ML14147A029

Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-Radiological

ML14147A029
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	02/25/2014
From:	Cress W M, Lange C L FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-14-147, RTL# A9.630F
Download: ML14147A029 (81)

Text

Enclosure B L-14-147 2013 Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-Radiological)(Report follows)

-4 *RTL# A9.63OF FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION 2013 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION ENVIRONMENTAL

& CHEMISTRY SECTION Technical Report Approval 2013 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (Non-Radiological)

UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 Prepared by: Cameron L. Lange (Via E-mail) Date: 2-24-2014 Prepared by: William Cress Date: --11 Reviewed byro2ýCo v0 Va " bate: q//1(01 Approved b ald J. Sn a ite: 4 Vo- A<9j TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

.................................................................1..

1.1 IN TRO D U CTION ..........................................................................................

1 1.2 SUM M ARY & CONCLUSION S .........................................................................

1 1.3 ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ................

2 1.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

...........

2 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES

................

4 3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS

.. .4 4.0 NONROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS ................................................

4 5.0 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM ...............................................................

5 5.1 SIT E D E SC IPT IO N ..............................................................................................

5 5.2 STU D Y A R EA .................................................................................................

6 5.3 M E T H O D S ..................................................................................................

6 5.3.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring

...............................................

6 5.3.2 Fish M onitoring

...................................................................................

7 5.3.3 Corbicula/Zebra Mussel Density Determinations

...............................

8 5.3.4 Corbicula Juvenile M onitoring

...........................................................

9 5.3.5 Zebra M ussel M onitoring

...................................................................

10 5.3.6 R eports .............................................................................................

..11 5.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM AND RESULTS ...........................

11 5.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program ....................................

11 5.4.2 Fish Sampling Program ......................................................................

14 5.4.3 Corbicula M onitoring Program ..........................................................

16 5.4.4 Corbicula Juvenile M onitoring

...........................................................

17 5.2.4 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program ....................................................

17 6.0 ZEBRA MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES

.....................

20 7.0 R E FE RE N C E S ........................................................................................................

21 8.0 TABLES 9.0 FIGURES 10.0 PERMITS APPENDIX A. SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2013 BVPS 2013 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)

LIST OF TABLES 5.1 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Sampling Dates For 2013 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 through 2013 in the Ohio River near BVPS (6 sheets)5.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Counts for Triplicate Samples Taken at Each Sample Station by Sample for May and September 2013 5.4 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m 2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms, 2013, BVPS 5.5 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m

2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms for the Control Station (1) and the Average for Non-control Stations (2B1, 2B2, and 2B3), 2013, BVPS 5.6 Shannon-Weiner Diversity, Evenness and Richness Indices for Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in the Ohio River, 2013 5.7 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities (Number/mi

2) for Station 1 (Control) and Station 2B (Non-Control)

During Preoperational and Operational Years through 2013 BVPS 5.8 Total Fish Catch, Electrofishing and Seine Net Combined During the BVPS 2013 Fisheries Survey 5.9 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Electrofishing Catches, During the BVPS 2013 Fisheries Survey 5.10 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Seine Catches, During the BVPS 2013 Fisheries Survey 5.11 Fish Species Collected During the May 2013 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.12 Fish Species Collected During the July 2013 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.13 Fish Species Collected During the September 2013 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.14 Fish Species Collected During the November 2013 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.15 Estimated Number of Fish Observed During Electrofishing Operations 2013 Annual Environmental Report ii FENOC (BVPS) 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 LIST OF TABLES Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2010 Fisheries Survey Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2011 Fisheries Survey Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2012 Fisheries Survey Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2013 Fisheries Survey Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2013 from BVPS Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2013 from BVPS 2013 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)iii LIST OF FIGURES 5.1 Location Map for the 2013 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations 5.2 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 2013 Study 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2013 Study 5.4 Location of Study Area, Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport, Pennsylvania BVPS 5.5 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among BVPS Unit I Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2013.5.6 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2013.5.7 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Intake Structure Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2013.5.8 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded on the Ohio River at the BVPS Intake Structure, During Monthly Sampling Dates, 2013.5.9 Density of Zebra Mussel Veligers (#/m 3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station; Intake Structure, Unit I Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2013.5.10 Density of Zebra Mussel Veligers (#/m 3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station; Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2013.5.11 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station; Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2013.5.12 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station; Barge I Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2013.I I 2013 Annual Environmental Report iv FENOC (BVPS)

1.1 INTRODUCTION

This report is submitted in accordance with Section 5.4.1 of Appendix B: To Facility Operating License No. NPF-73, Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 2, Environmental Protection Plan (Non-Radiological).

Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) is operated by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC). The Objectives of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) are to:* Verify that the facility is operated in an environmentally acceptable manner, as established by the Final Environmental Statement-Operating License Stage (FES-OL) and other NRC environmental impact assessments," Keep plant operations personnel appraised of changes in environmental conditions that may affect the facility," Coordinate NRC requirements and maintain consistency with other Federal, State, and local requirements for environmental protection, and" Keep the NRC informed of the environmental effects of facility construction and operation and of actions taken to control those effects.To achieve the objectives of the EPP, both FENOC and BVPS have written programs and procedures to comply with the EPP, protect the environment, and comply with governmental requirements primarily including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) requirements.

Water quality matters identified in the Final Environmental Statements-Operating License Stage (FES-OL) are regulated under the National Pollutants Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No.PA0025615.

Waste is regulated under EPA Identification No. PAR000040485.

Attachment 10.1 contains a listing of permits and certificates for environmental compliance.

The BVPS programs and procedures include pre-work and pre-project environmental evaluations, operating procedures, pollution prevention and response programs procedures and plans, process improvement and corrective action programs, and human performance programs.Technical and managerial monitoring of tasks, operations, and other activities are performed.

Any identified challenges, concerns, or questions are captured in the FENOC Problem Identification and Resolution Program with a Condition Report. Condition Reports include investigations, cause determinations, and corrective actions.During 2013 BVPS continued an Aquatic Monitoring Program to evaluate its potential impact on the New Cumberland Pool of the Ohio River, and to provide information on potential impacts to BVPS operation from macrofoulers such as Asian clams and zebra mussels.2013 Annual Environmental Report 1 FENOC (BVPS) 1.2

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS There were no significant environmental events during 2013. During 2013 no significant changes to operations that could affect the environment were made at Beaver Valley Power Station. As in previous years, results of the BVPS environmental programs did not indicate any adverse environmental impacts from station operation.

1.3 ANALYSIS

OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE During 2013, no significant changes were made at BVPS to cause significant negative affect on I the environment.

1.4 AQUATIC

MONITORING PROGRAM I The 2013 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Units 1 and 2 Non-Radiological Monitoring Program consisted of an Aquatic Program that included surveillance and field sampling of the Ohio River's aquatic life in the vicinity of the station. The Aquatic Program is an annual program conducted to provide baseline aquatic resources data, to assess the impact of the operation of BVPS on the aquatic ecosystem of the Ohio River, and to monitor for potential impacts of biofouling organisms (Corbicula and zebra mussels) on BVPS operations.

This is the 38F year of operational environmental monitoring for Unit 1 and the 27th year for Unit 2. As in previous years, the results of the program did not indicate any adverse environmental impact to the aquatic life in the Ohio River associated with the operation of BVPS.The results of the 2013 benthic macroinvertebrate survey conducted in May and September I indicated a normal community structure exists in the Ohio River both upstream and downstream of the BVPS. These benthic surveys are a continuation of a Fate and Effects Study conducted from 1990 through 1992 for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP)to assess the ecosystem impacts of the molluscicides Betz Clamtrol CT-1, CT-2, and Nalco H150M that have been used to control biofouling organisms at BVPS. To date the results of the benthic studies have not indicated any impacts of operation at the BVPS including the use these biocides on the benthic community below the BVPS discharge.

Substrate was probably the most important factor influencing the distribution and abundance of I the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. The generally soft muck-type substrate along the shoreline found in 2013 and previous years was conducive to segmented worm (oligochaete) and midge fly larvae (chironomid) proliferation.

Sixty (60)macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2013 monitoring program. In 2013 no new taxa were added to the cumulative list of macroinvertebrates collected near BVPS. No state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected during 2013.In May and in September oligochaetes were the most frequently collected group of macroinvertebrates.

There were no major differences in the community structure between control and non-control stations that could be attributed to operation of BVPS. The overall community structure has changed little since pre-operational years, and program results did 2013 Annual Environmental Report 2 FENOC (BVPS) not indicate that B VPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River.The fish community of the Ohio River near the BVPS was sampled in May (spring), July (summer), September (fall) and November (winter) of 2013 with electrofishing and seining.Since monitoring began in the early 1970's, the number of identified fish taxa has increased from 43 to 78 for the New Cumberland Pool.In 2013, 124 fish representing 23 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining. This was the same number of taxa and one fewer fish than collected in 2012. All taxa collected in 2013 were previously encountered at BVPS. A total of 85 fish, representing 19 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2013 compared to 88 fish representing 18 species in 2012. In each of these years there were both fewer fish and taxa than in 2011, when electrofishing was conducted at night. The relatively fewer fish collected in 2012 and 2013 may have been caused by the need to electrofish during the day, because of damage to the BVPS onsite launch. A total of 39 fish representing seven (7) taxa was collected by seines in 2013 (Table 5.10) compared to 37 fish representing seven (7) taxa in 2012.Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and forage species (e.g. spotfin shiners and emerald shiners) were generally collected in the highest numbers in 2013. The total number of forage species collected in 2013 was comparable to 2012, but less than in 2011.Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiner with high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large fluctuations in population size. This, in turn, influences their appearance in the sample populations during annual surveys. Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community.

In 2013, the annual catch rate using electrofishing was 0.53 fish per minute. The greatest catch rate in 2013 occurred in spring (May) when the catch rate was 0.97 fish per minute. Golden redhorse sucker and shorthead redhorse sucker contributed to the majority of this total. The lowest catch rate occurred in summer (July) with a rate of 0.28 fish per electrofishing minute.The annual catch rate in 2013 (0.53 fish per minute) was comparable to 2012 (0.59) but lower than the prior two years (1.09 in 2010 and 0.93 in 2011). This is probably caused by the need to electrofish during the day in 2013 and in May, July and November 2012 rather than at night as in all previous years.Little difference in the species composition of the catch was observed between the control (Station 1) and non-control (Stations 2A, 2B and 3) stations.

Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when fish were collected.

Results from the 2013 fish surveys indicated that a normal community structure for the Ohio River exists near BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance.

In 2013, there was no indication of negative impact to the fish community in the Ohio River from the operation of B VPS.The monthly reservoir Ponar samples collected in Units 1 and 2 cooling towers and the four 2013 Annual Environmental Report 3 FENOC (BVPS)

I samples collected at the intake during 2013 indicated that Corbicula were present in the Ohio River and entering the station. In 2013, eight (8) settled live Corbicula were collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower basin during monthly reservoir sampling.

In 2013, four (4) live settled Corbicula was collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir; one during March and three in April. Overall, the numbers of Corbicula collected in the samples were comparatively low, which continued the trend over the past few years of fewer Corbicula and reflected a water-body-wide trend observed in the Ohio River.In 1995, live zebra mussels were collected for the first time by divers in the BVPS main intake I and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleanings.

They have been found in the BVPS every year since. Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels in 2013 were consistent to those recorded in 2008-2012, and much higher than the preceding five years. Although densities of settled mussels are low compared to other populations such as the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the Ohio River are more than sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems. Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River will remain the same or increase cannot be determined.

In any case, the densities of mussels that presently exist are more titan sufficient to impact the B VPS, if continued prudent monitoring and control activities are not conducted.

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES There were no Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified in 2013.3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS No Un-reviewed Environmental Questions were identified in 2013. Therefore, there were no changes involving an Un-reviewed Environmental Question.4.0 NON-ROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT There were no non-routine environmental reports in 2013. I I I 2013 Annual Environmental Report 4 FENOC (BVPS)

5.0 AQUATIC

MONITORING PROGRAM This section of the report summarizes the Non-Radiological Environmental Program conducted for the BVPS Units 1 and 2; Operating License Numbers DPR-66 and NPF-73. This is a non-mandatory program, because on February 26, 1980, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)granted BVPS's request to delete all of the Aquatic Monitoring Program, with the exception of the fish impingement program (Amendment No. 25), from the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS). In 1983, BVPS was permitted to also delete the fish impingement studies from the ETS program of required sampling along with non-radiological water quality requirements.

