through June 1996, 1997, and 2010 at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant including Intake Pumping Station (IPS) and Chickamauga Reservoir flow, sample periods and dates, and average densities............................................................

46 iii

Abbreviations and Acronyms cfs cubic feet per second fps feet per second IPS Intake Pumping Station msl mean sea level SCCW Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water TRM Tennessee River Mile TVA Tennessee Valley Authority WBH Watts Bar Hydroelectric Dam WBN Watts Bar Nuclear Plant iv

Introduction Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) conducted ichthyoplankton monitoring during 2010-2011 to describe taxonomic composition, abundance, and temporal and spatial distribution in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN) and to estimate entrainment of fish eggs and larvae at the WBN Intake Pumping Station (IPS) and Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake due to the proposed operation of an additional nuclear reactor (Unit 2) at the Plant site. This monitoring began March 2010 and updates and verifies historical monitoring conducted in 1996 and 1997. This report presents taxonomic composition, temporal and spatial distribution, densities and estimated entrainment during March 2010 through March 2011, comparison of these data with data collected during 1996 and 1997, and entrainment estimates with the addition of Unit 2.

Location and General Site Characteristics WBN is located on the right descending (west) bank of upper Chickamauga Reservoir at Tennessee River Mile (TRM) 528 approximately 1.9 miles downstream of Watts Bar Hydroelectric Dam (WBH; TRM 529.9) and one mile downstream of the decommissioned Watts Bar Fossil Plant (Figure 1). At the plant site, Chickamauga Reservoir is 335.5 meters (m) wide with mid-channel depths ranging from 5.5 m to 7.9 m. Flow and water levels at the site are regulated by the operation of TVA's Watts Bar and Chickamauga dams. The running long-term daily average river flow past WBN from 1942 to present, as measured from Watts Bar Hydroelectric Dam (WBH) discharge, is 27,047 cubic feet per second (cfs). During the period from March 2010 through March 2011, daily average river flow past WBN was 19,308 cfs.

Plant Description WBN Unit 1 went into commercial operation on May 27, 1996 and is designed for a net electrical output of 1,160 megawatts (gross electrical output of 1,218 megawatts). Unit 2, of similar size, is under construction on the same site.

1

Intake Pumping Station Cooling water flows from Chickamauga Reservoir through the plant intake channel to the IPS located approximately 1.9 miles downstream of WBH at TRM 528 (Figure 1). WBN Unit 1 and proposed Unit 2 use closed-cycle cooling such that the cooling water withdrawn at the intake pumping station is to make up for evaporation and for cooling tower blowdown. The intake channel leading to the pumping station has a cross-sectional area of approximately 1,650 ft2 at Chickamauga Reservoir winter pool elevation of 677 ft mean sea level (msl), and 3,159 ft2 at summer pool elevation of 681 ft msl. The IPS includes four gated openings containing a combined gross flow area of approximately 360 ft2, producing a maximum average velocity at the entrance of IPS of 0.17 fps at summer pool and 0.18 fps at winter pool. The maximum average approach velocity entering the IPS wet well for the traveling water screens at summer and winter pools is 0.40 and 0.37 fps, respectively. At the traveling water screens, the combined unobstructed through-screen area of the flow corresponding to the gated openings is reduced to approximately 140 ft2, producing a maximum average through-screen velocity of 0.62 fps at summer pool and 0.67 fps at winter pool (Table 1).

The maximum average flow rate at the IPS for WBN Unit 1 only is approximately 73 cfs at summer pool and 68 cfs at winter pool. Hydraulic entrainment for Unit 1 at summer and winter pools is 0.3% of the long-term average river flow past the plant (27,047 cfs). With the operation of both Unit 1 and proposed Unit 2, the maximum average flow rate at the IPS at summer pool is expected to be 134 cfs, or 0.5% of the long-term average river flow past the plant. At winter pool, the average flow rate with operation of both Unit 1 and proposed Unit 2 is expected to be 113 cfs, or 0.4% of the long term average river flow (Table 1). Even at 0.5%, the percent hydraulic entrainment under dual unit operation is still ten times smaller than EPA's performance standard of 5%, which EPA established in its 2001 rulemaking implementing section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act for new facilities that use water from rivers, streams, lakes, and reservoirs for cooling purposes (EPA, 2001).

Maximum average velocities at the entrance to the IPS and at through-screen are inversely related to reservoir elevation of Chickamauga Reservoir (i.e., higher at winter pool); maximum average approach velocity entering the IPS wet well for the traveling water screens is directly 2

related to water surface elevation (i.e., higher at summer pool) (Table 1). The reason for this difference is that during both summer and winter pools, the openings at which the maximum average approach velocity entering the IPS wet well for the traveling water screens is measured are submerged. Because openings are submerged for summer and winter pools, the cross-sectional area of the flow through these openings is the same for both summer and winter pools.

Therefore, since the normal maximum IPS flow is higher at summer pool than winter, the maximum average approach velocity entering wet well for traveling water screens, in like manner, will be higher at summer pool. In contrast, the openings at which the maximum average velocities at the entrance to the IPS and at through-screen are measured are not submerged at both reservoir elevations; thus, the cross-sectional areas depend on the surface water elevation.

As a result, maximum average velocities at the entrance to the IPS and at through-screen are higher at winter pool.

Table 1 also illustrates that under dual unit operation maximum intake velocities will not increase, but average flow rates will increase. This is because the IPS contains additional intake openings to accommodate supplementary intake demand that will result under dual unit operation.

Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water Intake System The WBN SCCW intake system, designed to augment the makeup water supply system for WBN, became operational in 1999. The SCCW is designed to provide between 115,000 and 135,000 gallons of water per minute (gpm) by gravity flow from Watts Bar Reservoir to WBN to supplement the cooling capacity of the Unit 1 cooling tower. Since the SCCW system is operated by gravity flow, the amount of water entering and exiting the system depends on the elevation of the water surface behind Watts Bar Dam. Water from the reservoir flows by gravity through an intake screen house that is adjacent to the west upstream side of WBH. The water enters the screen house through six intake sluice gates with bottoms at elevation 710 ft msl and traveling water screens. The gates act as water skimmers since normal summer headwater is at elevation 740.5 ft msl. The SCCW is conveyed through the Unit 2 tower basin to the Unit 1 tower discharge flume. Here it mixes with the warmer water from the Unit 1 tower prior to being pumped to the inlet of the Unit 1 main condenser.

3

SCCW flow conditions during dual unit operation will be less than those during Unit 1 operation only. Reasons for this are twofold: (1) no changes are being made in the capacity of the SCCW intake and discharge conduits, and (2) the water level in the Unit 2 cooling tower basin, which receives the SCCW inflow, will be higher (i.e., reduced head for driving the flow). In like manner, the velocities also will be less. However, following the completion of Unit 2, SCCW velocities can still be as high as those for the current Unit 1 operation during periods when the Unit 2 condenser cooling water system is out of service (e.g., Unit 2 outage). Therefore, to properly describe the full range of possible flow conditions, values for current operation (Unit 1 only) and when Unit 1 and Unit 2 are both in operation are presented in Table 1.

Maximum average velocity at the entrance to the SCCW screen house is 0.44 fps during summer pool (741 ft msl) and 0.38 fps during winter pool (737 ft msl). At summer and winter pools, maximum average approach velocity entering the wet well for traveling water screens is 2.18 and 1.65 fps, respectively. The maximum average through-screen velocity is 1.15 and 1.00 fps at summer and winter pools, respectively. At summer pool, the maximum average flow rate is 313 cfs or 1.1% of the long-term average river flow past WBN (27,047 cfs); the maximum average flow rate at winter pool is 238 cfs or 0.9% of long-term average river flow past WBN (Table 1).

Even at 1.1%, the SCCW hydraulic entrainment is approximately five times less than EPA's performance standard of 5% (EPA, 2001).

Materials and Methods Data Collection Ichthyoplankton samples during 2010-2011 monitoring were collected weekly from March 2010 through August, then monthly from September through March 2011 on a diel schedule (day and night). Samples were collected at five stations along a transect located in Chickamauga Reservoir at TRM 528.5, which was perpendicular to river flow just upstream of the IPS water intake channel. Four samples were collected within the IPS channel located at TRM 528.0. In Watts Bar Reservoir two samples were collected (and combined) in front of the SCCW intake (TRM 529.9) and at five stations along a transect located at TRM 530.2 (Figure 1). Samples 4

were taken with a beam net (0.5 m square, 1.8 m long, with 505 micron "nitex" mesh netting) towed into the current at a speed of 1.0 mrs for ten minutes. The volume of water filtered through the net was measured with a large-vaned General Oceanics Inc. flowmeter. At both reservoir transects, eight samples (four each day and night) were collected at three stations: a full stratum sample on both left and right over banks and two mid-channel samples (full-stratum and a bottom tow). Detailed ichthyoplankton sampling procedures used during 2010-2011 monitoring are outlined in S&F OPS-FO-BR-23.5 (TVA, 2010a).

The SCCW intake and reservoir transect in Watts Bar Reservoir were not sampled in 1996 and 1997 because the SCCW system was not operational at this time; therefore, only ichthyoplankton data collected during April through June 2010 at the IPS channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect were compared to that of 1996 and 1997.

Laboratory Analysis Laboratory analyses followed the same procedures in 2010 and 2011 as in 1996 and 1997. Fish eggs and larvae were removed from the samples, identified to the lowest possible taxon, counted and measured (larvae) to the nearest millimeter total length following procedures outlined in S&F OPS-FO-BR-24.1 (TVA, 2010b). Taxonomic decisions were based on TVA's "Preliminary Guide to the Identification of Larval Fishes in the Tennessee River," (Hogue et al., 1976) and other pertinent literature (Wallus et al., 1990; Kay et al., 1994; Simon and Wallus, 2003; Simon and Wallus, 2006; Wallus and Simon, 2006; and Wallus and Simon, 2008).

