ML15314A648

FPL-024G - Turkey Point Plant; Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report, Units 3&4 Uprate Project (August 2014) - Pages 4-1 to 9-4

ML15314A648
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	08/31/2014
From:	Florida Power & Light Co
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-250-LA, 50-251-LA, ASLBP 15-935-02-LA-BD01, RAS 28503
Download: ML15314A648 (287)

Text

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report FPL-024G for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4

4. ECOLOGICAL MONITORING The purpose of ecological monitoring was to identify existing baseline conditions and evaluate potential impacts, if any, as a result of the Uprate. Ecological monitoring was conducted to

1) establish the Pre-Uprate status of ecological conditions and biotic components, 2) determine the extent to which, if any, CCS operations may impact conditions and components, and

3) establish Post-Uprate conditions to determine the extent to which Uprate implementation may result in impacts and changes to these conditions and components. Biotic components of primary interest were marsh vegetation in adjacent wetlands and mangroves, and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in Biscayne Bay.

This section includes data from the Post-Uprate sampling period, which includes four terrestrial ecological monitoring events (August 2013, November 2013, February 2014, and May 2014; Table 4.1-1), and two sampling events in Biscayne Bay (September 2013 and April 2014). An overview of Post-Uprate ecological conditions is provided, and Pre-Uprate conditions are presented as either an average or a minimum and maximum value range for all calculated values for comparison with the Post-Uprate data.

4.1 Marsh, Mangroves, and Tree Islands Plot establishment and monitoring setup is provided in detail in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). Per the Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009a), 12 transects were established to capture ecological characteristics and changes over time across the landscape surrounding the Turkey Point Power Plant (Figure 1.1-4). A total of 16 marsh, 4 tree island, and 12 mangrove 20-meter-by-20-meter (20x20) plots were established along six marsh and six mangrove transects. Nested within each 20x20 plot are four 1-meter-by-1-meter (1x1) subplots and four 5-meter-by-5-meter (5x5) subplots. The 5x5 subplots were set up to capture changes in the woody species, and the 1x1 subplots were designed to measure changes within the herbaceous community. Of the 32 20x20 plots, six were established within reference transects (four in the marsh and two within the mangroves). For the Post-Uprate, a reduction in ecological monitoring was implemented (Table 1.1-1). As part of the reduction, the mangrove site measurements were limited to once a year. Marsh vegetation measurements were still conducted on a quarterly basis while tree islands were sampled semi-annually. Ionic analyses were limited to chloride and sodium, and stable isotopic analyses were eliminated from all sites; nutrients and tritium still continue to be sampled at all sites.

4-1

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 4.1.1 Methods and Materials 4.1.1.1 Vegetation Sampling For herbaceous subplots, all individuals of the dominant and co-dominant herbaceous emergent plants were counted. Plots to the west of the CCS and the reference plots primarily consisted of sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense); in some plots during certain events, sawgrass was co-dominant with spikerush (Eleocharis cellulosa) (Table 4.1-2). In plots to the south, saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) was the dominant herbaceous vegetation in the 1x1 subplots within the mangrove plots.

In the 1x1 plots, either 30% of the plants or 15 individuals (whichever value was greater) of the dominant species were tagged. Tagged plants were measured for the parameters needed to calculate biomass estimates. Parameters required for the biomass equations varied with species, but measurements included length, width, diameter at base, diameter at tip, and number of live leaves. Biomass estimates were subsequently used to calculate plot productivity and turnover in grams per square meter (g/m2).

For the woody species, three trees were tagged in each 5x5 subplot and up to six branches per tree were tagged. Only dominant species were individually measured. Tree species selection was based on the dominance of each species, and individuals of a species were chosen based on which general tree sizes represented the highest percentages of biomass in the subplot. For example, if 60% of the coverage of red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) in a subplot was made up of small trees and 40% of the subplot was made up of large trees, two small trees and one large tree were tagged. Canopy width and length (and depth for white mangrove [Laguncularia racemosa] only), height, main stem diameter, and number of branches were recorded for each tagged tree to obtain tree biomass based on published allometric equations (Coronado-Molina et al. 2004).

Additional information about biomass and productivity calculations for dominant woody and herbaceous species is provided in both the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012) and Appendix J.

4.1.1.2 Porewater Sampling Field specific conductance and temperature were recorded at 0, 30, and 60 centimeter (cm) depths, and additional samples were collected at 30 cm for nutrient analyses per the Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009a) and were modified per the Post-Uprate reductions (SFWMD 2013b and c; Table 1.1-1). Samples were collected from the northeast 1x1 and 5x5 subplots at all sites. The method to collect porewater is detailed in Appendix A of the QAPP (FPL 2013b) and the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). Less porewater is required for each sample in the Post-Uprate due to the reduction in number of analytes.

At each subplot, a peristaltic pump was connected to a PushPoint Sampler (PushPoint Sampler PPX36, M.H.E. Products, East Tawas, Michigan) using polyethylene and silicon tubing. Low volume samples (approximately 50 milliliters [mL]) were collected at 0 and 60 cm within both the 1x1 and 5x5 subplots for specific conductance and temperature readings. These readings 4-2

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 were collected using a conductance/temperature sensor connected to a hand-held console (AT100 probe and Rugged Reader console, In-Situ Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado). New tubing and a PushPoint Sampler cleaned using FDEP FC1000 was used to collect samples at 30 cm. Once the PushPoint Sampler was inserted to 30-cm depth, water was pumped for several seconds prior to collection to clear excess sediment from the tubing, and a small volume was collected for conductance and temperature readings. For the nutrient analysis, a 200- to 450-mL porewater sample was collected in a pre-cleaned, 1-liter sample bottle from both the 1x1 and the 5x5 subplots at a 30-cm depth interval, for a total composite sample volume of 400 to 900 mL.

When sampling nutrients, a pH reading was made using a pH meter (Extech© PH220, FLIR Systems, Waltham, Massachusetts) and was recorded on the field datasheets. The pH value is used to calculate ammonia and is therefore only recorded during nutrient sampling events. The composite sample was distributed into the sample bottles using the same tubing and pump used for sample collection at 30 cm. Once the sample was distributed, the water level was marked on each sample bottle to help the lab determine if water was lost or gained (from melted ice) during transport. The sample bottles were then placed in sealed plastic bags and were stored per their preservation requirements for laboratory analysis.

4.1.1.3 Statistical Analysis Differences among sites were examined statistically using NCSS 9.0 (NCSS LLC, Kaysville, Utah). Data were examined to determine if there were differences between Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate data using repeated measures analyses-of-variance (ANOVAs).

4.1.2 Results and Discussion 4.1.2.1 Community Description The key vegetation communities in each of the general habitats are shown in Table 4.1-2 and a complete list of species is provided in Appendix L. Transects F2, F3, F4, and F6 were freshwater marsh transects dominated by sawgrass, although scrub woody species were periodically encountered. Although the F1 transect was designated as freshwater habitat, mangroves were present in both plots along this transect. F5 was primarily a mangrove plot, dominated by needlegrass rush (Juncus roemerianus), saltgrass, red mangrove, and white mangrove. Dense periphyton mats were observed among the vegetation in the F2, F3, F4, and F6 plots, but were not present in either F1 or F5 because of the higher salinity environments found along these two transects due to impoundment. All trees in the M transects were scrub mangroves, dominated mostly by the red mangrove (Table 4.1-2).

The Shannon-Wiener Index (SWI) of Diversity and species evenness were calculated from the plant communities in the 1x1 and 5x5 subplots located in the northeast corner of each plot.

Eleven total species of woody and herbaceous plants were documented in the northeast corners of the marsh subplots during the November 2013 sampling event. In the freshwater marsh-mangrove F plots (F1 and F5), red mangrove and sawgrass were the two species present. In the mangrove plots, red mangrove was the most prevalent species (Table 4.1-3). Diversity ranged 4-3

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 from one to four species within a plot and from one to six species when comparing transects (Table 4.1-3).

The SWI is a measure of the probability that a randomly sampled individual will be of a particular species. For instance, an SWI value of 0 indicates that only one species is present with no uncertainty as to what species a randomly sampled individual will be. Values can range from 0 to 4.5 but, in the transects measured, SWI was low and all transects had SWI values less than 1.5 (Table 4.1-4). In the marsh plots, diversity was lowest in the F4 plots and the reference transect F6 plots (SWI = 0), as all plots along the transect were dominated by a single species, sawgrass. Overall, the relatively low SWI values indicate low species diversity and low abundance of non-dominant species (i.e., most plots are dominated by sawgrass, with spikerush sparsely present). Diversity was highest in the marsh at transect F3 (SWI = 0.742), as this transect had four species recorded across all plots. Diversity was also low in the mangrove plots, which were dominated by red mangrove with white and black mangrove sparsely present. M5-1 was the most diverse mangrove plot with four species (Table 4.1-3). The community with the highest diversity was the marsh-mangrove mix which had three (F1) and six (F5) species along those transects. F5 was the most diverse transect, as it was composed of a mix of woody and non-woody species within the different plots. Although the SWI values have fluctuated each year, the overall trends have remained consistent throughout the entire monitoring period (Table 4.1-4).

Species evenness is a measure of how evenly distributed (numerically) each species is at a site.

A species evenness of 1 means an equal number of individuals of each species is present. The low evenness values of the mangrove plots indicate one highly dominant species (red mangrove) with other species sparsely intermixed. Higher evenness values for some of the marsh plots show that at plots such as F1-1, F3-1, and F3-3, most species present are well-represented (Table 4.1-4). Species evenness cannot be calculated when only one species is present in a plot, which is the case for both the F6 and M6 reference transects. The mangrove plots had the lowest species evenness, while the marsh sites had the highest (Table 4.1-4). These trends have remained consistent throughout the entire monitoring period.

4.1.2.2 Freshwater Marsh Sampling Sawgrass was the primary herbaceous species measured in the marsh plots; therefore, to focus on landscape trends, discussion of the herbaceous vegetation is limited to sawgrass. Sawgrass cover was consistently 25%, and average vegetation height for each sampling event never exceeded 1.0 meter (m) (Tables 4.1-5 and 4.1-6, respectively). These vegetation patterns are consistent with the sparse sawgrass community commonly observed in Florida (Olmsted and Armentano 1997).

Sawgrass percent cover values have remained consistent during the entire monitoring period.

The percent cover values are reported as percentage categories per the QAPP (FPL 2013b; Table 4.1-5). During the Post-Uprate period, values remained the same with the exception of small variations at F3-3, F6-1, and F6-3 (Table 4.1-5). Changes in percentage categories observed 4-4

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 between the Pre-Uprate and the Post-Uprate events are present, but are due to incremental and/or seasonal changes in percent cover and not due to rapid decline/growth.

Sawgrass height varied significantly by site, with F4-1 and F1-2 being the tallest plots and F3-1 being the shortest (Table 4.1-6). Most sites have been consistently trending downward with the exception of F4-1, F1-2, F6-2, and F6-3, which show a more irregular pattern that is possibly linked to wet/dry seasonal variations. The reason for the downward trend is unclear as other parameters that are related to height (porewater nutrients, live biomass, and total biomass) do not reflect the same trend. Notably, although the field crews take as much care and precaution as possible not to damage the vegetation, anthropogenic factors related to repeated sampling of the same plants over time could cause the decrease. However, despite this trend of decreasing height across the landscape, there have been no differences in the rank order of vegetation heights between the Pre and the Post-Uprate. Plants in F3, F2, and F6 (reference transect) have always had shorter sawgrass relative to F1 and F4 for the Pre-Uprate and the Post-Uprate periods. These differences may be explained by inherent hydrologic and biogeochemical interactions within each plot and are not related to the Uprate or CCS operations.

Both live and total sawgrass biomass were calculated using the four equations presented in Table 4.1-7. These equations were derived from semi-annual plant harvests conducted in accordance with this project. Both live and total biomass follow the same general patterns across the landscape, with F4-1 and F1-2 having the highest values and F3-1 the lowest (Tables 4.1-8 and 4.1-9). This overall trend has remained consistent during the Pre-Uprate and the Post-Uprate monitoring. A statistical test was performed to determine whether Pre-Uprate live sawgrass biomass is significantly different from Post-Uprate live sawgrass biomass. The analysis showed there is no significant difference in sawgrass live biomass between the two time periods (F1,125=0.22; P>0.05). The Model Lands Marsh adjacent to the Turkey Point plant has similar hydrology and community composition as the C-111 Basin and Taylor Slough (Childers et al.

2006). Although the Model Lands is smaller in size than either the C-111 or Taylor Slough, these landscapes are similarly characterized by sawgrass marshes; tree islands; and hydrology driven by rain, canal overflow, and surface water runoff (Childers et al. 2006). Historic live biomass data at study sites in the C-111 Basin and Taylor Slough (located west of the study area) generally range from 100 to 300 grams per square meter (g/m2) annually (Childers et al. 2006).

Live biomass during the Pre-Uprate and the Post-Uprate periods was less than 100 g/m2 at 10 of the 14 sawgrass plots, including all three plots along reference transect F6 (Table 4.1-9). None of the sawgrass plots exceeded 300 g/m2 (Table 4.1-9).

Since ecological sampling initially began in November 2010, sawgrass Annual Net Primary Productivity (ANPP) is calculated from November of each year. ANPP could not be calculated for the Post-Uprate because the time period does not include a November-to-November timeframe. Instead, productivity was calculated for the six months from November 2013 to May 2014. Data from the same six-month period between November and May during Pre-Uprate monitoring are included in Table 4.1-10 for comparison. Annual mean productivity from the C-111 Basin typically ranges from about 200 to 500 g/m2, while mean productivity at Taylor Slough within Everglades National Park was typically less than 300 g/m2 (Childers et al. 2006).

The values from this study are consistent with the values observed at Taylor Slough.

4-5

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Sclerophylly is a measure of leaf hardness or toughness that reflects climate and nutrient conditions. Low sclerophylly values represent more ideal growing conditions compared to high sclerophylly values. Sclerophylly of sawgrass was higher in May 2014 than in November 2013 for all F1, F2, and F4 plots, and lower in May relative to November for all F3 and F6 plots (Table 4.1-11). Sawgrass sclerophylly was significantly higher during the Post-Uprate monitoring period compared to the Pre-Uprate (F1,69=112.1; P<0.0001). The 12 months during the Post-Uprate monitoring have been about 40% drier relative to the previous year, i.e., 40.15 inches from June 2013 to May 2014 relative to 70.38 inches from June 2012 to May 2013 at the S-20 rainfall station (Figure 2.4-4). The increase in sclerophylly is most likely due to the drier meteorological conditions that were present during the Post-Uprate time period.

The leaf nutrient trends in November 2013 and May 2014 are consistent with data from the Pre-Uprate period. A summary of sawgrass leaf nutrients and stable isotopes is presented in Tables 4.1-12 through 4.1-18. C3 photosynthetic plants (e.g., sawgrass) can have carbon isotope values between -34 parts per mille () and -22 (Smith and Epstein 1971), where -22 is representative of plants from desert conditions and -34 is indicative of tropical rainforest vegetation (Kohn 2010). Chang et al. (2009) found that carbon isotopes from sawgrass in the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge (LNWR) ranged from -30.1 to -24.5. The average range of carbon isotopes from sawgrass collected during November 2013 ranged from -27.3 to

-26.1 and from -27.8 to -26.3 in May 2014, within range of the plant community in the LNWR and the Pre-Uprate data (Table 4.1-15). The 15N found in sawgrass from the LNWR ranged from -5.3 to 7.7 while sawgrass adjacent to Turkey Point had an average range of -3.9 to -

0.83 in November 2013 and -5.8 to -0.8 in May 2014 (Table 4.1-16). The molar ratio of C:N never fell below 47:1 which is representative of mature plants with high lignin content (Table 4.1-17). Terrestrial environments are considered nitrogen-limited when the N:P ratio is below 14 and phosphorous-limited when the N:P ratio is above 16. All N:P ratios were well above 16, indicating a P-limited system (Table 4.1-18).

Porewater specific conductance and temperature collected from 30 cm depth within the sediment are presented in Tables 4.1-19 and 4.1-20. Statistical comparisons were performed to determine whether or not porewater specific conductance and temperature at a 30-cm depth changed significantly between Pre- and Post-Uprate monitoring. Because F5-1 and F5-2 are not representative of a freshwater marsh (their water chemistry and vegetation communities are more consistent with a brackish marsh) they were omitted from this analysis. Additionally, the tree island plots were not included in this analysis because they are not considered marsh habitat.

The analysis showed that Pre-Uprate porewater specific conductance was significantly higher than the Post-Uprate values (F1,116=15.43; P=0.002) while there was no significant difference in Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate porewater temperature (F1,116=0.37; P=0.660). The difference in specific conductance is likely driven by the high values observed during a drought in the Pre-Uprate monitoring period. CCS water is characterized by high specific conductance and temperature. The absence of higher specific conductance and temperature in the Post-Uprate porewater data suggests that the surrounding marsh is not influenced by the Uprate or CCS operations.

4-6

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Post-Uprate monitoring consists of sampling quarterly for sodium, chloride, and tritium; and bi-annually for nutrients (May and November). Porewater analytical data for August 2013 to May 2014 are presented in Tables 4.1-21 through 4.1-24. In some quarters, data are not available for sites (e.g., F2-4, F-3-4, F4-2) which were often too dry at 30 cm and did not yield enough porewater for analysis.

In the Post-Uprate, marsh transects west of the CCS (F2, F3, F4) generally had higher sodium and chloride values with distance from the L-31 Canal (Figures 4.1-1 and 4.1-2). The reference transect, F6, showed a similar trend across the landscape as well, with the farthest site from any canal, F6-3, having the highest values. The impounded north transect (plots F1-1 and F1-2) had lower sodium and chloride levels than the impounded plots to the south (F5-1 and F5-2).

Although considered marsh sites, the southern impounded plots were similar to the mangrove sodium and chloride values than the other marsh plots.

A repeated measures ANOVA was performed to evaluate Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate differences in porewater analytes. For all marsh analyses, the four impounded plots (F1-1, F1-2, F5-1, and F5-2) and the four tree island plots (F2-4, F3-4, F4-4, and F6-4) were omitted because the vegetative communities and the water chemistry found at these sites are different from marsh habitat. Sodium and chloride values were generally lowest during the wet season and highest in the dry season. The lowest annual values were observed during the wet season, i.e., either in August or November. There was no significant difference between Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate values for either sodium (F1,114=2.19; P=0.1667) or chloride (F1,114=4.56; P=0.0561) in the marsh.

Porewater nutrients (TKN, ammonia, and TP) were also analyzed to evaluate Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate differences. There was no difference in Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate TKN (F1,56=4.63; P=0.054) or TP (F1,56=2.76; P=0.1246) in the marsh sites, but Pre-Uprate ammonia was significantly higher than Post-Uprate ammonia (F1,44=118.67; P<0.001). In the Post-Uprate period, the average TN ranged from 1.68 mg/L at F1-1 to 4.67 mg/L at F3-2. The TN data from each plot show seasonal variability with higher concentrations occurring generally in or at the end of the wet season (i.e., November) sampling (Figure 4.1-3). The differences in the types of nitrogen and phosphorus available may be, in part, a consequence of regional meteorological conditions.

The porewater nutrient concentrations in the tree island plots are typically higher than the surrounding marsh. Ion concentrations vary seasonally with higher values observed in the dry season months (February and May) than the wet season (August and November).

The structure and composition of the sawgrass marsh communities within the study area have remained stable throughout the entire monitoring effort. Many of the fluctuations observed are due to seasonal and meteorological conditions. Overall, the vegetation characteristics summarized above (i.e., live biomass, productivity, leaf nutrient concentration), porewater chemistry, and community composition are representative of the hydrologically modified marshes found throughout southern Florida.

4-7

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 4.1.2.3 Mangrove Sampling Post-Uprate vegetation sampling at the M sites occurred during the November 2013 event while porewater sampling occurred in November 2013 and May 2014. Values from the same timeframes during the Pre-Uprate monitoring period are provided for comparison along with the Pre-Uprate value ranges. Red mangrove is the primary woody species measured in the mangrove plots; therefore, to focus on landscape trends, discussion of the woody vegetation is limited to red mangrove.

Percent cover has remained consistent during the Post-Uprate period for all sites (Table 4.1-25).

The cover also has not changed between the Pre- and the Post-Uprate time periods with the exception of M3-1. The change in percentage categories observed between Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate events at M3-1 is difficult to interpret due to the wide range of values included in each percentage category. Because of this, it is worth noting that the changes in percent cover classes that have occurred during the monitoring period are due to incremental and/or seasonal changes in percent cover and not due to rapid decline/growth.

Lugo and Snedaker (1974) classified a scrub mangrove forest as having trees that are less than 1.5 m (150 cm) tall. All of the trees measured within the study area are consistent with this classification. At the F sites, red mangrove height remained consistent throughout the Post-Uprate sampling period (within 9 cm), indicating that very little vertical growth/die-off has occurred during the Post-Uprate events (Table 4.1-26). A statistical test was performed to compare Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate red mangrove height at the M sites. The Post-Uprate height dataset consists of one event at the M sites (November 2013), therefore, the analysis included Pre-Uprate data from October 2010 and November 2011 to help balance the dataset while still representing similar seasons. The analysis showed that the trees are significantly taller Post-Uprate, suggesting that the dwarf mangrove populations within the study area are slowly growing and that no considerable die-off has occurred (F1,45=11.95; P<0.0001). Slow growth is expected in dwarf mangrove ecosystems due to the difficult growing conditions naturally found in these areas (McKee et al. 2002).

Red mangrove biomass was calculated using the allometric equation presented in Coronado-Molina et al. (2004). Seasonal fluctuations in red mangrove biomass are present, and while Post-Uprate biomass values for plots M2-1, M3-2, M4-2, and M5-2 are below the Pre-Uprate ranges for these sites, there are no consistent increasing or decreasing trends over time (Table 4.1-27).

A statistical test was conducted to compare Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate red mangrove biomass at the M sites. The Post-Uprate biomass dataset consists of one event at the M sites (November 2013), therefore, the analysis included Pre-Uprate data from October 2010 and November 2011 to help balance the dataset while still representing similar seasons. The analysis showed that Pre-Uprate biomass during the October 2010 and November 2011 events was higher than Post-Uprate biomass during the November 2013 event (F1,47=11.62; P=0.006). The difference is likely a result of the drier meteorological conditions during the November 2013 time period.

Sclerophylly measurements were performed during the November 2013 sampling event (Table 4.1-28). A statistical test was performed to compare Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate red mangrove 4-8

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 sclerophylly at the M sites. The Post-Uprate sclerophylly dataset consists of one event at the M-sites (November 2013), therefore, the analysis included Pre-Uprate data from October 2010 and November 2011 to help balance the dataset while still representing similar seasons. The Post-Uprate red mangrove sclerophylly values from the November 2013 event were significantly higher than the Pre-Uprate data, indicative of the mangrove leaves being thicker and more succulent (F1,45=11.95; P=0.005). This is most likely a result of the drier meteorological conditions during this time period.

Mangrove leaf nutrients, stable isotopes, and molar ratios for the November 2013 Post-Uprate event are presented in Tables 4.1-29 through 4.1-35. Carbon isotope data were within the normal range that C3 plants are known to have (-34 to -22), reaching as high as -24.8 and as low as -28.0. Carbon isotope total average over all Post-Uprate seasons was -25.8, which is representative of data from scrub red mangroves in Belize (-25.3 from Smallwood et al. 2003 and -26.4 from McKee et al. 2002). The N:P molar ratios of the leaves were well above 16, indicating that all mangrove sites are P-limited. Red mangrove 15N ranged from -9.95 to 3.2 and averaged -3.5. McKee et al. (2002) found average 15N values of -5.38 in similar scrub mangrove habitats. Low nitrogen isotope values are a consequence of the slow growth patterns and the resulting low nitrogen demand associated with scrub mangrove forests (McKee et al. 2002). The Post-Uprate leaf nutrient and isotope values are consistent with the Pre-Uprate data, and are within the ideal ranges established in the literature for similar dwarf mangrove plant communities (Smallwood et al. 2003; McKee et al. 2002).

A statistical test was performed to determine whether or not porewater specific conductance and temperature at a 30-cm depth changed significantly between Pre- and Post-Uprate monitoring.

The Post-Uprate porewater dataset consists of two events at the M sites (November 2013 and May 2014), so the analysis included Pre-Uprate data from October 2010 and May and November 2011 to help balance the dataset while still representing similar seasons. The analysis showed that Pre-Uprate porewater specific conductance was significantly higher than the Post-Uprate time period (F1,93=13.06, P=0.004), while porewater temperature was significantly higher in the Post-Uprate (F1,57=5.08, P=0.050). CCS water is characterized by both high specific conductance and temperature. The absence of higher specific conductance values coincident with higher temperatures in the Post-Uprate porewater data suggest that the higher porewater temperature is likely due to insular effects and not the Uprate or CCS operations. The higher specific conductance values in the Pre-Uprate period appear to be influenced by the 2011 drought.

Sodium and chloride values were higher in May 2014 relative to November 2013, most likely the consequence of seasonal meteorological conditions. Values in most of the transects were similar with the exception of M4 which is located in a basin and generally has standing water with limited tidal exchange. Overall Post-Uprate sodium and chloride values were lower than the Pre-Uprate values (F1,86=17.74; P=0.001 and F1,86=10.64; P=0.008); the highest values were observed in May and August 2011 after a dry spring earlier that year.

There was an increase in TN and TP from November 2013 to May 2014 during the Post-Uprate.

This slight increase, similar to the observations for sodium and chloride, may have been due to 4-9

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 the drier conditions in the mangroves. A comparison of the Post-Uprate (November 2013) and the Pre-Uprate (May and November 2011) events showed that the Post-Uprate ammonia and TP levels were lower than the Pre-Uprate (F1,46=119.23; P=0.000 and F1,56=61.80; P<0.0001), while Post-Uprate TKN was not significantly different from Pre-Uprate values (F1,56=1.87; P=0.200).

This is similar to the observations in the marsh over the same time period and is most likely a meteorologically driven phenomenon.

The structure and composition of the scrub mangrove communities within the study area have remained stable throughout the entire monitoring effort. The system is driven by concurrent stressors, including nutrient deficiency, high salinities, and saturated soil. The vegetation characteristics of the study area are consistent with scrub mangrove forests found along the coastal fringe of south Florida and the Florida Keys (Lugo and Snedaker 1974).

4.2 Biscayne Bay Pre-Uprate ecological monitoring in Biscayne Bay was conducted bi-annually between September 2010 and September 2011 (two fall events and one spring event) and Post-Uprate monitoring was conducted in September 2013 and May 2014 (single fall and spring events). The sampling setup was based on the approved Monitoring Plan (FPL 2010) and followed the QAPP (FPL 2011a, 2013b); three study areas (BB1 to BB3) within Biscayne Bay and Card Sound, as well as a reference site in Barnes Sound (BB4) were selected for ecological sampling (Figure 1.3-1).