However, in the interest of providing an uninterrupted database, BVPS has continued the Aquatic Monitoring Program.The objectives of the 2013 environmental program were:* To monitor for any possible environmental impact of BVPS operation on the benthic macroinvertebrate and fish communities in the Ohio River;" To evaluate the presence, growth, and reproduction of macrofouling Corbicula (Asiatic clam) and zebra mussels (Dreissena spp.) at BVPS.* To provide a low level sampling program to continue an uninterrupted environmental database for the Ohio River near BVPS, pre-operational to present; and* Keep plant operations appraised of any of changes in environmental conditions that may affect the facility.These objectives have assisted facility personnel in the past. For instance, in the facility's Significant Operating Experience Report (SOER 07-2, October 2008) relative to "Intake Cooling Water Blockage" this Aquatic Monitoring Program was credited as a means of addressing"Changing Environmental Conditions" by looking "for changes in quantity of clam and mussel activity by monitoring the veliger (aka larval) density in the river and mussel settlement density." 5.1 SITE DESCRIPTION BVPS is located on an approximately 453-acre tract of land on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

The Shippingport Atomic Power Station once shared the site with BVPS before being decommissioned.

Figure 5.1 is a plan view of BVPS. The site is approximately 1 mile (1.6 kin) from Midland, Pennsylvania; 5 miles (8 kin)from East Liverpool, Ohio; and 25 miles (40 kin) from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The population within a 5-mile (8 kin) radius of the plant is approximately 18,000. The Borough of Midland, Pennsylvania has a population of approximately 3,500.The station is situated at Ohio River Mile 34.8 (Latitude:

400 36' 18"; Longitude:

80' 26' 02") at a location on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.1 river miles (5.3 kin) downstream from Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19.6 miles (31.2 kin) upstream from New Cumberland Lock 2013 Annual Environmental Report 5 FENOC (BVPS)

I and Dam. The Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia border is 5.2 river miles (8.4 km) downstream from the site. The river flow is regulated by a series of dams and reservoirs on the Beaver, Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers and their tributaries.

The study site lies along the Ohio River in a valley, which has a gradual slope that extends from the river at an elevation of 665 ft (203 m) above mean sea level; to an elevation of 1,160 ft (354 m) along a ridge south of BVPS. The plant entrance elevation at the station is approximately 735 ft (224 m) above mean sea level.BVPS Units 1 and 2 have a thermal rating of 2,900 megawatts (MW). Units 1 & 2 have a design electrical rating of 974 MW and 1,009 MW, respectively.

The circulating water systems for each unit are considered a closed cycle system with continuous overflow, using a cooling tower to minimize heat released to the Ohio River. Commercial operation of BVPS Unit 1 began in 1976 and Unit 2 began operation in 1987.5.2 STUDY AREA The environmental study area was established to assess potential impacts and consists of four sampling stations, each having a north and south shore (Figure 5.1). Station 1 is located at River Mile (RM) 34.5, approximately

0.3 miles

(0.5 km) upstream of BVPS and is the control station. m Station 2A is located approximately

0.5 miles

(0.8 km) downstream of the BVPS discharge structure in the main channel. Station 2B is located in the back channel of Phillis Island; also 0.5 miles downstream of the BVPS discharge structure.

Station 2B is the principal non-control I station because the majority of discharges from BVPS Units 1 and 2 are released to this back channel. Station 3 is located approximately two miles (3.2 km) downstream of BVPS and only rarely is influenced by the BVPS discharge.

5.3 METHODS

Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw), a CB&I, Incorporated company, was contracted to perform the 2013 Aquatic Monitoring Program as specified in BVBP-ENV-001-Aquatic Monitoring (procedural guide). This procedural guide references and describes in detail the field and laboratory procedures used in the various monitoring programs, as well as the data analysis and reporting requirements.

These procedures are summarized according to task in the following I subsections.

Sampling was conducted according to the schedule presented in Table 5.1.I 5.3.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring The benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring program consisted of river bottom sampling using a Ponar grab sampler at four stations on the Ohio River. Prior to 1996, duplicate sampling occurred at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, while triplicate sampling occurred at Station 2B (i.e., one sample at each shoreline and mid-channel) (Figures 5.1 and 5.2). In 1996, a review of the sampling design indicated that sampling should be performed in triplicate at each station to 2013 Annual Environmental Report 6 FENOC (BVPS) conform to standardized U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) procedures.

Therefore, starting in 1996, triplicate samples were taken at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, as in 1995, with triplicate samples also collected at each shore and mid-channel location at Station 2B. A petite Ponar dredge was used to collect these samples, replacing the standard Ponar dredge used in prior studies.In 2013, benthic macroinvertebrate sampling was conducted as scheduled in May and September.

For each 2013 field effort, 18 benthic samples were collected and processed in the laboratory.

All field procedures and data analyses were conducted in accordance with the procedural guide. The contents of each Ponar grab sample were gently washed through a U.S.Standard No. 30 sieve and the retained contents were placed in a labeled bottle and preserved in ethanol. In the laboratory, rose bengal stain was added to aid in sorting and identifying the benthic organisms.

Macroinvertebrates were sorted from each sample, identified to the lowest taxon practical and counted. Mean density (number/m 2) for each taxon was calculated for each replicate.

Four indices used to describe the benthic community were calculated:

Shannon-Weiner diversity index, evenness (Pielou, 1969), species richness, and the number of taxa.These estimates provide an indication of the relative quality of the macroinvertebrate community.

5.3.2 Fish Monitoring Fish sampling was conducted in 2013 to provide a continuous baseline of data and to detect possible changes that may have occurred in the fish populations in the Ohio River near BVPS.Fish population surveys have been conducted in the Ohio River near BVPS annually from 1970 through 2013. These surveys have resulted in the collection of 73 fish species and five different hybrids.Adult fish surveys were successfully conducted as scheduled in May, July, September, and November 2013. During each survey, fish were scheduled to be sampled at four stations (Stations 1, 2A, 2B and 3) (Figure 5.3). Prior to 2011, all electrofishing was conducted at night.In 2013 and at times during 2012, due to damage to the onsite boat launch, the crew was required to launch the boat from the Lock 57 Community Park Boat Launch located near Glasgow Pennsylvania.

The launch was only open until one hour after dark, so it was necessary to conduct electrofishing efforts during the day. Electrofishing was completed at all stations and months. Seining was scheduled to be performed at Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) to sample species that are generally under-represented in electrofishing catches (e.g., young-of-the-year fish and small cyprinids).

All seining efforts were successfully completed.

Electrofishing was conducted using a boat-mounted electroshocker with floodlights attached to the bow. A Smith-Root Type VI A variable voltage, pulsed-DC electrofishing unit powered by a 5-kW generator was used. The voltage selected depended on water conductivity and was adjusted to provide constant amperage (4-6 amps) of the current through the water. The north and south shoreline areas at each station were shocked for at least 10 minutes of unit "on" time 2013 Annual Environmental Report 7 FENOC (BVPS)

I (approximately five minutes along each shore) during each survey.When large schools of fish of a single non-game species such as gizzard shad and shiners were m encountered during electrofishing efforts, all of the stunned fish were not netted and retrieved onboard the boat. A few fish were netted for verification of identity, and the number of observed stunned fish remaining in the water was estimated.

The size range of the individual fish in the school was also estimated and recorded.

This was done in an effort to expedite sample processing and cover a larger area during the timed electrofishing run. Regardless of the number of individuals, all game fish were boated when observed.Fish seining was performed during the day at Station 1 (control) and Station 2B (non-control)(Figure 5.3) during each of the four 2013 BVPS fishery surveys. A 30-ft long bag seine made of 1/4-inch nylon mesh netting was used to collect fish located close to shore in 1 to 4 ft of water.Three seine hauls were performed at both Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) during each survey.Fish collected during electrofishing and seining efforts were processed according to standardized procedures.

All captured game fishes were identified to species, counted, measured for total length (nearest 1 mm), and weighed (nearest 1 g for fish less than or equal to 1000 g and the nearest 5 g for all other fish). Non-game fishes were counted, and a random subsample of lengths was taken. Live fish were returned to the river immediately after processing was completed.

All fish that were unidentifiable or of questionable identification and were obviously not on the endangered or threatened species list were placed in plastic sample bottles, preserved, labeled and returned to the laboratory for identification.

Any species of fish that had not previously been collected at BVPS was retained for the voucher collection.

Any threatened or endangered species (if collected) would be photographed and released.5.3.3 Corbicula Density Determinations for Cooling Tower Reservoirs I The Corbicula Monitoring Program at BVPS includes sampling the circulating river water and the service water systems of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling towers). The objectives of the ongoing Monitoring Program are to evaluate the presence of Corbicula at BVPS, and to evaluate the potential for and timing of infestation of the BVPS. This program is conducted in conjunction with a program to monitor for the presence of macrofouling zebra mussels (see Section 5.3.5).Corbicula enter the BVPS from the Ohio River by passing through the water intakes, and I eventually settle in low flow areas including the lower reservoirs of the Units 1 and 2 cooling towers. The density and growth of these Corbicula were monitored by collecting monthly samples from the lower reservoir sidewalls and sediments.

The sampler used on the sidewalls consisted of a D-frame net attached behind a 24-inch long metal scraping edge. This device was connected to a pole long enough to allow the sampler to extend down into the reservoir area from the outside wall of the cooling tower. Sediments were sampled with a petite Ponar dredge.Cooling tower reservoir sampling was historically conducted once per month. Beginning in 2013 Annual Environmental Report 8 FENOC (BVPS)

December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in cold water months since buildup of Corbicula does not occur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the warmer water months of the year. In 2013 sampling began in March and ended in mid-November.

In 2013, once each month (March through November), a single petite Ponar grab sample was scheduled to be taken in the reservoir of each cooling tower to obtain density and growth information on Corbicula present in the bottom sediment.

The samples collected from each cooling tower were returned to the laboratory and processed.

Samples were individually washed, and any Corbicula removed and rinsed through a series of stacked U.S. Standard sieves that ranged in mesh size from 1.00 mm to 9.49 mm. Live and dead clams retained in each sieve were counted and the numbers were recorded.

The size distribution data obtained using the sieves reflected clam width, rather than length. Samples containing a small number of Corbicula were not sieved; individuals were measured and placed in their respective size categories.

A scraping sample of about 12 square feet was also collected at each cooling tower during each monthly sampling effort. This sample was processed in a manner consistent with the petit Ponar samples.Population surveys of both BVPS cooling tower reservoirs have been conducted during scheduled outages (1986 to present) to estimate the number of Corbicula present in these structures.

During the scheduled shutdown period for each unit, each cooling tower reservoir bottom is sampled by petite Ponar at standardized locations within the reservoir.

Counts of live and dead clams and determination of density were made. There were no scheduled outages during 2013 when samples were collected.

5.3.4 Corbicula

Juvenile Monitoring The Corbicula juvenile study was designed to collect data on Corbicula spawning activities and growth of individuals entering the intake from the Ohio River. From 1988 through 1998, clam cages were deployed in the intake forebay to monitor for Corbicula that entered the BVPS.Observational-based concerns that the clam cages would quickly clog with sediment during high sediment periods and, as a result, would not effectively sample for Corbicula, led to an evaluation of an alternate sampling technique.

From April through June 1997, a study was conducted to compare the results of the clam cage samplers to a petite Ponar dredge technique to determine Corbicula presence and density in the BVPS intake bays. It was hypothesized that using a Ponar sampler to collect bottom sediments and analysis of those sediments would provide a more representative sample of Corbicula settlement and growth rates, and had the added benefit of not requiring confined space entry to conduct the sampling.

Results of the study confirmed this hypothesis.

During the 1998 sampling season, at the request of BVPS personnel, all clam cages were removed after the May collection.

Monthly petite Ponar grabs from the forebay in the intake building continued thereafter.

Samples were processed in the same manner as Cooling Tower Samples (Section 5.3.3).From 2002 to present, because of site access restrictions, sampling with the petite Ponar has been 2013 Annual Environmental Report 9 FENOC (BVPS)

I moved to the Ohio River directly in front of the Intake Structure Building.

Collections are presently scheduled to be made in conjunction with the fisheries sampling (May, July, September, and November).

During each sampling month two Ponar grabs are taken approximately 20 feet offshore of the intake building.

These grab samples are processed in the same manner as when they were collected from within the Intake Structure Building.5.3.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoringy The Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program includes sampling the Ohio River and the circulating river water system of the BVPS.The objectives of the Monitoring Program were: (1) To identify if zebra mussels were in the Ohio River adjacent to BVPS and provide early I warning to operations personnel as to their possible infestation; (2) To provide data as to when the larvae were mobile in the Ohio River and insights as to their vulnerability to potential treatments; and (3) To provide data on their overall density and growth rates under different water temperatures and provide estimates on the time it requires these mussels to reach the size and density that could impact the plant.The zebra mussel sampling for settled adults was historically conducted once per month, yearlong.

Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in the colder water months of each year, since buildup of zebra mussels and growth of the individuals that are present, does not occur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the balance of the year. In 2013 sampling occurred from March through November.A pump sample for zebra mussel veligers was collected at the barge slip location monthly from April through October in 1996 and 1997. The scope of the sampling was expanded in 1998 to also include the intake structure.

In June 1998, the Emergency Outfall and Emergency Outfall Impact Basin locations were also added. Additional pump samples were collected from the cooling towers of Unit 1 and Unit 2 in October 1998. In 2013 veliger sampling began in April and was conducted monthly through October.At the Intake Structure and Barge Slip the following surveillance techniques were used: " Wall scraper sample collections on a monthly basis (March through November) from the barge slip and the riprap near the intake structure to detect attached adults; and* Pump sample collections from the barge slip and outside the intake structure, to detect the planktonic early life forms (April through October).

I 2013 Annual Environmental Report 10 FENOC (BVPS)

At each of the cooling towers the following techniques were used:* Monthly reservoir scraper sample collections in each cooling tower (March through November);

and* Pump samples in April through October to detect planktonic life forms.At the Emergency Outfall and the Splash Pool the following techniques were used:* Monthly scraper sample collections in each (March through November);

and* Pump samples in each from April through October to detect planktonic life forms.5.3.6 Reports Each month, activity reports that summarized the activities that took place the previous month were prepared and submitted.

These reports included the results of the monthly Corbicula/zebra mussel monitoring including any trends observed and any preliminary results available from the benthic and fisheries programs.

The reports addressed progress made on each task, and reported any observed biological activity of interest.5.4 RESULTS OF THE AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM The following sections summarize the findings for each of the program elements.

Sampling dates for each of the program elements are presented in Table 5.1.5.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program Benthic surveys were performed in May and in September 2013. Benthic samples were successfully collected using a petite Ponar grab sampler at Stations 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 (Figure 5.2).Triplicate samples were taken off the south shore at Stations 1, 2A, and 3. Sampling at Station 2B, in the back channel of Phillis Island, consisted of triplicate petite Ponar grabs at the south side, middle, and north side of the channel (i.e., Sample Stations 2B11, 2132, and 2B3, respectively).

Substrate type is an important factor in determining the composition of the benthic community.

The habitats in the vicinity of BVPS are the result of damming, channelization, and river traffic.Shoreline habitats at the majority of sampling locations were generally in depositional areas that consisted of soft muck substrates composed of mixes of sand, silt, and detritus.

One exception 2013 Annual Environmental Report 11 FENOC (BVPS)

I was along the north shoreline of Phillis Island at Station 2A where hard-pan clay overlain with a thin layer of fine sand dominated.

The other distinct habitat, hard substrate (gravel and cobble), was located in mid-channel of the back channel of Phillis Island. The hard substrate was probably the result of channelization and ongoing scouring by river currents.

In general, the substrates found at each sampling location have been consistent from year to year.Sixty (60) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2013 monitoring program (Tables 5.2 and 5.3), which was seven more than identified in 2012. A mean density of 1,457 macroinvertebrates/m 2 was collected in May and 2,004/m 2 in September (Table 5.4). As in previous years, the macroinvertebrate assemblage during 2013 was dominated by burrowing organisms typical of soft unconsolidated substrates.

Oligochaetes (segmented worms), mollusks (clams and snails) and chironomid (midge fly) larvae were abundant (Table 5.4). Sixteen (16)taxa of chironomids and 21 taxa of oligochaetes were collected.

This is the same number of chironomid taxa and nine (9) more oligocheate taxa than collected in 2012. Ten (10) taxa of mollusks were also collected in 2013. Unlike 2012, but as in 2010 and 2011, the total mean density of organism was higher in September than in May.Thirty-four (34) taxa were present in the May 2013 samples. Forty-eight (48) taxa were present U in the September samples (Table 5.3.1 and 5.3.2). Twenty-two (22) of the 60 taxa were present in both May and September.

Immature tubificid worms were numerically the most abundant organism in both May and September 2013. In 2012, immature tubificid worms were also the most abundant species in May; however, the zebra mussel Dreissena polymorpha was the most abundant taxa in September.

The macrofouling Asiatic clam (Corbicula) has been observed in the Ohio River near BVPS from 1974 to present. Macrofouling zebra mussels were first collected in the BVPS benthic samples in 1998. Adult zebra mussels, however, were detected in 1995 and 1996 by divers in the BVPS main and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleaning operations.

Zebra mussel veligers, adults and juveniles were collected during the 1997-2013 sampling programs (see Sections 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program).

Both live adult Corbicula and adult zebra mussels were collected in benthic macroinvertebrate samples in 2013. Corbicula were the third most abundant and zebra mussels the seventh most abundant species collected in benthic samples collected in 2013.In 2013 no new taxa were added to the cumulative list of macroinvertebrates collected near BVPS (Table 5.2). No state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected during 2013.In the May 2013 samples, oligochaetes accounted for the highest mean density of macroinvertebrates and chironomids had the second highest (1,149/mi 2 or 79 percent of the total density and 162/M 2 or 11 percent, respectively) (Table 5.4). These two groups were also dominant in May 2012. Mollusks were present at a density of 48/mr 2.Organisms other than oligochaetes, chironomids and mollusks were present at a density of 98/mr 2 in May.In September 2013 samples, oligochaetes also accounted for the highest mean density of macroinvertebrates and mollusks had the second highest (958/mr 2 or 48 percent of the total 2013 Annual Environmental Report 12 FENOC (BVPS) density and 535/M 2 or 27 percent, respectively) (Table 5.4). Chironomids had the third highest mean density in September 2013 (289/rn 2 or 14 percent) while the "others" category had the fourth highest mean density (222/m or 11 percent).In May 2013, the highest density of macroinvertebrates (3,268/mr 2) occurred at Station 3. In September, the highest density of macroinvertebrates also occurred at Station 2B3 (4,458/M 2). In May the lowest mean density of organisms was 660/mr 2 that occurred at Station 2A and Station 2B3. In September, the lowest mean density of organisms also occurred at Station 1 (373/mr 2).For a comparison of the control to non-control stations, Station 1 was designated the control station, because it is always out of the influence of the BVPS discharge and Station 2B (mean density of Station 2B 1, 2B2, and 2B3) was designated as the non-control station, since it is the station most regularly subjected to BVPS's discharge.

Stations 3 and 2A may be under the influence of the plume under certain conditions, but it is unlikely that they are regularly influenced by BVPS.The mean density of macroinvertebrates in the control station was more than two times higher (2,107/M 2) than that of the non-control station (903/M 2) in May (Table 5.5). The relatively higher densities of oligochaetes, at the control station contributed to the majority of this difference.

Overall the differences probably reflect the natural differences in substrate and natural heterogeneous distributions of these organisms between the stations rather than project-related impacts.In September, the density of macroinvertebrates present at the non-control station (2,427/mr 2) was over six times greater than at the control station (373/M 2). This was the reverse of the previous year, when the density of macroinvertebrates was 15 percent greater at the control station.Differences were within the expected range of variation for natural populations of macroinvertebrates.

Indices that describe the relative diversity, evenness, and richness of the macroinvertebrate population structure among stations and between control and non-control sites were calculated.

A higher Shannon-Weiner diversity index indicates a relatively better structured assemblage of organisms, while a lower index generally indicates a low quality or stressed community.

Evenness is an index that estimates the relative contribution of each taxon to the community assemblage, the closer to 1.00, the healthier the community.

The community richness is another estimate of the quality of the macroinvertebrate community with a higher richness number indicating a healthier community.

The Shannon-Weiner diversity indices in May 2013 collections ranged from 0.32 at Station I to 1.04 at Station 3 (Table 5.6). In May evenness ranged from 0.30 at Station 1 to 0.76 at Station 3.Richness was greatest at Station 3 (4.05) and lowest at Station 2B1 (1.97). The overall low indices at all locations (control and non-control) except Station 3 are attributed to the relatively few species (8 to 12) collected at all locations except Station 3 where 23 species were collected.

The low numbers of organisms likely is due to natural variation in the Ohio River rather than due to BVPS operations, since they were present at both control and non-control stations.2013 Annual Environmental Report 13 FENOC (BVPS)

I The Shannon-Weiner diversity of the macroinvertebrate community (0.41 to 1.28), evenness (0.35 to 0.94) and richness (1.73 to 5.67) in September 2013 were higher than in May. Except at Staion 1, there was also generally an increase in the number of taxa present in September (seven to 29 taxa per station) compared to May (eight to 23 taxa per station).

Relatively high numbers of taxa are frequently present in early fall due to the increased numbers of aquatic stages of insects, especially chironomids, as well as the ability to identify many of the tubificids that are lumped together when immature to lower taxonomic levels. A comparable increase in indices values in September compared to May was also observed in 2010, 2011 and 2012.In May 2013, the number of taxa was slightly higher in the control station (Station 1) than in the non-control stations (2B1, 2B2, 2B3) (12 versus 10, 10 and 8). The diversity, evenness and richness indices were similar among control and non-control (Table 5.6). In September 2013 the indices at the control stations were, in general, lower than in the non-control stations.

Similar trends were apparent in the previous five study years and were likely due to natural variations in the local populations at these locations.

No impacts of the BVPS on the benthic community, as measured by differences between control and non-control zones, were evident in either May or September.

Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft, mucky substrates that generally existed along the shoreline are conducive to oligochaete, chironomid, and mollusk habitation and limit species of macroinvertebrates that require a more stable bottom.The density of macroinvertebrates in May and September 2013 fell within the range of densities of macroinvertebrates collected at BVPS in previous years (Table 5.7). The community structure has changed little since pre-operational years, and the available evidence does not I indicate that BVPS operations have affected the benthic community of the Ohio River.I 5.4.2 Fish Sampling Program In 2013, 124 fish representing 23 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining (Table 5.8). This was the same number of taxa and one fewer fish than collected in 2012. All taxa collected in 2013 were previously encountered at BVPS. The I most common species in the 2013 BVPS surveys that were collected by electrofishing and seining combined were emerald shiner (17.7% of the total catch), golden redhorse sucker (15.3%), shorthead redhorse sucker (13.7%), and smallmouth bass (10.5%). None of the I remaining 19 species contributed to more than 5 percent of the total handled catch. The most frequently observed but not handled fish in 2013 were unidentified suckers (Table 5.15). Game fish collected in 2013 included black crappie, channel catfish, bluegill, flathead catfish, I pumpkinseed sunfish, rock bass, smallmouth bass, sauger, walleye, spotted bass, and yellow perch. Game fish represented 28.2% of the total handled catch. Gizzard shad that were collected and observed in large numbers in 2012 were only infrequently collected.

A total of 85 fish, representing 19 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2013 (Table 5.9)2013 Annual Enviromrnental Report 14 FENOC (BVPS) compared to 88 fish representing 18 species in 2012. In each of these years there were both fewer fish (151) and taxa (22) than in 2011, when electrofishing was conducted at night. The relatively fewer fish collected in 2012 and 2013 may have been caused by the need to electrofish during the day, because of damage to the BVPS onsite launch. Nighttime electrofishing has been demonstrated to be more productive than during the day in riverine systems. Movements of fish into shallower water at night to feed, makes them more susceptible to the electrofishing technique.

Golden redhorse sucker, shorthead redhorse suckers, and smallmouth bass accounted for the greatest portion of the 2013 electrofishing catch (22.4%, 20.0% and 14.1%, respectively).

No other species collected contributed to greater than five percent of the total catch. Fish observed and not collected in the 2013 electrofishing study are presented in Table 5.15.A total of 39 fish representing seven (7) taxa was collected by seines in 2013 (Table 5.10)compared to 37 fish representing seven (7) taxa in 2012. The most abundant taxa collected in 2013 were emerald shiner and spotfin shiner (representing 56.4% and 18.0% of the total catch, respectively), followed by mimic shiner (7.7%), and spottail shiner (7.7%). Game species (bluegill, spotted bass and smallmouth bass) were only collected as juveniles.

A total of 61 fish representing 16 species was captured during the May (spring) 2013 sampling event (Table 5.11). A total of 39 fish representing thirteen (13) specieswere collected during electrofishing.