Some specimens could not be identified to species. The term "unidentifiable larvae" applies to specimens too damaged or mutilated to identify, while "unspecifiable" before a taxon implies a level of taxonomic resolution (i.e., "unspecifiable catostomids" designates larvae within the family Catostomidae that currently cannot be identified to a lower taxon). The category "unidentifiable eggs" applies to specimens that cannot be identified due to damage or lack of taxonomic knowledge. Taxonomic refinement is a function of specimen size and developmental stage. Throughout historical reports, the designation "unspecifiable clupeids" refers to clupeids less than 20 mm in total length and could include Dorosoma cepedianum (gizzard shad), D.

5

petenense (threadfin shad), and/or Alosa chrysochloris (skipjack herring) (Table 3). Any clupeid specimen identified to species level represents a juvenile 20 mm or longer in total length.

Developmental stage of moronids also determines level of taxonomic resolution. Morone saxatilis (striped bass) hatch at a larger size than either M chrysops (white bass) or M mississippiensis (yellow bass). Although it is currently impossible to distinguish between larvae of the latter two species, M saxatilis can be eliminated as a possibility based on developmental characteristics of specimens 5 mm or less in total length (hence, the taxonomic designation "Morone not saxatilis"). Specimens identified as "Morone sp." are those greater than 5 mm total length that could be any of the three species.

Data Analysis Temporal occurrence and relative abundance of eggs and larvae by taxon are presented and discussed for samples collected during 2010-2011 monitoring periods. Densities of fish eggs and larvae are expressed as numbers per 1,000 m3 and were calculated using the equation:

D = 1,000(Number fish eggs or larvae collected)

Sample volume Estimated entrainment of fish eggs and larvae was calculated by the following equation:

X DQ Ent =

1000 where Ent is estimated entrainment of fish eggs or larvae, D is the mean density (number/i,000 m3) of fish eggs or larvae and Q is the flow (m3/d). To estimate densities of fish eggs and larvae transported past WBN (from reservoir samples), densities of fish eggs and larvae from all stations along the reservoir transect were multiplied by the corresponding 24-hour river flow past the plant. Entrainment estimates for intake samples were calculated using the same method, except densities of fish eggs and larvae from the intake samples and plant intake water were used.

6

Percentage of transported ichthyofauna entrained at WBN IPS and SCCW intakes was estimated using the formula:

E

-100DjQjDrQr where Di is the mean density (number/l,000 mi3) of fish eggs or larvae in intake samples; Dr is the mean density (number/I,000 mi3) of fish eggs or larvae in the reservoir transect; Qi is the plant intake water flow (m3/d); and Qr is the river flow past WBN (M3/d).

Results and Discussion During thirty-three sample periods in 2010-2011 (weekly March-August 2010 then monthly September-March 2011), the average volume of water filtered was 603 M3 for IPS samples, 773 m3 for Chickamauga Reservoir transect samples, 299 M3 for SCCW samples, and 782 m3 for Watts Bar Reservoir transect samples (Table 2). Only one weekly sample was collected during March 2011 due to extremely high flows during the first three weeks of that month. A list of families of fish eggs and larvae collected from March 2010 through March 2011 including the lowest level of taxonomic resolution is presented in Table 3.

Chickamauma Reservoir transect and WBN Intake Pumping Station Fish Eggs A total of 4,035 fish eggs was collected from the Chickamauga Reservoir transect and the WBN IPS during March 2010 through March 2011. Total fish eggs were comprised of freshwater drum at 98.4%, moronids (not striped bass) 1.1%, clupeids 0.5%, and catostomids (trace) (Table 4). Densities of eggs peaked twice in reservoir samples, first on June 1 (1,356/1,000 mi3) and again on July 11 at 2,039/1,000 m3 (Table 5, Figure 2). The second peak in July is not typical.

Peaks in freshwater drum spawning typically occur May through June (Wrenn, 1968); however, spawning can continue into later summer months. Highest density recorded in intake samples was 327/1,000 M3 also on July 11. All eggs collected on those dates were sciaenid (freshwater drum) eggs. Period of occurrence for sciaenid eggs in samples was from May 2 through August 7

22, 2010 (Table 5). Freshwater drum are pelagic (open water) reservoir spawners as opposed to some species (e.g., sauger, white bass) which spawn in flowing waters such as streams and tailwaters (Etnier and Starnes, 1993). Therefore, the semi-buoyant freshwater drum eggs occurring in these samples were spawned above the dam and subsequently subjected to turbine passage from WBH.

A comparison of freshwater drum egg densities collected during both day and night and by station across the reservoir transect and by day and night in intake samples is presented in Table

6. Night densities were significantly greater than during daytime. Night density along the left descending bank was greater than at the other four stations. One possible explanation for higher densities at night could be a result of lower turbine generation at night and a "pooling effect" on the pelagic, semi-buoyant eggs. Another possibility is the diel timing of drum spawning above the dam to cause eggs to arrive in the tailwater when night samples were collected.

All other fish eggs were collected in lower densities in reservoir samples during March (catostomids), April (moronids), and May (clupeids) (Table 5).

Fish Larvae Weekly sampling at the Chickamauga Reservoir transect and the WBN IPS from March 2010 through August 2010 and monthly from September through March 2011 collected a total of 6,156 larval fish. Relative abundance for all taxa of larval fish collected during the thirty-three sample periods (intake and reservoir combined) was dominated by clupeids (71.2%),

centrarchids (14.8%), moronids (10.9%) and sciaenids (2.0%) (Table 4). Larval moronids, percids (darters and sauger), and clupeids were the earliest taxa (April 11, 2010) to be collected in both reservoir and intake samples (Table 5). Densities of total fish larvae peaked on May 17 in both intake (728/1,000 mi3) and reservoir (905/1,000 m3) samples (Table 7, Figure 4). Clupeid larvae were the dominant taxon represented in both peaks (Table 5). It should be noted that peak density of fish larvae on May 17 was coincidentally the date that there was no turbine flow through WBH to accommodate a hydrothermal survey of the WBN's Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) thermal plume under no-flow condition (TVA, 201 la).

8

Larval densities declined weekly after the May 17 peak at approximately the same rate they increased beginning in mid-April (Table 7, Figure 4). Densities essentially bottomed-out by late June, but increased slightly again during July as a result of collection of later-spawned centrarchid larvae (Table 5).

Clupeidae Clupeid larvae were first collected on April 18 in both intake and reservoir samples. Peak densities occurred on May 17, also in both sample locations. Larval clupeids were no longer collected in reservoir samples after August 1 in reservoir samples and August 22 in intake samples (Table 5, Figure 6). Occasional specimens collected after August 1 and August 22 were juveniles.

Centrarchidae Larval centrarchids were collected from April 25 through August 29 in both intake and reservoir samples (Table 5). Peak densities occurred on June 7 and June 14 in reservoir and intake samples, respectively (Table 5, Figure 8). Higher densities of centrarchid larvae collected in intake samples reflect the tendency for sunfish species to build nests and spawn in more protected environments such as the intake channel. Higher densities were collected at night in intake samples and from samples collected along the left descending bank station at the reservoir transect (Table 6). Densities declined abruptly by the end of June, but during July and August, significant numbers of centrarchid larvae were collected again in intake samples only (Table 5, Figure 8). This is considered the result of late-spawning by centrarchids residing in the intake channel.

Moronidae Larval moronids (white bass and yellow bass) made up 10.9% of the total larvae collected in 2010-2011 (Table 4). The first moronid larvae were collected on April 11, which was also the date of highest Moronidae densities for both intake (276/1,000 in 3) and reservoir (262/1,000 in3) samples (Table 5, Figure 10). A smaller (75/1,000 in 3) secondary peak occurred on June 7 in intake samples. Spatial distribution was similar across stations at the reservoir transect and between day and night samples. Sample densities in intake samples were noticeably higher at night (Table 6). Moronid larvae were collected until June 7 and June 14 in reservoir and intake samples, respectively (Table 5, Figure 10).

9

Sciaenidae Larval sciaenids (freshwater drum) composed 1.2% and 2.7% of larvae collected in intake and reservoir samples, respectively (Table 4). Larvae were first collected on May 2 in reservoir and May 17 in intake samples (Table 5). Peak densities were recorded on June 7 in both reservoir (37/1,000 m3) and intake (26/1,000 M3) samples (Table 5, Figure 12). Sciaenid larvae were collected until June 21 in both intake and reservoir samples, although four juvenile specimens were collected in August intake samples (Table 5, Figure 12). Spatial distribution was similar across stations and between day and night at the reservoir transect and slightly higher in night intake samples (Table 6).

Incidental Families Collected Larvae (or juveniles) representing five additional families were collected, all comprising less than one percent of the total. Numbers collected in both intake and reservoir samples by lowest taxonomic level identifiable are shown in Table 4.

" Cyprinidae - Twenty-eight cyprinids were collected, with 26 identified to the genus Pimephales. Distribution between intake and reservoir samples was similar (Table 4).

• Atherinopsidae - Family containing brook and Mississippi silverside. Twenty-three of 27 collected were identifiable only to family (Table 4).

" Percidae - Family containing yellow perch, logperch, darters and sauger. Thirteen larvae were collected, most noteworthy was one larval sauger collected in a reservoir sample on April 11 (Tables 4 and 5). This indicates some degree of spawning by sauger in the tailwater even though the primary spawning area for sauger is several miles downstream on Hunter Shoals (Hickman et al., 1990).

" Catostomidae - Two buffalo larvae (Ictobinae) were collected in reservoir samples (Table 4).

• Ictaluridae - One channel catfish larva was collected in a reservoir sample (Table 4).