In the Pre-Uprate, monitoring was conducted along five shore-parallel transects within each study area to document changes in SAV cover and faunal composition with increasing distance from the CCS. However, as no ecologically significant differences were observed in the Pre-Uprate period, all faunal monitoring and three of the five (i.e., 12 of the 20) SAV transects in each area were eliminated in the Post-Uprate, leaving the two nearest shore-parallel transects in each area (Figure 4.2-1). In this section, the results of the Post-Uprate monitoring (fall 2013 and spring 2014) at the remaining eight transects are compared and then contrasted with Pre-Uprate observations.

Within each study area, two 2-kilometer-long, shore-parallel transects were used to monitor ecological conditions (Figure 1.3-1). These transects, designated a and b, were located 250 m and 500 m from shore, respectively. Each transect was divided into eight 250-m-long segments. A 1-m-square point was randomly selected along each 250-m segment as the permanent sampling location for all future sampling events (Table 4.2-1). These points were numbered 1 through 8. Thus, a sampling point designated as BB1-b-4 represents Area BB1, Transect b, and Sampling Point 4. This design produced a total of 16 sampling points per study area and 64 points for all areas combined.

4-10

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 4.2.1 Methods and Materials Data collection methods followed the QAPP (FPL 2013b) and were consistent with methods used for the Pre-Uprate Period and as reported in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012).

4.2.1.1 Physical Parameters and Surface Water Quality Data General environmental data were collected at each sampling point. This included tidal cycle, air temperature, wind speed and direction, and sky conditions. The tidal cycle (high, low, ebb, or flood tide) was recorded based on published tide tables. A NIST-certified thermometer was used to determine air temperature. Wind speed was estimated, and wind direction was determined by use of a compass. Sky conditions were noted as Clear (0% to 25% cloud cover), Partly Cloudy (25% to 50% cloud cover), Mostly Cloudy (50% to 75% cloud cover), or Overcast (more than 75% cloud cover). Notes were made of any precipitation during the sampling event.

Light attenuation was measured at a single, fixed sampling point (Sampling Point 4) along each transect. A LI-COR LI-1400 data logger was connected to a LI-COR LI-193 spherical sensor and a LI-COR LI-190 quantum sensor to measure light (micromoles per square meter per second

[µmols/m2/sec]) at depth and at the surface, simultaneously. The LI-193 sensor was mounted in a weighted, black frame, while the LI-190 sensor was placed in an unshaded area on the boat. In water depths less than 1.5 m, three measurements were taken: 0.3 m below the surface, mid-depth, and 0.3 m above the bottom. In water depths greater than 1.5 m, five measurements were taken at equidistant depths starting at 0.3 m below the surface and finishing at 0.3 m above the bottom. Records of light measurements were made as the sensor was lowered to each depth, and again as the sensor was raised for a total of six to ten readings per sampling point. Sampling depth and time of sampling were recorded for each paired surface and underwater reading. For this report, only surface, mid-depth, and bottom values are presented.

A Hach Quanta water quality meter was used to measure water quality at each sampling point.

Monitored variables included temperature (°C), specific conductance (millisiemens per centimeter [mS/cm], converted to µS/cm for reporting purposes), salinity (ppt), dissolved oxygen (DO; mg/L), pH, oxidation reduction potential (ORP; mV), and turbidity (nephelometric turbidity units [NTU]). Salinity was calculated (not measured directly) by the water quality meter using conductance and a temperature correction normalized to 15°C (PSS-78 scale; UNESCO method). Water column measurements were taken approximately 30 cm below the surface and 30 cm above the bottom.

4.2.1.2 Porewater Water Quality At each station, porewater was collected at 30 cm using the methods described in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). If sediment depth was less than 30 cm, the bottom was probed within a 2-5 m radius of the sampling point until the target depth could be reached. Porewater was extracted with a Pushpoint Sampler and measured with a Hach Quanta water quality meter while temperature was measured in-situ with a thermocouple datalogger (TCTemp1000, ThermoWorks Inc., Lindon, UT).

4-11

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Similar to the Pre-Uprate events (FPL 2012), after completing SAV/water quality sampling at all eight points on a transect, porewater specific conductance data were reviewed, and the location with the highest conductance value was selected as the sampling point for porewater. At each of these sampling points, the porewater sampler was inserted to a depth of 30 cm, and the tubing attached to the sipper was connected to a peristaltic pump on the boat. For each sample, 500 to 750 mL of porewater was extracted from three sampling locations (<0.5 m apart). After collection, the three porewater samples were combined and homogenized, and subsequently distributed into pre-labeled analyte containers for laboratory analyses in accordance with the QAPP (FPL 2013b). Samples were analyzed for the following variables: sodium, chloride, nitrate nitrite as N, ortho-phosphate (OP), unionized ammonia (NH3), Kjeldahl nitrogen, phosphorus, and tritium.

4.2.1.3 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Surveys and Ecological Observations Post-Uprate SAV surveys were conducted at 16 sampling points within each study area (eight/transect) using the same method applied during the Pre-Uprate monitoring (FPL 2012).

Four quarter-meter quadrats were thrown from the boat roughly equidistant within a 3-m radius around the marked sampling point. The SAV within each of the four quadrats was examined and percent cover score was recorded on underwater datasheets. Each of 26 pre-established categories of SAV (Table 4.2-2) used by the SFWMD, Florida Fish and Wildlife Fisheries Habitat Assessment Program, and the RER were scored using the Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance (BBCA) Index methodology previously described in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). To ensure consistency in assessments among FPL and the Agencies, BBCA scoring was done only by scientific divers who had previously attended annual Interagency Calibration Exercises hosted by the SFWMD in Key Largo (April 17, 2013, and May 22, 2014).

In addition to quantifying SAV coverage, sediment depth was considered an important variable in determining the relative abundance of seagrasses. During the two Post-Uprate sampling events, a rod was inserted into the substrate within each scored quadrat. Depth to refusal (i.e.,

underlying hardbottom) was recorded.

A qualitative characterization of benthic conditions surrounding each sampling point was made by a diver at the beginning of each SAV survey. This characterization, made out to the range of visibility, generally encompassed an area within a 10- to 15-m radius of the sampling point.

Observations were recorded under three main categories:

Overall conditions - radius and visibility (in feet) of the area that was assessed and the overall biotic coverage (Open, Fairly Open, Moderately Open, Mostly Covered, and Uniform);

Qualitative assessment of seagrass, drift algae, and Batophora coverage in the surveyed area (Sparse, Sparse to Moderate, Moderate to Dense); and Generalization of the amount of calcareous algae, sponges, corals, and gorgonians found in the area (None, Few, Many).

4-12

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 The substrate in the immediate vicinity of each sampling point was also qualitatively characterized by noting the presence/absence of the following sediment types: sandy, shell hash, silty, and rubble. If a handful of substrate was picked up, released, and settled relatively quickly with little drift, it was classified as sandy. If a plume was evident and it settled more slowly, it was classified as silty. Pockets of shell fragments mixed in with the sand were classified as shell hash, while rocks or hardbottom either exposed or just beneath a veneer of sediment were classified as rubble.

4.2.1.4 Statistical Analyses To ensure that unequal Pre- and Post-Uprate sample sizes did not influence statistical results, data from the two Pre-Uprate fall events were averaged to yield a single value for comparison with the single Pre-Uprate fall value. All variables were statistically analyzed using STATISTICA 64 Version 11 software (Statsoft, Inc.). Data were first tested to determine if they met requisite requirements for parametric testing, namely normality (Shapiro-Wilks Test) and homogeneity of variance (Levenes Test). The tests revealed that much of the data did not meet either assumption, and thus non-parametric tests were used instead. A Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA by Ranks Test was first used to determine if differences in measured variables existed among areas or when comparing Pre- and Post-Uprate events. Further analyses were conducted using a Multiple Comparisons of Mean Ranks Post-hoc Test to determine which differences were statistically significant.

Differences among areas were analyzed for all Pre- and Post-Uprate events combined, Pre-Uprate events only, and Post-Uprate events only. Within-area values were also compared for both the Pre- and Post-Uprate. The significance levels (i.e., P-values) for the analyses were then Bonferroni-corrected by dividing the number of analyses run on each dataset i.e., P = 0.05/2 =

0.025.

To further investigate seagrass distribution and relative abundance, depth to hardbottom was measured during Post-Uprate sampling events and then correlated with mean seagrass BBCA scores using the non-parametric Spearman Rank Order Correlation Test. The same test was used to correlate bottom water and corresponding porewater water quality measurements. The significance value used for the Spearman Rank Order Correlation Test was set at P 0.05.

Significant correlations were considered to be strong if r l0.6l, weak if r <l0.6l and > l0.2l, and very weak if r < l0.2l. Only statistically significant correlations are reported.

4.2.2 Results and Discussion 4.2.2.1 Surface Water Quality Sampling was conducted over all tidal cycles. The data presented herein are actual depths at the time of sampling, unadjusted for tides. Mean water depth for all study areas and transects combined during the fall 2013 and spring 2014 sampling events was 2.2 m (Table 4.2-3). Area BB1 had the shallowest mean depth (1.7 m), while BB3 had the greatest (2.8 m). For all study areas combined, 37% of all sampling points during Post-Uprate monitoring were in water depths of 1 to 2 m, 60% were in depths of 2.1 to 3 m, and only 3% were in depths greater than 3 m.

4-13

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Ambient surface light measurements during the fall 2013 sampling event ranged from 407 to 2,621 µmols/m2/sec, while the bottom water column values ranged from 166 to 1,296

µmols/m2/sec (Table 4.2-4). Average percent attenuation between ambient and bottom values for fall 2013 was greatest in Areas BB2 and BB3 (71% and 81%, respectively) and least in Area BB1 (48%). For spring 2014, the average percent attenuation was greatest in Area BB4 (56%)

and lowest in BB1 (37%). Area BB4 was characterized as having a relatively high silty sediment component. Even small amounts of suspended silt in the water from surface waves can affect the amount of light reaching the bottom. Regardless, these values do not suggest that light is limiting seagrass coverage.

Sediment depth and type also varied across the four areas monitored. Seventy percent (70%) of the points sampled in the fall 2013 event and 75% in the spring 2014 monitoring event were classified as sandy-shell hash (Table 4.2-5). Twenty-eight percent (28%) of sediments had a silty component in the fall 2013 event, and 16% were in that category in spring 2014; more than half of all silty sampling points were located in BB4. Similarly, 10% to 15% of sampling points during the fall 2013 and spring 2014 events had rubble present, mostly in Area BB4. Consistent with the Pre-Uprate (FPL 2012) observations, the BB4 reference transects within Barnes Sound had different characteristics from the other areas as it had a higher percentage of stations with both silty and rubble components.

Temperature Temperatures in Biscayne Bay surface waters have been shown to track the meteorological conditions regionally (see Section 2). In the Post-Uprate, mean surface and bottom water temperatures along each transect were on average approximately 3ºC to 5ºC warmer in the fall of 2013 (29.0°C to 30.2°C) relative to the spring 2014 (26.0°C to 28.0°C) event (Table 4.2-6).

These values are reflective of the observations from the automated surface water stations in Biscayne Bay (Section 2) and within the normal tolerance ranges of the biota living in the Bay.

As would be expected in a shallow, well-mixed water body, there was very little difference between mean surface and bottom water quality values along any transect for either the Pre- or Post-Uprate (Table 4.2-7). This consistency includes the reference transect which is within Barnes Sound, further supporting landscape scale influences on water temperatures.

Pre-Uprate surface water temperatures were significantly lower than the Post-Uprate because of colder temperatures in fall 2010 and spring 2011 (FPL 2012); the fall 2010 event was conducted in October and November 2010, which was later in the year than fall events in the subsequent years. Temperatures differed among areas in the Pre-Uprate but not in the Post-Uprate. Mean bottom water temperatures were lower in BB2 and BB3 during the Pre-Uprate (P=0.0012) compared to the reference study area (BB4). Consequently, differences were observed between the Pre- and Post-Uprate in BB2 (P=0.0116) and BB3 (P=0.0140); these differences, however, were small (<1.0°C) (Table 4.2-7). Care must be used in drawing any definitive conclusions from these results since the surface water temperature data (Tables 4.2-7 and 4.2-8) are from spot-measurements that are reflective of the conditions of the area and thus are a function of 4-14

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 sampling at different times of day, tidal stage, and prevailing weather conditions, which create considerable natural spatial and temporal variability in the data.

Specific Conductance and Salinity Mean water column specific conductance and its derivative, salinity, was lower in the fall 2013 sampling (wet season) compared to the spring 2014 (dry season) event, consistent with seasonal and regional hydrologic influences. Values ranged from 39,988 to 52,900 µS/cm (25.7 to 35.1) during the fall and from 52,863 to 59,613 µS/cm (35.0 to 39.9) during the spring (Table 4.2-9 and 4.2-10). BB4, however, had lower specific conductance than BB2 and BB3 (P=0.0005) during the Post-Uprate (Table 4.2-8), and BB3 (P=0.0047) during the Pre-Uprate. As BB4 is located in a different basin, Barnes Sound, further south than the other three transects, these consistent observations may be attributable to the hydrologic and hydrodynamic conditions of the basin, i.e., freshwater terrestrial runoff and longer residence time of water.

Dissolved Oxygen, pH, Oxidation-Reduction Potential and Turbidity Although seasonal differences were observed in the DO, pH, and ORP levels, these differences were not significant and the patterns were consistent seasonally for both the Pre- and the Post-Uprate. DO levels were slightly lower in the fall (4.9 to 6.2 mg/L) compared to the spring (5.3 mg/L to 6.3 mg/L) during Post-Uprate monitoring (Table 4.2-11), similar to the patterns observed for pH (Table 4.2-12). ORP values were higher in the fall (40.3 mV to 113.8 mV) compared to the spring (13.1 mV to 85.5 mV) (Table 4.2-13).

Water clarity has been high, as reflected by the very low turbidity values for both the Pre-Uprate (FPL 2012) and the Post-Uprate (Table 4.2-14) at all sites. The only values above 0.0 NTU recorded during Post-Uprate monitoring occurred on Transect a in Area BB3 during the spring 2014, and the mean bottom value for that transect was only 1.4 NTU.

4.2.2.2 Porewater Quality Average porewater temperatures differed 2ºC to 5ºC between seasons (29.2°C to 31.5°C in fall 2013, to 27.2°C to 27.5°C in spring 2014) (Table 4.2-15), tracking values from the overlying surface water. Porewater temperatures during the fall 2013 and spring 2014 sampling events differed in range from -2.6°C to 1.0°C during the fall and from -1.4°C to 0.6°C during the spring compared with corresponding bottom water column temperatures (Table 4.2-16).

All Post-Uprate porewater temperatures were within the range of values observed during the Pre-Uprate. Average porewater temperatures among BB1, BB2, and BB3 were very similar (<0.5ºC difference) for both the Pre- and Post-Uprate. Mean values at the reference site BB4, however, were higher compared to the other transects in the Post-Uprate (fall: 1.3ºC, spring: 0.3ºC). This reference site is located farthest from the CCS in Barnes Sound and has very different sediment characteristics (i.e., silty) compared to the other three areas which were more open, hardbottom habitats. The sediment characteristics as well as lower hydrologic exchange in Barnes Sound may contribute to the differences observed at BB4.

4-15

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 There was little contrast in seasonal differences between porewater temperature and the overlying water between Pre- and Post-Uprate monitoring, particularly within those areas closest to the CCS (Table 4.2-17). These overall findings, coupled with a strong positive correlation (R=0.77) between bottom water column temperature and porewater temperature (p<0.0001; Table 4.2-18), suggest that temperatures in the overlying water column are likely the primary driver of porewater temperatures.

A comparison of Pre- and Post-Uprate bottom water specific conductance showed that the rank order of areas was always fairly consistent over the last four years; the freshest site was BB4, followed by BB1, BB2, and BB3 (Table 4.2-11). Average values in BB1 were similar to BB4 and BB2 for both the Pre- and the Post-Uprate; values observed in BB1 are consistent with the automated data from TPBBSW-10 in Biscayne Bay (Figure 2.2-7) and of the area in general.

During the fall 2013 sampling event, porewater specific conductance ranged from 46,963 to 52,550 µS/cm and during the spring 2014 event, from 49,550 to 57,825 µS/cm (Table 4.2-19);

these patterns are seasonally consistent with observations from the Pre-Uprate and with the automated data from the surface water Biscayne Bay probes (see Section 2). In fall 2013, porewater specific conductance was higher than the bottom water column values at BB1 and BB4, while only slight differences (<1%) were found in the other two areas (Table 4.2-20).

During the spring 2014 sampling event, mean porewater specific conductance was lower than the corresponding bottom water column value in all four study areas, with the largest mean difference (3181 µS/cm) found in the reference area (BB4). This indicates that there were considerable seasonal differences in the relationship of bottom water column and porewater specific conductance Post-Uprate, likely caused by the insular effects of sediments. There was a strong positive correlation (R=0.84) between bottom water column and porewater mean specific conductance within all areas (p<0.0001; Table 4.2-18) and the similarity of surface and bottom water column conductance values suggests that porewater specific conductance is largely influenced by conditions in the overlying water column.

Chloride concentrations ranged from an average of 18,900 mg/L to 22,250 mg/L during Post-Uprate period. These data overlapped with the values observed during the Pre-Uprate. Most of the areas had similar chloride values for the Pre- and the Post-Uprate with the exception of BB4, which had slightly lower values (Table 4.2-8). Similarly, there were no significant sodium differences among areas during either the Pre- or the Post-Uprate sampling periods (Table 4.2-8) and no significant changes within any study area following the Uprate (Table 4.2-7).

Porewater nutrient results for fall 2013 and spring 2014 are presented in Table 4.2-21 and comparisons between Pre- and Post-Uprate values are presented in Table 4.2-22. There were no differences in TN and TP concentrations between the Pre- and Post-Uprate, although the nitrogen speciation patterns did differ slightly; more ammonia was observed in the Post-Uprate relative to the Pre-Uprate. Tritium values were not available for either the fall or spring Post-Uprate events.

4-16

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 4.2.2.2 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Study Area Characterization Study Area BB1 can generally be described as embayment-like and is somewhat more sheltered than the other study areas, as portions are located west of the Arsenicker Islands and south of the Turkey Point peninsula (Figure 4.2-1). It is also the shallowest of the study areas (Table 4.2-3).

Transects within this area had sparse to moderate macrophyte coverage throughout for both the Pre- and the Post-Uprate. Turtle grass, Thalassia testudinum, was present in 97% of quadrats during the fall 2013 and the spring 2014 sampling events (Table 4.2-23). Shoal grass, Halodule wrightii, was also present but much less widespread, and bottom coverage never exceeded 5%.

The nearshore transects in BB2 had many open areas, with drift algae, gorgonians, sponges, and sparse seagrass. Shoal grass was present in about 33% of the quadrats during the fall 2013 and the spring 2014 sampling events, and was most abundant along the nearshore transect but coverage never exceeded 5%. Turtle grass coverage in BB2 was greater in the fall 2013 (36% of all quadrats), than in the following spring (25% of all quadrats).

Area BB3 is the deepest of the four study areas (mean depth 2.8 m; Table 4.2-3). Turtle grass occurred in about 73% of the quadrats during fall 2013 and spring 2014 (Table 4.2-23). Shoal grass was largely absent, occurring in just a few quadrats along the transect farthest from shore.

Both BB4 transects were composed of silty substrates, with rubble and small corals scattered throughout. Turtle grass was present in about 90% of the quadrats during the fall 2013 and the spring 2014 sampling events (Table 4.2-23), while shoal grass was largely absent during both events.

Although seagrasses were widely observed, they occurred primarily in sparse or sparse to moderate assemblages around the sampling points used for this study. For the fall 2013 sampling event, Areas BB2 and BB4 had the highest percentage of observations of sparse seagrass (87.5%

and 93.8%, respectively) and, conversely, the lowest percentages of sparse to moderate coverage (12.5% and 6.3%, respectively); no points were scored as moderate to dense (Table 4.2-24).

Area BB1 was the only area where seagrass was characterized as moderate to dense during the fall 2013 monitoring event (12.5%). For the spring 2014 sampling event, Areas BB2 and BB3 had the highest percentage of points scored as sparse (87.5% and 81.3%, respectively). Areas BB1 and BB4 had 25% and 31.3%, respectively, scored as sparse to moderate coverage, and again, BB1 was the only area where moderate to dense seagrass was present (12.5%).

Calcareous algae was ubiquitous throughout the project area, with all areas listed as having either a few or many present (Table 4.2-24). During the fall 2013 sampling event, 68.8% to 100% of survey points within the study area were characterized as having many calcareous algae present.

Similar results were obtained during the spring 2014 event, although a smaller percentage of points were classified as having many present.

Drift algae was present in all areas for both fall 2013 and spring 2014 (Table 4.2-24). Batophora was widespread in all areas and ranged from sparse to moderate/dense coverage. Overall, the 4-17

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 fall 2013 event had more Batophora present in the survey areas than the spring 2014 sampling event, with Areas BB1 and BB2 having the highest percentage of moderate to dense coverage.

Sponges were prevalent in all of the areas, with most points having either a few or many present.

Gorgonians (soft corals) occurred less frequently and were completely absent for all points in areas BB1 and BB4. Stony corals were found in all areas, but less frequently in BB1 than the other three areas. The relative abundance of both stony and soft corals within the study area relates largely to the amount of exposed hardbottom present. Those areas with relatively large amounts of unconsolidated sediments, such as Area BB1, have fewer corals than areas where exposed hardbottom is more expansive.

Macrophyte Coverage and Chemistry Average total macrophyte (seagrass and macroalgae) cover ranged between 5% and 50% in fall 2013 and spring 2014 (Table 4.2-25). BBCA values at BB1, BB2, and BB4 did not differ significantly across the landscape in the last year, but BB3 was slightly lower compared to the other three areas (Table 4.2-5). Within each area, there were no differences in BB1 and BB2 between the Pre- and Post-Uprate; BB3, however, showed a decrease during the Post-Uprate relative to the Pre-Uprate. At the same time, BB4 showed an increase from the Pre-Uprate to the Post-Uprate. The lowered BBCA values in BB3 and increased values in BB4 are attributable to the Post-Uprate macroalgae cover at these area (Table 4.2-25), driven by changes in drift macroalgae cover (Table 4.2-24). Drift macroalgae cover can be highly variable as the algae are not attached and can be moved by prevailing winds and tides. These conditions can be greatly influenced depending on the wind conditions and tidal cycles before and during the sampling event.

A better assessment of the Pre- and Post-Uprate conditions is a comparison of the attached seagrass community. During the Post-Uprate, seagrass cover did not differ among sites in the fall, but in the spring, BBCA values were slightly lower for most of the areas (Table 4.2-25).

These differences are attributable to the phonological growth patterns of the seagrassess as a function of the growing season; the fall 2013 sampling captures cover at the end of the growing season, while the seagrasses during spring 2014 sampling were just starting to grow back after the winter die-off. Depending on the site-specific conditions, the seagrasses may grow back slower in some areas than in others.

A comparison of the Pre- and Post-Uprate seagrass cover showed that BBCA values did not differ between the Pre- and the Post-Uprate, although there were differences among areas. Area BB1 had the highest cover, followed by BB3, BB4, and BB2 and these patterns were consistent over the monitoring period, indicating fairly stable conditions over the last four years. The SAV conditions observed are typical of those reported elsewhere in South Florida.

The seagrass cover in the study areas was primarily a consequence of Thalassia cover. Robblee and Browder (2007) found Thalassia generally to be the most abundant seagrass present at their monitoring locations in both Biscayne Bay and Florida Bay (frequency of occurrence 80% to 98%). High cover and low-standing crop of seagrass is typical of Biscayne Bay and has been 4-18

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 attributed to the shallow depth of sediments. As the Thalassia rhizosphere typically extends 25 to 40 cm into the substrate (Enriquez et al. 2001; Robblee and Browder 2007), this grass cannot effectively colonize and grow in areas where only a thin veneer of substrate exists over the hardbottom. A positive correlation (R=0.79; P < 0.0001) was observed between seagrass BBCA scores and sediment depth across all areas (Table 4.2-17), suggesting that seagrass coverage within the study area was largely based on the availability of suitable substrate for colonization and growth.

Leaf nutrients were collected at two points per transect during the fall 2013; transect averages are presented in Table 4.2-27. Leaf TN, TC, 13C, and 15N values were all within expected values for seagrasses (Fourqurean and Zieman 2002). Mean values for TN and TC were higher at BB1 and decreased towards the south, while TP was highest at BB4 and lowest at BB1.

Consequently, N:P ratios were higher in the north relative to the south, indicating a greater N-limitation in BB4 relative to BB1. As the TN and 15N values are positively correlated, this indicates that higher nitrogen concentrations are probably contributing to the higher 15N observed. The patterns among the areas do not clearly indicate any CCS influence on the seagrass community, but rather the regional landscape hydrology and anthropogenic management influences.

4-19

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 TABLES

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-1. Data and Samples Collected in August and November 2013 and in February and May 2014 August November February May Measurements 2013 2013 2014 2014 Measure herbaceous plants in X X X X 1x1m subplots Measure woody plants in 5x5m subplots X Collect herbaceous leaf samples for X X mass and nutrient analysis Collect woody leaf samples for mass X

and nutrient analysis Estimate herbaceous plant cover in X X X X 1x1m subplots Estimate woody plant cover in X

5x5m subplots Collect porewater samples for nutrient X X analysis Collect porewater samples for tracer X X X X suite analysis Key:

cm = centimeter(s).

m = meter(s).

4-21

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-2. Plot Location, Community Description, Dominant Vegetation in Subplots in 2013 -2014 North East Plot Set Up Location (decimal degrees) (meters)

Herbaceous Woody Dominant 1x 5x Transect Plot Latitude Longitude Community Dominant Species Species 1m 5m Rhizophora F1 1 25.43503 -80.34692 Marsh/Mangrove Cladium jamaicense Y Y mangle Freshwater F1 2 25.44027 -80.34042 C. jamaicense R. mangle Y Y marsh Freshwater F2 1 25.4331 -80.35403 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F2 2 25.43286 -80.35864 C. jamaicense R. mangle Y Y marsh Freshwater F2 3 25.43328 -80.36346 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F3 1 25.4084 -80.36248 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F3 2 25.40815 -80.36722 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F3 3 25.40806 -80.37231 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F4 1 25.38657 -80.37074 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F4 2 25.38669 -80.37492 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F4 3 25.38655 -80.37908 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Laguncularia F5 1 25.3557 -80.36692 Scrub mangrove Distichlis spicata racemosa Y Y R. mangle 4-22

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-2. Plot Location, Community Description, Dominant Vegetation in Subplots in 2013 -2014 North East Plot Set Up Location (decimal degrees) (meters)

Herbaceous Woody Dominant 1x 5x Transect Plot Latitude Longitude Community Dominant Species Species 1m 5m D. spicata F5 2 25.35304 -80.356 Scrub mangrove R. mangle Y Y Juncus roemerianus Freshwater F6 1 25.35469 -80.43848 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F6 2 25.34966 -80.43619 C. jamaicense None Y N marsh Freshwater F6 3 25.34413 -80.43097 C. jamaicense C. erectus Y N marsh M1 1 25.44296 -80.33598 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M1 2 25.44716 -80.33269 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M2 1 25.40535 -80.3307 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M2 2 25.40521 -80.3299 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M3 1 25.38628 -80.33083 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M3 2 25.3845 -80.32794 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M4 1 25.3563 -80.33138 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M4 2 25.35468 -80.32911 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y R. mangle M5 1 25.35186 -80.35543 Scrub mangrove D. spicata Avicennia Y Y germinans M5 2 25.34507 -80.33381 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle Y Y M6 1 25.29448 -80.39633 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M6 2 25.29305 -80.39538 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y Note:

NE = Location is at northeast corner of plot.