Shorthead redhorse sucker was the most abundant species and represented 25 percent of the electrofishing catch, followed in abundance by golden redhorse sucker (representing 20.0% of the total catch), and smallmouth bass (17.5%). No other species contributed to more than five (5) percent of the May electrofishing catch. Black crappie, bluegill, pumpkinseed sunfish, rock bass, smallmouth bass, and spotted bass were the game species collected in May. A total of 22 fish representing four species were collected by seines in May. Emerald shiner (representing 54.6% of the seine catch) and spotfish shiner (31.8%) were the most abundant species. Spottail shiner and spotted bass were also collected.

A total of 28 fish representing 10 species was captured during the July (summer) 2013 sampling event (Table 5.12). A total of 11 fish representing six (6) species was collected during electrofishing efforts. Smallmouth buffalo and golden redhorse sucker were the most abundant species and each represented 27.3% of the catch. Smallmouth bass (18.2% of the total catch)was the nest most abundant species. Seventeen fish representing five species were collected in the seines. Emerald shiner was the most abundant species and represented 58.8% of the seine catch. Mimic shiner (17.7% of the total catch) and juvenile bluegill (11.8%) were the next most abundant species.During the September (fall) 2013 sampling event, 13 fish representing 11 taxa were collected during electrofishing efforts. No fish were collected by seines (Table 5.13). All of the species except for bluegill and golden redhorse sucker were represented by a single individual.

Bluegill, channel catfish, flathead catfish, smallmouth bass, spotted bass, and walleye were the game species collected.

During the November (winter) 2013 sampling event, 22 fish representing eight (8) taxa were captured during electrofishing efforts. None were collected by seines (Table 5.14). Golden redhorse sucker and shorthead redhorse sucker were the most abundant species collected by 2013 Annual Environmental Report 15 FENOC (BVPS)

I electrofishing and contributed to 31.8% and 27.3% of the total catch, respectively.

Rock bass and smallmouth bass were the only other species represented by more than a single individual.

Game species collected in November included bluegill, channel catfish, rock bass, smallmouth bass, and yellow perch.Electrofishing catch rates are presented in Tables 5.16, 5.17, 5.18, and 5.19 for fish that were i boated and handled during the 2010 through 2013 surveys by season (FENOC 2011, 2012 and 2013). In 2013, the annual catch rate was 0.53 fish per minute. In 2013, the greatest catch rate occurred in spring (May) when the catch rate was 0.97 fish per minute. Golden redhorse sucker and shorthead redhorse sucker contributed to the majority of this total. The lowest catch rate occurred in summer (July) with a rate of 0.28 fish per electrofishing minute.The annual catch rate in 2013 (0.53 fish per minute) was comparable to 2012 (0.59), but lower than the prior two years (1.09 in 2010 and 0.93 in 2011). This is probably caused by the need to electrofish during the day in 2013 and in May, July and November 2012 rather than at night as in all previous years. The 2013 catch rates in summer and fall were the lowest of the four years and the second lowest (to catch rates in 2012) in spring and winter. Over the four years, the highest seasonal catch rates occurred in May 2010 (2.20 fish per minute).The results of the electrofishing sampling effort (Table 5.9) did not indicate any major differences in species composition between the control station (1) and the non-control Stations 2A, 2B, and 3. A greater number of fish representing more species was captured at non-control stations than control station. This was most likely due to the extra effort expended at non-control stations versus control station (i.e., there are three non-control stations and only one control station).

In 2013, more individual and species were collected by seines at the control station compared to the non-control station, where sampling effort is equal (Table 5.10). This is likely due to the schooling nature of shiner species, which represented the majority of the catch.In 2013, species composition remained comparable among stations.

Common taxa collected in the 2013 surveys by all methods included redhorse sucker species, emerald shiner, and smallmouth bass. Little difference in the species composition of the catch and relative composition was observed between the control (1) and non-control stations (2A, 2B and 3).Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when different species of fish are collected.

The results of the 2013 fish surveys indicated that there is a normal community structure in the Ohio River in the vicinity of BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance of fish observed during the surveys. Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and I forage species (e.g. emerald, spottail, and spotfin shiners) were generally collected in the highest numbers. The numbers of forage species were comparable to those present in 2012 but less than in some of the recent past years. Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal I fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad, minnow species and shiner species that have high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors I (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large fluctuations in population size. This, in turn, influences their appearance in the sampled populations during annual surveys.2013 Annual Environmental Report 16 FENOC (BVPS)

Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community.

In addition, differences in electrofishing catch rate can be attributed to environmental conditions that prevail during sampling efforts. High water, increased turbidity, and swift currents that occur during electrofishing efforts in some years can affect the collection efficiency in any given month. In 2013, as in 2012, increased water clarity was apparent during all months sampled. A direct result of the increased clarity was the abundance of rooted submerged aquatic vegetation throughout the study reach. The amount of rooted vegetation was much more than in any other year sampled. The increase in vegetation is likely the result of an increased photic zone due to zebra mussels filtering organic and inorganic particulates from the water and redistributes them to the benthic layer. The presence of rooted vegetation and increased water clarity can change the distribution of many of the fish species present in the study reach.The impact of needing to electrofish during the day in 2013 is also a factor that contributed to the 2013 catch. As previously discussed, shoreward fish movements at night generally increase catch rates. The avoidance of the majority of fish species from bright light conditions during the day was likely as acerbated by the increased water clarity.5.4.3 Corbicula Monitoring Program In 2013, eight (8) settled live Corbicula were collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower basin during monthly reservoir ponar sampling (Table 5.20 and Figure 5.5). They ranged in size from less than 1.00 mm to 9.94 mm. One dead Corbicula that fell into the 0.01mm to 0.99mm size range was also collected.

The season average density of settled live Corbicula was 48/ mi 2.The highest density of settled Corbicula occurred in April when a density of 129 Corbicula/m 2 was present. No Corbicula were collected in the scraping samples. Corbicula juveniles were also collected in monthly pump samples collected in the Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir in June, August and September.

In 2013, four (4) live settled Corbicula was collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir; one during March and three in April (Table 5.21 and Figure 5.6). They were all less than 2mm in size that indicates that they were spawned late in 2012. Three dead Corbicula were also collected during the March-April timeframe.

These were all less than 1mm and likely were spawned late in 2012. The season average density of settled live Corbicula was 19/ mi 2.The highest density of settled Corbicula occurred in April when a density of 129 Corbicula/m 2 was present. No Corbicula were collected in the scraping samples. Corbicula juveniles were also collected in monthly pump samples collected in the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir in August and September.

In 2013, BVPS continued its Corbicula control program (Year 24), which included the use of a molluscicide to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to use a molluscicide to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system.2013 Annual Environmental Report 17 FENOC (BVPS)

I In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 and 1995, the applications targeted the internal water systems; therefore, the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during applications.

Consequently, adult and juvenile Corbicula in the cooling towers often survived the applications.

Reservoir sediment samples taken after molluscicide applications represent mortality of Corbicula in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal water systems.The monthly reservoir sediment samples and pump samples collected in Units 1 and 2 Cooling n Towers in recent years demonstrated that Corbicula were entering and colonizing the reservoirs.

Only 12 live and four dead settled Corbicula were collected in the cooling towers in 2013;however, their presence in the cooling tower pump samples indicates that they still are available for establishment in the cooling towers. The recent decrease of Corbicula at the BVPS returns densities to levels more consistent with densities in the Ohio River in the mid-1990's, but well below those present during the 1980's. Whether the low density of Corbicula in 2013 is indicative of decreasing levels in the environment or due to sampling variability is uncertain, however, continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

5.4.4 Corbicula

Juvenile Monitoring Program Figure 5.7 presents the abundance and size distribution data for samples collected in the Ohio River near the intake structure by petite Ponar dredge in 2013. Twenty-four (24) live individuals n were collected 2013; 15 in May, three in July, and six in November.

They ranged in size from the 0.01-0.99 mm size range that were spawned in late 2012 and 2013 to greater than 9.50 mm that were spawned in prior years. The number of individuals collected in 2013 was somewhat more than in 2012 (19 individuals) and 2011 (12 individuals) but less than the two years prior to I that; 27 individuals in 2010, and 42 in 2009. A spring/early-summer spawning period typically occurs in the Ohio River near BVPS each year when preferred spawning temperatures (60-65' F)are reached (Figure 5.8). The offspring from this spawning event generally begin appearing in I the sample collections in June. The settled clams generally increase in size throughout the year.The overall low numbers of live Corbicula collected in the sample collected outside the intake and cooling towers in 2013, compared to levels in the 1980's, likely reflects a natural decrease in the density of Corbicula in the Ohio River near BVPS, although an increased density of live settled individuals and juveniles collected in the cooling towers may indicate that the population is beginning to increase again. Continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

I 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program Zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) are exotic freshwater mollusks that have ventrally flattened shells generally marked with alternating dark and lighter bands. They are believed to have been introduced into North America through the ballast water of ocean-going cargo vessels I probably from Eastern Europe. They were first identified in Lake St. Clair in 1988 and rapidly spread to other Great Lakes and the Mississippi River drainage system, and have become 2013 Annual Environmental Report 18 FENOC (BVPS) increasingly abundant in the lower, middle, and upper Ohio River. They use strong adhesive byssal threads, collectively referred to as their byssus, to attach themselves to any hard surfaces (e.g., intake pipes, cooling water intake systems, and other mussels).

Responding to NRC Notice No. 89-76 (Biofouling Agent-Zebra Mussel, November 21, 1989), BVPS instituted a Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program in January 1990. Studies have been conducted each year since then.Zebra mussels were detected in both the pump samples (Figures 5.9 and 5.10) and the substrate samples (Figure 5.11 and 5.12) in 2013. Zebra mussel veliger pump samples were collected from April through October 2013 (Figures 5.9 and 5.10). Veligers were collected at all of the six sites that were sampled in 2013. At most sample sites, there were generally two peaks in density.Densities in April and May were low. The first peak occurred in June. Then monthly densities were lower until a second peak occurred in September.

This seasonal pattern is typical for zebra mussels in the northeastern United States. Spawning begins as water temperature reach approximately 140 C and peaks at water temperatures of 210 C. Veligers densities usually peak about two weeks after the optimum water temperature for spawning is reached. Veliger densities then fall off as veligers mature and settle, although female mussels broadcast mature eggs throughout the season. The greatest density of veligers was present in the sample collected from the Barge Slip in late June (17,808/M 3). This was somewhat lower than the peak density of veligers collected in 2012 (34,628/mi

3) at the Emergency Outfall Building in August, but is a high density for the Ohio River. In April, veligers were collected only in the two cooling tower reservoirs.

This was probably due to the thermal enhancement of the cooling tower reservoirs, since the ambient Ohio River water temperatures did not reach the minimum spawning temperature for zebra mussels until May. Thereafter, veligers were present in every sample collected at all locations, except at the Barge Slip in May. Overall, veliger densities in 2013 were consistent with those found in 2012.In 2013, settled zebra mussels were collected only in scrape samples at the barge slip and the intake structure (Figures 5.11 and 5.12). The highest density of settled mussels in any sample collected was at the barge slip (12 mussels/m 2) in July. The mussels collected at each of the sites included individuals that were capable of reproducing.

The density of collected adult zebra mussels in 2013 was somewhat lower than the densities that occurred in 2012, but were consistent with those recorded in 2008- 2011.Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels in 2013 were consistent to those recorded in 2008-2012, and much higher than the preceding five years. Although densities of settled mussels are low compared to other populations such as the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the Ohio River are sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems. Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River will remain the same or increase cannot be determined.

In any case, the densities of mussels that presently exist are more than sufficient to impact the BVPS, if continued prudent monitoring and control activities are not conducted.

2013 Annual Environmental Report 19 FENOC (BVPS)

6.0 ZEBRA

MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES In 2013, BVPS continued its Corbicula and zebra mussel control program (2 4 th year), which included the use of a molluscicide to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula and zebra mussels within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to use a molluscicide to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system.In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications (CT-1) focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 through 2006, the CT-1 or CT-2 (reformulated CT-1) applications targeted zebra mussels and Corbicula in the internal water systems; therefore the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-1 or CT-2 applications.

Consequently, adult and juvenile Corbicula in the cooling towers often survived the applications.

Reservoir sediment samples taken after CT-1 or CT-2 applications represented mortality of Corbicula in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal water systems. In 2007 BVPS began using Nalco H150M as the molluscicide.

This product, which has the same active ingredients as the CT-2 and CT-2, was applied in the same manner.In addition to clamicide treatments, preventive measures were taken that included quarterly cleaning of the Intake Bays. The bay cleanings are intended to minimize the accumulation and growth of mussels within the bays. This practice prevents creating an uncontrolled internal colonization habitat.I I I I I I I I I 2013 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)20

7.0 REFERENCES

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1994. Pennsylvania's Endangered Fishes, Reptiles and Amphibians.

Published by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission.