Estimated Entrainment at the WBN IPS IPS entrainment estimates for fish eggs and larvae by sample period during March 2010 through March 2011 and weekly, monthly, and annual percent entrainment for the period sampled are 10

presented in Table 7. During this period, total annual entrainment of ichthyoplankton passing WBN was estimated to be 0.11% for fish eggs and 0.43% for fish larvae. There were some anomalously higher percentages, however, for individual weekly samples. During the May 17 and August 22 sample periods, densities of fish eggs in intake samples (117 and 27/1,000 m 3, respectively) were significantly higher than in reservoir samples (13 and 1/1,000 in3,

respectively) and resulted in higher entrainment estimates (4.1% and 6.5%, respectively) for those periods. However, monthly entrainment estimates for the months in which these two anomalous events occurred, May and August, were 0.26% and 1.81%, respectively. Similarly for fish larvae, during sample periods 13, 15-19, 21, 22, and 24, densities were considerably higher in intake samples and entrainment estimates ranged from 1.07% (June 28) to 10.34%

(July 25) (Table 7). The higher intake densities during these sample periods were due to higher numbers of centrarchid larvae (Table 5; Figure 8). This is probably a result of the intake channel shoreline serving as spawning and nursery habitat.

The EPA's recommended maximum water withdrawal of 5% or less of mean annual river flow is based on the assumption that 5% of the river's organisms would be entrained as well and that water withdrawal rates of 5% or less have a low tendency to cause significant entrainment impacts (EPA, 2001). Total entrainment values of 0.11% for fish eggs and 0.43% for fish larvae are well below this recommended value.

Watts Bar Reservoir transect and SCCW Intake Fish Eggs Ichthyoplankton monitoring conducted at the SCCW intake structure and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) above WBD during the period March 7, 2010 and March 25 2011 filtered 9,851 m3 and 25,795 m 3 of water, respectively (Table 2). At the SCCW intake, a total of 23 fish eggs (18 sciaenid and 5 clupeid) were collected and nine sciaenid eggs were collected at the upstream transect (Table 4, Figure 3). These numbers of fish eggs collected were lower than those observed at the downstream transect. Higher densities of drifting, semi-buoyant freshwater drum eggs would be expected at the upstream transect. One explanation for the low densities could be dilution in the large, open forebay area where sampling was conducted upstream compared to the more concentrated tailwater area downstream.

11

Fish Larvae Total numbers collected and percent composition for each taxon are presented in Table 4. A total of 2,498 fish larvae was collected at the SCCW intake dominated by 89.3% clupeids and 9.0% centrarchids. All other families made up less than one percent of the total. At the upstream reservoir transect, 5,056 larvae were collected. Families constituting over one percent of the total were Clupeidae (3,937; 77.9%), Centrarchidae (788; 15.6%), Sciaenidae (128; 2.5%),

and Moronidae (82; 1.6%) (Table 4). A graph of weekly densities of total fish larvae collected at the upstream transect and the SCCW intake is presented in Figure 5.

Clupeidae Larval clupeids were first collected on April 18 at both reservoir and intake and were present in samples through August 29, 2010 at the reservoir transect and August 8 at the SCCW intake.

Specimens collected during July and August were juveniles (Table 5). Densities of clupeids peaked on May 9, 2010 at both the upstream transect and the SCCW intake (Table 5). The highest density (4,104/1,000 mi3) was recorded at the SCCW intake, compared to 1,294/1,000 m 3 at the upstream transect (Table 5, Figure 7). The higher densities at the SCCW intake during the same sampling period can be explained by fluvial dynamics created by generation from WBH, which result in an eddying effect in Watts Bar forebay. Ichthyoplankton spawned in the forebay drift toward the SCCW intake where they are pooled and become available for entrainment. A few juvenile and adult clupeids were collected in November and December, 2010 and January and February, 2011 (Table 5). Diel and spatial distribution of clupeids at the upstream reservoir transect showed mostly higher densities at night and near both shorelines. Densities at the SCCW intake were also higher at night (Table 6).

Centrarchidae Centrarchid larvae were collected at the upstream transect from March 28 through August 29, 2010, and at the SCCW intake from April 25 through August 29, 2010 (Table 5). Peak densities of 240/1,000 m3 and 228/1,000 m 3 occurred at the upstream transect on June 14, 2010 and at the SCCW intake on June 1, 2010, respectively. A secondary spawn by centrarchids was indicated by densities of 47/1,000 m3 at the upstream transect and 57/1,000 m 3 at the SCCW intake on August 15, 2010 (Table 5, Figure 9). Diel and spatial distribution of centrarchids at the upstream 12

reservoir transect showed mostly higher densities at night and near both shorelines. Densities at the SCCW intake were also higher at night (Table 6).

Moronidae Larval moronids occurred in samples from April 18 through June 14, 2010 at the upstream transect and from April 25 through May 23, 2010 at the SCCW intake (Table 5, Figure 11).

Spatial distribution across the upstream transect was even during day samples, but higher densities were recorded near the left descending bank at night (Table 6).

Sciaenidae Sciaenid larvae were collected during May and June at both the upstream transect and the SCCW intake. Peak densities occurred at both locations on June 14, 2010 (Figure 13). Spatial distribution of sciaenid larvae was basically even across stations at the upstream transect and densities were somewhat higher at night at both the upstream transect and the SCCW intake (Table 6).

Incidental Families Collected Larvae of families representing less than one percent of the total collected from the upstream transect and the SCCW intake during 2010-2011 totaled 136 specimens (Table 4).

• Atherinopsidae - Thirty-four of 57 collected were identifiable only to family; seventeen were Mississippi silversides and 6 were brook silversides. All but one individual were collected in reservoir samples (Table 4).

Cyprinidae - Forty-seven cyprinids were collected, with 46 identified to the genus Pimephales. Most Pimephales spp. were collected in reservoir samples (Table 4).

" Ictaluridae - Fifteen channel catfish larvae and 5 blue catfish larvae were collected (Table 4).

Percidae - Family containing yellow perch, logperch, darters and sauger. Eight of the 11 larvae collected were yellow perch (Table 4).

Catostomidae - One buffalo larva (Ictobinae) was collected in reservoir samples (Table 4).

13

Estimated Entrainment at WBN SCCW Estimated entrainment of fish eggs at the SCCW intake on May 17 was 14.6% and 3.9% on June

1. On June 21 and July 18, 2010 densities of 3/1,000 m3 and 13/1,000 m3 fish eggs, respectively, were estimated for the SCCW intake, while no eggs were collected at the reservoir transect (Table 7) making an entrainment estimate for these two periods impossible. Given this fact and the low numbers of fish eggs collected at these two sites (23), overall entrainment of fish eggs for the 2010 through 2011 period was estimated to be 2.23%.

Estimated entrainment for fish larvae by sample period at the WBN SCCW intake during 2010 through 2011 is presented in Table 7. Total percent entrainment for fish larvae passing the SCCW intake for the period sampled was estimated to be 1.98%. Weekly entrainment percentages were higher than the annual estimate for six of the 33 sample periods (Table 7). As noted for entrainment at the WBN IPS downstream, densities of larvae at the SCCW intake are occasionally estimated to be higher or similar to densities recorded for the reservoir transect resulting in higher estimated entrainment for those sample periods.

The entrainment estimate of 2.23% for fish eggs and 1.98% for fish larvae at the WBN SCCW is, as noted for the WBN IPS downstream, well below EPA's guideline of recommended maximum water withdrawal of 5% or less to have a low tendency to cause significant entrainment impacts (EPA, 2001).

Comparison with Historical Data (1996 and 1997)

The most recent monitoring of ichthyoplankton at WBN (prior to current monitoring) was conducted during April through June 1996 and the same period in 1997 (TVA, 1998). Results of that monitoring (densities and entrainment estimates by sample period), along with those of the same period (April through June) in 2010, are presented in Table 8. This section will compare results from ichthyoplankton data collected during April through June 1996, 1997, and 2010.

At the reservoir transect downstream of the dam, average seasonal densities of fish eggs in 1996, 1997, and 2010 were 340/1,000 m3, 160/1,000 m3, and 134/1,000 M3, respectively. In the IPS 14

channel, average fish egg densities were similar among the three years at 32/1,000 m3 in 1996, 27/1,000 m3 in 1997, and 22/1,000 m 3 in 2010. Average larval fish densities in the reservoir samples were 443/1,000 m3 in 1996, 908/1,000 m3 in 1997, and 305/1,000 m 3 in 2010. Among the three years, larval fish densities in the IPS channel were 1,595/1,000 m3 (1996), 1,150/1,000 m3 (1997), and 352/1,000 m3 (2010) (Table 8).

The timing of peak densities of fish eggs at the reservoir transect differed among the three years:

April 22 in 1996, March 21 in 1997, and June 1 in 2010. Peak densities of fish eggs in reservoir samples were similar among years at 1,528/1,000 m3 in 1996, 1,070/1,000 m 3 in 1997, and 1,356/1,000 m3 in 2010. The highest densities of fish larvae during the three years were observed during the week of June 3, 1996 in the intake samples (5,575/1,000 M3), June 23, 1997, in the intake samples (2,646/1,000 M3), and May 17, 2010, in the reservoir samples (905/1,000 in 3) (Table 8).

Among the three years, highest seasonal entrainment recorded for fish eggs was 0.12% of those in the reservoir in 2010 and for larvae 0.88% in 1996. Seasonal entrainment for fish eggs was lowest in 1996 (0.02%) and 1997 (0.02%) and lowest for fish larvae in 2010 (0.40%). As stated in the previous section, one sample period (May 17) in 2010 exhibited an entrainment estimate of for fish eggs (4.08%) that was higher than any in 1996 or 1997 and was due to a considerably higher density of fish eggs in intake samples (117/1,000 in 3) than in reservoir samples (13/1,000 in 3). Similarly for fish larvae in 2010, during sample dates on June 1, June 14, and June 21 densities were higher in intake samples than reservoir samples and entrainment estimates ranged from 2.32% to 8.65% (Table 8).

Although the entrainment percentages were similar for the monitoring periods in 1996 and 1997 and for 2010, the fish egg and larvae densities were lower at the Chickamauga Reservoir transect in 2010. This is likely to be the result of normal fluctuations in fish spawning success.