Key:

m = Meter(s).

4-23

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-3. Species and Individuals Counted in Subplots for Shannon-Wiener Index of Diversity Calculations in November 2013 Community Type

• Plot Species Present # of Individuals C. jamaicense 77 F2-1 E. cellulosa 17 C. jamaicense 38 F2-2 E. cellulosa 38 R. mangle 2 C. jamaicense 66 F2-3 E. cellulosa 4 C. jamaicense 34 F3-1 E. cellulosa 35 C. jamaicense 37 Marsh F3-2 Aster spp. 1 M. scandens 1 C. jamaicense 33 F3-3 E. cellulosa 84 F4-1 C. jamaicense 155 F4-2 C. jamaicense 44 F4-3 C. jamaicense 41 F6-1 C. jamaicense 37 F6-2 C. jamaicense 38 F6-3 C. jamaicense 53 C. jamaicense 56 F1-1 R. mangle 32 C. jamaicense 62 F1-2 R. mangle 11 C. erectus 1 Brackish Marsh- R. mangle 45 Mangrove F5-1 L. racemosa 58 C. erectus 5 D. spicata 28 J. romerianus 8 F5-2 B. frutescens 5 R. mangle 169 M1-1 R. mangle 269 R. mangle 116 M1-2 L. racemosa 4 Mangrove M2-1 R. mangle 14 M2-2 R. mangle 464 4-24

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-3. Species and Individuals Counted in Subplots for Shannon-Wiener Index of Diversity Calculations in November 2013 Community Type

• Plot Species Present # of Individuals M3-1 R. mangle 74 M3-2 R. mangle 47 R. mangle 73 M4-1 A. germinans 1 R. mangle 64 M4-2 Mangrove A. germinans 1 D. spicata 24 R. mangle 189 M5-1 A. germinans 15 L. racemosa 4 M5-2 R. mangle 38 M6-1 R. mangle 24 M6-2 R. mangle 31 Note:

• In the marsh plots, all plants were counted in the northeast 1x1 (1 m2) subplot; similarly the northeast 5x5 (25 m2) was counted for the mangrove plots.

4-25

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-4. Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate Shannon-Wiener Index Calculated Values for Plots and Transects Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate August 2011 August 2012 November 2013 Location Shannon Wiener Index Species Evenness Shannon Wiener Index Species Evenness Shannon Wiener Index Species Evenness Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 0.603 0.870 0.530 0.764 0.288 0.946 F1 0.532 0.484 0.541 0.492 0.580 0.837 2 0.442 0.403 0.510 0.464 0.206 0.446 1 0.128 0.185 0.113 0.162 0.473 0.682 F2 2 0.195 0.670 0.281 0.609 0.506 0.192 0.461 0.175 0.701 0.601 0.723 0.547 3 0.215 0.310 0.000 N/A 0.219 0.316 1 0.670 0.966 0.130 0.187 0.693 1.000 F3 2 0.271 0.762 0.391 0.694 0.239 0.243 0.345 0.221 0.026 0.742 0.024 0.535 3 0.518 0.747 0.325 0.469 0.595 0.858 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A F4 2 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A N/A 0.000 0.000 N/A N/A 3 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A 1 0.512 0.739 0.766 0.697 0.476 0.765 F5 1.151 0.715 1.169 0.653 1.014 0.566 2 0.837 0.604 0.943 0.680 0.482 0.474 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A F6 2 0.682 0.458 0.984 0.661 0.687 0.460 0.991 0.664 0.000 0.000 N/A N/A 3 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A M1 0.011 0.002 0.076 0.109 0.057 0.083 2 0.040 0.057 0.255 0.369 0.113 0.211 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A M2 0.115 0.020 0.116 0.168 0.000 N/A 2 0.120 0.174 0.122 0.176 0.000 N/A 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A M3 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A 2 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A 1 0.000 0.000 0.063 0.091 0.058 0.103 M4 0.060 0.013 0.070 0.101 0.075 0.109 2 0.074 0.563 0.079 0.115 0.064 0.115 1 0.314 0.453 0.577 0.416 0.482 0.468 M5 0.290 0.049 0.530 0.383 0.584 0.421 2 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A M6 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A 2 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 N/A Key:

N/A = Not applilcable.

4-26

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-5. Average Sawgrass Coverage per Plot and Transect for Post -Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Average Percent (%) Cover Location Pre-Uprate Average August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 2-5 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 F1 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 2 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 1 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 F2 2 6 - 25 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 3 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 2-5 1 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 F3 2 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 3 6 - 25 2-5 2-5 2-5 6 - 25 1 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 F4 2 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 3 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 1 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 6 - 25 F6 2 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 3 6 - 25 2-5 6 - 25 6 - 25 2-5 Key:

% = Percent.

4-27

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-6. Average Sawgrass Height per Plot and Transect for Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range Average Height +/- Standard Error (cm)

Location Pre-Uprate Range August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 84.9 - 100 83.53 2.88 81.35 2.46 80.94 2.06 80.63 1.99 F1 2 100 - 114.5 93.8 - 107.8 89.72 2.23 87.21 1.78 97.01 2.23 88.36 1.80 93.29 2.63 86.47 1.71 94.27 1.97 86.79 1.52 1 80.6 - 96.3 76.74 1.08 76.91 0.97 74.55 1.39 70.75 1.23 2 73.5 - 89.6 74.99 1.66 74.92 2.28 73.53 3.09 69.38 2.32 F2 3 67.6 - 80.4 75.5 - 90.3 69.77 1.49 74.26 0.81 66.71 1.50 73.43 0.89 63.71 1.65 71.15 1.15 60.67 1.43 67.47 0.95 1 58.2 - 64.9 65.48 1.37 63.57 1.39 58.21 1.80 53.10 1.60 2 61.7 - 73 67.78 1.40 66.44 1.65 60.43 2.01 53.18 1.78 F3 3 79.8 - 101.6 67.7 - 78.3 81.53 2.14 72.39 1.17 80.38 2.15 70.16 1.15 71.76 2.20 63.50 1.24 69.66 2.05 58.68 1.19 1 103.1 - 123.9 97.88 2.19 99.83 2.04 96.16 2.07 93.91 1.87 2 62.1 - 79.9 67.11 1.24 66.45 1.59 63.47 1.73 57.93 1.91 F4 3 73.9 - 89.1 80.9 - 96.3 75.07 1.33 82.38 1.43 74.61 1.79 84.87 1.52 70.93 1.73 81.37 1.53 61.91 1.84 76.55 1.59 1 76.3 - 99.3 82.36 1.71 88.36 1.73 85.20 2.07 78.83 2.60 2 66.6 - 87 74.12 1.21 80.58 1.54 79.66 2.27 71.80 2.03 F6 3 67.3 - 81.5 70.5 - 89.9 67.01 1.40 74.72 0.97 74.20 1.31 81.01 0.98 70.88 1.65 78.54 1.24 66.67 1.39 72.37 1.24 Key:

cm = Centimeters.

SE= Standard Error.

4-28

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-7. Live and Total Sawgrass Biomass Equations for Post-Uprate Events Season Model R2 p-Value N Total Biomass Equations Total Biomass = -1.22987 + 2.55800 (Cdb2)2 +

November 2013 0.8286 <0.0001 168 0.03882 (NoLL)2 + 0.0002949 (LLL)2 Total Biomass = -0.46210 + 2.63119 (cdb1)2 +

May 2014 0.8722 <0.0001 168 0.0003069 (LLL)2 Live Biomass Equations Live Biomass = -1.53848 + 1.18027 (Cdb1) +

November 2013 0.71527 (Cdb2)2 + 0.04703 (NoLL)2 + 0.0002064 0.8785 <0.01 168 (LLL)2 Live Biomass = -2.45943 + 2.31954 (cdb2) +

May 2014 0.8158 <0.01 168 0.37373 (NoLL) + 0.0001897 (LLL)2 Key:

Cdb1 = Culm diameter at base 1.

Cdb2 = Culm diameter at base 2.

LLL = Longest live leaf.

NoLL = Number of live leaves.

N = Sample size.

4-29

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-8. Average Sawgrass Live Biomass per Plot and Transect for Post-Uprate Events with Pre-Uprate Range Sawgrass Live Biomass (g/m2)

Location Pre-Uprate Range August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 66.7 - 145.2 117.7 26.7 135.8 37.5 128.1 34.0 145.4 18.9 150.1 20.5 F1 104.8 - 167.7 151.3 18.9 141.7 20.1 176.52 17.70 2 142.9 - 190.2 184.9 14.2 147.6 21.5 162.7 17.5 202.9 24.0 1 112.7 - 208.8 130.4 15.8 151.3 20.4 126.6 15.8 135.1 17.0 80.6 11.2 F2 2 42.3 - 74.3 69.1 - 122.2 46.6 8.4 75.8 12.9 54.9 9.5 90.7 15.1 56.5 6.8 56.9 4.4 88.86 11.67 3 52.4 - 83.5 50.3 4.0 65.9 11.5 58.6 5.6 74.6 8.2 1 29.2 - 43.3 38.0 5.9 39.5 4.9 44.5 2.8 42.2 4.8 51.9 4.5 F3 2 43.4 - 60.3 53.1 - 79.4 50.9 8.4 58.4 6.9 61.1 5.2 61.4 6.1 42.8 6.4 45.6 4.4 60.39 7.35 3 78.5 - 141.9 86.2 1.7 83.5 6.0 68.5 6.0 93.3 2.8 1 184.9 - 275.5 264.4 71.6 320.9 85.6 234.0 30.1 268.4 26.4 115.0 27.0 F4 2 41.3 - 70.8 94.7 - 147.8 47.7 5.8 125.6 36.9 50.7 10.2 146.0 45.6 54.2 6.4 61.2 9.3 127.48 31.26 3 57.9 - 97.7 64.7 11.3 66.4 9.2 56.7 2.5 52.9 4.3 1 48.7 - 98 49.4 10.6 63.6 14.8 75.4 24.5 94.1 25.4 F6 2 36 - 84.8 50.8 - 92.1 54.9 8.8 52.5 4.5 54.6 10.4 60.7 7.0 48.4 7.6 65.0 9.7 50.2 13.3 72.39 11.12 3 62.6 - 100.8 53.2 5.7 64.0 13.9 71.3 15.4 72.9 14.7 Key:

2 g/m = Grams per square meter.

SE = Standard Error.

4-30

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-9. Average Sawgrass Total Biomass per Plot and Transect for Post-Uprate Events with Pre-Uprate Range Sawgrass Total Biomass (g/m2)

Location Pre-Uprate Range August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 87.6 - 262.8 164.1 35.2 189.3 54.8 201.0 55.8 231.7 36.3 F1 2 174.8 - 396.7 131.2 - 314.1 254.6 15.7 209.3 24.7 206.8 29.4 198.0 29.0 259.0 27.3 230.0 30.8 326.7 37.2 279.2 30.0 1 203 - 306.9 169.9 23.5 197.3 29.5 213.3 22.2 224.2 31.5 F2 2 65.6 - 166.6 61.8 12.5 73.2 11.3 86.4 10.4 93.4 8.9 3 80.8 - 157.9 116.5 - 199.7 67.4 7.2 99.7 17.1 87.4 13.5 119.3 19.7 87.5 7.4 129.1 19.6 106.9 6.8 141.5 20.4 1 32.7 - 104.1 49.3 8.5 51.2 6.3 67.7 5.1 59.3 4.5 F3 2 50 - 138.2 65.7 9.7 80.5 9.4 69.3 12.5 68.9 13.2 3 142.4 - 285.2 75.0 - 169.0 118.9 4.4 78.0 9.8 116.0 9.6 82.5 9.2 125.1 13.4 87.4 9.9 146.1 6.2 91.4 12.6 1 287.6 - 661.8 363.1 100.0 448.3 116.9 392.3 48.7 428.9 33.3 F4 2 59.3 - 161.7 60.9 6.1 68.4 14.5 83.3 8.3 92.9 15.0 3 81.5 - 206 142.8 - 325.9 87.7 15.6 170.6 51.3 87.9 13.6 201.5 63.6 97.6 4.3 191.0 45.5 99.0 5.3 206.9 48.6 1 84.4 - 219.2 67.3 13.9 87.7 19.6 140.9 44.3 155.8 39.1 F6 2 51.9 - 205.8 74.5 13.9 70.5 13.8 95.2 15.2 92.3 22.6 3 60.5 - 258 65.6 - 228.4 73.7 7.1 71.8 6.4 87.3 18.8 81.8 9.5 115.3 23.1 117.1 16.7 131.1 26.0 126.4 17.6 Key:

2 g/m = Grams per square meter.

SE = Standard Error.

4-31

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-10. Sawgrass Productivity for 6-Month Interval of October/November to May during the Pre- and Post-Uprate Periods Sawgrass Productivity (g/m2/6 months)

Location Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate October 2010 - May November 2011 - May November 2013 - May Transect Plot 2011 2012 2014 1 49.72 183.38 115.62 F1 2 97.99 162.91 174.07 1 55.57 105.25 84.31 F2 2 25.05 43.40 37.18 3 22.15 47.90 53.76 1 16.34 22.81 29.92 F3 2 16.71 40.96 15.84 3 36.85 64.66 66.55 1 50.44 220.66 107.43 F4 2 10.84 27.32 53.68 3 22.90 39.14 31.97 1 51.30 42.82 129.19 F6 2 52.44 25.74 40.11 3 65.93 47.73 68.19 Key:

2 g/m = Grams per square meter.

4-32

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-11. Sawgrass Leaf Sclerophylly per Plot and Transect for Post -Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range Sclerophylly (g/m 2)

Location Pre-Uprate Range November 2013 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE F1 1 101.2 - 166.8 170.3 6.7 196.1 13.4 F1 2 132.0 - 147 126.1 - 155.5 156.4 12.1 163.3 6.9 216.6 12.0 206.4 9.0 F2 1 123.2 - 230.9 175.6 4.2 261.2 13.3 F2 2 133.2 - 235.1 202.3 10.6 236.6 8.7 F2 3 125.9 - 215.3 137.6 - 179.7 197.7 20.3 191.9 7.8 209.2 11.4 235.7 7.3 F3 1 128.6 - 174.8 222.6 11.5 130.0 9.9 F3 2 134.0 - 179.8 200.2 6.8 183.0 11.3 F3 3 121.7 - 199.1 130 - 178 233.3 16.5 218.7 7.3 219.0 14.1 177.3 9.1 F4 1 142.4 - 171.0 149.6 9.2 228.2 16.2 F4 2 148 - 183.2 138.5 5.8 205.0 13.6 F4 3 153.0 - 186.7 146.1 - 163.9 149.3 7.1 145.8 4.3 248.3 8.6 227.2 8.0 F6 1 118.7 - 170.0 210.8 9.3 205.8 8.5 F6 2 129.2 - 160.7 206.6 6.7 189.5 15.8 F6 3 118.9 - 163.5 125.1 - 142.1 206.8 10.6 208.1 5.1 199.0 11.3 198.1 6.9 Key:

g = Grams.

2 m = Square Meters.

4-33

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-12. Average Leaf Carbon for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range C. jamaicense Total Carbon (mg/kg)

Location Pre-Uprate Range November 2013 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 441033 - 499000 478000 1000 449000 3342 F1 452371 - 501143 478250 1264 453750 3261 2 460875 - 502750 478500 2533 458500 4839 1 458275 - 507000 468000 3629 460500 3594 F2 2 456450 - 498840 458367 - 503000 465750 5023 468833 2135 464750 2839 460917 2360 3 460375 - 503750 472750 1797 457500 5605 1 453150 - 513174 464250 4404 458750 2496 F3 2 436000 - 505443 449917 - 507079 470750 3591 467000 2153 460750 2175 458250 1280 3 452000 - 501134 466000 3342 455250 1377 1 438725 - 489974 472500 4873 463000 4223 F4 2 456250 - 486780 449909 - 487403 479500 5560 478167 2760 473250 1887 471333 2638 3 451000 - 485454 482500 3403 477750 4131 1 470025 - 512279 475250 3568 463750 3794 F6 2 467325 - 508211 457867 - 510524 478500 5795 472083 3049 468000 4416 466250 2104 3 436250 - 511270 462500 2872 467000 3391 Key:

Mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram.

SE = Standard Error.

4-34

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-13. Average Leaf Total Nitrogen for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range C. jamaicense Total Nitrogen (mg/kg)

Location Pre-Uprate Range November 2013 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 5233 - 9701 7250 250 8500 645 F1 4771 - 10286 6500 327 8625 420 2 4425 - 10750 5750 250 8750 629 1 6725 - 11000 6250 479 8500 289 F2 2 8750 - 10500 7175 - 11083 6000 0 6250 179 8250 250 8250 179 3 6050 - 11750 6500 289 8000 408 1 6625 - 9250 6000 0 7500 500 F3 2 5975 - 8476 6308 - 8423 6000 408 5917 149 7250 629 7583 288 3 6325 - 9185 5750 250 8000 408 1 7725 - 8250 5750 479 8500 645 F4 2 5800 - 8987 6763 - 8746 5750 479 5750 218 7500 289 7917 313 3 8000 - 9139 5750 250 7750 629 1 6000 - 10500 6000 408 7750 479 F6 2 5225 - 12000 5283 - 10917 5750 250 6500 337 8750 250 8167 271 3 4625 - 10250 7750 479 8000 577 Key:

Mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram.

SE = Standard Error.

4-35

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-14. Average Leaf Total Phosphorous for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect During the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range C. jamaicense Total Phosphorous (mg/kg)

Location Pre-Uprate Range November 2013 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 213 - 247 144 12 296 37 F1 194 - 241 136 7.5 304 22 2 180 - 248 127 9 313 30 1 175 - 228 163 14 232 6 F2 2 160 - 203 143 - 230 164 11 164 6.9 237 17 239 7 3 93 - 260 167 15 249 13 1 148 - 195 120 6 190 6 F3 2 163 - 220 147 - 225 120 7 134 7.4 175 13 199 9 3 123 - 273 164 9 234 10 1 225 - 300 117 30 319 8 F4 2 93 - 218 181 - 234 156 13 147 12.1 244 8 272 11 3 208 - 240 169 5 252 11 1 190 - 240 159 26 219 20 F6 2 215 - 225 193 - 220 155 9 159 11.3 196 15 202 9 3 130 - 200 162 12 192 15 Key:

mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram.

SE = Standard Error.

4-36

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-15. Average Leaf Carbon Isotopes for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range C. jamaicense Carbon Isotopes ()

Location Pre-Uprate Range November 2013 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 -28.3 to -25.5 -27.3 0.5 -27.3 0.2 F1 -27.2 to -25.6 -27.3 0.3 -27.0 0.2 2 -27.3 to -24.3 -27.3 0.4 -26.8 0.3 1 -26.5 to -25.4 -26.1 0.1 -27.0 0.1 F2 2 -27.0 to -25.2 -26.7 to -25.4 -26.3 0.2 -26.4 0.1 -26.9 0.1 -27.0 0.1 3 -26.8 to -25.6 -26.7 0.3 -27.1 0.2 1 -26.5 to -25.2 -26.5 0.2 -26.7 0.1 F3 2 -26.0 to -25.1 -26.1 to -25.1 -26.2 0.3 -26.3 0.2 -26.6 0.1 -26.5 0.1 3 -26.2 to -25.1 -26.1 0.3 -26.3 0.2 1 -26.9 to -24.9 -27.1 0.2 -27.5 0.5 F4 2 -26.7 to -25.2 -26.5 to -25.0 -26.3 0.1 -26.6 0.1 -27.8 0.4 -27.4 0.2 3 -26.3 to -25.4 -26.5 0.2 -26.9 0.3 1 -26.7 to -24.8 -26.3 0.3 -27.6 0.2 F6 2 -26.3 to -24.9 -26.5 to -25.0 -26.1 0.3 -26.3 0.2 -27.0 0.1 -27.4 0.1 3 -26.7 to -25.4 -26.5 0.2 -27.6 0.1 Key:

= Parts per mille.

SE = Standard Error.

4-37

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-16. Average Leaf Nitrogen Isotopes for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range C. jamaicense Nitrogen Isotopes ()

Location Pre-Uprate Range November 2013 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 -3.38 to 2.44 -0.83 0.62 -0.80 0.29 F1 -3.62 to 1.31 -1.30 0.40 -0.93 0.28 2 -3.79 to 0.53 -1.78 0.46 -1.05 0.53 1 -3.2 to -0.45 -2.50 0.74 -2.70 0.38 F2 2 -4.63 to -0.98 -3.65 to -0.48 -1.88 0.50 -1.83 0.32 -2.90 0.31 -2.34 0.26 3 -3.13 to 0.00 -1.13 0.17 -1.43 0.31 1 -4.93 to -2.2 -3.45 0.32 -5.15 0.93 F3 2 -4.45 to -0.73 -4.55 to -1.39 -2.78 0.60 -3.11 0.29 -3.23 0.48 -3.79 0.49 3 -4.28 to -0.79 -3.10 0.64 -3.00 0.77 1 -5.01 to -0.18 -2.60 0.42 -1.60 0.64 F4 2 -5.88 to -2.40 -5.45 to -1.32 -3.90 0.43 -3.34 0.26 -5.75 0.35 -3.77 0.56 3 -3.07 to -1.40 -3.53 0.31 -3.95 0.22 Key:

= Parts per mille.

SE = Standard Error.

r 4-38

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-17. Sawgrass Leaf C:N Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in November 2013 and May 2014 C. jamaicense C:N Molar Ratio Location November 2013 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 77:1 62:1 F1 86:1 61:1 2 97:1 61:1 1 87:1 63:1 F2 2 91:1 88:1 66:1 65:1 3 85:1 67:1 1 90:1 71:1 F3 2 92:1 92:1 74:1 71:1 3 95:1 66:1 1 96:1 64:1 F4 2 97:1 97:1 74:1 69:1 3 98:1 72:1 1 92:1 70:1 F6 2 97:1 85:1 62:1 67:1 3 70:1 68:1 Key:

C = Carbon.

N = Nitrogen.

4-39

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-18. Sawgrass Leaf N:P Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in November 2013 and May 2014 C. jamaicense C:N Molar Ratio Location May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 111:1 64:1 F1 106:1 63:1 2 100:1 62:1 1 85:1 81:1 F2 2 81:1 84:1 77:1 76:1 3 86:1 71:1 1 111:1 88:1 F3 2 111:1 98:1 92:1 84:1 3 78:1 76:1 1 109:1 59:1 F4 2 82:1 87:1 68:1 65:1 3 75:1 68:1 1 83:1 78:1 F6 2 82:1 91:1 99:1 89:1 3 106:1 92:1 Key:

N = Nitrogen.

P = Phosphorous.

4-40

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-19. Average Specific Conductance (µS/cm) of Porewater at Each Site for Each Post-Uprate Quarter with Pre-Uprate Range Porewater Specific Conductance at 30 cm Depth (µS/cm)

Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Pre-Uprate Range October 2010 May 2011 November 2011 August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 2260.8 - 5230.9 2505.8 4036.5 3196.5 1543.9 258.4 1382.3 5.7 1458.5 145.1 1508.2 137.1 F1 1790.6 - 3666.8 2011.9 3104.7 2555.5 1359.5 224.0 1460.1 45.8 1363.3 86.6 1621.0 98.2 2 1320.4 - 2173 1518.0 2173.0 1914.6 1175.1 407.8 1537.9 21.5 1268.1 76.4 1733.7 116.9 1 908.0 - 2127.7 1031.1 N/A 1587.0 1074.2 240.0 1145.1 122.8 971.3 164.0 1163.2 80.3 2 1231 - 2362.2 1351.2 N/A 1695.1 1273.3 63.8 1432.3 37.8 1260.1 115.9 1481.8 60.1 F2 1227.4 - 2622.9 1317.9 2622.9 1722.0 1527.8 238.5 1411.0 219.4 1352.8 169.9 1486.7 218.7 3 2048 - 2722.6 2219.3 2622.9 2722.6 2236.0 138.7 2316.6 16.5 1826.9 116.9 2414.3 46.9 4 670.0 - 1180.8 670.0 N/A 883.3 N/A N/A 749.9 49.8 N/A N/A 887.4 53.0 1 1380.2 - 2105.1 1736.1 1637.7 1832.3 1341.8 58.2 1298.8 23.7 1191.0 7.0 1290.3 63.9 2 1559.1 - 2089.2 1631.1 1677.8 1902.6 1529.2 42.3 1498.0 72.1 1314.1 26.3 1502.9 22.5 F3 1436.9 - 2047.8 1763.3 1923.6 1805.7 1690.7 167.1 1409.9 199.3 1529.1 179.3 1592.4 131.2 3 2359.9 - 3214.6 2614.0 2455.4 2926.7 2201.0 74.8 2140.5 217.9 2082.3 121.2 1984.0 30.6 4 380.6 - 782.4 380.6 N/A 561.4 N/A N/A 702.5 64.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 758.0 - 965.6 858.1 925.3 758.0 697.5 28.8 858.4 6.0 873.2 68.8 1030.7 2.9 2 568.0 - 825.8 689.3 763.3 568.0 512.4 45.2 728.3 47.6 799.6 16.3 787.0 34.9 F4 883.3 - 1243.1 908.6 883.3 1023.1 666.5 53.9 947.4 54.7 894.8 49.3 965.2 49.5 3 827.3 - 1012.2 978.3 961.4 844.1 789.6 30.9 943.2 82.1 1011.6 91.2 1053.6 72.6 4 1108.9 - 1719.9 1108.9 N/A 1472.7 N/A N/A 1103.5 59.3 N/A N/A 1013.8 N/A 1 19168.9 - 31996.6 22990.9 20357.9 23680.7 34647.6 301.1 44370.5 25.7 34810.5 22.5 38982.4 443.6 F5 19413.9 - 48523.7 21486.5 29147.8 33494.3 44786.5 5970.3 47401.8 1751.7 41646.2 3954.4 53363.7 8334.3 2 19903.9 - 65050.8 19982.1 46727.7 43307.8 54925.4 2860.2 50433.2 180.3 48482.0 606.6 67745.0 1709.5 1 888.5 - 1125.2 1027.2 990.4 1009.8 1005.7 15.4 1060.5 28.8 1034.0 48.8 1039.2 42.2 2 1070.3 - 1206.8 1095.0 1070.3 1130.8 1187.0 18.0 1230.0 11.7 1200.0 7.7 1213.7 1.4 F6 1282.1 - 1784.7 1373.0 1784.7 1577.1 1797.5 455.0 1586.8 310.6 1604.1 312.6 1958.0 528.0 3 2523.5 - 3293.6 2679.0 3293.6 3214.2 3199.7 372.3 2936.5 445.0 2578.5 160.3 3621.2 126.9 4 645.5 - 1218.6 691.1 N/A 953.6 N/A N/A 1120.4 242.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 40788.2 - 64315.3 47100.8 56588.7 55947.0 N/A N/A 42284.0 670.6 N/A N/A 47442.4 3794.9 M1 43403.9 - 64100.0 47534.4 57242.3 55180.0 N/A N/A 44387.6 1266.0 N/A N/A 50762.9 3313.2 2 46019.7 - 63884.7 47967.9 57895.9 54413.1 N/A N/A 46491.1 562.6 N/A N/A 54083.4 5423.1 1 43276.9 - 62516.0 52510.3 59849.2 55072.4 N/A N/A 49759.1 761.2 N/A N/A 54776.0 49.5 M2 46998 - 63304.7 52186.0 60928.4 57860.1 N/A N/A 49784.9 503.8 N/A N/A 54399.0 224.5 2 49553.4 - 64093.4 51861.8 62007.6 60647.8 N/A N/A 49810.8 970.6 N/A N/A 54022.1 125.3 1 45589.1 - 67367.6 52123.6 64201.4 57153.8 N/A N/A 44296.6 2824.3 N/A N/A 54147.0 1529.0 M3 44903.7 - 66140.6 51545.2 62991.8 56772.6 N/A N/A 46397.9 1679.4 N/A N/A 54830.9 1399.4 2 43649.9 - 64913.6 50966.7 61782.3 56391.4 N/A N/A 48499.3 337.0 N/A N/A 55514.8 2911.4 1 41543.2 - 79855.8 43344.8 78742.9 59997.0 N/A N/A 51665.7 1095.6 N/A N/A 67294.6 4403.4 M4 44093.6 - 82868.1 44739.5 78150.3 64434.6 N/A N/A 49850.3 1321.1 N/A N/A 64759.7 2332.1 2 46134.3 - 85880.5 46134.3 77557.8 68872.3 N/A N/A 48034.9 1637.2 N/A N/A 62224.8 625.0 1 44949.4 - 81750.9 51624.5 55111.7 61393.0 N/A N/A 47225.9 536.0 N/A N/A 63430.5 1078.3 M5 46473 - 70118.4 46473.0 55900.2 57845.4 N/A N/A 48143.7 715.5 N/A N/A 60176.4 1998.4 2 41321.5 - 58485.8 41321.5 56294.5 54297.8 N/A N/A 49061.6 1048.3 N/A N/A 56922.2 1272.7 1 41186.5 - 51057.4 N/A 44079.0 46514.1 N/A N/A 42390.8 323.2 N/A N/A 47797.3 1007.2 M6 42908.5 - 49898.1 N/A 45899.1 47405.4 N/A N/A 43680.2 771.4 N/A N/A 46716.3 764.8 2 44630.5 - 48738.8 N/A 47719.2 48296.7 N/A N/A 44969.5 375.0 N/A N/A 45635.3 398.1 Key:

µS = Microsiemens.

cm = Centimeters.