Counts, C. C. III, 1985. Distribution of Corbicula fluminea at Nuclear Facilities.

Division of Engineering, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

NUREGLCR.

4233. 79 pp.Dahlberg, M. D. and E. P. Odum, 1970. Annual cycles of species occurrence, abundance and diversity in Georgia estuarine fish populations.

Am. Midl. Nat. 83:382-392.

FENOC, 2003. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Nuclear Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 113 pp.FENOC, 2004. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 &2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2005. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2006. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 &2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2007. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2008. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 &2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2009. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 &2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2010. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2011. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp FENOC, 2012. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 &2. 82 pp FENOC, 2013. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp Hutchinson, G. E., 1967. A treatise on linmology.

Vol. 2, Introduction to lake biology and the limnoplankton.

John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. 1115 pp.2013 Annual Environmental Report 21 FENOC (BVPS)

Hynes, H. B. N., 1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto.NRC, IE Bulletin 81-03: Flow Blockage of Cooling Tower to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel).Pielou, E. C., 1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley Interscience, Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Robins, C. R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B.Scott, 1991. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada (fifth edition).

American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 20:1-183.Shiffer, C., 1990. Identification Guide to Pennsylvania Fishes. Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Bureau of Education and Information.

51 pp.Winner, J. M., 1975. Zooplankton.

In: B. A. Whitton, ed. River ecology. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. 155-169 pp.I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2013 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)22

8.0 TABLES

TABLE 5.1 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION (BVPS)SAMPLING DATES FOR 2013 Study Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Benthic Macroinvertebrate 26 19 Fish 22 18 19 4 Corbicula and Zebra Mussel 26 30 22 26 18 29 19 16 4 Corbicula CT Density Zebra Mussel Veliger 30 22 26 18 29 19 16 Table 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2013 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class Family GenusPrevious Collectedin Newin Sub-Family Collections 2013 2013 Porifera Spongillafragilis X Cnidaria Hydrozoa Clavidae...............

..............

..C ord .lo hora lacustris Hydridae Craspedacusta sowerbii X Hydra sp. X Platyhelminthes Tricladida X Rhaldocoela X Nemertea X Nematoda X X Entoprocta I Urnatella gracilis X Ectoprocta Fredericella sp. X Paludicella articulata X........ Pectinatella sp. X Plumatella sp. X Annelida_______

• 4 Oligochaeta x x lAeolosomalidae x SEnchytraeidae x Naididae X I X I Allonais nectinata x Amphichaeta leydigi X Amphichaeta sp. X Arcteonais lomondi X X Aulophonis sp. X Chaetogaster diaphanus X C. diastrophus X Dero digitata X Deroflabelliger X D. nivea X Dero sp. X Nais barbata X N. behningi X N. bretscheri X N. communis X X N. elinguis X N. pardalis X X I. pseudobtusa X N. simplex X N. variabilis X X Nais sp. X Ophidonais serpentina X Paranaisfrici X Paranais litoralis X Paranais sp. X X Piguetiella michiganensis X Prislina idrensis X Pristina longisoma X Pristina longiseta X P. osborni X X P. sima x Pristina sp. X I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Pristinella sp.X 6 .1 __ ___ ____ ___ ___ ____ __ -..1 Table 5.2 (conptinued)..

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2013 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class Family Genus and Species Previous Collected in New in Sub-Famil Collections 2013 2013 Annelida Oligochaeta Naididae Pristinellajenkinae X X Pristinella idrensis x............................

....... ... ...... ......... .. .. .... ........... .............................

Tubificida Pristina osborni X Ripistes parasita X Slavina appendiculata X Specariajosinae X X Stephensoniana trivandrana X SIvIariafossularis X S. lacustris X X Uncinais uncinata X Vejdovskyella conmata X Vejdovskyella intermnedia X Ve]dovskyella sp. X x+ + 4-Tubificidae x x Aulodrilus limnnobius x A. pigueti I X I A. DIuriseta x.......~ + 4-Aulodrilus sp.x x..............

Bothrioneurum vejdovskyanum X Branchiura sowerbyi X X.lyodrilus templetoni X Limnodrilus cervix X L. cervix (variant)

X L. claparedianus X L. hoffineisteri X X L. maumeensis X X L. profinidicla X X L. spiralis X L. udekemianus X X Limnodrilus sp. X I Peloscolex multisetosus longidentus X P. m. multisetosus X Potamnothrix moldaviensis X Potamothrix sp. X P. vejdovskyi X Psammoryctides curvisetosus X Tubifex tubifex x+ 4-Unidentified immature forms: with hair chaetae without hair chaetae x x V x x I I I-Lumbriculidae x x Himudinae x x~_____ ____Ciossiphoniidae

________________

I x~IHelobdella elongata x H. stagnalis x I[Helobdella sp. X I _Emobdelhda Haplotamidae Lumbricina Il~urbficidae e Erwobdella st).+ 4-x Mooreobdella microstonma x Stvlodrilus sp.+ 4 x x x

..te te ....t ..a.....e..eh .te.... ectdTable 5.2 (continued)

Phylum Class Family Gen and Spcies Pre-ious Collectedin Newin I Sub-Faml Collections 2013 2013 Arthropoda Acarina X... ... ... .-IOxus sp. x X Ostracoda X.Asellus sp. X Arthropoda

... ..............

.A m phipoda. .:: Talitridae

.. .IHyalella azteca X SCrangonyxpseudogracilis X Crangonyx sp. X Gaminarusfasciatus x Gamnnarus sp. X X Pontoporeuidae

.....Monoporeiaaffinis x Corophididae x Decapoda X Collembola X Ephemeroptera_

X X............

....... Heptageniidae X.... .............

............

...... S ten a cro n sp. X...... ..... ...... S t e n o n e r n a s p .X Ephemeridae

.Ephemera sp. X Hexagenia sp. X X Ephron sp. X X Baetidae -I ats... .... ..... ..............

.... ... B e t s s .x Caenidae.. .... ..... ... ...... .. ...... ....... :..... ....... ....C e i p Serattella sp. X.. ..... ..........

..... ... ....... ..... .. ."~r t e l sp..... T r c r t i a.rc r ta e ......X .jc r t ia.. .... ..... ..................

........ ...............

.. ...... ........ IT r ic o ry th o d e s sp .X Megaloptera Sialis sp. X Odonata Go mphidac Argia sp.X........ ..................

...........

Drom ogomnphus spoliatus X SDromrogomnphus sp. X Gomphus sp. X X.... ...........

..... .t ... .e ... ..... ..... ...... .... .. .............

... .. ..... .... .. ........ ... e s s s p............................

...............................................

I st s .Libellula sp. X Plecoeera X X Trichoptera X[ Hydropsychidae

_____Cheurnatopsyche sp. X.Hydropsyche sp. X SParapsyche sp. X Hydroptilidae

... Hydroptila sp. X X O0rthotrichia sp. X Oxyethira sp. X Ceraclea sp. X oecetis sp. X.. .........

............

.Polycentropodidae Cvrnellus sp X Polycentropodidae Polycentropus sp. X I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Syste .at .c L..s ...... .a.ro.n...e.rae

..... .Table 5.2 92O(continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 11973 Through 2013 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class Family .. ...... .Genus and Species Previous Collectedin Newin S ub-Family Collections 2013 2013 Coleoptera Hydrophilidae x Coleoptera Elmidae Ancyronyx variegalus X Dubiraphia sp. X Helichus sp. X Oplioserus sp. X Steneinis sp. X Psephenidae X')iplera i i Unidentified Diptera x x Psychodidae X Pericoma sp. X Psychoda sp. _________.... ... ..... ............

I. .... ..........

... ..... P s -h d p Telnatoscopus sp. X Unidentified Psychodidae pupae X Chaoboridae Chaoborus sp. x Simuliidae Sirniliurn sp. X Chironomidae X X Chironominae X Tanytarsini pupa X Chironominae pupa X X Axarus sp. X Chironomus sp. X X Cladopelma sp. X Cladotanytarsus sp. X X Cryptochironomus sp. X X Dicrotendipes nervosus X... ...................

....... D icrotendip es sp. X X.................

Glptotendipes sp. x Harnischia sp. X Microchironomus sp. X.Aicropsectra sp. X A'ficrotendipes sp. x _____...........

........ .. ... ... ...............

i r t n i e p Parachironomus sp. X Paracladopelhna sp. X Paratanytarsus sp. X Paratendipes sp. x Phaenopsectra sp. X X.............................

Polypedilum (s.s.) convictum type X P. (ss.) simulans type x Polypedilurn sp. X X Pseudochironomis sp. X X Rheotanytarsus sp. X Stempellina sp. X X Stenochironomnus sp. x... ... .........

....... .. ....... ............

... S t n c i o o u -.............

..... .... Stictochirononnis sp. X Tanytarsus coffinani X Tanytarsus sp. X X Tribelos sp. X Xenochironornus sp. x Tanypodinae_

X Tanypodinae pupae x Ablabesnzyia sp. X Clinotanypus sp. X Coelotanypus scapularis X Coelotanypus sp. X X Djiahnabalista pulcher X O/ahnabatista sp. X Procladius sp. X X Tanypus sp.X

.... ...... .............

... ...T..a. .................

T able .5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2013 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class Family Genus andSpecies Previous Collectedin Newin S ub-Familv Collections 2013 2013 Diptera Tanypodinae Thienemanninlyia group X X.. .... .. ..........

.. .............

... ............

.... ........................

.. Z a v r e lim y ia s p .X Orthocladiinae X Orthocladiinae pupae X Cricotopus bicinctus X.C. (s.s.) trifascia x..........

... Cricotopus (Isocladius)-sjlvestris Group X.... ................

... C. (Isocladius) sp. X Cricotopus (s.s.) sp. X X.....E..u.................u...

.... E kiefferiella sp. X...................

.......................

Hydrobaenus sp. X........ ..... .. ... ... .... .... .... ... ... ...... ............

L im n op hy es sp .X Nanocladius (s.s.) distinctus X.. ....................

..........

.........................

......... ..........

a n o c la d iu s s p .X Orthocladius sp. X X...............

.. ...................

........................

................

P a ra m e trio cn em u s sp .X.............

.........

........Paraphaenocladius sp. X.. .. .................

Psectrocladius sp. x Pseudorthocladius sp. x Pseudosmittia sp. X Sinittia sp. X..... .... .............

...... ....... ..... Theineinannimy ia sp. X Diames inae... ........ .... ... .. ..D iam esa sp. x........ ...... .........

..............

..........................................

....... .. P o tth a stia s p .X Ceratopogonidae X................

..... .. .Probezzia sp. X X.....................

.............................

... .............

B e z z ia s p .X...................

... .. C ulicoides sp. x.... .........

.................

..... D olichopodidae X.. ...................

...... ... E m p id id ae X IClinocera sp. X....... .. .. .. ..........

..W iedemannia sp. X Ephydridae X Muscidae X Rhagionidae X...............

..... ..... T ipulidae X Stratiomyidae X Syrphidae X Lepidoptera X Hydracarinidia X Oxus sp. X Mollusca..........................

G astro poda ..... .._x.........

... .. .. .............

.................

... H y d ro b iid ae X Ancnicolinae

.. ..... ......... ... ..........

.. ..... .. ...... .. ...... ... ..........

A m n tc o la s p .X... .. ..... ........................

A.n. .. .. ...........................

.A n ico la b in n ey a n a X Amnicola limosa X X Staknicola elodes X.. .. .... .... .... B ithynidae I-Bithynia

s. X.............

.. .. .. ..........

P h y s~ac e a ...X Pleuroceridae Pleurocera acuta X X Goniobasis sp. X...." ..... ... .... .... ... iPhy~sldae

.. .. ..x.. ... ........ ... ....... .Phq sa sp. X X.. ... ..... ...... .... .... ........ ... .. ..... P h ,sa a n cilla ria X IPhysa in tegmi X I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

..... ...........

.....T a b le 5 ..2 (c o n ti n u e d ) .... ... .. ..... ... ............................................

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2013 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class FlY.. .. Genus and Species Previous Collectedin Newin ISub-aily Collections 2013 2013 Mollusca Physacea Ancylidae X.Ferrissia sp. X X Planorbidae Gillia atilis X X.. ..... ... ..........

.. ... ..... ............

.........

.. G v ra uilu s SP ........ ....... .. .. .........

... .....t d a .x ....IValvatidae X Valvata perdepressa X Valvata piscinalis X Valvata sincera X X Valvata sp. X Pelecypoda X I Sphaeriacea X CCorbicuaidae i... .. ".. '. .........

.... ...........