Estimated Entrainment with WBN Unit 2 Proposed operation of Unit 2, given that both units would only withdraw water through the IPS to provide make-up for evaporation and cooling tower blowdown, would increase average flow 15

rates and percent hydraulic entrainment to values shown in Table 1. Numbers of entrained fish eggs and larvae could increase proportionally to average flow rates, which would expand numbers entrained by the ratio of 73 to 134 cfs at summer pool or 68 to 113 cfs at winter pool (Table 1). Based on these expansion ratios, the addition of Unit 2 would increase estimated entrainment of fish eggs to 0.20% at summer pool and 0.18% at winter pool and entrainment of fish larvae to 0.79% and 0.71% at summer and winter pools, respectively. However, considering the highly variable spawning success of fish communities and variability in ichthyoplankton densities among years, numbers of fish eggs and larvae entrained with dual unit operation would be driven by spawning success of fish and numbers of eggs and larvae transported past WBN via WBH turbine passage rather than the projected increase in flow volume.

As discussed earlier, SCCW intake flows and velocities will decrease under normal dual unit operation. Therefore, entrainment estimates for the SCCW intake could be expected to decrease proportionately to average flow rates.

Even with the addition of Unit 2, estimated total entrainment values for summer and winter pools at the IPS and SCCW intakes are well below the EPA recommended maximum water withdrawal of 5% of mean annual river flow.

Conclusions Total entrainment percentages for both fish eggs and larvae for WBN Unit 1 during April through June 2010 were similar to those estimated for previous operational monitoring during the same period in 1996 and 1997. It was concluded in the previous report (TVA, 1998) that the low entrainment levels would not be detrimental to the ichthyoplankton population of Chickamauga Reservoir. Therefore, the April through June 2010 ichthyoplankton population in upper Chickamauga Reservoir should not have been adversely affected due to entrainment by WBN Unit 1. The year-long study in 2010-2011 confirmed that the March-June period was an appropriate time frame for analyzing ichthyoplankton entrainment. Nonetheless, the 2010-2011 monitoring extended the sampling to year-round to eliminate the possibility of spawning occurring beyond the normal range.

16

Addition of WBN Unit 2 should increase entrainment by the IPS and decrease entrainment by the SCCW, both in proportion to water withdrawal, assuming all water is taken from the respective IPS and SCCW. Since entrainment by the IPS with Unit 1 was generally below 1% of reservoir ichthyoplankton except for specific periods of significant spawning in the intake channel, the expected increase of water withdrawal should not increase entrainment above the EPA-recommended 5% of mean annual river flow. The addition of Unit 2 will decrease SCCW entrainment from levels already below the EPA's recommendation of 5% of mean annual flow.

17

References Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System:

Regulations Addressing Cooling Water Intake Structures for New Facilities, 66 Fed. Reg.

65,256, 65,277 (Dec. 18, 2001); 40 C.F.R. § 125.84.

Etnier, D.A. & Starnes, W.C. 1993. The Fishes of Tennessee. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee, 681 pp.

Hickman, G.D., K.W. Hevel and E.M. Scott. 1990. Population survey of sauger (Stizostedion canadense) in Chickamauga Reservoir - 1989. TVAIWRIAB-90/10. Water Resources.

Tennessee Valley Authority. Norris, Tennessee.

Hogue, Jacob J., Jr., Robert Wallus, and Larry Kay. 1976. Preliminary guide to the identification of larval fishes in the Tennessee River. TVA Tech. Note B19. 67pp.

Kay, L.K., R. Wallus, and B.L. Yeager. 1994. Reproductive Biology and Early Life History of Fishes in the Ohio River Drainage. Volume 2: Catostomidae. Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga, TN, USA.

Simon, T.P., and R. Wallus. 2003. Reproductive Biology and Early Life History of Fishes in the Ohio River Drainage. Volume 3: Ictaluridae-Catfish and Madtoms. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.

Simon, T.P., and R. Wallus. 2006. Reproductive Biology and Early Life History of Fishes in the Ohio River Drainage. Volume 4: Percidae. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.

Tennessee Valley Authority. 1998. Aquatic environmental conditions in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant during two years of operation, 1996-1997. Norris, TN.

Tennessee Valley Authority. 2010a. Standard Operating Procedures (S&F OPS-FO-BR-23.5) for "Ichthyoplankton Sampling." Knoxville, TN.

Tennessee Valley Authority. 2010b. Standard Operating Procedures (S&F OPS-FO-BR-24.1) for "Ichthyoplankton Sample Processing." Knoxville, TN.

Tennessee Valley Authority. 201 Oc. Biological Monitoring of the Tennessee River Near Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Discharge, Autumn 2009. Chattanooga, TN.

Tennessee Valley Authority. 201 Ia. Hydrothermal Effects on the Ichthyoplankton from the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water Outfall in Upper Chickamauga Reservoir. Biological and Water Resources, Knoxville, TN, USA.

Tennessee Valley Authority. 201 lb. NPG Calculation Coversheet/ CCRIS Update, Rev 002 --

Sizing of Traveling Water Screen for Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 1 & 2. Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN, USA. 44pp.

18

Wallus, R., B.L. Yeager, and T.P. Simon. 1990. Reproductive Biology and Early Life History of Fishes in the Ohio River Drainage. Volume 1: Acipenseridae through Esocidae. Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga, TN, USA.

Wallus, R. and T.P. Simon. 2006. Reproductive Biology and Early Life History of Fishes in the Ohio River Drainage. Volume 5: Aphredoderidae through Cottidae, Moronidae, and Sciaenidae. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.

Wallus R. and T.P. Simon. 2008. Reproductive Biology and Early Life History of Fishes in the Ohio River Drainage. Volume 6: Elassomatidae and Centrarchidae. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.

Wrenn, W.B. 1968. Life history aspects of smallmouth buffalo and freshwater drum in Wheeler Reservoir, Alabama. Proc. 22nd Ann. S.E. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 22:479-495.

19

Figure 1. Locations of sampling stations at the WBN Intake Pumping Station channel (TRM 528),

Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water intake (TRM 529.9), and reservoir transects in Chickamauga Reservoir (TRM 528.5) and Watts Bar Reservoir (TRM 530.2) used to collect ichthyoplankton (fish eggs and larvae) from March 2010 through March 2011 in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN.

20

Densities of Fish Eggs 2500 2000 E

1500 E

1000 C

500 0

--/-Chickamauga Reservoir

-,,#,-PS 2-.-..

9120 1 ý2121 2-324125126272 8293031323 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Sample Period/ Month Figure 2. Densities of fish eggs collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

21

Densities of Fish Eggs 14 12 10

.0 E

C

-Vr 8

6

[---

Watts Bar Reservoir

-O--SCCW A IAI A Il

... 6.1... V V V. --x 4

2 0

Mar Apr 91M1011112113 14115116117 18119 20121 22 23A24125126 27 8

0 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Ma Sample Period/ Month Figure 3. Densities of fish eggs collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

22

1000 900 800 700

7 E

E 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

Densities of Fish Larvae A-*i-Chickamauga Reservoir

-+-e--PS 15 78 9 110 112 113 14 115 116 178119 20 21 22 23124 25 26 27 28 29 3u13 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Ma Sample Period/ Month Figure 4. Densities of fish larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

23

4500 4000 3500

=3000 E

0 C

C

-. 2500 E

.S2000 C

1500 1000 500 0

Densities of Fish Larvae

-*--Watts Bar Reservoir

-+-SCCW 1 a2 3 4

5 6

718 9110 11112113 14115116 17 18 12425 2 7 28 29 30 31 32 33 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Sample Period/ Month Figure 5. Densities of fish larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

24

900 800 700

• - 600 E

-500 E

400 C

o 300 200 100 0

Densities of Clupeidae Larvae

-- rChickamauga Reservoir 1 ~

~

7 2 31 8 9 110 1ll 12 113 14 115 116 1871 19 20 121 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 03 23 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Ma Sample Period/ Month Figure 6. Densities of Clupeidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

25

4500 4000 3500

-3000 E

0 2500 E

.2000 1 2500 00

.S 000 500 Densities of Clupeidae Larvae Watts Bar Reservoir

-*-SCCW 1A

-n

-Aug-2 3 4

56 7

8 910 111 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19201223245267289301323 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Ma Sample Period/ Month Figure 7. Densities of Clupeidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

26

Densities of Centrarchidae Larvae 300 250 200 E

0 C

100 150 50 50

-- *--Chickamauga Reservoir -IPS Mar Apr May Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Sample Period/ Month Figure 8. Densities of Centrarchidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

27

Densities of Centrarchidae Larvae 300 250 A 200 E

C

"*150 50 S10

--*--Watts Bar Reservoir j_**SCCW 1721314 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 124 125 1u26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Sample Period/ Month Figure 9. Densities of Centrarchidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

28

Densities of Moronidae Larvae 300 250

-i-Chickamauga Reservoir

-. 200

-. *-IPS E

0 0

0 150 o 100 50 1 21374 5 6 17 18 9 110 111 112 113 14 115 16 17 18 19 20 21 2-2123 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Ma Sample Period/ Month Figure 10. Densities of Moronidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

29

Densities of Moronidae Larvae 25 20

-*-Watts Bar Reservoir SCCW 00 15 a'

E 10 5

71 1 8

9 11013 14 115 16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Mar Apr May JnulAgSep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Sample Period/ Month Figure 11. Densities of Moronidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

30

Densities of Sciaenidae Larvae 40 35 30 25 20 c 15 a'

10 5

0

--*-Chickamauga Reservoir

-l-i1PS 210a 11 12113 14 15 16 17 18 19 20259 MarAprMayJunJul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Sample Period/ Month Figure 12. Densities of Sciaenidae larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel and the Chickamauga Reservoir transect downstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Wafts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

31

Densities of Sciaenidae Larvae 50 45 40 35 E

830

-0 25

• 20 C

-; 0 15 10 5

0 Watts Bar Reservoir *Sccw 1 a2 3 4

5 6

717011 12113 14115116117 18 19 201 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 31 32 33 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep IOct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Sample Period/ Month Figure 13. Densities of Sciaenidae larvae collected at the Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake and the Watts Bar Reservoir transect upstream of Watts Bar dam in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Rhea County, TN, from March 2010 through March 2011.