N/A = Not applicable.

4-41

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-20. Average Specific Conductance (µS/cm) of Porewater at Each Site for Each Post-Uprate Quarter with Pre-Uprate Range Porewater Temperature at 30 cm Depth (°C)

Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Pre-Uprate Range October 2010 May 2011 November 2011 August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 May 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 23.2 - 30.6 27.8 30.6 24.8 30.0 0.1 26.3 0.1 25.9 0.1 28.1 0.2 F1 21.8 - 31.1 28.7 31.1 26.0 29.5 0.3 26.3 0.1 25.2 0.4 27.3 0.5 2 20.0 - 31.7 29.5 31.7 27.3 29.1 0.2 26.4 0.1 24.6 0.1 26.5 0.0 1 22.6 - 29.6 27.8 N/A 25.0 28.8 0.0 26.3 0.5 22.3 0.2 28.5 0.4 2 22.3 - 28.6 27.3 N/A 25.7 28.5 0.1 24.0 0.1 21.6 0.1 27.3 0.3 F2 22.9 - 29.3 26.1 29.0 25.3 28.6 0.1 25.1 0.4 22.3 0.2 27.6 0.3 3 22.8 - 29.0 26.9 29.0 25.1 28.7 0.0 24.2 0.2 22.9 0.3 26.7 0.2 4 22.3 - 30.0 22.3 N/A 25.5 N/A N/A 25.7 0.1 N/A N/A 28.0 0.4 1 22.8 - 28.8 27.4 26.9 23.8 30.0 0.0 26.0 0.1 25.0 0.2 27.6 0.2 2 23.0 - 30.1 26.5 29.0 25.0 29.9 0.1 26.7 0.2 25.1 0.2 27.9 0.2 F3 23.0 - 29.7 26.3 29.5 24.7 29.9 0.1 26.2 0.2 25.0 0.1 27.3 0.3 3 22.7 - 32.6 26.7 32.6 26.1 29.7 0.2 26.4 0.3 24.8 0.3 26.3 0.3 4 23.1 - 28.7 23.1 N/A 24.1 N/A N/A 25.4 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 21.4 - 29.2 21.4 28.9 26.3 30.0 0.5 26.2 0.2 24.6 0.1 26.8 0.4 2 21.4 - 31.4 21.4 29.8 26.7 30.3 0.1 27.4 0.1 25.5 0.6 26.5 0.3 F4 22.8 - 30.2 22.8 30.2 25.4 30.1 0.2 26.3 0.2 25.2 0.3 26.9 0.3 3 24.7 - 32.1 24.7 32.1 25.1 30.1 0.1 26.6 0.1 25.5 0.2 26.7 0.4 4 23.6 - 27.9 23.6 N/A 24.5 N/A N/A 25.8 0.2 N/A N/A 28.3 N/A 1 25.1 - 34.5 27.5 34.5 26.1 30.0 0.2 28.5 0.1 25.0 0.1 28.7 0.2 F5 24.9 - 33.7 27.4 33.7 26.0 30.5 0.3 28.3 0.2 25.8 0.5 28.4 0.2 2 24.8 - 34.1 27.4 32.1 26.0 30.9 0.4 28.0 0.4 26.5 0.2 28.1 0.0 1 23.5 - 28.7 28.7 24.7 25.4 28.7 0.1 24.5 0.2 23.3 0.1 26.4 0.5 2 23.9 - 29.4 27.3 25.9 27.4 29.7 0.1 24.6 0.2 24.8 0.0 26.8 0.2 F6 22.9 - 28.5 26.4 25.8 26.5 29.3 0.2 24.2 0.2 24.2 0.3 26.4 0.2 3 21.6 - 30.1 28.3 26.9 27.4 29.5 0.1 24.6 0.1 24.6 0.3 26.1 0.4 4 21.4 - 27.1 21.4 N/A 25.7 N/A N/A 23.2 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 22.1 - 31.9 26.2 26.3 26.6 N/A N/A 25.1 0.3 N/A N/A 28.6 0.1 M1 22.7 - 31.5 26.4 28.1 26.2 N/A N/A 25.8 0.4 N/A N/A 28.2 0.2 2 23.4 - 31.1 26.6 30.0 25.7 N/A N/A 26.5 0.0 N/A N/A 27.9 0.0 1 22.8 - 32.6 25.9 27.3 28.0 N/A N/A 26.8 0.3 N/A N/A 28.4 0.1 M2 23.0 - 32.3 25.9 26.3 28.3 N/A N/A 27.0 0.2 N/A N/A 28.5 0.2 2 23.2 - 32.1 25.9 25.3 28.7 N/A N/A 27.2 0.0 N/A N/A 28.6 0.4 1 22.1 - 31.3 26.1 29.8 25.7 N/A N/A 27.0 0.2 N/A N/A 29.7 0.3 M3 21.5 - 31.1 26.7 29.9 25.3 N/A N/A 27.0 0.1 N/A N/A 29.5 0.3 2 20.9 - 31.0 27.3 30.0 25.0 N/A N/A 26.9 0.2 N/A N/A 29.3 0.6 1 23.0 - 33.5 23.0 29.2 26.1 N/A N/A 27.5 0.3 N/A N/A 29.1 0.0 M4 23.3 - 33.1 23.3 30.8 26.1 N/A N/A 27.4 0.2 N/A N/A 29.1 0.2 2 20.5 - 32.7 23.6 32.4 26.1 N/A N/A 27.4 0.5 N/A N/A 29.2 0.5 1 24.2 - 32.8 28.0 31.8 26.7 N/A N/A 27.1 0.2 N/A N/A 30.1 0.4 M5 22.8 - 31.9 27.7 29.8 26.1 N/A N/A 26.8 0.2 N/A N/A 29.0 0.7 2 18.4 - 31.0 27.4 28.8 25.5 N/A N/A 26.5 0.2 N/A N/A 27.8 0.1 1 24.3 - 31.5 N/A 28.2 26.8 N/A N/A 27.5 0.0 N/A N/A 27.7 0.1 M6 24.4 - 32.0 N/A 28.8 27.0 N/A N/A 27.7 0.2 N/A N/A 27.5 0.2 2 24.5 - 32.5 N/A 29.4 27.2 N/A N/A 27.9 0.2 N/A N/A 27.2 0.2 Key:

°C = Degrees Celsius.

cm = Centimeters.

N/A = Not applicable.

4-42

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-21. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater August 2013 PW-F1-1 PW-F1-2 PW-F2-1 PW-F2-2 PW-F2-3 PW-F3-1 PW-F3-2 PW-F3-3 Parameter Units 8/7/2013 8/7/2013 8/9/2013 8/9/2013 8/9/2013 8/13/2013 8/13/2013 8/13/2013 Temperature °C 29.98 29.06 28.77 28.48 28.69 30.02 29.94 29.66 pH SU Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 1543.93 1175.11 1074.17 1273.25 2235.98 1341.78 1529.19 2201.01 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 132 73 88 87.2 103 125 139 268 Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 184 107 146 195 433 227 281 496 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N

+

Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L Unionized NH3 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N TKN mg/L TN mg/L ortho-Phosphate mg/L Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 0.9 J 0.6 J 0.4 J 0.7 J 1.2 J 0.7 J 0.8 J 1.1 J Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 Salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PW = Porewater.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. RPD = Relative Percent Difference.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).

+

= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonium ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.

4-43

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-21. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater August 2013 PW-F4-1 PW-F4-3 PW-F5-1 PW-F5-2 PW-F6-1 PW-F6-2 PW-F6-3 PW-EB1 PW-FB1 Parameter Units 8/13/2013 8/13/2013 8/8/2013 8/8/2013 8/12/2013 8/12/2013 8/12/2013 8/7/2013 8/13/2013 Temperature °C 30.04 30.05 30.02 30.91 28.72 29.72 28.01 pH SU Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 697.5 789.57 34647.64 J 54925.39 1005.72 1186.95 3199.73 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 38.5 52.2 6690 10500 223 77 386 2.39 0.31 U Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 71.9 92.7 24900 J 20200 119 152 804 0.253 I 0.25 U Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L Unionized NH3 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N TKN mg/L TN mg/L ortho-Phosphate mg/L Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 0.3 J 0.4 J 22.4 J 37.1 0.5 J 0.6 J 1.7 J Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 Salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PW = Porewater.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. RPD = Relative Percent Difference.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).

+

= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonium ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.

4-44

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater November 2013 PW-F1-1 PW-F1-2 PW-F2-1 PW-F2-2 PW-F2-3 PW-F2-4 Parameter Units 11/05/2013 11/19/2013 11/08/2013 11/14/2013 11/14/2013 11/12/2013 Temperature °C 26.29 26.36 26.33 26.33 24.24 25.75 pH SU 6.56 6.65 6.69 6.69 6.62 6.04 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 1382.26 1537.93 1145.06 1432.31 2316.59 749.91 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 127 121 73.3 102 219 60 Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 164 204 134 205 453 112 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.629 J 1.4 1.96 2.13 1.76 0.772

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L 0.807 J 1.81 2.51 2.73 2.26 0.992 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00172 J 0.00478 0.00726 0.00789 0.00479 0.000616 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U TKN mg/L 2.18 J 2.77 2.7 3.28 3.15 2.26 TN mg/L 2.207 J 2.797 2.727 3.307 3.177 2.287 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0014 U 0.00246 I 0.0028 U J- 0.0014 U J- 0.00215 I J- 0.00234 IV Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0023 I 0.0022 U 0.0316 0.0177 0.0136 0.0022 U Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 0.70 J 0.78 J 0.58 J 0.75 J 1.21 J 0.37 J Tritium pCi/L (+/-1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 Salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PW = Porewater.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. RPD = Relative Percent Difference.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).

+

= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonium ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. V = Detected in method blank.

4-45

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater November 2013 PW-F3-1 PW-F3-2 PW-F3-3 PW-F3-4 PW-F4-1 PW-F4-2 PW-F4-3 PW-F4-4 Parameter Units 11/12/2013 11/12/2013 11/12/2013 11/12/2013 11/11/2013 11/11/2013 11/11/2013 11/11/2013 Temperature °C 26.05 26.75 26.43 25.42 26.24 27.36 26.58 25.48 pH SU 6.69 6.76 6.69 5.81 6.61 6.9 6.68 6.31 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 1298.82 1497.47 2140.47 702.46 858.43 728.3 943.17 1103.53 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 109 120 230 71.6 40.1 42.1 52.2 77.9 Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 214 253 479 132 77.9 85.2 102 145 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 2.45 2.72 1.98 0.421 0.857 1.92 1.72 1.03

+

Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 3.14 3.48 2.54 0.541 1.1 2.46 2.2 1.32 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0089 0.0122 0.00739 0.000193 0.00263 0.0124 0.00634 0.0015 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U TKN mg/L 4.02 4.16 3.3 2.09 2.76 2.82 2.78 2.9 TN mg/L 4.047 4.187 3.327 2.117 2.787 2.847 2.807 2.927 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.00141 IV 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.00255 IV 0.00265 IVJ 0.00194 IV 0.0014 U 0.00328 IV Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00999 I 0.00623 I 0.00227 I 0.0022 U 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U 0.00504 I 0.00545 I Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 0.66 J 0.76 J 1.11 J 0.35 J 0.43 J 0.36 J 0.48 J 0.55 J Tritium pCi/L (+/-1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 Salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PW = Porewater.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. RPD = Relative Percent Difference.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).

+

= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonium ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. V = Detected in method blank.

4-46

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater November 2013 PW-F5-1 PW-F5-2 PW-F6-1 PW-F6-2 PW-F6-3 PW-F6-4 PW-M1-1 PW-M1-2 Parameter Units 11/18/2013 11/18/2013 11/13/2013 11/13/2013 11/13/2013 11/13/2013 11/05/2013 11/06/2013 Temperature °C 28.96 28 24.47 24.64 24.63 23.21 25.14 26.48 pH SU 6.72 6.86 6.75 6.67 6.57 6.4 6.53 6.61 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 44370.52 50433.17 1060.5 1229.96 2936.48 1120.44 42284 46491.1 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 8550 9130 49.5 76 313 44 7950 9170 J Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 16600 18800 112 171 639 78.9 16300 18200 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.904 0.996 2.53 2.01 1.61 0.822 0.411 J 0.287 J

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L 1.16 1.27 3.24 2.58 2.07 1.06 0.527 J 0.368 J Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0043 0.00612 0.00944 0.00632 0.00402 0.00125 0.00097 J 0.00089 J Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.0443 I 0.027 U 0.027 UJ TKN mg/L 2.59 1.57 3.64 2.95 2.71 3.02 0.719 J 0.89 J TN mg/L 2.617 1.597 3.667 2.977 2.737 3.0643 0.746 J 0.917 J ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.00233 I J- 0.0014 U J- 0.0014 U J- 0.00478 I J- 0.00656 IJ 0.0206 J Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 UJ Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 29.16 33.69 0.54 J 0.62 J 1.55 J 0.56 J 27.59 30.70 Tritium pCi/L (+/-1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 Salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PW = Porewater.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. RPD = Relative Percent Difference.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).

+

= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonium ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. V = Detected in method blank.

4-47

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater November 2013 PW-M2-1 PW-M2-2 PW-M3-1 PW-M3-2 PW-M4-1 PW-M4-2 PW-M5-1 PW-M5-2 Parameter Units 11/19/2013 11/20/2013 11/19/2013 11/20/2013 11/19/2013 11/06/2013 11/18/2013 11/06/2013 Temperature °C 26.78 27.17 27.02 26.91 27.5 27.38 27.09 26.5 pH SU 6.83 6.55 7.04 6.91 6.88 6.59 6.85 6.84 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 49759.1 49810.8 44296.6 48499.3 48034.9 48034.9 47225.9 49061.6 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 9660 9330 8670 8960 J 10100 9490 J 8720 9530 Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 18800 19000 17200 17900 19500 18800 18000 19600 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 1.02 0.406 J 0.529 0.756 J 0.834 1.1 J 0.495 0.894

+

Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 1.31 0.521 J 0.675 0.967 J 1.07 1.41 J 0.633 1.14 Unionized NH 3 mg/L 0.00538 0.00054 J 0.00459 0.00483 J 0.00518 0.00349 J 0.00279 0.00473 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.027 U 0.0428 I 0.027 U 0.027 UJ 0.027 U 0.027 UJ 0.027 U 0.027 U TKN mg/L 1.45 0.916 J 1.2 1.59 J 1.65 2.37 J 1.37 1.38 TN mg/L 1.477 0.9588 J 1.227 1.617 J 1.677 2.397 J 1.397 1.407 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.00625 IJ 0.0242 J 0.00214 I 0.00245 I 0.0014 U 0.00625 IJ 0.0014 U 0.0193 J Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U 0.0022 UJ Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 33.13 33.18 29.10 32.19 34.57 31.86 31.25 32.60 Tritium pCi/L (+/-1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 Salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PW = Porewater.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. RPD = Relative Percent Difference.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).

+

= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonium ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. V = Detected in method blank.

4-48

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater November 2013 PW-M6-1 PW-M6-2 PW-EB1 PW-FB1 Parameter Units 11/07/2013 11/07/2013 11/05/2013 11/20/2013 Temperature °C 27.46 27.89 pH SU 6.49 6.46 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 42390.9 44969.6 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 7800 J 8300 J 1.28 0.31 U Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 16300 16800 0.25 U 0.25 U Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 2.22 J 2.41 J 0.236 0.273

+

Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 2.85 J 3.09 J Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00562 J 0.00587 J Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.027 UJ 0.027 UJ 0.027 U 0.027 U TKN mg/L 2.83 J- 3.02 J 0.498 0.285 TN mg/L 2.857 J 3.047 J ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0319 J 0.0344 J 0.00284 I 0.0014 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00556 IJ 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U 0.0022 U Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 27.70 29.59 Tritium pCi/L (+/-1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 Salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PW = Porewater.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. RPD = Relative Percent Difference.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).

+

= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonium ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. V = Detected in method blank.

4-49

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-23. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater February 2014 020414-PW-F1-1 020414-PW-F1-2 021314-PW-F2-1 021314-PW-F2-2 021314-PW-F2-3 020614-PW-F3-1 020614-PW-F3-2 020614-PW-F3-3 Parameter Units 02/04/2014 02/04/2014 02/13/2014 02/13/2014 02/13/2014 02/06/2014 02/06/2014 02/06/2014 Temperature °C 25.9 24.6 22.3 21.6 22.9 25.0 25.1 24.8 Specific Conductance S/cm 1458 1268 971 1259 1826 1190 1314 2082 Sodium mg/L 162 125 77.9 95.7 189 110 124 245 Chloride mg/L 157 193 126 178 330 196 230 455 Salinity

• 0.74 J 0.64 J 0.49 J 0.64 J 0.94 J 0.60 J 0.67 J 1.01 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 020514-PW-F4-1 020514-PW-F4-2 020514-PW-F4-3 021114-PW-F5-1 021114-PW-F5-2 021214-PW-F6-1 021214-PW-F6-2 021214-PW-F6-3 Parameter Units 02/05/2014 02/05/2014 02/05/2014 02/11/2014 02/11/2014 02/12/2014 02/12/2014 02/12/2014 Temperature °C 24.6 25.6 25.5 25.0 26.5 23.3 24.8 24.6 Specific Conductance S/cm 873 799 1011 34810 48481 1033 1200 2578 Sodium mg/L 55.5 56.4 59.2 6910 10400 53.9 81.5 312 Chloride mg/L 119 110 126 12900 18700 116 167 560 Salinity

• 0.44 J 0.40 J 0.51 J 22.2 32.2 0.52 J 0.61 J 1.4 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 020514-PW-EB1 021314-PW-FB-1 Parameter Units 02/05/2014 02/13/2014 Temperature °C Specific Conductance S/cm Sodium mg/L 0.310 U 0.310 U Chloride mg/L 0.250 U 0.250 U Salinity

• Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.

= Sigma (Standard Deviation). PW = Porewater.

J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

4-50

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater May 2014 050514-PW-F1-1 050514-PW-F1-2 050814-PW-F2-1 050814-PW-F2-2 050814-PW-F2-3 050214-PW-F2-4 050214-PW-F3-1 050214-PW-F3-2 050214-PW-F3-3 Parameter Units 05/05/2014 05/05/2014 05/08/2014 05/08/2014 05/08/2014 05/02/2014 05/02/2014 05/02/2014 05/02/2014 Temperature °C 28.08 26.49 28.52 27.33 26.74 27.98 27.62 27.94 26.31 pH SU 6.99 6.86 7.36 7.17 6.91 6.17 6.86 6.77 6.7 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 1508.19 1733.73 1163.22 1481.83 2414.26 887.41 1290.31 1502.9 1983.95 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 138 176 82.3 127.0 256 66 110 123 215.0 Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 174 316 150 246 498 138 213 273 434 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.341 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.026 U

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.438 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.000429 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.000017 U Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0654 0.638 0.027 U 0.276 0.0294 I 0.0297 I 0.0349 I 0.027 U 0.0541 TKN mg/L 1.08 2.45 3.05 2.91 4.44 2.14 4.23 5.12 3.17 TN mg/L 1.1454 3.088 3.077 3.186 4.4694 2.1697 4.2649 5.147 3.2241 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.00171 I 0.0047 I 0.0014 I 0.0014 U 0.00159 I 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00292 I 0.00492 I 0.0022 U 0.00351 I 0.0116 0.013 0.0217 0.0022 U 0.00246 I Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 0.77 0.89 0.59 0.75 1.26 0.42 0.66 0.77 1.03 Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. I = Value between the MDL and PQL. NH3 = Ammonia. PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Levels. NH4 = Ammonium. PW = Porewater.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. MDL = Minimum detection limit. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

= sigma (Standard Deviation mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. N = Nitrogen. PQL - Practical quantitation limit. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

4-51

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater May 2014 050614-PW-F4-1 050614-PW-F4-2 050614-PW-F4-3 050214-PW-F4-4 051314-PW-F5-1 051314-PW-F5-2 050714-PW-F6-1 050714-PW-F6-2 050714-PW-F6-3 Parameter Units 05/06/2014 05/06/2014 05/06/2014 05/02/2014 05/13/2014 05/13/2014 05/07/2014 05/07/2014 05/07/2014 Temperature °C 26.8 26.55 26.72 28.34 28.69 28.05 26.39 26.82 26.08 pH SU 6.68 6.78 6.62 6.53 6.59 6.88 6.71 6.58 6.67 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 1030.69 786.97 1053.64 1013.77 38982.43 67745.02 1039.19 1213.67 3621.23 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 60.7 48.3 65 68 7210.0 13600.0 55 80.600 442.000 Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 132 94 123 125 14200 26400 111 167.000 870.000 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.515 0.152 0.026 U 1.07 0.026 U

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.66 0.194 0.05 U 1.37 0.05 U Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.000017 U 0.00179 0.000981 0.000017 U 0.00319 1.7E-05 U Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0288 I 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.0285 I 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U TKN mg/L 4.65 6.02 6.13 3.49 2.96 2.64 5.46 3.87 2.16 TN mg/L 4.6788 6.047 6.157 3.5185 2.987 2.667 5.487 3.897 2.187 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.00199 I 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0147 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.00716 I 0.011 U 0.015 I 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0414 Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 0.52 0.39 0.53 0.51 25.24 47.05 0.52 0.61 1.93 Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. I = Value between the MDL and PQL. NH3 = Ammonia. PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Levels. NH4 = Ammonium. PW = Porewater.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. MDL = Minimum detection limit. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

= sigma (Standard Deviation mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. N = Nitrogen. PQL - Practical quantitation limit. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

4-52

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater May 2014 050514-PW-M1-1 051214-PW-M1-2 050114-PW-M2-1 050114-PW-M2-2 050114-PW-M3-1 050114-PW-M3-2 050114-PW-M4-1 051214-PW-M4-2 050114-PW-M5-1 051214-PW-M5-2 Parameter Units 05/05/2014 05/12/2014 05/01/2014 05/01/2014 05/01/2014 05/01/2014 05/01/2014 05/12/2014 05/01/2014 05/12/2014 Temperature °C 28.61 27.88 28.41 28.59 29.71 29.27 29.08 29.19 30.09 27.84 pH SU 6.65 6.71 7.13 6.51 6.83 6.79 6.78 6.7 6.81 6.99 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 47442.4 54083.4 54776 54022.1 54147 55514.8 67294.6 62224.8 63430.5 56922.3 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 9090 10300 9210 10800 7480 10700 12600 12600 12400 11400 Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 16800 20000 20600 20500 20400 21100 27000 24200 24600 21900 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0764 0.0611 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.283 0.283 0.309 0.814 0.144 0.394

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L 0.0979 0.783 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.362 0.362 0.395 1.04 0.184 0.503 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0003 0.00264 1.7E-05 U 1.7E-05 U 0.00183 0.00162 0.0017 0.00376 0.00091 0.00322 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.0354 I 0.027 U 0.038 I 0.0303 I 0.027 U 0.0589 0.0477 I TKN mg/L 0.685 1.34 1.78 1.62 1.5 3.14 5.04 2.52 2.41 2.24 TN mg/L 0.712 1.367 1.807 1.6554 1.527 3.178 5.0703 2.547 2.4689 2.2877 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0014 U 0.00203 I 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.00489 I 0.0014 U 0.0028 I Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0022 U 0.011 U 0.0022 U 0.0128 0.0023 I 0.00478 I 0.0022 U 0.011 U 0.00432 I 0.0197 I Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 31.45 36.45 36.95 36.38 36.49 37.54 46.74 42.72 43.69 38.58 Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. I = Value between the MDL and PQL. NH3 = Ammonia. PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Levels. NH4 = Ammonium. PW = Porewater.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. MDL = Minimum detection limit. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

= sigma (Standard Deviation mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. N = Nitrogen. PQL - Practical quantitation limit. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

4-53

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater May 2014 051214-PW-M6-1 051214-PW-M6-2 050114-PW-EB1 051314-PW-FB-1 051114-BB1-a-1-NTR 051114-BB1-b-1-NTR 051114-BB2-a-3-NTR 051114-BB2-b-2-NTR051114-BB3-a-2-NTR 051114-BB3-b-7-NTR Parameter Units 05/12/2014 05/12/2014 05/01/2014 05/13/2014 05/11/2014 05/11/2014 05/11/2014 05/11/2014 05/11/2014 05/11/2014 Temperature °C 27.72 27.25 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.2 27.1 27.1 pH SU 6.8 6.82 7.24 7.52 7.5 7.31 7.41 7.41 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 47797.3 45635.3 59.1 59.3 57.8 58 57.7 56.4 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L 9200 8830 0.31 U 0.31 U Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 17900 16300 1.25 0.25 U 23300 23400 22000 22500 22500 21600 Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 1.19 1.64 0.026 U 0.026 U 0.64 0.858 0.657 0.496 0.819 0.754

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L 1.52 2.1 0.814 1.08 0.827 0.629 1.04 0.953 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00625 0.00873 0.0088 0.0223 0.0163 0.00806 0.0166 0.0153 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0311 I 0.0316 I 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.084 0.027 U 0.049 I 0.027 U 0.034 I 0.027 U TKN mg/L 3.21 3.17 0.462 0.444 0.717 0.987 0.791 0.3 U 0.896 0.59 TN mg/L 3.2411 3.2016 0.489 0.471 0.801 1.014 0.84 0.327 0.93 0.617 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0115 0.0409 0.0014 U 0.00303 I 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.011 U 0.011 U 0.00231 I 0.011 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• 31.68 30.08 Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. I = Value between the MDL and PQL. NH3 = Ammonia. PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Levels. NH4 = Ammonium. PW = Porewater.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. MDL = Minimum detection limit. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

= sigma (Standard Deviation mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. N = Nitrogen. PQL - Practical quantitation limit. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

4-54

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater May 2014 051114-BB4-a-1-NTR 051114-BB4-b-4-NTR 051114-PW-EB1 Parameter Units 05/11/2014 05/11/2014 05/11/2014 Temperature °C 27 27 pH SU 7.44 7.47 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Specific Conductance S/cm 50.2 50.6 Turbidity NTU Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L Magnesium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L Boron mg/L Strontium mg/L Bromide mg/L Chloride mg/L 19100 18500 0.25 U Fluoride mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.624 0.804 0.445

+

Ammonium ion (NH 4 ) mg/L 0.788 1.01 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0134 0.0185 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.027 U 0.027 U 0.027 U TKN mg/L 1.02 0.974 0.71 TN mg/L 1.047 1.001 0.737 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0022 U 0.0022 U 0.0022 U Alkalinity mg/L Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 Sulfide mg/L Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Salinity

• Tritium pCi/L (1)

NOTES:

Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.