... ........ -JCor~bicul_-a fl um inea X Corbicula sp. X X... ..... ........:Sphaeriidae.

X Pisidium ventricosum X Pisidiumn sp. X X Sphaeriumn sp. X X Unidentified immature Splaeriidae X Dreissenidae

.-, Dreissena polymorpha x x Unionidae X Anodonta grandis x Anodonta (inmature)

X Elliptio sp. X Quadrula pustulosa X Unidentified immature Unionidae X* a TABLE5.3 BFIITUlC NIACROIDVFRTEBRATECOUNTS FOR TRIPUICATESAMPLES TAKEN AT EACH SAMPLESTATION FOR MAY AND S EPTMBER 2013 May Sept Scientific name location May Location Sept 2013 I 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3 Total I 2A 2BI 2B2 2B3 3 Total Total Amnicola limosa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 5 Arcteonais lomondi 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Aulodrilus sp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 Branchiura sowerbyi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 Caenis sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Chironomid pupae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 3 3 Chironomidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 4 4 Chironomus sp. 0 0 .0 6 22 10 38 0 0 6 0 14 0 20 58 Cladotanytarsus sp 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 Coelotanypus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 10 10 Corbicula sp. 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 7 31 2 16 58 59 Cricotopus (s.s.) sp. 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 5 6 Cryptochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 1 0 0 14 14 Dicrotentipides sp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 21 21 Diptera 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Dreissena polymorpha 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 2 0 0 25 27 30 Ephemeroptera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 3 Ephonsp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 Ferossia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 0 87 95 95 Gammarus sp. 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 Gillia atilis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 0 2 11 11 Gomphus sp. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 Hexagenia sp. 0 0 0 1 10 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 Hirudinea 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 4 4 Hydroptila sp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 Immature tubificid without 126 30 79 27 8 63 333 20 8 28 5 244 28 333 666 Immature tubiflcid with hair 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 3 Limnoddlus hoffmeisteri 3 0 0 3 1 3 10 1 0 3 1 7 8 20 30 Limnodrilus maumeensis 1 2 0 1 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 21 Limnodnilus profundicola 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 Limnodfilus udemekianus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 Lumbticulidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 Naididae 0 0 1 0 1 29 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 Nais communis 0 0 0 0 0 22 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 Nais pardalis 1 3 5 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 Nais variabilis 0 0 0 0 0 23 23 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 24 Nematoda 2 1 5 2 0 9 19 0 0 1 0 0 70 71 90 Oligochaeta 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 4 Orthocladius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 Oxus sp (Hydracadna) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 Paranais sp 0 0 0 0 0 28 28 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 32 Phaenopsectra sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 Physa sp 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 Pisidium sp. 2 1 0 1 0 7 11 1 0 3 12 0 3 19 30 Pleurocera acuta 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Plecoptera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 Polypedilum sp. 2 4 1 0 1 5 13 1 3 9 3 0 1 17 30 Pristina osbomi 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Pnstinella jenkinae 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 1 0 8 5 14 20 Probezzia sp. 2 0 1 3 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 4 0 5 11 Procladius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 0 1 4 8 10 Pseudochironomis sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 4 Specaria josinae 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Sphaerium sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 5 Stempellina sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 Stylaria lacustris 0 0 1 2 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Tanytarsus sp. 1 3 0 0 0 8 12 0 2 8 0 0 0 10 22 Thienemannimyia group 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Tubificidae 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Valvata sincera 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 6 Total 147 46 96 47 46 228 610 26 28 140 57 311 277 839 1449 TABLE5.4 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER/Mz)

AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAErMS, CHIRONOMIDS, MOLLUSKS, AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 2013 BVPS May Station 1 (Control) 2A 2B1 (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control) 3 Total Mean#/M2 % #/M2 % #/mz % #/m2? % #/m % I #/M2 #/M2 %Oligochaetes 1964 93 502 76 1261 92 473 70 158 24 2551 78 1149 79 Chironomids 43 2 115 17 14 1 86 13 330 50 387 12 162 11 Mollusks 43 2 14 2 0 0 14 2 29 4 172 5 48 3 Others 57 3 29 4 100 7 100 15 143 22 158 5 98 7 Total 2107 " 100 660 " 100 1375

• 100 673

• 100 660 P 100 3268 ' 100 1457 100 September Station 1 (Control) 2A 12B1 (Non-control) 12B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control) 3 Total Mean/ M 2 % / 2 % / 2 % # / 2 # / M2 % L / 2 # / 2%Oligochaetes 315 84 115 29 487 24 100 12 4099 92 631 16 958 48 Chironornids 29 8 258 64 917 46 57 7 244 5 229 6 289 14 Mollusks 29 8 29 7 516 26 659 81 29 1 1949 49 535 27 Others 0 0 0 0 86 4 0 0 86 2 1161 29 222 11 Total 373 100 402 100 2006 ' 100 816 ' 100 4458 ' 100 3970 100 2004 100 M M M- M M--- M--- M M- M M M TABLE 5.5 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER/M 2) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA, AND OTHER ORGANISMS FOR THE CONTROL STATION (1) AND THE AVERAGE FOR NON-CONTROL STATIONS (22B1, 2B2, AND 2B3), 2013 BVPS May 1 Control Station (Mean) Non-Control Station (Mean)I #/M2 % #/m 2 %Oligochaeta 1964 93 631 70 Chironomidae 43 2 143 16 Mollusca 43 2 14 2 Others 57 3 114 13 TOTAL 2107 100 903 100 September 1 Control Station (Mean) Non-Control Station (Mean)________ #/m 2  % #/m 2 %Oligochaeta 315 84 1562 64 Chironomidae 29 8 406 17 Mollusca 29 8 401 17 Others 0 0 57 2 TOTAL 373 100 2427 100 TABLE 5.6 SHANNON-WEINER DIVERSITY, EVENNESS AND RICHNESS INDICES FOR BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN THE 01O RIVER, 2013 Station May 1 2A 2BI 2B2 2B3 3 No. of Taxa 12 9 10 10 8 23 Shannon-Weiner Index 0.32 0.57 0.35 0.66 0.63 1.04 Evenness 0.30 0.60 0.35 0.66 0.70 0.76 Richness 2.20 2.09 1.97 2.34 1.83 4.05 Station September 1 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3 No. of Taxa 7 10 29 8 18 23 Shannon-Weiner Index 0.41 0.94 1.28 0.62 0.44 0.92 Evenness 0.49 0.94 0.88 0.69 0.35 0.68 Richness 1.84 2.70 5.67 1.73 2.96 3.91 Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations I (Control)and 2B (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2013.

Preoperational 1973 1974 1975 1 2B I 2B I 2B May 248 508 1116 2197 August 99 244 143 541 1017 1124 Mean 173 376 630 1369 1017 1124 Operational 1976 1977 1978 I 2B 1 2B I 2B May 927 3660 674 848 351 126 August 851 785 591 3474 601 1896 Mean 889 2223 633 2161 476 1011 Operational 1979 1980 1981 1 2B I 2B I 2B May 1004 840 1041 747 209 456 Aug/Sept 1185 588 1523 448 2185 912 Mean 1095 714 1282 598 1197 684 Operational 1982 1983 1984 1 2B I 2B I 2B May 3490 3026 3590 1314 2741 621 September 2958 3364 4172 4213 1341 828 Mean 3223 3195 3881 2764 2041 725 Operational 1985 1986 1987 1 2B I 2B I 2B May 2256 867 601 969 1971 2649 September 1024 913 849 943 2910 2780 Mean 1640 890 725 956 2440 2714 I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations I (Control)and 2B (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2013 (Continued).

Operational 1988 1989 1990 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 1804 1775 3459 2335 15135 5796 September 1420 1514 1560 4707 5550 1118 Mean 1612 1645 2510 3274 10343 3457 Qperational 1991 1992 1993 1 2B I 2B 1 2B May 7760 6355 7314 10560 8435 2152 September 3588 2605 2723 4707 4693 2143 Mean 5808 4480 5019 7634 6564 2148 Operational 1994 1995 1996 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 6980 2349 8083 9283 1987 1333 September 1371 2930 1669 3873 1649 2413 Mean 4176 2640 4876 6578 1814 1873 Operational 1997 1998 1999 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 1411 2520 6980 2349 879 1002 September 1944 2774 1371 2930 302 402 Mean 1678 2647 4176 2640 591 702 Operational 2000 2001 2002 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 2987 2881 3139 5232 1548 2795 September 3092 2742 8632 14663 Mean 3040 2812 3139 5232 5090 8729 Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations I (Control)and 2B (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2013 (Continued).

Operational 2003 2004 2005 I 2B I 2B 1 2B May 7095 10750 2752 4558 516 1146 September 2193 6464 10062 7604 4773 6435 Mean 4644 8607 6407 6181 2645 3791 Operational 2006 2007 2008 1 2B 1 2B I 2B May 143 1242 559 912 158 1252 September 229 2199 560 3794 1161 2150 Mean 186 1721 560 2353 660 1701 Operational 2009 2010 2011 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 71 1462 1763 2527 115 1700 September 903 1902 1720 1256 874 1233 Mean 487 1682 1742 1892 495 1467 Operational 2012 2013 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 71 1462 2107 903 September 903 1902 373 1731 Mean 487 1682 1240 1317 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 5.8 TOTAL FISH CATCH; ELECTROFISHING AND SEINE NET COMBINED DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Scientific Name Number Percent Smailmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus 4 3.23 Black crappie Ponoxis nigrornaculatus 2 1.61 Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 6 4.84 Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 2 1.61 Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides 22 17.74 Flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris 1 0.81 Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens 2 1.61 Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum 3 2.42 Golden redhorse sucker Moxostoma erythrurum 19 15.32 Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus 3 2.42 Mimic shiner Notropis volucellus 3 2.42 Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 1 0.81 Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus 2 1.61 River carpsucker Carpiodes carpio 3 2.42 Rock Bass Ambloplites rupestris 4 3.23 Sauger Sander canadense 1 0.81 Shorthead redhorse sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotum 17 13.71 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 3 2.42 Smalimouth bass Micropterus dolomieu 13 10.48 Spotfin shiner Notropis spilopterus 7 5.65 Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus 4 3.23 Walleye Sander vitreum 1 0.81 Yellow perch Percaflavescens 1 0.81 Total Fish Collected in 2013 1 124 100.00 TABLE 5.9 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL ELECTROFISHING CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name I Control % Non-control

% lTotal fish %Smallmouth buffalo 4 5.6 4 4.71 Black crappie 2 2.8 2 2.35 Bluegill 4 5.6 4 4.71 Channel catfish 1 7.69 1 1.4 2 2.35 Emerald shiner Flathead catfish 1 1.4 1 1.18 Freshwater drum 2 2.8 2 2.35 Gizzard shad 1 7.69 2 2.8 3 3.53 Golden redhorse sucker 3 23.08 16 22.2 19 22.35 Longnose gar 1 7.69 2 2.8 3 3.53 Mimic shiner Pumpkinseed 1 1.4 1 1.18 Quillback 2 2.8 2 2.35 River carpsucker 1 7.69 2 2.8 3 3.53 Rock bass 4 5.6 4 4.71 Sauger 1 1.4 1 1.18 Shorthead redhorse sucker 3 23.08 14 19.4 17 20.00 Spottail shiner Smallmouth bass 3 23.08 9 12.5 12 14.12 Spotfin shiner Spotted bass 3 4.2 3 3.53 Walleye 1 1.4 1 1.18 Yellow perch 1 1.4 1 1.18 Total 13 100.00 1 72 J 100.0 85 100.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 5.10 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL SEINE CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Control % Non-control