32

Table 1. Comparison of maximum average velocity at entrance of intake pumping system, approach velocity entering wet well for traveling water screens, through-screen velocity, and flow rate and percent hydraulic entrainment (percent of river flow) past the Watts Bar Nuclear intake pumping station (IPS) and Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) intake at summer and winter pool elevations and during operation of Unit 1 only and expected values during operation of Units 1 and 2 combined. SCCW values represent those for Unit 1 only and Units 1 and 2 combined. Calculations presented in TVA, 2011b. (msl = mean sea level)

Summer Pool Winter Pool IPS (681 ft msl)

(677 ft msl)

Units l and 2 Units l and 2 Unit 1 Only Combined Unit 1 Only Combined Maximum Average Velocity 0.17 fps 0.17 fps 0.18 fps 0.18 fps at Entrance of IPS Maximum Average Approach Velocity Entering 0.40 fps 0.40 fps 0.37 fps 0.37 fps Wet Well for Traveling Water Screens Maximum Average Through-0.62 fps 0.62 fps 0.67 fps 0.67 fps Screen Velocity Maximum Average Flow 73 cfs 134 cfs 68 cfs 113 cfs Rate Percent Hydraulic 0.3%

0.5%

0.3%

0.4%

Entrainment

• Summer Pool Winter Pool SCCW **

(741 ft msl)

(737 ft msl)

Maximum Average Velocity at Entrance to SCCW Screen 0.44 fps 0.38 fps House (Face of Trash Racks)

Maximum Average Approach Velocity Entering 2.18 fps 1.65 fps Wet Well for Traveling Water Screens Maximum Average Through-1.15 Lbs 1.00 Lbs Screen Velocity Approximate Maximum 313 cfs 238 cfs Average Flow Rate Percent Hydraulic 1.1%

0.9%

Entrainment *

• Percent hydraulic entrainment is based on a long-term average river flow past WBN of 27,047 cfs.

• • Values presented for SCCW bound the full range of flow conditions observed during operation of Unit 1 only and Units 1 and 2 combined (see text for explanation).

33

Table 2. Total volume of water filtered by sample period from March 2010 through March 2011 at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5),

Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) near Watts Bar Nuclear Plant to estimate densities and entrainment of fish eggs and larvae.

IPS Chickamauga SCCW Watts Bar Sample Period Sample Date Reservoir transect (M 3 )

Reservoir transect SamplPeridSamleDae(m)

(W 3

)

(M 3

)

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 7-Mar-10 14-Mar-10 21-Mar-10 28-Mar-10 4-Apr-10 11-Apr-10 18-Apr-10 25-Apr-10 2-May-10 9-May-10 17-May-10 23-May-10 1-Jun-10 7-Jun-10 14-Jun-10 21-Jun-10 28-Jun-10 4-Jul-10 11-Jul-10 18-Jul-10 25-Jul-10 1-Aug-10 8-Aug-10 15-Aug-10 22-Aug-10 29-Aug-10 20-Sep-10 13-Oct-10 16-Nov-10 22-Dec-10 19-Jan-11 14-Feb-1I 25-Mar-11 598 585 577 588 595 612 623 609 618 588 588 621 594 587 628 647 647 642 642 641 491 656 650 625 595 644 612 597 613 601 609 361 604 796 773 729 744 744 751 760 809 801 774 771 798 816 814 799 813 787 802 816 785 805 824 811 788 760 802 748 783 792 752 775 734 440 153 300 295 304 288 326 319 316 296 290 320 311 311 298 303 310 303 306 301 308 297 298 296 297 287 297 300 303 312 306 301 295 305 750 758 753 779 782 796 793 814 765 794 776 810 816 804 818 809 770 802 756 791 780 791 793 794 761 779 773 777 793 756 729 745 787 Total 19,888 25,495 9,851 25,795 Average 603 773 299 782 34

Table 3. List by family of fish eggs and larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) near Watts Bar Nuclear Plant from March 2010 through March 2011, and lowest level of taxonomic resolution for each family.

Scientific Common Lowest Level of Taxonomic Name Name Identification Eggs Catostomidae Suckers Family - Catostomid spp.

Clupeidae Shad Family - Clupeid spp. (not skipjack herring)

Moronidae Temperate Genus - Morone spp. (not striped bass)

Basses Sciaenidae Drums Species -Freshwater drum Larvae Atherinopsidae Silversides Family - Atherinid spp.

Species - Brook and Mississippi silverside Catostomidae Suckers Subfamily - Ictiobines (buffalo and carpsucker)

Genus - Crappie, lepomids (sunfishes), and black Centrarchidae Sunfishes bass Species - Larger individuals to largemouth bass, white crappie, and bluegill Family - All larvae <20 mm TL Clupeidae Shad Species - Larger individuals to alewife, skipjack, and gizzard and threadfin shad Minnows and Family - Cyprinid spp.

Cyprinidae Carps Genus - Pimephales spp. and Cyprinella spp.

Species - Common carp Ictaluridae Catfishes Species - Blue and channel catfish Moronidae Temperate Genus - Morone and Morone type (but not saxatilis)

Basses Species - White bass and yellow bass Genus - Percina (P. caprodes type, not P. caprodes)

Percidae Darters type Species - Sauger and yellow perch Sciaenidae Drums Species - Freshwater drum 35

Table 4. Actual numbers and percent composition of fish eggs and larvae collected in entrainment samples at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through March 2011 in the vicinity of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant.

IPS Channel Chickamauga Reservoir Total transect (TRM 528.5)

Total Total Total Ttl Percent Ttl Percent TtlPercent Taxon Numbers Pe Numbers Pe Numbers Pe Collected Comp.

Collected Comp.

Collected Comp.

FISH EGGS Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens (freshwater drum) eggs 455 98.9%

3,514 98.3%

3,969 98.4%

Moronidae Unspecifiable moronids (not M saxatilis) 43 1.2%

43 1.1%

Clupeidae Clupeid eggs 5

1.1%

15 0.4%

20 0.5%

Percidae Percid eggs 2

0.1%

2 T

Catostomidae Catostomid eggs 1

T 1

T Total 460 100%

3,575 100%

4,035 100%

LARVAE Clupeidae 1,998 66.0%

2,387 76.3%

4,385 71.2%

Unspecifiable Clupeids 1,741 57.5%

2,270 72.5%

4,011 65.2%

Dorosoma cepedianum (gizzard shad) 91 3.0%

111 3.5%

202 3.3%

Dorosoma petenense (threadfin shad) 166 5.5%

5 0.2%

171 2.8%

Alosa chrysochloris (skipjack herring) 1 T

1 T

Centrarchidae 650 21.5%

261 8.3%

911 14.8%

Lepomis spp.

515 17.0%

132 4.2%

647 10.5%

Lepomis macrochirus (bluegill) 7 0.2%

7 0.1%

Micropterus spp (not M dolomieu) 2 0.1%

2 0.1%

4 0.1%

Pomoxis spp.

125 4.1%

125 4.0%

250 4.1%

Pomoxis annularis (white crappie) 1 T

2 0.1%

3 T

Moronidae 301 9.9%

367 11.7%

668 10.9%

Unspecifiable Moronid 16 0.5%

35 1.1%

51 0.8%

Unspecifiable Moronid (not M saxatilis) 236 7.8%

324 10.4%

560 9.1%

Morone chrysops (white bass) 49 1.6%

8 0.3%

57 0.9%

Sciaenidae 37 1.2%

84 2.7%

121 2.0%

Aplodinotus grunniens (freshwater drum) 37 1.2%

84 2.7%

121 2.0%

Cyprinidae 15 0.5%

13 0.4%

28 0.5%

Unspecifiable Cyprinid I

T 1

T Pimephales spp 14 0.5%

12 0.4%

26 0.4%

Cyprinella spp.

1 T

1 T

Atherinopsidae 17 0.6%

10 0.3%

27 0.4%

Unspecifiable Atherinopsid 14 0.5%

9 0.3%

23 0.4%

Menidia audens (Mississippi silverside) 2 0.1%

1 T

3 T

Labidesthes sicculus (brook silverside) 1 T

1 T

Percidae 9

0.3%

4 0.1%

13 0.2%

Sander canadensis (sauger) 1 T

1 T

Percaflavescens (yellow perch) 4 0.1%

3 0.1%

7 0.1%

Percina spp. (not P. caprodes) 1 T

1 T

Percina spp. (P. caprodes type) 4 0.1%

4 0.1%

Catostomidae 2

0.1%

2 T

Ictiobinae 2

0.1%

2 T

Ictaluridae 1

T 1

T Ictalurus punctatus (channel catfish) 1 T

1 T

Total 3,027 100%

3,129 100%

6,156 100%

36

Table 4 (continued).

SCCW Intake Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2)

Total Total Total Ttl Percent Ttl Percent Ttl Percent Taxon Numbers Pe Numbers pe Numbers Pe Collected Comp.

Collected Comp.

Collected Comp.

FISH EGGS Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens (freshwater drum) eggs 18 78.3%

9 100%

27 84.4%

Clupeidae Unspecifiable Clupeid (not skipjack herring) eggs 5

21.7%

5 15.6%

Total 23 100%

9 100%

32 100%

LARVAE Clupeidae 2,231 89.3%

3,937 77.9%

6,168 81.7%

Unspecifiable Clupeid 2,215 88.7%

3,469 68.6%

5,648 75.2%

Dorosoma cepedianum (gizzard shad) 16 0.6%

458 9.1%

474 6.3%

Dorosomapetenense (threadfm shad) 4 0.1%

4 0.1%

Alosa chrysochloris (skipjack herring) 2 T

2 T

Alosa pseudoharengus (alewife) 4 0.1%

4 0.1%

Centrarchidae 226 9.0%

788 15.6%

1,014 13.4%

Lepomis spp.

123 4.9%

576 3.1%

699 9.3%

Lepomis macrochirus (bluegill) 7 0.1%

7 0.1%

Micropterus spp (not M dolomieu) 3 0.1%

3 T

Micropterus salmoides (largemouth bass) 1 T

1 T

Pomoxis spp.