• PSS-78 salinity is unitless.

KEY:

°C = Degrees Celsius. I = Value between the MDL and PQL. NH3 = Ammonia. PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.

g/L = Microgram(s) per liter. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Levels. NH4 = Ammonium. PW = Porewater.

S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. MDL = Minimum detection limit. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s). TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.

= sigma (Standard Deviation mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.

CaCO3 = Calcium carbonate. N = Nitrogen. PQL - Practical quantitation limit. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

4-55

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 4.1-25. Percent Cover of Red Mangroves per Plot and Transect for Post -Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Average Percent (%) Cover Location Pre-Uprate Average August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 F1 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 2 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-5 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A F2 2 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 F5 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 2 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 6 - 25 1 26 - 50 N/A 26 - 50 N/A M1 26 - 50 N/A 26 - 50 N/A 2 26 - 50 N/A 26 - 50 N/A 1 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A M2 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 2 26 - 50 N/A 26 - 50 N/A 1 26 - 50 N/A 6 - 25 N/A M3 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 2 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 1 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A M4 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 2 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 1 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A M5 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 2 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 1 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A M6 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 2 6 - 25 N/A 6 - 25 N/A 4-56

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-26. Average Red Mangrove Height per Plot and Transect for Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range Height +/- Standard Error (cm)

Location Pre-Uprate Range August 2013 November 2013 February 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 112.3 - 114.6 112.3 6.2 113.8 6.3 113.7 5.9 F1 83.7 - 114.6 101.5 4.4 104.0 4.3 104.1 4.1 2 83.7 - 90.0 88.4 2.8 92.4 3.2 92.6 2.8 F2 2 41.8 - 43.5 41.8 - 43.5 48.7 3.5 - - 49.5 3.1 - - 48.8 2.8 - -

1 77.1 - 83.2 85.8 19.2 83.8 19.7 90.4 17.5 F5 57.8 - 83.2 68.0 7.4 72.7 7.1 72.5 7.0 2 57.8 - 59.5 60.6 6.4 69.0 7.2 65.1 6.2 1 71.3 - 72.7 N/A N/A 74.5 1.9 N/A N/A M1 71.3 - 86.4 N/A N/A 81.6 2.5 N/A N/A 2 84.6 - 86.4 N/A N/A 88.7 3.6 N/A N/A 1 87.3 - 88.8 N/A N/A 90.3 4.1 N/A N/A M2 67.0 - 88.8 N/A N/A 80.1 3.1 N/A N/A 2 67.0 - 70.2 N/A N/A 69.9 2.1 N/A N/A 1 80.8 - 84.8 N/A N/A 82.2 4.0 N/A N/A M3 80.8 - 97.8 N/A N/A 90.6 4.1 N/A N/A 2 96.4 - 97.8 N/A N/A 99.1 6.5 N/A N/A 1 78.6 - 83.0 N/A N/A 86.4 4.7 N/A N/A M4 78.6 - 83.7 N/A N/A 86.2 3.6 N/A N/A 2 82.3 - 83.7 N/A N/A 86.0 5.8 N/A N/A 1 57.5 - 59.6 N/A N/A 61.5 3.2 N/A N/A M5 57.5 - 111.5 N/A N/A 87.9 6.2 N/A N/A 2 110.3 - 111.5 N/A N/A 112.0 5.3 N/A N/A 1 100.0 - 103.7 N/A N/A 105.4 5.6 N/A N/A M6 88.5 - 103.7 N/A N/A 101.8 4.2 N/A N/A 2 88.5 - 94.3 N/A N/A 98.3 6.4 N/A N/A Key:

cm = Centimeters.

N/A = Not applicable.

SE = Standard Error.

4-57

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-27. Average Red Mangrove Biomass per Plot and Transect for Post-Uprate Events with Pre-Uprate Range Biomass (g/m2)

Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Location Pre-Uprate Range October 2010 November 2011 February 2012 November 2013 February 2014 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 210.0 - 221.0 220.2 210.0 221.0 262.8 65.6 257.6 68.8 F1 121.7 - 128.5 128.5 126.7 123.0 155.4 51.1 152.4 51.3 2 25.0 - 36.8 36.7 33.5 25.0 48.1 14.2 47.3 14.1 1 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 F2 2 2.3 - 10.0 0.8 - 3.3 9.2 3.1 2.3 3.3 10.0 3.3 13.7 4.8 4.6 2.4 13.5 4.6 4.5 2.4 3 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 93.8 - 118.8 118.0 105.4 93.8 188.7 83.1 126.1 43.6 F5 179.3 - 211.3 205.1 211.3 193.8 218.2 43.1 186.1 34.7 2 253.2 - 303.9 292.3 253.2 293.7 247.6 34.2 246.0 36.4 1 660.5 - 849.7 849.7 660.5 688.7 757.6 43.5 N/A N/A M1 649.1 - 766.9 766.9 719.2 654.5 690.8 33.7 N/A N/A 2 620.4 - 684.1 684.1 637.7 620.4 624.0 21.0 N/A N/A 1 119.0 - 134.0 132.3 123.0 119.0 100.8 18.5 N/A N/A M2 347.7 - 393.6 393.6 392.9 354.7 343.0 96.9 N/A N/A 2 572.5 - 654.8 654.8 572.5 590.4 585.1 66.5 N/A N/A 1 360.1 - 399.2 392.0 360.1 362.2 393.4 43.1 N/A N/A M3 282 - 322.4 322.4 318.3 282.0 292.6 45.0 N/A N/A 2 201.8 - 252.8 252.8 220.0 201.8 191.9 28.9 N/A N/A 1 201.5 - 226.2 226.2 204.8 201.5 208.1 22.6 N/A N/A M4 273.5 - 307 307.0 303.1 276.7 267.1 28.6 N/A N/A 2 342.2 - 387.9 387.9 342.2 351.9 326.1 31.2 N/A N/A 1 256.5 - 319.9 308.1 280.4 256.5 271.0 39.1 N/A N/A M5 288.6 - 366.3 359.6 366.3 288.6 271.7 23.5 N/A N/A 2 320.7 - 412.6 411.0 391.1 320.7 272.5 32.5 N/A N/A 1 145.3 - 168.4 168.4 145.3 152.9 145.8 19.4 N/A N/A M6 154.8 - 207.3 207.3 196.1 154.8 161.1 14.7 N/A N/A 2 156.7 - 246.3 246.3 227.1 156.7 176.4 21.8 N/A N/A Key:

2 g/m = Grams per square meter.

N/A = Not applicable.

SE = Standard Error.

4-58

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-28. Red Mangrove Sclerophylly per Plot and Transect for Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range Sclerophylly (g/m 2)

Location Pre-Uprate Range November 2013 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 234.1 - 249.5 269.8 3.9 F1 229.0 - 251.7 255.5 5.0 2 223.9 - 253.9 241.2 7.1 F2 2 228.8 - 291.0 228.8 - 291.0 250.9 6.9 250.9 6.9 1 163.0 - 240.8 227.3 3.2 F5 180.6 - 242.1 242.6 8.3 2 206.9 - 265.5 257.9 15.3 1 216.8 - 259.6 253.1 9.9 M1 217.5 - 257 261.3 10.1 2 218.2 - 254.4 269.6 17.8 1 246.7 - 275.4 281.1 9.8 M2 245.5 - 267.3 273.3 6.3 2 244.3 - 259.1 265.5 7.5 1 233.5 - 298.9 255.8 6.2 M3 235.7 - 275.7 252.2 4.7 2 223.1 - 252.4 248.6 7.3 1 220.6 - 244.3 232.2 6.4 M4 219.1 - 243.1 234.1 4.4 2 214.6 - 242.0 236.0 6.2 1 222.3 - 267.9 249.1 4.5 M5 219.3 - 260.7 258.1 4.5 2 216.2 - 260.9 267.1 7.1 1 232.9 - 265.6 269.6 8.4 M6 239.4 - 276.0 269.3 5.2 2 245.8 - 286.3 268.9 6.6 Key:

g = Grams.

2 m = Square meters.

4-59

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-29. Average Leaf Carbon for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range R. mangle Total Carbon (mg/kg)

Location Pre-Uprate Ranges November 2013 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 462675 - 490082 441750 854 F1 474612 - 490000 445125 2349 2 476030 - 490500 448500 4173 F2 2 437350 - 488040 448467 - 488040 440000 4041 440000 4041 1 456250 - 494134 463000 3873 F5 460750 - 496441 454500 4351 2 465250 - 498172 446000 5017 1 454750 - 492975 433750 2250 M1 456125 - 496888 435875 3603 2 457500 - 500800 438000 7246 1 459250 - 471325 430750 10028 M2 431738 - 468300 429375 4847 2 392150 - 468684 428000 2799 1 459059 - 476925 444000 4601 M3 436025 - 464579 446000 3207 2 395125 - 470100 448000 4916 1 460750 - 586650 457500 7053 M4 456250 - 511975 455625 6050 2 437300 - 474908 453750 10896 1 434450 - 477310 438250 3473 M5 442575 - 479169 441000 3606 2 450700 - 481027 443750 6600 1 441500 - 471298 430000 5292 M6 442875 - 470251 433375 4464 2 444250 - 469203 436750 7576 Key:

mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram.

SE = Standard Error.

4-60

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-30. Average Leaf Total Nitrogen for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range R. mangle Total Nitrogen (mg/kg)

Location Pre-Uprate Ranges November 2013 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 12355.3 - 15975.0 10750.0 250.0 F1 12402.8 - 16450.0 10750.0 163.7 2 12450.3 - 16925.0 10750.0 250.0 F2 2 10370.9 - 14500.0 10370.9 - 15400.0 10333.3 881.9 10333.3 881.9 1 13250.0 - 19300.0 13750.0 250.0 F5 12750.0 - 16433.3 13250.0 250.0 2 12250.0 - 15000.0 12750.0 250.0 1 12721.3 - 15500.0 10250.0 478.7 M1 12939.1 - 15862.5 10750.0 313.4 2 13000.0 - 16275.0 11250.0 250.0 1 10250.0 - 14175.0 9500.0 500.0 M2 10500.0 - 13725 10250.0 411.9 2 10750.0 - 13275.0 11000.0 408.2 1 11500.0 - 13925.0 11750.0 250.0 M3 11875.0 - 13350.0 11250.0 313.4 2 12250.0 - 12775.0 10750.0 478.7 1 12250.0 - 20525.0 13000.0 577.4 M4 12625.0 - 17737.5 13000.0 327.3 2 13000.0 - 14950.0 13000.0 408.2 1 12000.0 - 18450.0 11750.0 478.7 M5 11814.5 - 16862.5 11250.0 313.4 2 11454.4 - 15275.0 10750.0 250.0 1 10278.6 - 11750.0 10500.0 500.0 M6 10392.8 - 11750.0 10250.0 313.4 2 10507.0 - 11750.0 10000.0 408.2 Key:

mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram.

SE = Standard Error.

4-61

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-31. Average Leaf Total Phosphorus for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range R. mangle Total Phosphorous (mg/kg)

Location Pre-uprate Ranges November 2013 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 305.3 - 500.0 444.0 21.1 F1 365.2 - 535.0 454.0 22.3 2 425.0 - 570.0 464.0 42.4 F2 2 305.5 - 560.0 360.0 - 560.0 526.7 67.3 526.7 67.3 1 315.7 - 565.0 606.3 13.9 F5 360.2 - 498.8 556.3 24.1 2 382.5 - 432.5 506.3 29.0 1 380.0 - 485.0 474.5 25.5 M1 417.5 - 486.3 514.1 22.9 2 455.0 - 487.5 553.8 27.5 1 412.5 - 502.5 550.5 20.5 M2 407.5 - 483.8 567.6 23.3 2 402.5 - 465.0 584.8 43.9 1 233.1 - 497.5 639.8 19.5 M3 344.0 - 517.5 633.0 17.5 2 455.0 - 537.5 626.3 31.8 1 365.3 - 557.5 707.0 60.3 M4 371.4 - 537.5 673.4 32.8 2 377.5 - 517.5 639.8 25.1 1 345.0 - 480.0 546.3 30.9 M5 401.4 - 433.8 497.6 24.3 2 322.9 - 522.5 449.0 15.2 1 430.0 - 525.0 480.5 19.6 M6 416.3 - 493.8 468.9 17.5 2 402.5 - 462.5 457.3 30.8 Key:

mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram.

SE = Standard Error.

4-62

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-32. Average Leaf Carbon Isotopes for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Post- Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range R. mangle Carbon Isotopes ()

Location Pre-Uprate Ranges November 2013 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 -27.6 to -25.8 -27.2 0.2 F1 -27.2 to -25.7 -27.2 0.2 2 -27.1 to -25.7 -27.3 0.3 F2 2 -28.4 to -26.1 -28.4 to -26.1 -28.0 0.3 -28.0 0.3 1 -27.7 to -25.9 -27.3 0.3 F5 -26.9 to -25.8 -26.5 0.3 2 -26.4 to -25.7 -25.7 0.2 1 -26.1 to -24.4 -25.9 0.1 M1 -26.0 to -24.3 -25.8 0.2 2 -26.0 to -24.2 -25.8 0.4 1 -25.7 to -22.6 -25.2 0.2 M2 -25.6 to -23.4 -25.3 0.2 2 -25.6 to -24.3 -25.4 0.3 1 -25.7 to -24.1 -24.8 0.4 M3 -25.5 to -24.1 -24.8 0.2 2 -25.3 to -23.9 -24.8 0.2 1 -25.7 to -23.4 -25.1 0.3 M4 -25.9 to -24.3 -25.1 0.1 2 -26.0 to -24.9 -25.1 0.1 1 -25.3 to -22.8 -25.4 0.1 M5 -25.4 to -22.9 -25.6 0.1 2 -25.9 to -22.9 -25.8 0.2 1 -25.9 to -24.7 -25.4 0.3 M6 -25.8 to -24.9 -25.5 0.2 2 -25.6 to -25.1 -25.5 0.2 Key:

= Parts per mille.

SE =Standard Error.

4-63

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-33. Average Leaf Nitrogen Isotopes for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Post-Uprate Period with Pre-Uprate Range R. mangle Nitrogen Isotopes ()

Location Pre-Uprate Ranges November 2013 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 -2.4 to -0.3 -0.10 0.54 F1 -4.5 to -3.2 -1.99 0.85 2 -6.5 to -6.0 -3.88 0.84 F2 2 -1.7 to -0.7 -1.9 to -0.7 -0.23 0.54 -0.23 0.54 1 -2.7 to -0.8 -0.55 0.72 F5 -2.0 to -1.4 -1.81 0.66 2 -2.1 to -1.6 -3.08 0.66 1 -1.3 to -0.6 1.23 0.59 M1 0.4 to 0.8 2.19 0.47 2 1.4 to 2.5 3.15 0.23 1 -11.2 to -9.3 -9.95 1.26 M2 -6.8 to -6.0 -5.70 1.77 2 -2.6 to -1.2 -1.45 1.00 1 -9.0 to -4.1 -5.60 1.44 M3 -7.3 to -5.7 -6.93 1.07 2 -8.5 to -5.6 -8.25 1.47 1 -6.0 to -5.1 -5.20 0.43 M4 -5.8 to -4.6 -5.86 0.43 2 -6.4 to -4.0 -6.53 0.61 1 1.3 to 2.6 2.05 0.99 M5 -3.0 to -1.1 -1.96 1.66 2 -7.4 to -4.8 -5.98 1.11 1 -6.1 to -4.1 -6.40 0.86 M6 -6.6 to -5.6 -7.40 0.55 2 -7.2 to -7.1 -8.40 0.11 Key:

= Parts per mille.

SE =Standard Error.

4-64

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-34. Red Mangrove Leaf C:N Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in November 2013 R. mangle C:N Molar Ratio Location November 2013 Transect Plot Plot Transect 1 48:1 F1 48:1 2 49:1 F2 2 50:1 -

1 39:1 F5 40:1 2 41:1 1 49:1 M1 47:1 2 45:1 1 53:1 M2 49:1 2 45:1 1 44:1 M3 46:1 2 49:1 1 41:1 M4 41:1 2 41:1 1 44:1 M5 46:1 2 48:1 1 48:1 M6 49:1 2 51:1 Key:

C = Carbon.

N = Nitrogen.

4-65

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.1-35. Red Mangrove Leaf N:P Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in November 2013 C. jamaicense N:P Ratio November 2013 Transect Plot Location Location Plot Transect 1 54:1 F1 52:1 2 51:1 F2 2 43:1 -

1 50:1 F5 53:1 2 56:1 1 48:1 M1 46:1 2 45:1 1 38:1 M2 40:1 2 42:1 1 41:1 M3 39:1 2 38:1 1 41:1 M4 43:1 2 45:1 1 48:1 M5 50:1 2 53:1 1 48:1 M6 48:1 2 48:1 Key:

N = Nitrogen.

P = Phosphorous.

4-66

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table-4.2-1. Latitude and Longitude of Biscayne Bay, Card Sound, and Barnes Sound Ecological Sampling Points Point Latitude Longitude Point Latitude Longitude BB1-a-1 25.42632 80.32344 BB3-a-1 25.35211 80.32451 BB1-a-2 25.42355 80.32348 BB3-a-2 25.35034 80.32586 BB1-a-3 25.42296 80.32346 BB3-a-3 25.34834 80.32731 BB1-a-4 25.41888 80.32347 BB3-a-4 25.34671 80.32854 BB1-a-5 25.41664 80.32343 BB3-a-5 25.34400 80.33055 BB1-a-6 25.41644 80.32344 BB3-a-6 25.34172 80.33224 BB1-a-7 25.41217 80.32345 BB3-a-7 25.34089 80.33284 BB1-a-8 25.41074 80.32344 BB3-a-8 25.33927 80.33405 BB1-b-1 25.42769 80.32095 BB3-b-1 25.35051 80.32288 BB1-b-2 25.42335 80.32097 BB3-b-2 25.34832 80.32450 BB1-b-3 25.42116 80.32096 BB3-b-3 25.34663 80.32575 BB1-b-4 25.42049 80.32096 BB3-b-4 25.34426 80.32749 BB1-b-5 25.41750 80.32094 BB3-b-5 25.34346 80.32808 BB1-b-6 25.41514 80.32094 BB3-b-6 25.34202 80.32914 BB1-b-7 25.41306 80.32094 BB3-b-7 25.33996 80.33068 BB1-b-8 25.41130 80.32095 BB3-b-8 25.33817 80.33199 BB2-a-1 25.37277 80.30706 BB4-a-1 25.28361 80.38995 BB2-a-2 25.37171 80.30782 BB4-a-2 25.28203 80.39109 BB2-a-3 25.37021 80.30888 BB4-a-3 25.28096 80.39186 BB2-a-4 25.36822 80.31030 BB4-a-4 25.27843 80.39368 BB2-a-5 25.36692 80.31122 BB4-a-5 25.27762 80.39426 BB2-a-6 25.36490 80.31265 BB4-a-6 25.27576 80.39561 BB2-a-7 25.36334 80.31375 BB4-a-7 25.27357 80.39718 BB2-a-8 25.36009 80.31604 BB4-a-8 25.27135 80.39879 BB2-b-1 25.37296 80.30388 BB4-b-1 25.28255 80.38793 BB2-b-2 25.37088 80.30538 BB4-b-2 25.28035 80.38951 BB2-b-3 25.36808 80.30740 BB4-b-3 25.27996 80.38978 BB2-b-4 25.36702 80.30816 BB4-b-4 25.27821 80.39103 BB2-b-5 25.36481 80.30966 BB4-b-5 25.27587 80.39272 BB2-b-6 25.36344 80.31065 BB4-b-6 25.27476 80.39350 BB2-b-7 25.36159 80.31196 BB4-b-7 25.27293 80.39482 BB2-b-8 25.35886 80.31391 BB4-b-8 25.27068 80.39641 Note: Latitude and Longitude are in decimal degrees.

4-67

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-2. Categories of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Scored Using Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance Index Method at Each Ecological Sampling Point Calcareous Fleshy Green Corals/

Totals Algae Seagrasses Algae Algae Sponges1 Total Total Thalassia Batophora/

Penicillus Corals Macrophytes Macroalgae testudinum Dasycladus Total Drift Total Gorgonians/

Halodule wrightii Rhipocephalus Anadyomene Red Calcareous Soft Corals Total Macrophytes Total Green Syringodium Halimeda Sponges Minus Drift Other (Fleshy) filiforme Red Total Total Red Ruppia martima Udotea Seagrass Other Halophila Total Brown Acetabularia engelmannii Halophila johnsonii Halophila decipiens Note:

1 Presence/absence only.

4-68

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-3. Water Depth (m), Standard Error (SE), and Minimum and Maximum Depth by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Fall 2013 and Spring Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Area Transect 2014 Combined Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Min Max a 1.7 +/- 0.0 1.5 +/- 0.0 1.3 1.9 BB1 b 1.6 +/- 0.0 1.5 +/- 0.0 1.5 1.8 Total 1.7 +/- 0.0 1.5 +/- 0.0 1.3 1.9 a 2.2 +/- 0.1 2.2 +/- 0.1 1.9 2.6 BB2 b 2.6 +/- 0.1 2.4 +/- 0.1 2.0 3.0 Total 2.4 +/- 0.1 2.3 +/- 0.1 1.9 3.0 a 2.7 +/- 0.1 2.8 +/- 0.0 2.5 3.0 BB3 b 3.0 +/- 0.1 2.8 +/- 0.0 2.6 3.2 Total 2.8 +/- 0.1 2.8 +/- 0.0 2.5 3.2 a 2.0 +/- 0.0 2.1 +/- 0.0 2.0 2.2 BB4 b 2.1 +/- 0.0 2.1 +/- 0.0 2.0 2.2 Total 2.1 +/- 0.0 2.1 +/- 0.0 2.0 2.2 All Areas 2.2 +/- 0.1 2.2 +/- 0.1 1.3 3.2 Key:

m = meter(s).

SE = Standard Error.

4-69

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-4. Light Readings (µmols/m 2/sec) Taken Simultaneously in Air and at Each of Three Water Depths at One Point Along Each Transect by Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Sub-Surface Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Area Transect Depth Water Depth Water Air ATN1  % ATN2 Air ATN  % ATN (m) Column (m) Column*

a 0.3 2263 1825 439 19% 0.3 2065 1772 293 14%

BB1 b 0.3 2256 1872 385 17% 0.3 2061 1627 434 21%

Area 0.3 2260 1848 412 18% 0.3 2063 1700 363 18%

a 0.3 1965 1478 487 25% 0.3 2177 1790 387 18%

BB2 b 0.3 1352 1062 290 21% 0.3 2293 1935 358 16%

Area 0.3 1658 1270 388 23% 0.3 2235 1862 372 17%

a 0.3 2066 1044 1023 49% 0.3 2045 1760 285 14%

BB3 b 0.3 2432 1462 971 40% 0.3 2151 1674 478 22%

Area 0.3 2249 1253 997 44% 0.3 2098 1717 381 18%

a 0.3 408 301 107 26% 0.3 1371 1155 216 16%

BB4 b 0.3 424 268 156 37% 0.3 1819 1582 237 13%

Area 0.3 416 284 131 32% 0.3 1595 1369 226 14%

4-70

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-4. Light Readings (µmols/m 2/sec) Taken Simultaneously in Air and at Each of Three Water Depths at One Point Along Each Transect by Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Mid-Depth Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Area Transect Depth (m) Air Water Column ATN1  % ATN2 Depth (m) Air Water Column* ATN  % ATN a 0.9 2268 1293 976 43% 0.7 2062 1425 637 31%

BB1 b 0.9 2261 1451 810 36% 0.6 2060 1439 622 30%

Area 0.9 2264 1372 893 39% 0.7 2061 1432 629 31%

a 1.0 1065 520 545 51% 1.0 2180 1486 694 32%

BB2 b 1.2 1594 688 906 57% 1.2 2292 1564 728 32%

Area 1.1 1330 604 726 55% 1.1 2236 1525 711 32%

a 1.3 2621 1190 1432 55% 1.3 2028 1381 648 32%

BB3 b 1.5 2438 840 1598 66% 1.5 2204 1432 772 35%

Area 1.4 2530 1015 1515 60% 1.4 2116 1406 710 34%

a 0.9 419 200 219 52% 0.9 681 356 325 48%

BB4 b 1.0 407 205 202 50% 1.0 2060 1460 601 29%

Area 0.9 413 202 211 51% 0.9 1370 908 463 34%

4-71

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-4. Light Readings (µmols/m 2/sec) Taken Simultaneously in Air and at Each of Three Water Depths at One Point Along Each Transect by Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Off-Bottom Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Area Transect 1 2 Depth (m) Air Water Column ATN  % ATN Depth (m) Air Water Column* ATN  % ATN a 1.5 2266 1043 1224 54% 1.0 2055 1304 751 37%

BB1 b 1.4 2264 1296 968 43% 1.5 2057 1293 765 37%

Area 1.5 2265 1169 1096 48% 1.3 2056 1298 758 37%

a 1.7 803 253 550 69% 1.7 2176 1419 757 35%

BB2 b 2.0 2559 727 1833 72% 2.0 2289 1289 1000 44%

Area 1.9 1681 490 1191 71% 1.9 2232 1354 879 39%

a 2.2 1615 538 1077 67% 2.2 2028 1055 974 48%

BB3 b 2.7 2424 242 2183 90% 2.7 2210 1126 1084 49%

Area 2.5 2020 390 1630 81% 2.5 2119 1090 1029 49%

a 1.5 413 179 234 57% 1.5 608 275 333 55%

BB4 b 1.7 413 166 247 60% 1.7 393 163 230 59%

Area 1.6 413 172 241 58% 1.6 500 219 282 56%

Notes:

1 Attenuation (ATN) is the difference between the air and water readings.

2 Percent Attenuation (% ATN) is the percentage of attenuation from the air reading.

Key:

2

µmols/m /sec = Micromoles per second per square meter.

m = Meter(s).