[ % ITotal fishl %Bluegill 2 5.88 0 0.00 2 5.13 Emerald shiner 21 61.76 1 20.00 22 56.41 Mimic shiner 3 8.82 0 0.00 3 7.69 Spottail shiner 3 8.82 0 0.00 3 7.69 Smallmouth bass 0 0.00 1 20.00 1 2.56 Spotfin shiner 5 14.71 2 40.00 7 17.95 Spotted bass 0 0.00 1 20.00 1 2.56 Total 34 100.00 5 100.00 39 100.00 TABLE 5.11 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE MAY 2013 (SPRING) SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrofishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smalmouth buffalo 1 0 0.00 1 2.50 Black crappie 1 0 0.00 1 2.50 Bluegill 1 0 0.00 1 2.50 Channel catfish 0 0.00 0 0.00 Emerald shiner 11 1 12 54.55 0 0.00 Flathead catfish 0 0.00 0 0.00 Freshwater drum 0 0.00 0 0.00 Gizzard shad 1 0 0.00 1 2.50 Golden redhorse sucker 1 6 1 0 0.00 8 20.00 Longnose gar 2 0 0.00 2 5.00 Mimic shiner 0 0.00 0 0.00 Pumpkinseed 1 0 0.00 1 2.50 Quillback 2 0 0.00 2 5.00 River carpsucker 1 1 0 0.00 2 5.00 Rock bass 1 0 0.00 1 2.50 Sauger 0 0.00 0 0.00 Shorthead redhorse sucker 1 8 1 0 0.00 10 25.00 Spottail shiner 2 2 9.09 0 0.00 Smallmouth bass 2 3 1 1 0 0.00 7 17.50 Spotfin shiner 5 2 7 31.82 0 0.00 Spotted bass 1 2 1 4.55 2 5.00 Walleye 0 0.00 0 0.00 Yellow perch 0 0.00 0 0.00 Total 18 4 4 22 10 3 22 100.00 39 100.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I* Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining TABLE 5.12 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE JULY (SUMMER) 2013 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrofishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smallmouth buffalo 1 2 0 0.00 3 27.27 Black crappie 1 0 0.00 1 9.09 Bluegill 2 2 11.76 0 0.00 Channel catfish 0 0.00 0 0.00 Emerald shiner 10 10 58.82 0 0.00 Flathead catfish 0 0.00 0 0.00 Freshwater drum 0 0.00 0 0.00 Gizzard shad 1 0 0.00 1 9.09 Golden redhorse sucker 3 0 0.00 3 27.27 Longnose gar 0 0.00 0 0.00 Mimic shiner 3 3 17.65 0 0.00 Pumpkinseed 0 0.00 0 0.00 Quillback 0 0.00 0 0.00 River carpsucker 0 0.00 0 0.00 Rock Bass 0 0.00 0 0.00 Sauger 1 0 0.00 1 9.09 Shorthead redhorse sucker 0 0.00 0 0.00 Spottail shiner 1 1 5.88 0 0.00 Smallmouth bass 1 2 1 5.88 2 18.18 Spotfin shiner 0 0.00 0 0.00 Spotted bass 0 0.00 0 0.00 Walleye 0 0.00 0 0.00 Yellow perch 0 0.00 0 0.00 Total 16 1 0 4 6 1 17 100.00 11 100.00* Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining TABLE 5.13 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE SEPTEMBER (FALL) 2013 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrofishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smallmouth buffalo 0 -0 0.00 Black crappie 0 -0 0.00 Bluegill 1 0 -2 15.38 Channel catfish 1 0 -1 7.69 Emerald shiner 0 -0 0.00 Flathead catfish 1 0 -1 7.69 Freshwater drum 1 0 -1 7.69 Gizzard shad 1 0 -1 7.69 Golden redhorse sucker 1 1 0 -2 15.38 Longnose gar 1 0 -1 7.69 Mimic shiner 0 -0 0.00 Pumpkinseed 0 -0 0.00 Quillback 0 -0 0.00 River carpsucker 0 -1 7.69 Rock bass 0 -0 0.00 Sauger 0 -0 0.00 Shorthead redhorse sucker 0 -0 0.00 Spottail shiner 0 -0 0.00 Smallmouth bass 0 -1 7.69 Spotfin shiner 0 -0 0.00 Spotted bass 0 -1 7.69 Walleye 1 0 -1 7.69 Yellow perch 0 -0 0.00 Total 0 0 3 6 3 1 0 13 100.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I*Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining TABLE 5.14 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE NOVEMBER (WINTER) 2013 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrolishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smalimouth buffalo 0 -0 0.00 Black crappie 0 -0 0.00 Bluegill 1 0 -1 4.55 Channel catfish 1 0 -1 4.55 Emerald shiner 0 -0 0.00 Flathead catfish 0 -0 0.00 Freshwater drum 1 0 -1 4.55 Gizzard shad 0 -0 0.00 Golden redhorse sucker 2 1 3 0 -6 27.27 Longnose gar 0 -0 0.00 Mimic shiner 0 -0 0.00 Pumpkinseed 0 -0 0.00 Quillback 0 -0 0.00 River carpsucker 0 -0 0.00 Rock bass 1 2 0 -3 13.64 Sauger 0 -0 0.00 Shorthead redhorse sucker 2 4 1 0 -7 31.82 Spottail shiner 0 -0 0.00 Smallmouth bass 1 1 0 -2 9.09 Spotfin shiner 0 -0 0.00 Spotted bass 0 -0 0.00 Walleye 0 -0 0.00 Yellow perch 1 0 -1 4.55 Total 0 0 6 7 3 6 0 -22 100.00* Gear= (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining TABLE 5.15 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF FISH OBSERVED DURING ELECTROFISHING OPERATIONS, 2013 Common Name May July Sept Nov Total Unidentified black bass 3 3 Smalhmuth buffalo 0 Longnose gar 1 1 Unidentified suckers 5 1 6 Unidentified sunfish 3 3 Gizzard shad 3 1 4 Total 15 1 1 17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I* = Not boated or handled Table 5.16 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2010 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (minm) Common Name Number Collected CPUE(fish/min)

Spring 41.0 Smallmouth buffalo 4 0.0976 Channel catfish 3 0.0732 Freshwater drum 1 0.0244 Gizzard shad 3 0.0732 Golden redhorse sucker 11 0.2683 Longnose gar 4 0.0976 Mooneye 2 0.0488 Sauger 16 0.3902 Shorthead redhorse sucker 22 0.5366 Silver redhorse 4 0.0976 Smailmouth bass 13 0.3171 Spotted bass 2 0.0488 Walleye 3 0.0732 White bass 2 0.0488 Season Total 90 2.1951 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 40.4 Smalmouth buffalo 4 0.0990 Channel catfish 1 0.0248 Flathead catfish 1 0.0248 Golden shiner 1 0.0248 Mooneye 1 0.0248 Quillback 2 0.0495 Shorthead redhorse sucker 2 0.0495 Silver redhorse 1 0.0248 Season Total 13 0.3218 Table 5.16 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2010 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40.2 Smallmouth buffalo 1 0.0249 Gizzard shad 6 0.1493 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0498 Sauger 1 0.0249 Shorthead redhorse sucker 2 0.0498 Silver redhorse 1 0.0249 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0746 Spotted bass 4 0.0995 White bass 6 0.1493 Season Total 26 0.6468 Number Season Effort(min)

Common Name Collected CPUE (lish/min)

Winter 40.4 Smallmouth buffalo 1 0.0248 Freshwater drum 3 0.0743 Gizzard shad 4 0.0990 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0495 Mooneye 1 0.0248 Pumpkinseed 0 0.0000 Quillback 2 0.0495 River carpsucker 1 0.0248 Sauger 3 0.0743 Shorthead redhorse sucker 7 0.1733 Silver redhorse 5 0.1238 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0743 Spotted bass 2 0.0495 White bass 13 0.3218 Season Total 47 1.1634 2010 162.0 176 1.08642 I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I U Table 5.17 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISHIELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2011 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Spring 40.5 Smallmouth buffalo 2 0.0494 Channel catfish 1 0.0247 Gizzard shad 1 0.0247 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0494 Longnose gar 1 0.0247 Quillback 5 0.1235 Shorthead redhorse sucker 12 0.2963 Smallmouth bass 5 0.1235 White bass 2 0.0494 Season Total 31 0.7654 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 40.3 Bluegill 2 0.0496 Freshwater drum 1 0.0248 Gizzard shad 3 0.0744 Golden redhorse sucker 1 0.0248 Longnose gar 1 0.0248 Quillback 3 0.0744 Shorthead redhorse sucker 3 0.0744 Smallmouth bass 2 0.0496 Spotted bass 3 0.0744 Season Total 19 0.4715 Table 5.17 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2011 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40.2 Smalimouth buffalo 1 0.0249 Black crappie 1 0.0249 Bluegill 1 0.0249 Channel catfish 1 0.0249 Common carp 1 0.0249 Flathead catfish 2 0.0498 Freshwater drum 1 0.0249 Gizzard shad 3 0.0746 Golden redhorse sucker 5 0.1244 Longnose gar 3 0.0746 Monneve ? 0.0498 Sauger 5 0.1244 Shorthead redhorse sucker 10 0.2488 Silver redhorse 2 0.0498 Smallmouth bass 8 0.1990 Spotted bass 5 0.1244 Walleve 3 0.0746 White bass 3 0.0746 Season Total 57 1.4179 Number Season Effort (mi) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Winter 40.5 Smallmouth buffalo 4 0.0988 Bluegill 3 0.0741 Common carp 1 0.0247 Freshwater drum 2 0.0494 Gi77ard shad 1 0.0247 Largemouth bass 1 0.0247 Pumpkinseed 1 0.0247 Saucer 11 0.2716 Shorthead redhorse sucker 9 0.2222 Smailmouth bass 7 0.1728 Spotted bass 2 0.0494 White bass 1 0.0247 Yellow perch 1 0.0247 Season Total 44 1.0864 2011 161.5 151 0.93498 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 5.18 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2012 FISHERIES SURVEY Numbe r Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Spring 40.1 Smallmouth buffalo 1 0.0249 Channel catfish 1 0.0249 Conmon carp 1 0.0249 Gizzard shad 5 0.1247 Golden redhorse sucker 5 0.1247 Longnose gar 1 0.0249 Rock bass 1 0.0249 Shorthead redhorse sucker 5 0.1247 Smalimouth bass 3 0.0748 Season Total 23 0.5736 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 40.1 Smalhmouth buffalo 5 0.1247carp 1 0.0249 Gizzard shad 8 0.1995 Largemouth bass 1 0.0249 Smalimouth bass 3 0.0748 Season Total 18 0.4489 Table 5.18 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2012 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/mi)Fall 40.1 Smallmouth buffalo 4 0.0998 Black crappie 1 0.0249 Common carp 2 0.0499 Freshwater drum 1 0.0249 Gizzard shad 10 0.2494 Golden redhorse sucker 3 0.0748 Largemouth bass 1 0.0249 Quillback 1 0.0249 Rock bass 1 0.0249 Sauger 1 0.0249 Shorthead redhorse sucker 3 0.0748 Smallmouth bass 2 0.0499 Spotted bass 1 0.0249 White bass 6 0.1496 Season Total 37 0.9227 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Winter 30 Smallmouth buffalo 1 0.0333 Freshwater drum 1 0.0333 Golden shiner 1 0.0333 Shorthead redhorse sucker 3 0.1000 Smallmouth bass 2 0.0667 Walleye 1 0.0333 White bass 1 0.0333 Season Total 10 0.3333 2012 150.3 88 0.58550 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 5.19 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY o NNumber Season Efforti Common Name Collected CPUE (lish/min)

Spring 40.4 Smalknouth buffalo 1 0.0248 Black crappie 1 0.0248 Bluegill 1 0.0248 Gizzard shad 1 0.0248 Golden redhorse sucker 8 0.1980 Longnose gar 2 0.0495 Pumpkinseed 1 0.0248 Quillback 2 0.0495 River carpsucker 2 0.0495 Rock bass 1 0.0248 Shorthead redhorse sucker 10 0.2475 Smallmouth bass 7 0.1733 Spotted bass 2 0.0495 Season Total 39 0.9653 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 40.0 Smallmouth buffilo 3 0.0750 Black crappie 1 0.0250 Gizzard shad 1 0.0250 Golden redhorse sucker 3 0.0750 Sauger 1 0.0250 Smallmouth bass 2 0.0500 Season Total 11 0.2750 Table 5.19 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISHIELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40.4 Bluegill 2 0.0495 Channel catfish 1 0.0248 Flathead catfish 1 0.0248 Freshwater drum 1 0.0248 Gizzard shad 1 0.0248 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0495 Longnose gar 1 0.0248 River carpsucker 1 0.0248 Smallmouth bass 1 0.0248 Spotted bass 1 0.0248 Walleye 1 0.0248 Season Total 13 0.3218 Common Name Number CPUE (fish/min)

Season Effort (min) Collected Winter 40.1 Bluegill 1 0.0249 Channel catfish 1 0.0249 Freshwater drum 1 0.0249 Golden redhorse sucker 6 0.1496 Rock bass 3 0.0748 Shorthead redhorse sucker 7 0.1746 Smallmouth bass 2 0.0499 Yellow perch 1 0.0249 Season Total 22 0.5486 2013 160.9 85 0.52828 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 5.20 UNIT 1 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2013 FROM BVPS Area Maximum Minimum Estimated Collection Sampled Live or Length Length Number Date (sq ft) Dead Count Range (mm) Range(mm) r s m Dead 1 0.001-0.99 0.001-0.99 43 3/26/2013 0.25 Live 2 1.00-1.99 0.001-0.99 86 4/30/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- 0 Live 3 1.00-1.99 0.001-0.99 129 5/22/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- 0 Live 0 ...... 0 6/26/2013 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 1 0.001-0.99 0.001-0.99 43 7/18/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- 0 Live 1 6.30-9.94 6.30-9.94 43 8/29/2013 0.25 Dead 0 ---- ---- 0 Live 2 2.00-3.34 1.00-1.99 86 9/19/2013 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 0 ---... 0 10/16/2013*