102 4.1%

196 3.9%

298 3.9%

Pomoxis annularis (white crappie) 1 T

5 0.1%

6 0.1%

Moronidae 8

0.3%

82 1.6%

90 1.2%

Unspecifiable Moronid 8

0.3%

59 1.2%

67 0.9%

Moronid (not M saxatilis) 4 0.1%

4 0.1%

Morone chrysops (white bass) 19 0.4%

19 0.3%

Sciaenidae 18 0.7%

128 2.5%

146 1.9%

Aplodinotus grunniens (freshwater drum) 18 0.7%

128 2.5%

146 1.9%

Cyprinidae 6

0.2%

41 0.8%

47 0.6%

Cyprinus carpio (common carp) 1 T

1 T

Pimephales spp 6

0.2%

40 0.8%

46 0.6%

Atherinopsidae 1

T 56 1.1%

57 0.8%

Unspecifiable Atherinopsid 1

T 33 0.7%

34 0.5%

Menidia audens (Mississippi silverside) 17 0.3%

17 0.2%

Labidesthes sicculus (brook silverside) 6 0.1%

6 0.1%

Percidae 5

0.2%

6 0.1%

11 0.1%

Percaflavescens (yellow perch) 4 0.2%

4 0.1%

8 0.1%

Percina spp. (not P. caprodes) 1 T

1 T

2 T

Percina spp. (P. caprodes type) 1 T

1 T

Catostomidae 1

T 1

T Ictiobinae 1

T 1

T Ictaluridae 3

0.1%

17 0.3%

20 0.3%

Ictalurus punctatus (channel catfish) 3 0.1%

12 0.2%

15 0.2%

Ictalurusfurcatus (blue catfish) 5 0.1%

5 0.1%

Total 2,498 100%

5,056 100%

7,554 100%

37

Table 5. Average densities (number/1,000 m3) by sample period and family of fish eggs and larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through March 2011 at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant.

Fish Eggs Fish Larvae Chickamauga Reservoir IPS Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel transect Channel Sam ple Sam ple

=2 a

• 0.

M T

=

g Period Date a

L M

6C U

U U

PE U

1 07-Mar 2

14-Mar 3

21-Mar 4

28-Mar 5

04-Apr 7

6 11-Apr 48 262 276 2

7 18-Apr 3

54 163 42 108 2

8 25-Apr 322 42 7

2 369 25 7

2 9

02-May 20 17 3

613 21 4

4 2

338 29 2

2 6

10 09-May I

565 3

3 651 7

2 3

11 17-May 13 116 2

856 14 17 8

3 6

1 695 14 9

3 2

3 2

12 23-May 105 3

3 377 49 16 23-430 47 5

5 2

13 01-Jun 1,356 62 102 61 5

21 5

1 307 189 8

8 2

2 14 07-Jun 104 49 95 85 6

37 4

4 107 153 75 26 5

12 2

15 14-Jun 28 43 30 30 13 1

62 279 5

10 2

2 16 21-Jun 22 2

2 6

5 15 196 6

2 2

17 28-Jun 19 2

4 3

14 2

18 04-Jul 41 5

1 2

6 19 11-Jul 2,039 327 2

1 20 2

2 20 18-Jul 466 87 23 2

21 25-Jul 113 6

18 22 01-Aug 2

4 1

7 15 9

2 23 08-Aug 2

8 5

8 2

24 15-Aug I

11 2

2 25 22-Aug 1

27 2

5 2

26 29-Aug-4 4 2

27 20-Sep 28 13-Oct 29 16-Nov 30 22-Dec 75 31 19-Jan 4

39 32 14-Feb 274 3

33 25-Mar 38

Table 5 (continued).

Fish E gs Fish Larvae Watts Bar SCCW afts Bar Reservoir transect SCCW Intake transect Intake A

aa a

M Sample Sample a

.C c

PC Period Date M=

"a-0 I

07-Mar 1

2 14-Mar 1

3 21-Mar

-3 4

28-Mar 1

5 04-Apr 6

11-Apr 3

7 18-Apr 69 3

5 1

4 53 3

8 25-Apr 353 41 16 1

2 1

607 139 16 3

9 02-May 1

1 730 47 8

1 3

1 172 24 3

3 3

10 09-May 4

1,294 31 10 1

5 1

4,104 10 3

3 3

11 17-May 1

9 728 36 5

21 14 8

572 25 3

3 12 23-May 11 503 104 17 15 7

6 1,412 71 6

3 13 01-Jun 2

1 3

895 194 18 16 17 2

1 389 228 13 14 07-Jun 2

191 116 34 11 9

1 2

54 74 10 3

7 3

15 14-Jun 59 240 44 1

7 33 13 16 21-Jun 3

6 30 27 2

1 2

3 16 10 17 28-Jun 12 31 13 1

6 4

13 7

18 04-Jul 2

17 12 5

11 23 19 11-Jul 9

1 3

3 3

20 18-Jul 13 3

I 21 25-Jul 1

9 4

-1 1-10 22 01-Aug 18 16 6

34 3

23 08-Aug 20 10 1

1 10 7

24 15-Aug 13 47 1

4 57 25 22-Aug 1

13 3

26 29-Aug 3

3 7

27 20-Sep 3

28 13-Oct 29 16-Nov 3

30 22-Dec 4

31 19-Jan 3

32 14-Feb 4

33 25-Mar 9

39

Table 6. Densities (number/1,000 m3) by family of fish eggs and larvae during day and night collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5), Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through March 2011 at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant. *Intake densities are averages of four samples.

Fish Eggs Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel*

Day Night Day Night 40%

Midchannel 60%

40%

Midchannel 60%

Family RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB Tow)

RDB RDB Tow)

RDB Sciaenidae 1.5 4.3 0.8 2.0 2.8 200.8 211.0 279.5 267.8 393.8 8.2 38.1 Moronidae 0.8 1.2 0.4 1.9 3.0 8.4 0.8 0.4 Clupeidae 1.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.9 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.3 Percidae 0.4 0.4 Catostomidae 0.4 Total:

2.7 7.0 1.6 2.4 3.2 203.1 215.9 289.1 269.0 394.2 8.2 38.1 Diel Avg:

3.4 274.2 8.2 38.1 24-hr Avg:

138.8 23.1 Fish Larvae Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel*

Day Night Day Night 40%

Midchannel 60%

40%

Midchannel 60%

Family RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB Tow)

RDB RDB Tow)

RDB Clupeidae 55.2 48.8 42.0 54.2 53.1 174.7 104.9 64.1 112.6 218.3 60.2 142.0 Centrarchidae 9.6 6.2 10.3 6.4 5.2 15.9 4.9 9.2 3.9 30.3 15.7 50.2 Moronidae 20.1 9.8 12.8 4.0 10.0 163 16.3 7.2 20.3 26.4 4.8 25.7 Sciaenidae 1.2 1.6 5.8 1.2 1.2 3.8 4.5 5.6 5.5 3.5 0.2 3.6 Cyprinidae 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.6 0.1 1.4 Atherinopsidae 1.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.8 1.1 0.6 Percidae 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.7 Catostomidae 0.4 0.4 Ictaluridae 0.4 Total:

87.6 66.4 71.6 66.6 70.2 212.1 131.4 86.9 143.9 281.2 82.3 224.2 Diel Avg:

72.5 171.1 82.3 224.2 24-hr Avg:

121.8 153.3

• IPS densities are averages of four samples.

40

Table 6 (continued).

Fish Eggs Watts Bar Reservoir transect SCCW Intake**

Day Night Day Night 40%

Midchannel 60%

40%

Midchannel 60%

Family RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB Tow)

RDB RDB Tow)

RDB Sciaenidae 2.0 0.8 0.4 2.7 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 1.6 Clupeidae 0.4 1.2 0.4 Total:

0.4 0.0 2.0 0.8 1.6 2.7 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.0 0.2 1.6 Diel Avg:

0.9 0.8 0.2 1.6 24-hr Avg:

0.9 0.9 Fish Larvae Watts Bar Reservoir transect SCCW Intake**

Day Night Day Night 40%

Midchannel 60%

40%

Midchannel 60%

Family RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB from (Bottom from LDB RDB Tow)

RDB RDB Tow)

RDB Clupeidae 61.5 26.1 2.0 47.6 415.3 317.3 164.8 7.1 232.1 251.6 51.6 399.1 Centrarchidae 33.7 8.0 8.5 29.9 109.1 12.9 22.8 79.7 16.1 29.6 Sciaenidae 0.8 2.3 0.8 1.2 0.4 7.7 6.0 4.0 13.1 13.2 0.8 2.8 Moronidae 0.4 0.8 1.5 1.6 3.5 1.1 4.2 18.6 0.6 1.0 Atherinopsidae 0.4 0.8 2.7 0.8 10.0 2.3 1.9 2.7 0.2 Cyprinidae 0.4 1.2 0.4 8.1 1.9 0.4 0.4 3.1 0.2 1.0 Ictaluridae 1.2 0.4 2.8 2.3 0.6 Percidae 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.8 Catostomidae 0.4 Total:

96.8 38.3 3.9 62.0 448.0 457.3 189.8 14.2 278.0 369.7 69.6 435.2 Diel Avg:

129.8 261.8 69.6 435.2 24-hr Avg:

195.8 252.4

• • SCCW densities are averages of two samples.

41

Table 7. Estimated entrainment by sample period of fish eggs and larvae collected at the Intake Pumping Station (IPS) channel (TRM 528), Chickamauga Reservoir transect (TRM 528.5),

Supplemental Condenser Cooling Water (SCCW) Intake (TRM 529.9), and Watts Bar Reservoir transect (TRM 530.2) from March 2010 through March 2011 at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant including intake and reservoir flow and average densities.