ATN = Attenuation.

4-72

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-5. Number of Points Within Each Study Area (n=16) Containing Each of Six Substrate Types, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Sandy, Shell Sandy Sandy, Sample Sandy and Sandy, Shell Area Hash, Silty, Silty and Shell Hash, Period Shell Hash Hash, Rubble and Rubble Silty and Silty BB1 7 1 2 6 BB2 16 Fall 2013 BB3 15 1 BB4 7 7 1 1 Total 45 1 7 1 2 8 BB1 13 1 2 BB2 15 1 Spring 2014 BB3 14 2 BB4 6 5 4 1 Total 48 6 4 2 4 4-73

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-6. Mean and Standard Error (SE) Values for Surface and Bottom Water Temperature (°C) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Surface Bottom Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE a 29.6 +/- 0.1 26.0 +/- 0.0 29.6 +/- 0.15 26.0 +/- 0.0 BB1 b 30.1 +/- 0.2 27.0 +/- 0.1 30.2 +/- 0.1 27.1 +/- 0.1 Area 29.8 +/- 0.1 26.5 +/- 0.1 29.9 +/- 0.1 26.5 +/- 0.1 a 29.3 +/- 0.1 26.7 +/- 0.1 29.2 +/- 0.1 26.7 +/- 0.1 BB2 b 29.6 +/- 0.2 27.5 +/- 0.1 29.6 +/- 0.1 27.5 +/- 0.1 Area 29.4 +/- 0.1 27.1 +/- 0.1 29.4 +/- 0.1 27.1 +/- 0.1 a 29.1 +/- 0.0 26.8 +/- 0.0 29.2 +/- 0.0 26.8 +/- 0.1 BB3 b 29.4 +/- 0.0 27.3 +/- 0.1 29.4 +/- 0.0 27.4 +/- 0.2 Area 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.0 +/- 0.1 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.1 +/- 0.1 a 29.0 +/- 0.1 27.1 +/- 0.0 29.1 +/- 0.1 27.1 +/- 0.0 BB4 b 29.7 +/- 0.1 28.0 +/- 0.1 29.7 +/- 0.1 28.0 +/- 0.1 Area 29.4 +/- 0.1 27.5 +/- 0.1 29.4 +/- 0.1 27.5 +/- 0.1 Key: SE = Standard Error °C = Degrees Celsius 4-74

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-7. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients between Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events for All Areas Combined and for Each Area Analyzed Separately Bottom Water Temperature Sampling Mean Temperature (°C) +/- SE df n H p Area Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 28.27 All 27.86 +/-0.12 1 256 8.8281 0.0030

+/-0.10 27.83 28.22 BB1 1 64 1.4443 0.2294

+/-0.24 +/-0.32 28.24 BB2 27.46 +/-0.22 1 64 6.3723 0.0116

+/-0.17 28.17 BB3 27.62 +/-0.20 1 64 6.0400 0.0140

+/-0.20 28.53 28.46 BB4 1 64 0.0065 0.9358

+/-0.08 +/-0.18 Bottom Water Specific Conductance Mean Specific Conductance Sampling (µS/cm) +/- SE df n H p Area Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 52,000 52,400 All 1 256 0.5481 0.4591

+/-0.51 +/-0.53 50,980 50,700 BB1 1 64 0.0218 0.8826

+/-1.24 +/-1.54 54,980 BB2 52,740 +/-0.47 1 64 7.8337 0.0051

+/-0.92 55,430 BB3 53,070 +/-0.50 1 64 4.2827 0.0385

+/-0.90 51,200 BB4 +/-0.93 48,510 1 64 10.6089 0.0011

+/-0.82 4-75

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-7. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients between Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events for All Areas Combined and for Each Area Analyzed Separately.

Porewater Temperature Mean Temperature (°C) +/- SE Sampling Area df n H p Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 28.39 All 28.02 +/-0.12 1 251 6.0439 0.0140

+/-0.07 28.18 28.23 BB1 1 64 0.0724 0.7879

+/-0.20 +/-0.18 28.24 BB2 27.65 +/-0.18 1 64 5.6524 0.0174

+/-0.12 28.22 BB3 27.88 +/-0.18 1 64 4.6915 0.0303

+/-0.13 28.38 28.97 BB4 1 59 1.4908 0.2221

+/-0.04 +/-0.41 Porewater Specific Conductance Mean Specific Conductance Sampling Area (µS/cm) +/- SE df n H p Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 52,180 52,300 All 1 256 0.0667 0.7962

+/-0.32 +/-0.36 52,790 51,700 BB1 1 64 0.8963 0.3438

+/-0.77 +/-0.92 53,660 54,660 BB2 1 64 0.8218 0.3647

+/-0.52 +/-0.46 53,380 54,420 BB3 1 64 1.8587 0.1728

+/-0.41 +/-0.43 48,900 48,440 BB4 1 64 0.2959 0.5865

+/-0.45 +/-0.35 4-76

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-7. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients between Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events for All Areas Combined and for Each Area Analyzed Separately.

Total Macrophyte Coverage Mean BBCA Score +/- SE Sampling Area df n H p Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 2.24 2.36 All 1 256 0.4833 0.4869

+/-0.06 +/-0.08 2.23 2.39 BB1 1 64 1.0026 0.3167

+/-0.10 +/-0.13 2.27 2.31 BB2 1 64 0.0657 0.7978

+/-0.16 +/-0.21 2.44 BB3 +/-0.13 2.11 1 64 4.7610 0.0291

+/-0.15 2.62 BB4 2.02 +/-0.11 1 64 12.8865 0.0003

+/-0.1 Total Seagrass Coverage Mean BBCA Score +/- SE Sampling Area df n H p Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 1.12 1.08 All 1 256 0.2022 0.6529

+/-0.05 +/-0.06 1.41 1.39 BB1 1 64 0.0315 0.8591

+/-0.13 +/-0.12 0.86 0.72 BB2 1 64 0.7289 0.3932

+/-0.11 +/-0.12 1.16 1.17 BB3 1 64 0.0037 0.9516

+/-0.10 +/-0.11 1.05 1.03 BB4 1 64 0.0068 0.9341

+/-0.04 +/-0.06 4-77

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-7. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients between Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events for All Areas Combined and for Each Area Analyzed Separately.

Total Macroalgae Coverage Mean BBCA Score +/- SE Sampling Area df n H p Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 1.65 1.82 All 1 256 1.5095 0.2192

+/-0.05 +/-0.07 1.64 1.87 BB1 1 64 2.3630 0.1242

+/-0.10 +/-0.10 1.67 1.87 BB2 1 64 0.0438 0.8342

+/-0.10 +/-0.19 1.73 BB3 +/-0.10 1.38 1 64 6.6309 0.0100

+/-0.07 2.17 BB4 1.56 +/-0.12 1 64 14.6143 0.0001

+/-0.07 Porewater Chloride Sampling Mean Value Per Area +/- SE df n H p Area Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate 20313 21194 All 1 32 2.0602 0.1512

+/-551 +/-417 21125 21650 BB1 1 8 0.0000 1.0000

+/-1663 +/-999 20750 22250 BB2 1 8 1.0457 0.3065

+/-1031 +/-119 20375 21975 BB3 1 8 3.0361 0.0814

+/-747 +/-225 19000 18900 BB4 1 8 0.0000 1.0000

+/-913 +/-135 4-78

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-7. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients between Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events for All Areas Combined and for Each Area Analyzed Separately.

Porewater Sodium Mean Value Per Area +/- SE Sampling Area df n H p Pre-uprate Post-uprate 10538 32982 All 1 32 2.2773 0.1313

+/-280 +/-6013 10875 34283 BB1 1 8 0.3333 0.5637

+/-961 +/-14387 10988 34175 BB2 1 8 0.3333 0.5637

+/-360 +/-13698 10488 33825 BB3 1 8 3.0361 0.0814

+/-205 +/-13412 9800 29645 BB4 1 8 0.0000 1.0000

+/-426 +/-11983 Notes:

Means are presented for each area plus or minus one Standard Error (SE). The black lines denote significant differences among Uprate.

P Values in bold font are statistically significant.

Key:

°C = Degrees Celsius. BBCA = Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance.

µS/cm = Micro-Siemens per Centimeter. SE = Standard Error.

ANOVA = Analysis of Variance.

4-79

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-8. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients Among Areas for All Events Combined and for Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events Analyzed Separately.

Bottom Water Temperature Sampling Mean Temperature (°C) +/- SE df n H p Period BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 28.02 27.89 28.49 All Events +/-0.20 27.85 +/-0.14 +/-0.10 3 256 10.0500 0.0181

+/-0.15 28.53 Pre-uprate 27.83 27.46 27.62 +/-0.08 3 128 15.8217 0.0012

+/-0.24 +/-0.17 +/-0.20 28.22 28.24 28.17 28.46 Post-uprate 3 128 1.1697 0.7603

+/-0.32 +/-0.22 +/-0.20 +/-0.18 Bottom Water Specific Conductance Sampling Mean Specific Conductance (µS/cm) +/- SE df n H p Period BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 53,860 54,250 50,840 +/-0.53 +/-0.53 All Events 3 256 27.9526 < 0.0001

+/-0.98 49,850

+/-0.64 52,740 53,070 Pre-uprate 50,980 +/-0.92 +/-0.90 51,200 3 128 12.9623 0.0047

+/-1.24 +/-0.93 54,980 55,430 Post-uprate 50,700 +/-0.47 +/-0.50 48,510 3 128 17.6811 0.0005

+/-1.54 +/-0.82 4-80

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-8. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients Among Areas for All Events Combined and for Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events Analyzed Separately.

Porewater Temperature Mean Temperature (°C) +/- SE Sampling Period df n H p BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 28.20 28.65 All Events +/-0.13 27.94 28.05 +/-0.19 3 251 11.0275 0.0116

+/-0.11 +/-0.11 28.18 28.38 Pre-uprate +/-0.20 27.65 27.88 +/-0.04 3 128 13.6864 0.0034

+/-0.12 +/-0.13 28.97 Post-uprate 28.23 28.24 28.22 +/-0.41 3 123 8.1112 0.0438

+/-0.18 +/-0.18 +/-0.18 Porewater Specific Conductance Mean Specific Conductance (µS/cm) +/- SE Sampling Period df n H p BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 54,160 53,900 52,250 +/-0.35 +/-0.30 <

All Events 3 256 88.2148 0.0001

+/-0.60 48,670

+/-0.28 52,790 53,660 53,380 Pre-uprate +/-0.77 +/-0.52 +/-0.41 48,900 3 128 36.7862 0.0001

+/-0.45 54,660 54,420 51,700 +/-0.46 +/-0.43 <

Post-uprate 3 128 53.8535 0.0001

+/-0.92 48,440

+/-0.35 4-81

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-8. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients Among Areas for All Events Combined and for Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events Analyzed Separately.

Total Macrophyte Coverage Mean BBCA Score +/- SE Sampling Period df n H p BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 2.31 2.29 2.28 2.32 All Events 3 256 0.7731 0.8559

+/-0.08 +/-0.13 +/-0.10 +/-0.08 2.23 2.27 2.45 2.02 Pre-uprate 3 128 6.1667 0.1038

+/-0.10 +/-0.16 +/-0.13 +/-0.10 2.39 2.31 2.62 Post-uprate +/-0.13 +/-0.21 2.11 +/-0.11 3 128 9.0548 0.0286

+/-0.15 Total Seagrass Coverage Mean BBCA Score +/- SE Sampling Period df n H p BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 1.40 1.17 All Events +/-0.09 0.79 +/-0.07 1.04 3 256 22.8571 < 0.0001

+/-0.08 +/-0.03 1.41 1.16 1.05 Pre-uprate +/-0.13 0.86 +/-0.10 +/-0.04 3 128 10.4596 0.0150

+/-0.11 1.39 1.17 Post-uprate +/-0.12 0.72 +/-0.11 1.03 3 128 12.6605 0.0054

+/-0.12 +/-0.06 4-82

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-8. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients Among Areas for All Events Combined and for Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events Analyzed Separately.

Total Macroalgae Coverage Mean BBCA Score +/- SE Sampling Period df n H p BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 1.76 1.77 1.87 All Events +/-0.07 +/-0.10 1.56 +/-0.08 3 256 8.4892 0.0369

+/-0.06 1.65 1.67 1.73 1.56 Pre-uprate 3 128 1.1089 0.7749

+/-0.10 +/-0.10 +/-0.10 +/-0.07 1.87 1.87 2.17 Post-uprate +/-0.10 +/-0.19 1.38 +/-0.12 2 128 21.9025 0.0001

+/-0.07 Porewater Chloride Mean Value Per Area +/- SE Sampling Period df n H p BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 21388 21500 21175 All Events +/-903 +/-558 +/-471 18950 3 32 8.4077 0.0383

+/-428 21125 20750 20375 19000 Pre-uprate 3 16 2.0338 0.5654

+/-1663 +/-1031 +/-747 +/-913 21650 22250 21975 Post-uprate +/-999 +/-119 +/-225 18900 3 16 8.6466 0.0344

+/-135 4-83

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-8. Results of Statistical Comparisons of Bottom Water Temperature and Conductivity, Porewater Temperature and Conductivity, Total Macrophytes Cover, Total Seagrass Cover, Total Macroalgae Cover, and Porewater Nutrients Among Areas for All Events Combined and for Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Sampling Events Analyzed Separately.

Porewater Sodium Mean Value Per Area +/- SE Sampling Period df n H p BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 22579 22581 22156 19723 All Events 3 32 3.2986 0.3478

+/-8007 +/-7710 +/-7616 +/-6699 10875 10988 10488 9800 Pre-uprate 3 16 2.9699 0.3963

+/-961 +/-360 +/-205 +/-426 34283 34175 33825 29645 Post-uprate 3 16 2.1524 0.5414

+/-14387 +/-13697 +/-13411 +/-11983 Notes:

Means are presented for each area plus or minus one Standard Error (SE). The black lines denote significant differences among Uprate.

P Values in bold font are statistically significant.

Key:

°C = Degrees Celsius. BBCA = Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance.

µS/cm = Micro-Siemens per Centimeter. SE = Standard Error.

ANOVA = Analysis of Variance.

4-84

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-9. Mean and Standard Error (SE) Values for Surface and Bottom Water Specific Conductance (µS/cm) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Surface Bottom Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE a 39,988 +/- 373 59,613 +/- 190 40,313 +/- 358 59,538 +/- 180 BB1 b 42,925 +/- 111 58,775 +/- 190 44,238 +/- 243 58,700 +/- 210 Area 41,456 +/- 423 59,194 +/- 170 42,275 +/- 548 59,119 +/- 170 a 51,863 +/- 311 57,638 +/- 30 52,138 +/- 184 57,575 +/- 30 BB2 b 51,625 +/- 518 57,600 +/- 50 52,663 +/- 134 57,525 +/- 40 Area 51,744 +/- 293 57,619 +/- 30 52,400 +/- 129 57,550 +/- 30 a 52,400 +/- 204 58,013 +/- 180 52,438 +/- 189 57,975 +/- 200 BB3 b 52,800 +/- 105 58,413 +/- 170 52,900 +/- 63 58,400 +/- 170 Area 52,600 +/- 123 58,213 +/- 130 52,669 +/- 113 58,188 +/- 140 a 43,413 +/- 348 53,175 +/- 100 43,775 +/- 524 53,088 +/- 80 BB4 b 44,238 +/- 273 52,900 +/- 60 44,300 +/- 296 52,863 +/- 60 Area 43,825 +/- 239 53,038 +/- 60 44,038 +/- 299 52,975 +/- 60 Key:

µS/cm = MicroSiemens per centimeter(s).

SE = Standard Error.

4-85

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-10. Mean and Standard Error (SE) Values for Surface and Bottom Water Salinity (PSU) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Surface Bottom Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Mean Mean Mean Mean a 25.7 +/- 0.3 39.9 +/- 0.1 25.9 +/- 0.24 39.9 +/- 0.1 BB1 b 27.8 +/- 0.1 39.3 +/- 0.1 28.7 +/- 0.16 39.3 +/- 0.1 Area 26.8 +/- 0.3 39.6 +/- 0.1 27.3 +/- 0.4 39.6 +/- 0.1 a 34.3 +/- 0.2 38.5 +/- 0.0 34.5 +/- 0.1 38.5 +/- 0.0 BB2 b 34.2 +/- 0.4 38.5 +/- 0.0 34.9 +/- 0.1 38.5 +/- 0.0 Area 34.3 +/- 0.2 38.5 +/- 0.0 34.7 +/- 0.1 38.5 +/- 0.0 a 34.7 +/- 0.2 38.8 +/- 0.1 34.7 +/- 0.1 38.8 +/- 0.1 BB3 b 35.0 +/- 0.1 39.1 +/- 0.1 35.1 +/- 0.0 39.1 +/- 0.1 Area 34.9 +/- 0.1 39.0 +/- 0.1 34.9 +/- 0.1 38.9 +/- 0.1 a 28.1 +/- 0.2 35.2 +/- 0.1 28.3 +/- 0.4 35.1 +/- 0.1 BB4 b 28.7 +/- 0.2 35.0 +/- 0.0 28.8 +/- 0.2 35.0 +/- 0.0 Area 28.4 +/- 0.2 35.1 +/- 0.0 28.6 +/- 0.2 35.1 +/- 0.0 Key:

PSU = Practical Salinity Unit(s).

SE = Standard Error.

4-86

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-11. Mean and Standard Error (SE) Values for Surface and Bottom Water DO (mg/L) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Surface Bottom Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE a 6.1 +/- 0.3 5.3 +/- 0.1 6.2 +/- 0.2 5.3 +/- 0.1 BB1 b 5.0 +/- 0.9 6.2 +/- 0.1 5.3 +/- 0.2 6.1 +/- 0.1 Area 5.6 +/- 0.3 5.7 +/- 0.1 5.8 +/- 0.4 5.7 +/- 0.1 a 5.4 +/- 0.2 5.7 +/- 0.0 5.3 +/- 0.1 5.7 +/- 0.1 BB2 b 4.9 +/- 0.4 6.1 +/- 0.0 5.3 +/- 0.1 6.1 +/- 0.0 Area 5.2 +/- 0.2 5.9 +/- 0.0 5.3 +/- 0.1 5.9 +/- 0.0 a 5.3 +/- 0.2 5.7 +/- 0.1 5.2 +/- 0.1 5.7 +/- 0.1 BB3 b 5.6 +/- 0.1 6.0 +/- 0.1 5.6 +/- 0.0 6.1 +/- 0.1 Area 5.5 +/- 0.1 5.9 +/- 0.1 5.4 +/- 0.1 5.9 +/- 0.1 a 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.6 +/- 0.1 5.0 +/- 0.4 5.6 +/- 0.1 BB4 b 5.7 +/- 0.2 6.3 +/- 0.0 5.7 +/- 0.2 6.3 +/- 0.0 Area 5.4 +/- 0.2 6.0 +/- 0.0 5.3 +/- 0.2 6.0 +/- 0.0 Key:

mg/L = Milligram per liter.

SE = Standard Error.

4-87

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-12. Mean and Standard Error (SE) Values for Surface and Bottom Water pH by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Surface Bottom Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE a 8.0 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 8.0 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 BB1 b 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 Area 8.0 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 a 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 BB2 b 8.0 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 8.0 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 Area 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 a 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 BB3 b 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 Area 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 8.1 +/- 0.0 8.3 +/- 0.0 a 7.9 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 7.9 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 BB4 b 8.0 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 8.0 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 Area 7.9 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 7.9 +/- 0.0 8.2 +/- 0.0 Key: SE = Standard Error.

4-88

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-13. Mean and Standard Error (SE) Values for Surface and Bottom Water ORP (mV) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Surface Bottom Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE a 113.8 +/- 15.6 25.5 +/- 23.8 107.8 +/- 13.5 21.6 +/- 22.5 BB1 b 49.1 +/- 7.2 29.8 +/- 7.8 40.3 +/- 5.9 23.8 +/- 7.2 Area 81.4 +/- 11.7 27.6 +/- 12.1 74.0 +/- 11.2 22.7 +/- 11.4 a 78.6 +/- 8.7 52.1 +/- 13.9 72.5 +/- 9.6 41.8 +/- 15.2 BB2 b 71.1 +/- 11.4 20.8 +/- 9.0 65.0 +/- 11.6 13.1 +/- 7.0 Area 74.9 +/- 7.0 36.4 +/- 9.0 68.8 +/- 7.3 27.4 +/- 8.9 a 89.6 +/- 6.5 54.9 +/- 11.8 71.8 +/- 8.8 46.5 +/- 13.1 BB3 b 75.8 +/- 6.6 44.1 +/- 16.8 61.6 +/- 7.5 33.8 +/- 16.8 Area 82.7 +/- 4.8 49.5 +/- 10.0 66.7 +/- 5.7 40.1 +/- 10.4 a 98.0 +/- 8.4 85.5 +/- 16.2 90.1 +/- 8.8 79.4 +/- 17.0 BB4 b 74.4 +/- 6.3 65.5 +/- 10.6 72.1 +/- 5.3 59.4 +/- 10.3 Area 86.2 +/- 5.9 75.5 +/- 9.7 81.1 +/- 5.5 69.4 +/- 10.0 Key:

mV = Millivolt(s).

SE = Standard Error.

4-89

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-14. Mean and Standard Error (SE) for Surface and Bottom Water Turbidity (NTU) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Surface Bottom Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE a 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 BB1 b 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 Area 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 a 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 BB2 b 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 Area 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 a 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.9 +/- 0.6 0.0 +/- 0.0 1.4 +/- 0.6 BB3 b 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 Area 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.4 +/- 0.5 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.7 +/- 0.4 a 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 BB4 b 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 Area 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 0.0 +/- 0.0 Key:

NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit(s).

SE = Standard Error.

4-90

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-15. Mean and Standard Error (SE) Values for Porewater Temperature (°C) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Area Transect Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE a 29.2 +/- 0.2 27.4 +/- 0.0 BB1 b 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.2 +/- 0.0 Area 29.2 +/- 0.1 27.3 +/- 0.0 a 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.3 +/- 0.0 BB2 b 29.3 +/- 0.1 27.2 +/- 0.0 Area 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.2 +/- 0.0 a 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.3 +/- 0.0 BB3 b 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.2 +/- 0.0 Area 29.2 +/- 0.0 27.2 +/- 0.0 a 30.8 +/- 0.6 27.6 +/- 0.0 1

BB4 b 32.3 +/- 0.5 27.4 +/- 0.1 Area 31.5 +/- 0.5 27.5 +/- 0.1 Notes:

1 During the Fall 2013 sampling event, porewater temperatures were collected at only three sampling points along Transect b in area BB4 due to instrument malfunction Key:

°C = Degrees Celsius.

SE = Standard Error.

4-91

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-16. Average Values for Porewater and Bottom Water Temperature (°C) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Area Transect Mean Difference1 Mean Difference1 Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom a 29.2 29.6 0.4 27.4 26.0 -1.4 BB1 b 29.2 30.2 1.0 27.2 27.0 -0.2 Area 29.2 29.9 0.7 27.3 26.5 -0.8 a 29.2 29.2 0.0 27.3 26.7 -0.6 BB2 b 29.3 29.6 0.3 27.2 27.5 0.3 Area 29.2 29.4 0.2 27.2 27.1 -0.1 a 29.2 29.1 -0.1 27.3 26.8 -0.5 BB3 b 29.2 29.4 0.2 27.2 27.4 0.2 Area 29.2 29.2 0.0 27.2 27.1 -0.1 a 30.8 29.1 -1.7 27.6 27.1 -0.5 BB4 b2 32.3 29.7 -2.6 27.4 28.0 0.6 Area 31.5 29.4 -2.1 27.5 27.5 0.0 Notes:

1 Positive values indicate the porewater temperature is lower than the ambient water temperature.

2 During the Fall 2013 sampling event, porewater temperatures were collected at only three sampling points due to instrument malfunction.

Key:

°C = Degrees Celsius.

4-92

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-17. Comparison of Mean Porewater to Mean Bottom Water Column Temperatures (°C) by Transect and Sampling Area, Pre- and Post- Uprate Sampling Events Fall events Spring Events Tran- Pre-Uprate Fall 1 Post-Uprate Fall Pre-Uprate Spring Post-Uprate Spring Area sect PW Bott. Differ- PW Bott. Differ- PW Bott. Differ- PW Bott. Differ-Temp Temp ence2 Temp Temp ence Temp Temp ence Temp Temp ence a 29.3 29.4 0.1 29.2 29.6 0.4 27.3 26.6 -0.7 27.4 26.0 -1.4 BB1 b 29.1 28.1 -1.0 29.2 30.1 1.0 27.0 27.3 0.3 27.2 27.0 -0.2 Area 29.2 28.8 -0.4 29.2 29.9 0.7 27.2 26.9 -0.3 27.3 26.5 -0.8 a 28.3 27.9 -0.4 29.2 29.2 0.0 27.3 27.2 -0.1 27.3 26.7 -0.6 BB2 b 28.2 28.2 0.0 29.3 29.6 0.3 26.8 26.5 -0.3 27.2 27.5 0.3 Area 28.2 28.1 0.1 29.2 29.4 0.2 27.1 26.8 -0.3 27.2 27.1 -0.1 a 28.6 28.6 0.0 29.2 29.1 -0.1 27.3 26.6 -0.7 27.3 26.8 -0.5 BB3 b 28.5 28.5 0.0 29.2 29.4 0.2 27.1 26.7 -0.4 27.2 27.4 0.2 Area 28.6 28.6 0.0 29.2 29.2 0.0 27.2 26.6 -0.6 27.2 27.1 -0.1 a 28.6 28.2 -0.4 30.8 29.1 -1.7 28.2 28.6 0.4 27.6 27.1 -0.5 BB4 b 28.5 28.5 0.0 32.3 29.7 -2.6 28.2 28.8 0.6 27.4 28.0 -0.6 Area 28.5 28.3 -0.2 31.5 29.4 -2.1 28.2 28.7 0.5 27.5 27.5 -0.1 Notes:

1 Mean calculated from the two pre-uprate fall events (Fall 2010 and Fall 2011) to get a single mean value for comparison to post-uprate fall values.