Dead ---Live --- ---.....11/4/2013 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 0 ...... 0 Dead 1 --Unit summary Live 8 ...... 48*Not sampled due to outage TABLE 5.21 UNIT 2 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2013 FROM BVPS Area Maximum M'lnimum Estimated Collection Sampled Liw or Length Range Length Number Date (sq ft) Dead Count (mm) Range(mm) (per sq m)3/26/2013 0.25 Dead 2 0.001-0.99 0.001-0.99 86 Live 1 1.00-1.99 1.00-1.99 43 4/30/2013 0.25 Dead 1 0.001-0.99 0.001-0.99 43 Live 3 0.001-0.99 0.001-0.99 129 5/22/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- 0 Live 0 ..... -0 6/26/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- 0 Live 0 --- --- 0 7/18/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- --- 0 Live 0 --- --- 0 8/29/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- 0 Live 0 --- --- 0 9/19/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- 0 Live 0 --- --- 0 10/16/2013 0.25 Dead 0 --- --- 0 Live 0 --- --- 0 11/4/2013 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 0 --- --- 0 Dead 3 --- --- 14 Unit summary Live 4 ...--- 19 I I I I I U I I I I I I

9.0 FIGURES

--- --- ------- ----- -0 2lI Figure 5.1 2013 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations F-z U"ml 14.00 it LThu Jan 1610:231997 LEGEND Scia 1:31.250 fat jBnIthic sample site 200D Fee IN low Meters PLli Or anis Vael y Station Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling, Sites for the 2013 Study Figure 5.2= M/ M M--- M M M M- M M M M 1 m m m m m m m m -i- m -m m- -m icj 3]a-Shlppbngpout z z 0 21'Ia LIEGEND a CEfrctzofishaing site e Seine site Meg 14.W ThW Jon 18 10:.14 1997 Statin 2AScie 1:31.250 jai canter)20W) Feet 0 Iwo Mate", I'kal..Beaverr Vai ver Stataio Figure 5.3.Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2013 Study 0 m m V 0 Figure 5.4 Location of Study Area, Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport, Pennsylvania BVPS m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2013 BVPS Unit I cooling tower reservoir events, for various clam shell groups.500 ___________________________

450 -_______________________

w/400= 350 300 .9 0 5 150 100 .SIZE RANGE z 20J0-3.34 r 50 ....-...0 1 M 1.0-3/26 4/30 5/22 6/26 7/18 8/29 9/10 10/1 11/4 M0. 0 1-0. 99 MM 43 86 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 111.00-1.99 MM 43 43 0 0 0 43 0 0 0* 2.00-3.34 mm 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 5 3.354.74 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M 4.75-6.29 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.30-9.49 mm 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 a >9.50 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Figure 5.5 ITOTAL #/m2 1 86 1 129 1 0 1 43 1 43 186 10 1] 0 _L 0__*No sample collected in October due to Unit I Shutdown Comparison oflive Corbicula clam density estimates among 2013 BVPS Unit 2 cooling towerreservoir events, for various clam shell gmups.I 4W 3W 300c 250 2cc-f5o 50 20 41M 5/22 ftl0?0.00a 0 120 0 D0.00--1.1 mm 43 0 0.a 80-3-,3 mm 0 a 0mm 0 0 0 ml 75.20 mm 0 0 0.,0-0.40mm a 0 a'-O.Somm 0 0 0 TOTAL OW 43 120 0 MiTALý990 nnn.0 ITfl WOMmm SIZE RANGE Figure 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m = = = m = m = m m m = m m m m = m m Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2013 BVPS Intake Structure sample events, for various clam shell groups.-J 0 LL.U-0 w z 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0-9.5Gmm 4.75-6.29 mm 200-3.34 mm 00-0992:-

-mm -SIZE RANGE 5/22 7'18 9'10 0 11/4 0 M0.01-0.99 mm 01.00-1.99 mm 3 0 0 1 02.00-3.34 mm 5 0 0 3 03.35-4.74 mm 2 0 0 1 m4.75-6.29 mm 1 0 0 0 06.30-9.49 mm 1 0 0 1 m>9.50mm 2 2 0 0 OTOTAL 15 3 0 6 Intake structure bottom samples are collected from the Ohio River at the Intake Building.Figure 5.7 90 80 70 LI.0)to 0)0.E 0)I-0)(0 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded at the Ohio River at BVPS Intake Structure During 2013 on Monthly Sample Dates.676 674 672 (0 m 670 E 0 668 666-u-temp-4elevation 664 60 50 40 30 3/26 4/30 5/22 6/26 7118 8/29 9/10 10/16 11/4 2013 Monthly Sample Dates Figure 5.8 M M-m M M M M M M M mI M M MM 25000 20000 15000 d 10000 5000 0~ILm Intake Structure/Open Water Unit I Cooling Tower Reservoir*

Unit 2 Cooling Tow~er Reservoir 04/30 0 32 57 05/22 7 451 33 06/26 2660 6936 11868 07/18 2760 900 1040*8/29 50 1620 6906*9/10 22916 6200 16750 010/16 160 0 3130 Sample location Figure 5.9. Density of zebra mussel veligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2013.*Unit 1 sample not collected in October due to unit shutdown 20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Barg Sli Splsh Pol / Emergency Out fall Barg Sli Spash oolFacility*

E0 0 0 05/220 50 0 17808 6480 13065 07/18 2010 4000 3210 08/29 7800 1570 5775*9/10 7308 16940 14800 010/16 2660 2856 2100 Sample location Figure 5.10. Density of zebra mussel veligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2013.*No Sample Collected at EOF in April or May; Construction Precluded Access 3.0 2.0 1.0 i i !Intake Structure/

Water*0.0 -Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir**

Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir 83/26 2.2 0.0 0.0 o4/30 0.4 0.0 0.0 05/22 0.9 0.0 0.0 06/26 0.9 0.0 0.0 m7/18 0.4 0.0 0.0 08/29 0.0 0.0 0.0.9/10 0.4 0.0 0.0 010/16 0.9 0.0 0.0 011/4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Figure 5.11. Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2013.*Intake not sampled in August due to high water.**Unit 1 Cooling Tower not sampled in October due to unit shutdown 15 10 5 0/v A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I=_I Barge Slip**Splash Pool Emergency Outfall Facility*03/26 9 0 0 04/30 0 0 0 05/22 0 0 0 06/26 1 0 0 07/18 12 0 0 E8/29 0 0 0*9/10 2 0 0 E10/16 1 0 0 011/4 1 0 0 Figure 5.12. Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2013.*No sample collected at EOF in April or May; Construction Precluded Access**No sample taken at Barge Slip in August due to High Water.

10.0 PERMITS Attachment 10.1: PERMITS & CERTIFICATES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE Registration Number Regulator/Description Expiration BVPS EPA generator identification Resource Conservation

& Recovery Act PAR000040485 (RCRA) Identification number for regulated waste activity.

Also used by PA DEP Indefinite to monitor regulated waste activity under the Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act (SWMA).04-02474 BVPS EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLA/EPCRA/SARA.

Used for SARA Tier II reporting and emergency planning.

Indefinite 04-02475 FE Long Term Distribution Center/Warehouse (22) EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLA/EPCRA/SARA.

Used for SARA Tier II reporting and Indefinite emergency planning.PA0025615 BVPS NPDES Permit number under US EPA and PA DEP. 12/27/2006 Continued pending approval of reniewal application.

04-13281 BVPS Unit I PA DEP Facility Identification

& certificate number for regulated storage tanks. Indefinite 04-13361 BVPS Unit 2 PA DEP Facility Identification

& certificate number for regulated storage tanks. Indefinite OP-04-00086 PA DEP State Only Synthetic Minor Permit for emergency auxiliary boilers, 10/12/2012 emergency diesel generators, paint shop and other miscellaneous sources. Continited pending approval of renewal application.

N/A PA DEP Open Burning Permit for operation of the BVPS Fire School- annual application and renewal 01/01/2015 042009 450 002RT US Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Registration 06/30/2015 200100242 US Army Permit for maintenance dredging (With Encroachment/Submerged Lands 12/31/2021 Agreement

1. 0477705, this allows maintenance dredging.).

0477705 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and Indefinite maintenance of current barge slip. (With US Army Permit #200100242, this allows maintenance dredging.)

06786A Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for transmission line over Ohio Indefinite River @ Mile 34.5 18737 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for Unit I intake and discharge Indefinite (main combined intake and outfall structures) 0475711 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and Indefinite maintenance of Unit 2 auxiliary intake GP020409201 For construction and maintenance of boat ramp near barge slip. Indefinite

-End Table -

APPENDIX A SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME'OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2013 BVPS 1 Nomenclature follows Robins et al. (1991)

Appendix A SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME 1 OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2013 BVPS Page 1 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Lepisosteidae (gars)Lepisosteus osseus Hiodontidae (mooneyes)

Hiodon alosoides H. tergisus Clupeidae (herrings)

Alosa chrysochloris A. pseudoharengus Dorosoma cepedianum Cyprinidae (carps and minnows)Campostoma anomalum Carassius auratus Ctenopharyngodon idella Notropis spilopterus Cyprinus carpio C. carpio x C. auratus Luxilus chrysocephalus Macrhybopsis storeriana Nocomis micropogon Notemigonus crysoleucas Notropis atherinoides N. buccatus N. hudsonius N. rubellus N. stramineus N. volucellus Pimephales notatus P. promelas Rhinichthys atratulus Semotilus atromaculatus Catostomidae (suckers)Carpiodes carpio C. cyprinus C. velifer Catostomus commersonii Hypentelium nigricans Ictiobus bubalus I. niger Minytrema melanops Common Name Longnose gar Goldeye Mooneye Skipjack herring Alewife Gizzard shad Central stoneroller Goldfish Grass carp Spotfin shiner Common carp Carp-goldfish hybrid Striped shiner Silver chub River chub Golden shiner Emerald shiner Silverjaw minnow Spottail shiner Rosyface shiner Sand shiner Mimic shiner Bluntnose minnow Fathead minnow Blacknose dace Creek chub River carpsucker Quillback Highfin carpsucker White sucker Northern hogsucker Smallmouth buffalo Black buffalo Spotted sucker Appendix A (Continued)

Page 2 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Moxostoma anisurum M. carinatum M. duquesnei M. erythrurum M. macrolepidotum Ictaluridae (bullhead catfishes)

Ameiurus catus A. furcatus A. melas A. natalis A. nebulosus Ictalurus punctatus Noturus flavus Pylodictis olivaris Esocidae (pikes)Esox lucius E. masquinongy E. lucius x E. masquinongy Salmonidae (trouts)Oncorhynchus mykiss Percopsidae (trout-perches)

Percopsis omiscomaycus Cyprinodontidae (killifishes)

Fundulus diaphanus Atherinidae (silversides)

Labidesthes sicculus Percichthyidae (temperate basses)Morone chrysops M. saxatilis M. saxatilis x M. chrysops Centrarchidae (sunfishes)

Ambloplites rupestris Lepomis cyanellus L. gibbosus L. macrochirus L. microlophus L. gibbosus x L. microlophus Common Name Silver redhorse River redhorse Black redhorse Golden redhorse Shorthead redhorse White catfish Blue catfish Black bullhead Yellow bullhead Brown bullhead Channel catfish Stonecat Flathead catfish Northern pike Muskellunge Tiger muskellunge Rainbow trout Trout-perch Banded killifish Brook silverside White bass Striped bass Striped bass hybrid Rock bass Green sunfish Pumpkinseed Bluegill Redear sunfish Pumpkinseed-redear sunfish hybrid I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A (Continued)

Page 3 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Micropterus dolomieu M. punctulatus M. salmoides Pomoxis annularis P. nigromaculatus Percidae (perches)Etheostoma blennioides E. nigrum E. zonale Perca flavescens Percina caprodes P. copelandi Sander canadense S. vitreum S. canadense x S. vitreum Sciaenidae (drums)Aplodinotus grunniens Common Name Smallmouth bass Spotted bass Largemouth bass White crappie Black crappie Greenside darter Johnny darter Banded darter Yellow perch Logperch Channel darter Sauger Walleye Saugeye Freshwater drum 1 Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1991)