FishEs Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Density Water Estimated Weekly Monthly 4

Number Demand Number Percent Percent Period Date (no./1000m 3) (10~ m3/day) Transported (no./1000m 3) (104 m3/ day)

Entrained Entrainment Entrainment 1

7-Mar 0

5,999 0

0 9

0 0%

2 14-Mar 0

7,735 0

0 9

0 0%

0%

3 21-Mar 1

4,364 5.99 X 104 0

9 0

0%

4 28-Mar 0

2,697 0

0 10 0

0%

5 4-Apr 7

2,144 1.44 X 105 0

10 0

0%

6 11-Apr 48 1,739 8.34 X 10' 0

10 0

0%

0%

7 18-Apr 3

1,477 3.89 X 104 0

9 0

0%

8 25-Apr 0

2,550 0

0 10 0

0%

9 2-May 37 11,925 4.47 X 106 3

16 5.05 X 102 0.01%

10 9-May 1

3,083 3.98 X 104 0

16 0

0%

0.26%

11 17-May 13 3,645 4.73 X 105 117 16 1.93 X 104 4.08%

12 23-May 105 2,877 3.03 X 106 6

16 1.06 X 103 0.03%

13 1-Jun 1,356 1,851 2.51 X 107 62 16 1.01 X 104 0.04%

14 7-Jun 104 3,463 3.62 X 106 49 17 8.13 X 103 0.22%

15 14-Jun 28 3,036 8.36 X 105 43 17 7.12 X 103 0.85%

0.08%

16 21-Jun 22 3,142 6.96 X 105 2

17 2.57 X 102 0.04%

17 28-Jun 19 3,113 5.94 X 105 2

17 2.55 X 102 0.04%

18 4-Jul 41 3,099 1.28 X 106 5

17 7.75 X 102 0.06%

19 11-Jul 2,039 3,026 6.17 X 107 327 17 5.56 X 104 0.09%

0.09%

20 18-Jul 466 2,118" 9.88 X 106 87 17 1.48 X 104 0.15%

21 25-Jul 113 3,246 3.67 X 106 0

17 0

0%

22 1-Aug 2

5,475 1.33 X 105 0

17 0

0%

23 8-Aug 2

5,301 1.31 X 105 8

18 1.38 X 103 1.06%

24 15-Aug 0

5,645 0

0 18 0

0%

1.81%

25 22-Aug 1

5,477 7.21 X 104 27 18 4.70 X 103 6.53%

26 29-Aug 0

5,694 0

0 17 0

0%

27 20-Sep 0

4,265 0

0 17 0

0%

0%

28 13-Oct 0

3,778 0

0 17 0

0%

0%

29 16-Nov 0

7,098 0

0 14 0

0%

0%

30 22-Dec 0

9,388 0

0 16 0

0%

0%

31 19-Jan 0

4,997 0

0 9

0 0%

0%

32 14-Feb 0

2,915 0

0 9

0 0%

0%

33 25-Mar 5

11,413 5.71 X 105 0

9 0

0%

0%

Total:

1.17 X 108 Total:

1.24 X 105 Annual Percent Entrained 0.11%

42

Table 7 (continued).

Fish Larvae Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Density Water Estimated Weekly Monthly 4

Number Demand Number Percent Percent Period Date (no/lOOOm3) (104 ml/ day) Transported (no.lOO0m

3) (104 mi/ day)

Entrained Entrained Entrained 1

7-Mar 0

5,999 0

0 9

0 0%

2 14-Mar 0

7,735 0

0 9

0 0%

0%

3 21-Mar 0

4,364 0

0 9

0 0%

4 28-Mar 0

2,697 0

0 10 0

0%

5 4-Apr 0

2,144 0

0 10 0

0%

6 11-Apr 264 1,739 4.58 X 106 278 10 2.69 X 104 0.59%

0.47%

7 18-Apr 217 1,477 3.21 X 106 151 9

1.35 X 104 0.42%

8 25-Apr 374 2,550 9.55 X 106 402 10 4.06 X 104 0.43%

9 2-May 646 11,925 7.70 X 107 377 16 5.89 X 104 0.08%

10 9-May 570 3,083 1.76 X 107 663 16 1.05 X 10' 0.60%

0.26%

11 17-May 905 3,645 3.30 X 107 728 16 1.20 X 10' 0.36%

12 23-May 465 2,877 1.34 X 107 488 16 8.00 X 104 0.60%

13 1-Jun 195 1,851 3.61 X 106 516 17 8.37 X 104 2.32%

14 7-Jun 230 3,463 7.96 X 106 380 17 6.25 X 104 0.78%

15 14-Jun 74 3,036 2.24 X 106 358 17 5.93 X 104 2.65%

2.25%

16 21-Jun 14 3,142 4.25 X 10' 221 17 3.68 X I04 8.65%

17 28-Jun 8

3,113 2.37 X 10' 15 17 2.55 X 103 1.07%

18 4-Jul 1

3,099 3.86 X I10 8

17 1.29 X 10' 3.34%

19 11-Jul 4

3,026 1.11 X 10, 23 17 3.97X 103 3.57%

7.18%

20 18-Jul 0

2,118 0

25 17 4.23X 103 21 25-Jul 1

3,246 4.03 X 104 24 18 4.17 X 103 10.34%

22 1-Aug 6

5,475 3.32 X 10' 26 18 4.44 X 10' 1.34%

23 8-Aug 0

5,301 0

14 18 2.49 X 103 24 15-Aug 1

5,645 7.16X 104 14 17 2.59X 103 3.61%

1.83%

25 22-Aug 0

5,477 0

8 17 1.47 X 103 26 29-Aug 4

5,694 2.13 X 10' 2

17 2.70 X 102 0.13%

27 20-Sep 0

4,265 0

0 14 0

0%

0%

28 13-Oct 0

3,778 0

0 16 0

0%

0%

29 16-Nov 0

7,098 0

0 9

0 0%

0%

30 22-Dec 0

9,388 0

75 9

1.16 X 104 31 19-Jan 4

4,997 1.93 X 10' 39 9

3.33 X 103 1.72%

1.72%

32 14-Feb 0

2,915 0

277 9

2.46 X 104 33 25-Mar 0

11,413 0

0 9

0 0%

0%

Total:

1.74 X 108 Total:

7.54 X 105 Annual Percent Entrained 0.43%

43

Table 7 (continued).

Fish Eggs Watts Bar Reservoir transect SCCW Intake Estimated Water Estimated Weekly Monthly Sample! Sample Density River Flow Density Period Date (no./1000mS) (10 4 m/day)

Number

./1000m3)

Demand Number Percent Percent Transported (no (104 M3/ day)

Entrained Entrained Entrained 1

7-Mar 0

5,881 0

0 45 0

0%

2 14-Mar 0

7,622 0

0 39 0

0%

0%

3 21-Mar 0

4,239 0

0 51 0

0%

4 28-Mar 0

2,570 0

0 54 0

0%

5 4-Apr 0

2,016 0

0 58 0

0%

6 11-Apr 0

2,044 0

0 57 0

0%

0%

7 18-Apr 0

1,347 0

0 57 0

0%

8 25-Apr 0

2,404 0

0 73 0

0%

9 2-May 3

11,806 3.09 X 10' 0

46 0

0%

10 9-May 4

2,980 1.13 X 105 0

44 0

0%

0.88%

11 17-May 1

3,616 4.66X 104 9

73 6.81 X 103 14.63%

12 23-May 11 2,733 3.04 X 105 0

78 0

0%

13 1-Jun 4

1,701 6.25 X 104 3

76 2.44 X 103 3.91%

14 7-Jun 2

3,374 8.39 X 104 0

81 0

0%

15 14-Jun 0

2,925 0

0 76 0

0%

3.71%

16 21-Jun 0

2,977 0

3 93 2.98 X 103*

17 28-Jun 0

2,950 0

0 92 0

0%

18 4-Jul 2

2,910 7.26X 10 4 0

115 0

0%

19 11-Jul 0

2,631 0

0 322 0

0%

9.57%

20 18-Jul 0

1,962 0

13 83 1.07 X 104 21 25-Jul 1

3,096 3.97 X 104 0

76 0

0%

22 1-Aug 0

5,324 0

0 78 0

0%

23 8-Aug 0

5,158 0

0 70 0

0%

24 15-Aug 0

5,500 0

0 71 0

0%

0%

25 22-Aug 0

5,329 0

0 74 0

0%

26 29-Aug 0

5,545 0

0 75 0

0%

27 20-Sep 0

4,118 0

0 73 0

0%

0%

28 13-Oct 0

3,634 0

0 71 0

0%

0%

29 16-Nov 0

6,961 0

0 64 0

0%

0%

30 22-Dec 0

9,258 0

0 57 0

0%

0%

31 19-Jan 0

4,864 0

0 60 0

0%

0%

32 14-Feb 0

2,819 0

0 22 0

0%

0%

33 25-Mar 0

11,339 0

0 0.02 0

0%

0%

Total:

1.03 X 106 Total:

2.30 X 104 Annual Percent Entrained 2.23%

44

Table 7 (continued).