2 Positive values indicate the porewater temperature is lower than the ambient water temperature.

3 During the Fall 2013 sampling event, porewater temperatures were collected at only three sampling points due to instrument malfunction.

Key:

°C = Degrees Celsius.

Bott. Temp = Bottom Temperature.

4-93

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-18. Results of Statistical Comparisons (Spearman Rank Order Correlations) of Bottom Water to Porewater Temperature (°C), Bottom Water to Porewater Specific Conductivity (µS/cm), and Seagrass Abundance (BBCA) to Depth to Hard Bottom (cm) for All Areas Combined, among Pre- and Post-Uprate Sampling Events1 Sampling Area n R p Temperature (°C): Bottom Water to Porewater All 256 0.77 < 0.0001 Specific Conductivity (µS/cm): Bottom Water to Porewater All 251 0.84 < 0.0001 Seagrass Abundance (BBCA) with Depth to Hard Bottom (cm)

All 128 0.79 < 0.0001 Note:

1 Fall 2010 and Fall 2011events combined for a single pre-uprate fall mean for analysis.

P Values in bold font are statistically significant.

Key:

µS/cm = Micro-Siemens per centimeter.

°C = Degrees Celsius.

BBCA = Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance.

cm = Centimeter(s).

4-94

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-19. Mean Values for Porewater and Bottom Water Column Specific Conductance (µS/cm) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 1

Area Transect Mean Difference Mean Difference Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom a 46,963 40,313 -6,650 56,163 59,538 3,375 BB1 b 47,425 44,238 -3,188 56,263 58,700 2,438 Area 47,194 42,275 -4,919 56,213 59,119 2,906 a 52,275 52,138 -138 57,825 57,575 -250 BB2 b 52,550 52,663 112 55,975 57,525 1,550 Area 52,413 52,400 -13 56,900 57,550 650 a 52,113 52,438 325 56,688 57,975 1,287 BB3 b 52,513 52,900 388 56,363 58,400 2,038 Area 52,313 52,669 356 56,525 58,188 1,663 a 46,463 43,775 -2,688 49,550 53,088 3,538 BB4 b 47,700 44,300 -3,400 50,038 52,863 2,825 Area 47,081 44,038 -3,044 49,794 52,975 3,181 Note:

1 Positive values indicate the porewater specific conductance is lower than the bottom water column specific conductance.

Key:

µS/cm = Micro-Siemens per centimeter.

4-95

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-20. Difference1 Between Bottom Water Column and Porewater Specific Conductance (µS/cm ) by Transect and Sampling Area, Pre- and Post-Uprate Sampling Events Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Area Transect Fall Spring Fall Spring a -3,143.1 -6,812.5 -6,650.0 3,375.0 BB1 b -5,078.1 -3,843.8 -3,187.5 2,437.5 Area -4,110.6 -5,328.1 -4,918.8 2,906.2 a -4,034.4 -275.0 -137.5 -250.0 BB2 b -3,993.8 -406.3 112.5 1,550.0 Area -4,014.1 -340.6 -12.5 650.0 a -4,409.4 306.2 325.0 1,287.5 BB3 b -5,831.3 337.5 387.5 2,037.5 Area -5,120.3 321.9 356.2 1,662.5 a -4,253.1 -2,868.8 -2,687.5 3,537.5 BB4 b -3,225.0 -3,431.2 -3,400.0 2,825.0 Area -3,739.1 -3,150.0 -3,043.8 3,181.3 Note:

1 Positive values indicate the porewater specific conductance is lower than the bottom water column specific conductance.

Key:

µS/cm = Micro-Siemens per Centimeter.

4-96

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-21. Results of Porewater Nutrient Sampling by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Sodium (mg/L)

Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 20141 Value Qual Value Qual a 8,970 59,100.00 BB1 b 9,760 59,300.00 Area Mean 9,365 59,200.00 a 10,300 57,800.00 BB2 b 10,600 58,000.00 Area Mean 10,450 57,900.00 a 10,600 57,700.00 BB3 b 10,600 56,400.00 Area Mean 10,600 57,050.00 a 8,870 50,200.00 BB4 b 8,910 50,600.00 Area Mean 8,890 50,400.00 Chloride (mg/L)

Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Value Qual Value Qual a 19,500 23,300 BB1 b 20,400 23,400 Area Mean 19,950 23,350 a 22,100 22,000 BB2 b 22,400 22,500 Area Mean 22,250 22,250 a 22,200 22,500 BB3 b 21,600 21,600 Area Mean 21,900 22,050 a 19,000 19,100 BB4 b 19,000 18,500 Area Mean 19,000 18,800 4-97

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-21. Results of Porewater Nutrient Sampling by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L)

Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Value Qual Value Qual a 0.0079 IJ 0.0840 BB1 b 0.0090 IJ 0.0270 U Area Mean 0.0085 0.0555 a 0.0054 U 0.0490 I BB2 b 0.7860 0.0270 U Area Mean 0.3957 0.0380 a 0.0054 U 0.0340 I BB3 b 0.0054 U 0.0270 U Area Mean 0.0054 0.0305 a 0.0054 U 0.0270 U BB4 b 0.0067 IJ 0.0270 U Area Mean 0.0060 0.0270 Unionized Ammonia (mg/L)

Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Value Qual Value Qual a 0.002 J 0.009 BB1 b 0.008 J 0.022 Area Mean 0.005 0.016 a 0.024 J 0.016 BB2 b 0.003 J 0.008 Area Mean 0.013 0.012 a 0.001 J 0.017 BB3 b 0.005 J 0.015 Area Mean 0.003 0.016 a 0.002 J 0.013 BB4 b 0.002 J 0.019 Area Mean 0.002 0.016 4-98

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-21. Results of Porewater Nutrient Sampling by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L)

Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Value Qual Value Qual a 0.6750 J 0.7170 BB1 b 0.7790 J 0.9870 Area Mean 0.7270 0.8520 a 0.9670 J 0.7910 BB2 b 0.5980 J 0.3000 U Area Mean 0.7825 0.5455 a 0.4990 J 0.8960 BB3 b 0.3710 IJ 0.5900 Area Mean 0.4350 0.7430 a 0.6330 J 1.0200 BB4 b 0.6020 J 0.9740 Area Mean 0.6175 0.9970 Total Phosphorus (mg/L)

Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Value Qual Value Qual a 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U BB1 b 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U Area Mean 0.0022 0.0022 a 0.0022 U 0.0022 U BB2 b 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U Area Mean 0.0022 0.0022 a 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U BB3 b 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U Area Mean 0.0022 0.0022 a 0.0022 UJ 0.0022 U BB4 b 0.0022 U 0.0022 U Area Mean 0.0022 0.0022 4-99

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-21. Results of Porewater Nutrient Sampling by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 ortho-Phosphate (mg/L)

Area Transect Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Value Qual Value Qual a 0.0181 J 0.0014 U BB1 b 0.0089 IJ 0.0014 U Area Mean 0.0135 0.0014 a 0.0016 I 0.0014 U BB2 b 0.0288 J 0.0014 U Area Mean 0.0152 0.0014 a 0.0262 J 0.0014 U BB3 b 0.0171 J 0.0014 U Area Mean 0.0217 0.0014 a 0.0052 IJ 0.0014 U BB4 b 0.0023 I 0.0014 U Area Mean 0.0038 0.0014 Notes:

1 No values for sodium reported for the Spring 2014 sampling event.

2 No values for tritium reported for the Fall 2013 sampling event.

3 No values for tritium reported for the Spring 2014 sampling event.

Key:

I = Value between the MDL and PQL.

J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias).

Q = Holding time exceeded.

U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.

4-100

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-22. Comparison of Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Analytical Results for Porewater Nutrient Samples by Transect and Sampling Area Sodium (mg/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall Spring Fall Spring1 a 9,150 13,000 8,970 59100 BB1 b 9,350 12,000 9,760 59300 Area Mean 9,250 12,500 9,365 59200 a 10,450 12,000 10,300 57800 BB2 b 10,500 11,000 10,600 58000 Area Mean 10,475 11,500 10,450 57900 a 10,500 10,000 10,600 57700 BB3 b 10,450 11,000 10,600 56400 Area Mean 10,475 10,500 10,600 57050 a 9,300 9,800 8,870 50200 BB4 b 9,100 11,000 8,910 50600 Area Mean 9,200 10,400 8,890 50400 Chloride (mg/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall Spring Fall Spring a 18,000 24,000 19,500 23,300 BB1 b 18,500 24,000 20,400 23,400 Area Mean 18,250 24,000 19,950 23,350 a 19,000 23,000 22,100 22,000 BB2 b 19,000 22,000 22,400 22,500 Area Mean 19,000 22,500 22,250 22,250 a 20,000 22,000 22,200 22,500 BB3 b 18,500 21,000 21,600 21,600 Area Mean 19,250 21,500 21,900 22,050 a 18,000 20,000 19,000 19,100 BB4 b 17,000 21,000 19,000 18,500 Area Mean 17,500 20,500 19,000 18,800 4-101

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-22. Comparison of Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Analytical Results for Porewater Nutrient Samples by Transect and Sampling Area Nitrate+Nitrite (mg/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall Spring Fall Spring a 0.0225 0.1100 0.0079 0.0840 BB1 b 0.0289 0.2100 0.0090 0.0270 Area Mean 0.0257 0.1600 0.0085 0.0555 a 0.0049 0.0260 0.0054 0.0490 BB2 b 0.0051 0.0250 0.7860 0.0270 Area Mean 0.0050 0.0255 0.3957 0.0380 a 0.0065 0.0360 0.0054 0.0340 BB3 b 0.0070 0.0240 0.0054 0.0270 Area Mean 0.0067 0.0300 0.0054 0.0305 a 0.0184 0.1300 0.0054 0.0270 BB4 b 0.0124 0.1200 0.0067 0.0270 Area Mean 0.0154 0.1250 0.0060 0.0270 Unionized Ammonia (mg/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall Spring Fall Spring a 0.001 0.003 0.002 0.009 BB1 b 0.002 0.000 0.008 0.022 Area Mean 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.016 a 0.004 0.006 0.024 0.016 BB2 b 0.001 0.010 0.003 0.008 Area Mean 0.002 0.008 0.013 0.012 a 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.017 BB3 b 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.015 Area Mean 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.016 a 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.013 BB4 b 0.004 0.009 0.002 0.019 Area Mean 0.004 0.006 0.002 0.016 4-102

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-22. Comparison of Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Analytical Results for Porewater Nutrient Samples by Transect and Sampling Area Total Kjedahl Nitrogen (mg/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall Spring Fall Spring a 0.6000 0.9000 0.6750 0.7170 BB1 b 0.5950 1.2000 0.7790 0.9870 Area Mean 0.5975 1.0500 0.7270 0.8520 a 0.6600 0.8100 0.9670 0.7910 BB2 b 0.4750 0.4600 0.5980 0.3000 Area Mean 0.5675 0.6350 0.7825 0.5455 a 0.5000 0.2300 0.4990 0.8960 BB3 b 0.3900 0.3500 0.3710 0.5900 Area Mean 0.4450 0.2900 0.4350 0.7430 a 1.1250 0.4600 0.6330 1.0200 BB4 b 0.6850 1.0000 0.6020 0.9740 Area Mean 0.9050 0.7300 0.6175 0.9970 Total Phosphorus (mg/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall Spring Fall Spring a 0.0120 0.0230 0.0022 0.0022 BB1 b 0.0135 0.0210 0.0022 0.0022 Area Mean 0.0128 0.0220 0.0022 0.0022 a 0.0155 0.0200 0.0022 0.0022 BB2 b 0.0160 0.0200 0.0022 0.0022 Area Mean 0.0158 0.0200 0.0022 0.0022 a 0.0180 0.0190 0.0022 0.0022 BB3 b 0.0135 0.0200 0.0022 0.0022 Area Mean 0.0158 0.0195 0.0022 0.0022 a 0.0280 0.0260 0.0022 0.0022 BB4 b 0.0195 0.0230 0.0022 0.0022 Area Mean 0.0238 0.0245 0.0022 0.0022 4-103

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-22. Comparison of Pre- (Fall 2010 to Fall 2011) and Post-Uprate (Fall 2013 and Spring 2014) Analytical Results for Porewater Nutrient Samples by Transect and Sampling Area Orthophosphate (mg/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall Spring Fall Spring a 0.0382 0.0400 0.0181 0.0014 BB1 b 0.0387 0.0024 0.0089 0.0014 Area Mean 0.0385 0.0212 0.0135 0.0014 a 0.0071 0.0044 0.0016 0.0014 BB2 b 0.0241 0.0036 0.0288 0.0014 Area Mean 0.0156 0.0040 0.0152 0.0014 a 0.0657 0.0038 0.0262 0.0014 BB3 b 0.0510 0.0029 0.0171 0.0014 Area Mean 0.0584 0.0034 0.0217 0.0014 a 0.0162 0.0015 0.0052 0.0014 BB4 b 0.0162 0.0051 0.0023 0.0014 Area Mean 0.0162 0.0033 0.0038 0.0014 Tritium (pCi/L)

Area Transect Pre-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Post-Uprate 2 3 Fall Spring Fall Spring a 9.3 11.9 NA NA BB1 b 9.5 16.3 NA NA Area Mean 9.4 14.10 NA NA a 13.7 13.0 NA NA BB2 b 9.0 5.8 NA NA Area Mean 11.3 9.40 NA NA a 20.0 9.6 NA NA BB3 b 23.2 15.2 NA NA Area Mean 21.6 12.40 NA NA a 8.1 13.7 NA NA BB4 b 9.6 19.5 NA NA Area Mean 8.8 16.60 NA NA Notes:

1 No values for sodium reported for the Spring Post-Uprate sampling event.

2 No values for tritium reported for the Fall Post-Uprate sampling event.

3 No values for tritium reported for the Spring Post-Uprate sampling event.

Key:

NA = Not available.

4-104

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-23. Number of Quadrats Along Each Transect (n=32) with Halodule wrightii (HW) and/or Thalassia testudinum (TT) by Study Area (n=64), Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Area Transect HW TT HW TT a 5 32 7 32 BB1 b 12 30 9 30 Total 17 62 16 62 a 16 11 15 3 BB2 b 5 12 6 13 Total 21 23 21 16 a 0 23 0 23 BB3 b 5 24 3 23 Total 5 47 3 46 a 2 32 2 32 BB4 b 0 27 1 25 Total 2 59 3 57 Total All Areas 45 191 43 181 Key: HW = Halodule wrightii. TT = Thalassia testudinum.

4-105

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-24. Percent (%) of Points within Each Study Area (n=16) Having Different Bottom Conditions, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Coverage /

Category Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Presence 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 Open 18.8 12.5 Fairly Open 25.0 68.8 50.0 68.8 50.0 62.5 31.3 37.5 Overall Moderately Open 37.5 12.5 18.8 12.5 37.5 25.0 50.0 37.5 Mostly Covered 37.5 18.8 25.0 12.5 18.8 25.0 Uniform 6.3 Sparse 25.0 62.5 87.5 87.5 75.0 81.3 93.8 68.8 Seagrass Sparse to Moderate 62.5 25.0 12.5 12.5 25.0 18.8 6.3 31.3 Moderate to Dense 12.5 12.5 Sparse 93.8 62.5 43.8 68.8 25.0 93.8 18.8 43.8 Drift Algae Sparse to Moderate 6.3 37.5 43.8 25.0 43.8 6.3 68.8 37.5 Moderate to Dense 12.5 6.3 31.3 12.5 18.8 Sparse 31.3 31.3 25.0 62.5 31.3 93.8 56.3 18.8 Batophora Sparse to Moderate 25.0 56.3 37.5 25.0 68.8 6.3 43.8 68.8 Moderate to Dense 43.8 12.5 37.5 12.5 12.5 None Calcareous Few 31.3 62.5 12.5 12.5 18.8 Algae Many 68.8 37.5 87.5 87.5 100.0 81.3 100.0 100.0 None 6.3 6.3 6.3 Sponges Few 87.5 87.5 25.0 18.8 56.3 25.0 25.0 68.8 Many 12.5 6.3 68.8 81.3 43.8 75.0 75.0 25.0 4-106

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-24. Percent (%) of Points within Each Study Area (n=16) Having Different Bottom Conditions, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Coverage /

Category Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Presence 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 None 43.8 37.5 6.3 18.8 6.3 18.8 6.3 6.3 Corals Few 56.3 62.5 31.3 12.5 56.3 31.3 25.0 62.5 Many 62.5 68.8 37.5 50.0 68.8 31.3 None 100.0 100.0 25.0 18.8 25.0 31.3 100.0 100.0 Gorgonians Few 12.5 37.5 18.8 Many 62.5 81.3 37.5 50.0 4-107

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-25. Mean and Standard Error of Water Depth (m), Mean Braun -Blaunquet Coverage Abundance1 (BBCA) Scores for Total Macrophytes, Total Seagrass, and Total Macroalgae, and Depth to Hardbottom (cm) by Transect and Sampling Area, Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 Total Macrophytes Total Seagrass Total Macroalgae Depth to Hardbottom (cm)

Spring Spring Spring Area Tran-sect Fall 2013 Fall 2013 Fall 2013 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 2014 2014 2014 Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE Mean +/-SE a 2.1 +/- 0.1 3.0 +/- 0.2 1.5 +/- 0.2 1.8 +/- 0.2 1.5 +/- 0.1 2.1 +/- 0.1 24.3 +/- 3.3 21.4 +/- 2.2 BB1 b 2.3 +/- 0.1 2.1 +/- 0.1 1.1 +/- 0.1 1.1 +/- 0.1 2.1 +/- 0.1 1.7 +/- 0.1 17.9 +/- 2.0 12.1 +/- 2.1 Area 2.2 +/- 0.1 2.5 +/- 0.1 1.3 +/- 0.1 1.4 +/- 0.1 1.8 +/- 0.1 1.9 +/- 0.1 21.1 +/- 2.0 16.8 +/- 1.6 a 3.2 +/- 0.3 1.7 +/- 0.2 1.2 +/- 0.1 0.5 +/- 0.1 2.9 +/- 0.3 1.3 +/- 0.1 10.6 +/- 1.6 4.3 +/- 0.8 BB2 b 2.6 +/- 0.2 1.8 +/- 0.2 1.5 +/- 0.1 0.4 +/- 0.1 1.8 +/- 0.1 1.5 +/- 0.2 12.2 +/- 2.7 9.4 +/- 2.2 Area 2.9 +/- 0.2 1.7 +/- 0.1 1.4 +/- 0.1 0.5 +/- 0.1 2.4 +/- 0.2 1.4 +/- 0.1 11.3 +/- 1.5 6.8 +/- 1.2 a 3.0 +/- 0.2 1.4 +/- 0.1 1.5 +/- 0.1 1.1 +/- 0.1 1.4 +/- 0.1 1.1 +/- 0.1 12.7 +/- 1.6 11.1 +/- 1.3 BB3 b 2.3 +/- 0.2 1.8 +/- 0.1 1.2 +/- 0.1 0.9 +/- 0.1 1.7 +/- 0.1 1.3 +/- 0.1 12.8 +/- 1.5 10.7 +/- 1.9 Area 2.6 +/- 0.1 1.6 +/- 0.1 1.3 +/- 0.1 1.0 +/- 0.1 1.6 +/- 0.1 1.2 +/- 0.0 12.7 +/- 1.1 10.9 +/- 1.1 a 2.7 +/- 0.1 2.5 +/- 0.1 1.3 +/- 0.1 1.0 +/- 0.0 2.3 +/- 0.2 2.1 +/- 0.2 16.1 +/- 1.4 15.0 +/- 1.3 BB4 b 2.4 +/- 0.2 2.8 +/- 0.2 1.0 +/- 0.1 0.8 +/- 0.1 1.8 +/- 0.1 2.5 +/- 0.2 12.7 +/- 1.8 9.6 +/- 1.0 Area 2.6 +/- 0.1 2.7 +/- 0.1 1.1 +/- 0.1 0.9 +/- 0.1 2.0 +/- 0.1 2.3 +/- 0.1 14.4 +/- 1.1 12.3 +/- 0.9 Notes:

1 BBCA scores: 1 (includes 0.1 and 0.5) - less than 5% coverage; 2 - 5% to 25% coverage; 3 - 25% to 50% coverage; 4 - 50% to 75% coverage; 5 - 75% to 100%

coverage.

Key:

BBCA = Braun-Blaunquet Coverage Abundance.

m = Meter(s) cm = Centimeter(s).

SE = Standard Error.

4-108

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-26. Comparison of Pre- and Post-Uprate1 Mean Braun Blanquet Coverage Abundance (BBCA) Scores 2 for Total Macrophytes, Total Seagrass, and Total Macroalgae by Transect and Sampling Area, Pre- and Post- Uprate Sampling Events Total Macrophytes Total Seagrass Total Macroalgae Area Transect Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Pre-Uprate Post-Uprate Fall* Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring a 2.1 2.3 2.1 3.0 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.8 1.4 1.6 1.5 2.1 BB1 b 1.8 2.7 2.3 2.1 1.2 1.6 1.1 1.1 1.6 2.0 2.1 1.7 Area 1.9 2.5 2.2 2.5 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.9 a 2.2 2.3 3.2 1.7 1.1 0.4 1.2 0.5 1.5 1.7 2.9 1.3 BB2 b 2.3 2.3 2.6 1.8 0.9 1.1 1.5 0.4 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.5 Area 2.2 2.3 2.9 1.7 1.0 0.7 1.3 0.5 1.6 1.7 2.4 1.4 a 2.3 2.8 3.0 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.1 1.3 1.9 1.4 1.1 BB3 b 1.8 2.8 2.3 1.8 0.9 0.8 1.2 0.9 1.3 2.4 1.7 1.3 Area 2.1 2.8 2.6 1.6 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.0 1.3 2.2 1.6 1.2 a 1.8 2.0 2.7 2.5 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.8 2.2 2.1 BB4 b 1.9 2.4 2.4 2.8 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.8 1.4 1.8 1.8 2.5 Area 1.9 2.2 2.6 2.7 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.9 1.4 1.8 2.0 2.3 Notes:

1 Fall 2010 and 2011 averaged for Fall Pre-Uprate values.

2 BBCA scores: 1 (includes 0.1 and 0.5) - less than 5% coverage; 2 - 5% to 25% coverage; 3 - 25% to 50% coverage; 4 - 50% to 75% coverage; 5 - 75% to 100%

coverage.

Key:

BBCA = Braun-Blaunquet Coverage Abundance.

4-109

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Table 4.2-27. Analytical Results for Seagrass Leaf Nutrient Samples Collected within Each of the Study A reas, Fall 2013 Method 353.2 & 351.2 365.4 U of M U of M U of M 13 Parameter Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus Total Carbon C 15N Area Transect wt% Qualifier mg/Kg Qualifier wt% Qualifier Qualifier Qualifier a 2.35 548.50 41.25 -9.70 6.45 BB1 b 2.30 555.00 41.85 -9.60 4.55 Total 2.33 551.75 41.55 -9.65 5.50 a 2.00 581.50 41.65 -9.00 2.95 BB2 b 2.05 607.50 40.60 -9.85 3.25 Total 2.03 594.50 41.13 -9.43 3.10 a 2.00 628.50 41.25 -10.55 3.70 BB3 b 2.05 628.00 41.35 -10.50 3.65 Total 2.03 628.25 41.30 -10.53 3.68 a 2.00 689.50 40.70 -10.75 4.85 BB4 b 2.10 706.00 40.55 -10.70 4.10 Total 2.05 697.75 40.63 -10.73 4.48 Note:

Methods 353.2 and 351.2 refer to the corresponding EPA methods.

Key:

= Parts per mille.

wt% = Weight percent.

mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram.

U of M - University of Miami.

4-110

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 FIGURES

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Figure 4.1-1. Post-Uprate Quarterly Porewater Sodium (mg/L) Results with Pre-Uprate Ranges.

4-112

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Figure 4.1-2. Post-Uprate Quarterly Porewater Chloride (mg/L) Results with Pre-Uprate Ranges.

4-113

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Figure 4.1-3. Post-Uprate Semi-Annual Porewater Nutrient (mg/L) Results with Pre-Uprate Ranges.

4-114

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 4 Figure 4.2-1. Post-Uprate Ecological Transect Locations with Reduced Monitoring Locations in Biscayne Bay.

4-115

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5

5. HYDROGEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT In the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012), FPL provided an overview of the Biscayne aquifer and geologic formations. Information was also presented that showed groundwater responses to environmental conditions in the area, operational effects of the CCS on water levels, and the extent of CCS waters. This Post-Uprate report follows up on some of the information previously presented and notes any changes since the Pre-Uprate Report.

5.1 Post-Uprate Hydrogeologic Observations Water levels in the CCS have been in a general decline over the Post-Uprate period. Unlike in the Pre-Uprate period when substantial rain events raised water levels throughout the CCS, no substantial rain events have occurred during the Post-Uprate, which is one of the reasons for the currently higher specific conductance values in the CCS. With lower water levels (basically no major spikes in water levels) there is less of a driving head for water to move outward into the groundwater. Any effects of generally lower water level in the CCS are offset, though, by the increased specific conductance/densities of the CCS water. In the Post-Uprate period, the previously reported occasional seepage effects of the CCS at TPSWC-5 (Grand Canal immediately adjacent, south of the CCS) were not as evident based on temperature and specific conductance data.

When reviewing the CCS water levels for the entire monitoring period from June 2010 through May 2014, the smallest difference in water levels among the CCS stations was during the middle part of the Interim Operating period when the nuclear units were being uprated. Water level on the intake side of the plant at TPSWCCS-6 was also higher than normal for an extended period during the Interim Operating period. It is possible that the increase in specific conductance and tritium at TPGW-10D could be attributable, in part, to the higher water levels at TPSWCCS-6, but that has not been confirmed.

While specific conductance and temperature have increased in the CCS since the Uprate, the effect has not yet been observed in TPGW-13S, the shallow well in the CCS. The temperature in TPGW-13S has gradually decreased over the entire monitoring period and specific conductance levels in this well were lower in May 2014 than in May 2011. These observations provide some insights into the vertical hydraulic conductivity below the CCS.