Fish Larvae Watts Bar Reservoir transect SCCW Intake Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Density Water Estimated Weekly Monthly (104 Number Demand Number Percent Percent Period Date (no./l0m3) (

m3/day) Transported (no11000m)

(104 m3/ day)

Entrained Entrained Entrained 1

7-Mar 3

5,881 1.57 X 105 0

45 0

0%

2 14-Mar 1

7,622 1.01 X 105 0

39 0

0%

0%

3 21-Mar 3

4,239 1.13 X 105 0

51 0

0%

4 28-Mar 3

2,570 6.60 X 104 0

54 0

0%

5 4-Apr 0

2,016 0

0 58 0

0%

6 11-Apr 0

2,044 0

3 57 1.76 X 103 5.33%

7 18-Apr 82 1,347 1.10X 106 56 57 3.21 X 104 2.91%

8 25-Apr 414 2,404 9.95 X 106 765 73 5.56 X 10' 5.58%

9 2-May 790 11,806 9.33 X 10' 206 46 9.48 X 104 0.10%

10 9-May 1,343 2,980 4.00 X 10 7 4,125 44 1.80 X 106 4.49%

1.94%

11 17-May 811 3,616 2.93 X 107 604 73 4.38 X 105 1.49%

12 23-May 653 2,733 1.78 X 107 1,493 78 1.17 X 106 6.53%

13 1-Jun 1,144 1,701 1.65 X 107 630 76 4.79 X 105 2.46%

14 7-Jun 364 3,374 1.23 X 107 151 81 1.22 X 105 0.99%

15 14-Jun 344 2,925 1.OiX 107 53 76 4.03 X 104 0.40%

1.50%

16 21-Jun 69 2,977 2.06 X 106 29 93 2.68 X 104 1.30%

17 28-Jun 67 2,950 1.99 X 106 20 92 1.83 X 104 0.92%

18 4-Jul 46 2,910 1.34 X 106 23 115 2.63 X 104 1.96%

19 11-Jul 13 2,631 3.48X 105 7

322 2.14X 104 6.15%

2.47%

20 18-Jul 4

1,962 7.44 X 104 0

83 0

0%

21 25-Jul 15 3,096 4.76 X 10' 10 76 7.71 X 103 1.62%

22 1-Aug 40 5,324 2.15 X 106 37 78 2.86 X 104 1.33%

23 8-Aug 33 5,158 1.69X 106 17 70 1.19X 10 4

0.70%

24 15-Aug 64 5,500 3.53 X 106 57 71 4.09 X 104 1.16%

1.06%

25 22-Aug 14 5,329 7.70 X 105 3

74 2.58 X 103 0.34%

26 29-Aug 5

5,545 2.85 X 10' 7

75 5.08 X 103 1.78%

27 20-Sep 0

4,118 0

3 73 2.44 X 103 28 13-Oct 0

3,634 0

0 71 0

0%

0%

29 16-Nov 0

6,961 0

3 64 2.06 X 103 30 22-Dec 4

9,258 3.67 X 105 0

57 0

0%

0%

31 19-Jan 3

4,864 1.34 X 105 0

60 0

0%

0%

32 14-Feb 4

2,819 1.14 X 10' 0

22 0

0%

0%

33 25-Mar 9

11,339 1.02 X 106 0

0.02 0

0%

0%

Total:

2.49 X 108 Total:

4.92 X 106 Annual Percent Entrained 1.98%

• For this sample period, fish larvae were collected in intake samples, but not in reservoir samples.

Calculating entrainment for these sample periods was mathematically impossible.

45

Table 8. Estimated entrainment of fish eggs and larvae during April through June 1996, 1997, and 2010 at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant including Intake Pumping Station (IPS) and Chickamauga Reservoir flow, sample periods and dates, and average densities.

1996 - FishEs Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Densi Water Estimated Percent Sampe Smpl Desit Rier low Numer ensty Demand NumberPeen Period Date (no./1000m 3)

(104 m3/ day)

Number (nDe/m0md) (104 N

era Entrained S~~~~Transported no10m) 0 i 3! day)

Entrained 1

8-Apr 382 2,040 7.80 X 106 17 12.7 2.18 X 103 0.03%

2 22-Apr 1,528 6,290 9.61 X 107 109 7.1 7.73 X 10 3 0.01%

3 6-May 26 2,410 6.17 X 105 59 16.2 9.54 X 103 1.55%

4 20-May 84 4,360 3.64 X 106 0

15.4 0

0%

5 3-Jun 10 8,200 7.80 X 10' 9

11.7 1.03 X10 3 0.13%

6 17-Jun 7

6,940 4.84 X 105 0

22.6 0

0%

Avg Dens: 340 Total:

1.09 X l01 Avg Dens: 32 Total:

2.05 X 104 0.02%*

1996 - Larvae Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Density Water Estimated Percent Period Date (noJ.OOOi 3)

(104 mi/ day)

Number (nD'/1000m3) 4emand Number Entrained Transported (n.10m)

(04 M3 day)

Entrained I

8-Apr 1

2,040 2.93 X 104 0

12.7 0

0%

2 22-Apr 22 6,290 1.39 X 106 0

7.1 0

0%

3 6-May 426 2,410 1.03 X 10' 294 16.2 4.77 X 104 0.47%

4 20-May 594 4,360 2.59 X 107 1,348 15.4 2.08 X 105 0.80%

5 3-Jun 1,065 8,200 8.73 X 107 5,575 11.7 6.51 X 10 0.75%

6 17-Jun 551 6,940 3.82 X 107 2,354 22.6 5.32 X 10' 1.39%

Avg Dens: 443 Total:

1.63 X i0' Avg Dens: 1,595 Total:

1.44 X 106 0.88%*

1997 - Fish Eggs Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Water Estimated Percent period Date DnsityOm 3

Rin 3r day)

Number Density Demand Number eraed Period Date (no./1000m3)

(104 M3 day)

Transported (n°o/1000m 3 )

(104 m3/ day)

Entrained Entrained 1

21-Mar 1,070 10,900 1.17 X 10" 177 10.3 1.82 X f07 0.02%

2 14-Apr 16 2,380 3.80 X 105 0

12.4 0

0%

3 28-Apr 11 5,430 5.72 X 10' 0

10.1 0

0%

4 15-May 1

4,960 3.35 X 104 0

10.4 0

0%

5 27-May 3

4,630 1.25 X i05 0

11.0 0

0%

6 9-Jun 0

7,490 0

0 11.9 0

0%

7 23-Jun 18 9,990 1.81 X 106 9

12.3 1.12 X 10 3 0.06%

Avg Dens: 160 Total:

1.20 X 108 Avg Dens: 27 Total:

1.94 X 104 0.02%*

1997 - Larvae Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Density Water Estimated Percent Period Date (noJitOyOm)

Re 3! day)

Number Dnsity Demand Number Entrained Pro Dt)

(10 mTransported (n°'/1000m3 )

(104 in 3 / day)

Entrained I

21-Mar 52 10,900 5.70 X 106 35 10.3 3.65 X 103 0.06%

2 14-Apr 319 2,380 7.59 X 106 232 12.4 2.89 X 10 4 0.38%

3 28-Apr 1,115 5,430 6.05 X 107 427 10.1 4.30 X 10 4 0.07%

4 15-May 1,689 4,960 8.37 X 107 1,822 10.4 1.89 X 10' 0.23%

5 27-May 550 4,630 2.55 X 107 625 11.0 6.88 X 104 0.27%

6 9-Jun 1,032 7,490 7.74 X 107 2,260 11.9 2.70 X 105 0.35%

7 23-Jun 1,600 9,990 1.60 X 108 2,646 12.3 3.25 X 10' 0.20%

Avg Dens: 908 Total:

4.20 X 10' Avg Dens: 1,150 Total:

9.28 X 105 0.22%*

46

Table 8 (continued).

2010 - Fish Eggs Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Density Water Estimated Percent Period Date (no./1000m 3)

(104 i 3! day) and Ntr Entrained Transported (n.10m)(104 in 3!/ day)

Entrained 1

4-Apr 7

2,140 1.44 X 105 0

9.8 0

0%

2 11-Apr 48 1,740 8.34 X 105 0

9.7 0

0%

3 18-Apr 3

1,480 3.89 X 104 0

9.0 0

0%

4 25-Apr 0

2,550 0

0 10.1 0

0%

5 2-May 38 11,900 4.47 X 106 3

15.6 5.05 X 102 0.01%

6 9-May 1

3,080 3.98 X 104 0

15.9 0

0%

7 17-May 13 3,650 4.73 X 105 117 16.4 1.93 X 10 4 4.08%

8 23-May 105 2,880 3.03 X 106 6

16.4 1.06 X 103 0.03%

9 1-Jun 1,356 1,850 2.51 X 107 62 16.2 1.01 X 104 0.04%

10 7-Jun 105 3,460 3.62 X 106 49 16.5 8.13 X 103 0.22%

11 14-Jun 28 3,040 8.36 X 10' 43 16.6 7.12 X 103 0.85%

12 21-Jun 22 3,140 6.96 X 10' 2

16.6 2.57 X 102 0.04%

13 28-Jun 19 3,110 5.94X 105 2

16.5 2.55 X 102 0.04%

Avg Dens: 134 Total:

3.99 X 10 7 Avg Dens: 22 Total:

4.67 X 10 4 0.12%

2010 - Larvae Chickamauga Reservoir transect IPS Channel Sample Sample Density River Flow Estimated Density Water Estimated Percent Period Date (no./st Rim

3)

(10Fi Number

(,Demand Number eraed

(

m3/day)

Transported (no./1000m 3)

(104 m3/ day)

Entrained Entrained 1

4-Apr 0

2,140 0

0 9.8 0

0%

2 11-Apr 264 1,740 4.58 X 106 278 9.7 2.69 X 104 0.59%

3 18-Apr 217 1,480 3.21 X 106 151 9.0 1.35 X 104 0.42%

4 25-Apr 374 2,550 9.55 X 106 402 10.1 4.06 X 104 0.43%

5 2-May 646 11,900 7.70 X 107 377 15.6 5.89 X 104 0.08%

6 9-May 570 3,080 1.76 X 107 663 15.9 1.05 X 105 0.60%

7 17-May 905 3,650 3.30 X 107 728 16.4 1.20 X 10' 0.36%

8 23-May 465 2,880 1.34 X 107 488 16.4 8.00 X 10 4 0.60%

9 1-Jun 195 1,850 3.61 X 106 516 16.2 8.37 X 104 2.32%

10 7-Jun 230 3,460 7.96 X 106 380 16.5 6.25 X 104 0.78%

11 14-Jun 74 3,040 2.24 X 106 358 16.6 5.93 X 104 2.65%

12 21-Jun 14 3,140 4.25 X 10 5 221 16.6 3.68 X 104 8.65%

13 28-Jun 8

3,110 2.37 X 105 16 16.5 2.55 X 103 1.08%

1 Avg Dens: 305 Total:

1.73 X 108 Avg Dens: 352 Total:

6.90 X 10' 0.40%

• Denoted values will not match those in TVA, 1998 and are quotients of total estimated number entrained and total estimated number transported. The corresponding values in TVA, 1998 were calculated by averaging weekly percent entrained values.

47