As a follow-up to the assessment conducted in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report, FPL reviewed the Post-Uprate data along with the rest of the water level data to determine if the CCS operations were having any profound effect on the groundwater levels. Groundwater levels for the three well clusters in Biscayne Bay are shown in Figures 5.1-1, 5.1-2, and 5.1-3. The values reflect daily averages and the vertical scale is enhanced to facilitate a review of the differences 5-1

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5 between each zone. Since the TPGW-10 well cluster is located closest to the CCS plant intake where the CCS water levels are the lowest, the potential for drawing down the groundwater in the shallow zone, and possibly in the intermediate zone, is greatest at this location. A review of the time series plot for the three wells at TPGW-10 shows that differences in water levels between zones are minimal i.e. typically within hundredths of a foot; these differences are within the accuracy of the instruments and their settings. Additionally, the differences in water levels among the three wells do not track each other consistently. If there is continued drawdown from the CCS, water level at the zone of withdrawal would most likely be lower compared to the other wells. Neither TPGW-10 nor TPGW-11 exhibited such a pattern over the Pre-Uprate or Post-Uprate periods At well cluster TPGW-14, difference in water levels among the three zones was greater than at other Biscayne Bay well clusters. In the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012), FPL noted that the only well cluster that consistently had the shallow and intermediate zones lower than the deeper zone groundwater levels was at well cluster TPGW-14, which is farthest from the pump intake into the CCS. The water levels in the shallow and intermediate zones were shallower than the deep zone for approximately half of the Post-Uprate period, but since the beginning of 2014, the shallow zone now has the highest elevations. Thus, there is no consistency in the trends. None of the observations at well clusters TPGW-10, TPGW-11, and TPGW-14 indicate an influence of the CCS on groundwater level at any depth interval.

Differences in water levels between zones such as at TPGW-14 are more likely associated with site-specific hydrogeological conditions.

In an effort to further determine if and how the groundwater responds to operation of the CCS, FPL reviewed groundwater levels during periods of outages and non-outages for the plant with a focus on the Uprate construction/Interim Operating period when either Nuclear Unit 3 or Nuclear Unit 4 was out of service for an extended period of time. When pumping and associated flow is reduced, the CCS water levels may rise on the intake side and drop on the discharge canal side of the plant. Figures 5.1-4 and 5.1-5 show plots of flow for the nuclear units with CCS water levels and adjacent groundwater level superimposed for TPGW-1 and TPGW-10 for the entire monitoring period. The Interim Operating period is clearly noted. The flow from the nuclear units is based on the run time of the four circulating water pumps and configuration of the three intake cooling water pumps for each nuclear unit. TPGW-1 would be the most likely location to see an effect of reduced flows/lower water levels on the discharge side of the CCS, and TPGW-10 would be the most likely location to see an effect of reduced flows/increased water levels on the intake side of the CCS as a result of an outage. Water levels at TPSWCCS-1 and TPSWCCS-6 are included with TPGW-1 and TPGW-10, respectively. For both TPGW-1 and TPGW-10, there is no clear trend or influence associated with the Uprate outage. If there are effects, they are subtle and are masked by meteorological and seasonal conditions. This still suggests that other factors (perhaps meteorological or hydrological) exert a greater influence on groundwater in wells near the CCS than does operation of the CCS.

5-2

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5 5.2 Extent of CCS Water As discussed in Sections 2 and 3, the most notable changes in the extent of saline water in the groundwater is the increase in specific conductance at TPGW-10D and, to a lesser extent, in TPGW-11D. Another notable increase in specific conductance was at TPGW-7D where levels began to rise in July 2013 from less than 600 S/cm to over 4300 S/cm by May 2014 (Figure 2.1-8).

Figures 5.2-1, 5.2-2, and 5.2-3 show cross-section locations and cross-sections with pre-CCS (April 1, 1971, through February 1, 1972) and recent (March 2014) specific conductance data.

Isopleths are drawn to show the approximate change in specific conductance concentrations from the early 1970s (pre-CCS operation) to the recent period. Other than accounting for the increases, primarily in TPGW-10D and TPGW-7D, these figures are similar to those provided in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). All isopleths represent estimations of historical and current water quality conditions and were developed based on interpolation methods and best professional judgment. While chloride concentrations provide more direct evidence of saltwater/marine water intrusion, specific conductance can also be used as a surrogate, with the understanding that its value could be affected by salts found in fresh water. In nearly all the wells sampled for this current monitoring effort, a high specific conductance value (greater than 1,275 S/cm) appears to indicate marine influences. Only one well (TPGW-8S) had specific conductance readings that were influenced by another ion (calcium) and may not reflect marine influences.

Figures 5.2-2 and 5.2-3 show the approximate historical limit of what would now be defined by the FDEP as Class III groundwater (TDS greater than 10,000 mg/L per Chapter 62-520.430, F.A.C.). While historical TDS values are not available for all stations, there is a relationship between specific conductance and TDS; based on the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report findings from recent analytical data, the TDS value on average is 60% of the specific conductance value.

This relationship was used to calculate historical TDS values and to estimate the approximate limits of Class III groundwater prior to CCS construction.

Plan view maps showing the isopleths of specific conductance in each zone (shallow, intermediate, and deep) are provided as Figures 5.2.4, 5.2-5, and 5.2-6. Although there have been some slight adjustments, these figures are almost identical to the Pre-Uprate figures (FPL 2012).

5.3 Water and Salt Balance Model Tetra Tech developed a model of the water and salt balance for the CCS. The purpose of this model is to quantify the volume of water and mass of salt entering and exiting the CCS over a period of time. This Excel-based model, the underlying conceptualization of the relationship between the CCS and the surrounding environmental systems, key calculations, and results were most recently detailed in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). That version of the model simulated water and salt flow to and from the CCS for the period between September 5-3

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5 2010 and June 2012. Currently, the modeled period extends through May 2014 and encompasses a Post-Uprate period.

The conceptual model and associated calculations are predominantly unchanged since last presented in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report. As such, only a brief summary of the model is provided below. In addition, model results and corresponding conclusions regarding the operation of the CCS, based on the current calibrated water and salt balance model, are provided herein. The Excel spreadsheet that comprises the model is provided in a separate data file.

5.3.1 Model Summary As Figure 5.3-1 depicts, the water balance for the proposed control volume is comprised of seepage (lateral through the sides and vertical through the bottom), blowdown (additional water pumped from other units to the CCS), precipitation (including runoff from earth berms between canals), and evaporation. Aside from evaporation and precipitation, these are the same mechanisms by which salt flows into and out of the CCS. The means by which water and/or salt is transferred (e.g., seepage, evaporation) are calculated using various equations provided in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). Calculations were performed for a 45-month period from September 2010 through May 2014. Average flows of water and salt into and out of the control volume were calculated for each day of this period using hydrologic, water quality, and meteorological data measured within, beneath, and adjacent to the CCS. The average daily flows were summed to estimate the amount of water and salt that enters or exits the control volume (i.e., the CCS) during each month and the entire 45-month period. These calculations demonstrate and validate the conceptual model of the CCS and, in so doing, illustrate the hydrologic mechanisms by which the CCS functions.

Calculated water flows are reported in 106 gallons per day (millions of gallons per day [MGD]).

The mass flux into or out of the control volume is calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the body of water from which the water is flowing. Salinity was monitored at all groundwater and surface water stations employed in the ensuing calculations and was reported in the practical salinity scale (PSS-78), which is equivalent to grams per liter (g/L).

Calculated mass fluxes are reported in thousands of pounds per day (lb x 1000/day).

The gain/loss of water and salt mass within the control volume during some period of time results in a change in the control volumes water and salt mass storage. Increased water storage, for instance, occurs when more water enters the control volume than exits. Storage, then, can be estimated by summing all of the components of the water (and salt) balance. When the net flow is positive (into the control volume) during a specified period of time, the storage of control volume increases. Conversely, a net negative (out of the control volume) flow implies a decrease in storage during a specified time period.

Another manner in which a change in storage can be estimated relies on direct measurements of water elevations and salinities within the control volume. A change in water elevation within the control volume can be calculated as a difference between water elevations at the beginning and end of a specified time period. The product of this change in water elevations and the 5-4

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5 surface area of the control volume provide an estimate of the change in the volume of water contained in the control volume during that period of time. Estimates of daily storage changes derived from this method are used to further calibrate the water and salt balance model to ensure an accurate simulation of temporal trends CCS water elevation and salinity.

5.3.2 Results and Discussion The individual components of the water and salt balance were simulated daily and summed for each month from September 2010 through May 2014, as well as for the collective 45-month period. The individual components of flow are summed in order to calculate a simulated change in volume for each month and for the 45-month period. These simulated changes in storage were compared to observed changes in CCS water and salt storage for each month and the entire calibration period. Errors between the simulated and observed storage changes were minimized by adjusting key variables associated with the flow balance model; this process is called calibration. The calibration process ensures that the model can accurately reflect the average changes in CCS storage over the 45-month time frame, while also effectively capturing day-to-day changes in CCS water and mass storage. Calibration of the water and salt balance model was achieved by adjusting hydraulic conductivities of the aquifer materials adjacent to and beneath the CCS that factor into the calculation of seepage to/from groundwater and Biscayne Bay. Additional adjustable parameters include the coefficients in the wind function (FPL 2012),

the amount of runoff that enters the control volume as percentage of precipitation, the amount of Unit 5 cooling tower water that is lost to evaporation before entering the CCS, and the salinity of the Unit 5 blowdown as a percentage of seawater. The calibrated model parameter values are provided in Table 5.3-1.

The horizontal hydraulic conductivities laterally adjacent to the control volume were calibrated to range between 500 ft/d and 950 ft/d. The calibrated vertical conductivities beneath the control volume ranged from 0.1 ft/day to 4 ft/d. The northern portion of the discharge canals and return canals, where it is assumed deeper canals intersect highly permeable material underlying the muck and Miami limestone, were calibrated to have higher vertical hydraulic conductivities (3.8 ft/d and 4 ft/d, respectively). Lower vertical conductivities were calibrated for the mid- and southern portions of the discharge canals, as well as the southern portion of the return canals (0.1 ft/d).

Results of the simulated 45-month water and salt balance model are provided in Tables 5.3-2 and 5.3-3, respectively. Monthly balance results follow in Table 5.3-4 through Table 5.3-5. The modeled net flow of water, as calculated by the summing the components of the water balance for the 45-month calibration period, is denoted as the Modeled Change in CCS Storage and was calculated to be an average inflow of 0.05 MGD over the 45-month calibration period. The observed change in storage, which is the difference in the volume of water in the CCS between the final and first days of the calibration period, divided by the number of days in the period, was observed to be 0.31 MGD (inflow). Though the model underestimated the net inflow of water from the CCS, the residual error between the simulated and observed flow is only 0.26 MGD.

This error is small (0.26%) relative to the monthly net observed flows, which for the entire 45-month period range from a net outflow of 46.6 MGD (October 2010) and a net inflow of 52.1 5-5

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5 MGD (September 2010). During the Post-Uprate period (June 2013 - May 2014), the monthly net observed flows range from a net outflow of 31.1 MGD (June 2013) to a net inflow of 19.6 MGD (July 2013). The model simulates a net outflow of 3.26 MGD of water from the CCS during the Post-Uprate period, which matches the observed net outflow of water during Post-Uprate (3.42 MGD) reasonably well. The net outflow of water during this timeframe is predominantly attributable to a relative lack of precipitation (which accounts for 30% of the simulated inflow during this timeframe) and relatively high evaporation (which accounts for 85%

of the simulated outflow). During the simulated Pre-Uprate and Interim Operating period (September 2010 through May 2013), precipitation accounted for 39.4% of inflowing water to the CCS and evaporation accounted for 63.7% of the outflowing water from the CCS.

The model simulated a net influx of salt over the 45-month period at rate of 1,938 (lb x 1,000)/day. The corresponding observed rate of salt inflow was calculated by multiplying the average observed salinity in the CCS on the final and first day of the calibration period by the corresponding CCS volumes on those days. The difference between these two products, divided by the number of days in the calibration period, provides the net inflow of salt, 497 (lb x 1,000)/day. The error associated with the mass flux is an overestimation by approximately 697 (lb x 1,000)/day. As in the case of water balance simulation, the magnitude of this overestimation is small (3.1%) relative to the range in monthly average flows for the entire 45- month period; the monthly net mass fluxes range from an outflow of 13,790 (lb x 1,000)/day (October 2010) to an inflow of 8,659 (lb x 1,000)/day (June 2011). During the Post-Uprate period (June 2013 - May 2014), the monthly observed net salt mass fluxes range from a net outflow of 6,529 (lb x 1,000)/day (December 2013) to a net inflow of 5,847 (lb x 1,000)/day (April 2014). There was a net gain of salt within the CCS during the Post-Uprate period of 2,216 (lb x 1,000)/day. This gain in salt is likely to be attributable to two factors. First, the relative paucity in freshwater precipitation resulted in reduced CCS water levels. As such, groundwater and associated salt mass account for much of the inflow to the CCS during the Post-Uprate period. Second, the low water levels and relatively high evaporation (which removes freshwater from the CCS and leaves salt behind) resulted in seepage to groundwater being a relatively small component of the water and mass outflow from the CCS. Thus, CCS salt mass outflow was not a pronounced element of the salt balance during the Post-Uprate period and salt mass from evaporation was generally retained. As a result, the CCS gained salt between June 2013 and May 2014.

Figures 5.3-2 and 5.3-3 illustrate the models ability to match the magnitude and direction of net monthly flows of water and salt, respectively. Figure 5.3-2 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of water into and out of the CCS. There is a seasonal trend in observed flows to/from the CCS, where inflows are generally associated with the wet season and outflows are generally associated with the dry season. The model is able to replicate this trend reasonably well. However, there are isolated months where the model does not accurately simulate the net flow (e.g., April and September 2011). Figure 5.3-3 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of salt into and out of the CCS. Like the modeled water flows, estimated salt mass fluxes generally match observed fluxes well, though there are individual months where the estimated mass flux is less accurate.

5-6

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5 Implicit in the models ability to simulate monthly net water and salt mass flows is the accurate simulation of daily flows to and from the CCS. Because the model is able to characterize the daily flows of water and salt, the model estimates the daily changes in CCS water and salt storage. As previously mentioned, these changes in storage are associated with daily changes in CCS water levels and salinity. Figure 5.3-4 shows the model-calculated water level in the CCS, which varies over the period of record. These modeled water levels range between approximately

-1.5 ft NAVD 88 and 1 ft NAVD 88, and reflects an average water level throughout the entire CCS. Also shown in this figure are the observed CCS water levels over time; the observed values reflect the mean of daily-averaged water elevations across the seven sensors in the CCS.

Simulated water elevations are calculated by dividing the simulated daily change in CCS storage by the average daily CCS surface area and adding the resulting value (which reflects a change in water level) to the previous days simulated water elevation. It is evident from this figure that the model effectively captures the general trend in CCS water elevations over the 45-month period, and accurately simulates average CCS water elevations throughout much of the calibration period.

Similarly, changes in salt mass storage within the CCS can be used to calculate average CCS salinity changes over time. The simulated daily net flow of salt is divided by the simulated volume of water in the CCS, which results in a change in salinity. This change in salinity is added to the simulated salinity calculated for the previous day to produce a simulated salinity for the current day. Like the simulated CCS water level, the model salinity reflects a representative daily salinity throughout the CCS. Figure 5.3-5 compares the simulated salinities to those observed in the CCS over the period of record. Observed salinities are the mean of daily averaged salinities measured in the CCS monitoring stations. The modeled CCS salinity changes over time match changes in the average observed CCS salinity throughout the 45-month period of record. This timeframe includes the recent rise in salinity from approximately 60 g/L to approximately 90 g/L. That the model can match this notable increase in CCS salinity reinforces the conceptual model, which suggests that changes in CCS salinity are predicated solely on changes in the flow of water into and out of the CCS.

The accurate simulation of changing CCS inflows, outflows, water elevations and salinities is complex due to the different components of the balance model and their varying impacts upon CCS water and salt storage. For instance, vertical flows into and out of the control volume are generally larger than horizontal flows, and have a greater impact upon CCS water elevation. The salinity of inflowing water, however, can vary depending upon the source of the water. For example, horizontal flow from the west (L-31E) is non-saline and has a pronounced mitigating impact upon CCS salinities; vertical flow from groundwater beneath portions of the discharge canals is saline to hyper-saline and generally increases the salinity of the CCS. The correct balance of both water and salt mass flow is difficult to estimate in the model. In addition, the simulated timeframe encompasses both Pre- and Post-Uprate periods, during which CCS water temperatures slightly increase. The model addresses associated impacts to the CCS by explicitly simulating the effects of water/air temperature gradients on evaporation. Whereas myriad sources and sinks of water, varying salinities, and changes in water temperature do increase model complexity, the need to accurately simulate these different components of CCS operation constrains the number of possible solutions.

5-7

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 5 Though the model is able to simulate the complex dynamics associated with the CCS over a 45-month timeframe with reasonable accuracy, there are periods of time where the simulated flows of water and salt do not accurately reflect observed conditions. Consequently, the simulated water level and salinities in the CCS deviate from those that have been observed at various times in the simulation period. However, the overall performance of the model reinforces its utility as a tool for understanding how the CCS has and will operate under varying meteorological, hydrological, and operational conditions. This is best demonstrated by the fact that the same conceptual model employed to characterize changes in CCS storage of water and salt during the Pre-Uprate period is used to explain changes in storage during the Post-Uprate period. This is a period of time during which water levels have generally decreased, salinities have dramatically increased and water temperatures have risen within the CCS. Nevertheless, the exchanges of flows between the CCS and surrounding environment during Post-Uprate are governed by the same hydrologic principles as during the Pre-Uprate period. This robustness and accuracy in the model underpins FPLs firm understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the adjacent aquifer and water bodies. This accuracy in simulating the historical changes within the CCS bolsters confidence in the models utility as a tool to evaluate the sensitivity of CCS operations to certain factors such as changes in operation, drought conditions, storm events, and other potential environmental stresses. Additionally, the model accuracy validates the fact that the most appropriate data are being collected to effectively capture CCS operations, identify interactions between the CCS and the surrounding environment, and support FPLs comprehension of historical and future operations of the CCS.

5-8

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 TABLES

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-1. Calibration Parameters Calibrated Parameter Name Value Units Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone A) 3.8 ft/day Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone B) 0.1 ft/day Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone C) 0.1 ft/day Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone D) 4 ft/day West Face Hydraulic Conductivity 950 ft/day East Face Hydraulic Conductivity 1000 ft/day North Face Hydraulic Conductivity 500 ft/day South Face Hydraulic Conductivity 500 ft/day Evaporation Modifier (Factor Multiplier) 0.69 Runoff Modifier (as % of Precipitation) 34%

Blowdown Evaporation Factor 20%

Blowdown Concentration (as % of Seawater) 0.4 5-10

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-2. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2010 to May 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.92 1256.71 E. Seepage 15.37 21044.68 N. Seepage 0.01 13.96 S. Seepage 2.39 3274.42 Bottom Seepage 11.47 15708.95 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 20.44 27984.72 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.47 648.79 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.92 1256.99 ID Pumping 3.31 4529.48 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 55.31 75718.69 W. Seepage 0.00 -3.91 E. Seepage -4.12 -5642.91 N. Seepage -0.01 -8.68 S. Seepage -0.12 -162.98 Bottom Seepage -12.48 -17091.43 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -38.53 -52744.39 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -55.26 -75654.30 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.05 64.39 Observed Change 0.31 417.57 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal = Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-11

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-3. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2010 to May 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.55 8965.03 E. Seepage 4324.59 5920366.26 N. Seepage 2.30 3150.21 S. Seepage 466.15 638163.40 Bottom Seepage 3350.12 4586312.27 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 107.28 146861.12 ID Pumped Water 363.67 497869.29 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8620.66 11801687.58 W. Seepage -42.58 -58287.90 E. Seepage -1632.46 -2234836.51 N. Seepage -3.05 -4179.04 S. Seepage -63.49 -86913.97 Bottom Seepage -5685.41 -7783332.80 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7426.99 -10167550.22 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1193.67 1634137.36 Observed Change 497.04 680445.13 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

lb = Pound(s).

5-12

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.73 21.80 E. Seepage 10.82 324.68 N. Seepage 0.02 0.45 S. Seepage 2.54 76.13 Bottom Seepage 8.29 248.59 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 78.65 2359.64 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.98 29.36 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 102.31 3069.29 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6.06 -181.83 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.08 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -7.18 -215.33 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -38.11 -1143.43 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -51.36 -1540.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 50.95 1528.63 Observed Change 52.14 1564.08 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal = Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-13

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.25 7.86 E. Seepage 0.74 22.98 N. Seepage 0.00 0.15 S. Seepage 2.04 63.20 Bottom Seepage 6.04 187.28 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 13.60 421.63 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 0.75 23.11 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 23.71 735.14 W. Seepage -0.01 -0.33 E. Seepage -24.43 -757.44 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.19 S. Seepage -0.04 -1.13 Bottom Seepage -23.74 -735.81 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -29.88 -926.14 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -78.10 -2421.04 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -54.38 -1685.91 Observed Change -46.60 -1444.52 5-14

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.30 9.12 E. Seepage 4.85 145.62 N. Seepage 0.00 0.14 S. Seepage 1.77 53.17 Bottom Seepage 1.67 50.15 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 26.93 807.85 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Blowdown 0.50 14.98 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 36.32 1089.69 W. Seepage -0.07 -1.99 E. Seepage -7.91 -237.30 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.11 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.66 Bottom Seepage -14.98 -449.29 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -29.16 -874.94 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -52.14 -1564.29 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -15.82 -474.60 Observed Change -5.02 -150.50 5-15

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.85 26.31 E. Seepage 18.20 564.28 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.60 49.75 Bottom Seepage 2.36 73.31 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 3.79 117.56 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 0.72 22.33 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 27.82 862.46 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.49 -15.24 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.41 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.13 Bottom Seepage -15.08 -467.61 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -27.76 -860.43 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -43.35 -1343.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -15.53 -481.36 Observed Change -12.72 -394.29 5-16

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.76 54.46 E. Seepage 9.94 308.08 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.38 42.83 Bottom Seepage 2.80 86.95 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 19.42 602.16 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 0.82 25.40 ID Pumping 4.91 152.24 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 41.32 1281.04 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4.19 -129.74 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.45 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -18.38 -569.72 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -26.80 -830.84 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -49.38 -1530.75 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -8.06 -249.71 Observed Change -2.54 -78.88 5-17

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.26 35.15 E. Seepage 25.22 706.19 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 2.80 78.37 Bottom Seepage 10.00 279.99 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.70 19.51 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.06 Blowdown 0.70 19.46 ID Pumping 2.25 63.03 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 43.21 1209.76 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.38 -10.77 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.56 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -19.59 -548.63 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -32.26 -903.41 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -52.26 -1463.38 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -9.06 -253.62 Observed Change -14.26 -399.40 5-18

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.41 43.73 E. Seepage 20.83 645.80 N. Seepage 0.00 0.08 S. Seepage 3.06 94.99 Bottom Seepage 11.11 344.53 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 7.12 220.82 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 0.66 20.55 ID Pumping 9.37 290.40 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 53.87 1669.85 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.31 -9.51 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.14 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -17.95 -556.34 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -33.91 -1051.21 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -52.17 -1617.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1.70 52.64 Observed Change 3.19 99.02 5-19

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.11 33.40 E. Seepage 29.39 881.74 N. Seepage 0.00 0.13 S. Seepage 3.75 112.65 Bottom Seepage 16.92 507.68 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 10.36 310.85 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Blowdown 1.13 33.95 ID Pumping 7.46 223.80 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 70.43 2112.84 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -18.57 -557.09 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -35.31 -1059.27 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -53.88 -1616.42 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 16.55 496.41 Observed Change -7.85 -235.45 5-20

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.44 44.50 E. Seepage 47.76 1480.44 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 4.38 135.75 Bottom Seepage 28.64 887.78 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 6.92 214.50 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 1.16 35.93 ID Pumping 14.81 459.13 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 105.39 3266.96 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -0.04 -1.19 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -51.71 -1603.15 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -42.03 -1302.87 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -93.78 -2907.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11.60 359.75 Observed Change 11.51 356.77 5-21

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components June 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.59 47.67 E. Seepage 38.31 1149.35 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 4.26 127.95 Bottom Seepage 28.84 865.18 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 8.02 240.68 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 15.99 Blowdown 1.02 30.60 ID Pumping 16.13 483.83 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 98.71 2961.25 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.01 -0.27 N. Seepage -0.03 -1.02 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -43.32 -1299.71 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -46.24 -1387.09 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -89.60 -2688.10 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 9.11 273.16 Observed Change 10.30 309.07 5-22

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components July 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.95 60.52 E. Seepage 4.81 149.10 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.56 48.21 Bottom Seepage 5.91 183.20 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 45.19 1400.79 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.54 16.59 Blowdown 1.13 35.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 61.08 1893.42 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -12.01 -372.46 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.43 S. Seepage -0.05 -1.58 Bottom Seepage -14.48 -449.03 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -46.43 -1439.30 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -72.99 -2262.80 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -11.92 -369.38 Observed Change 9.24 286.59 5-23

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components August 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.16 36.08 E. Seepage 14.19 439.99 N. Seepage 0.00 0.13 S. Seepage 2.56 79.39 Bottom Seepage 7.27 225.36 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 37.76 1170.55 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 16.36 Blowdown 1.04 32.25 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 64.52 2000.11 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.05 E. Seepage -2.37 -73.46 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -3.97 -123.00 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -44.75 -1387.17 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -51.09 -1583.72 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 13.43 416.39 Observed Change 20.17 625.23 5-24

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.83 24.75 E. Seepage 10.10 302.92 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.10 62.99 Bottom Seepage 3.65 109.50 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 37.53 1125.82 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.55 Blowdown 0.98 29.36 ID Pumping 5.74 172.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 61.47 1843.99 W. Seepage -0.02 -0.70 E. Seepage -2.05 -61.38 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.21 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -8.12 -243.67 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -44.87 -1346.23 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -55.07 -1652.19 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6.39 191.81 Observed Change -5.14 -154.17 5-25

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.75 23.15 E. Seepage 6.22 192.95 N. Seepage 0.00 0.11 S. Seepage 2.48 76.86 Bottom Seepage 6.96 215.70 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 52.98 1642.32 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 16.21 Blowdown 0.75 23.11 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 70.66 2190.41 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -9.88 -306.26 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.24 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -12.38 -383.88 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -32.60 -1010.53 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -54.87 -1700.91 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 15.79 489.50 Observed Change 8.79 272.51 5-26

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.47 14.01 E. Seepage 14.55 436.40 N. Seepage 0.01 0.22 S. Seepage 2.26 67.69 Bottom Seepage 6.76 202.89 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 1.24 37.18 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.47 14.14 Blowdown 0.50 14.98 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 26.25 787.53 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 E. Seepage -1.08 -32.32 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.07 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -4.06 -121.76 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -34.24 -1027.32 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -39.38 -393.94 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -13.13 393.58 Observed Change -25.56 -766.91 5-27

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.03 31.82 E. Seepage 21.14 655.36 N. Seepage 0.01 0.16 S. Seepage 2.52 78.16 Bottom Seepage 7.44 230.79 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 1.77 55.02 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.61 18.76 Blowdown 0.72 22.33 ID Pumping 9.14 283.37 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 44.38 1375.75 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.22 -6.77 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.13 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -13.23 -410.20 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -30.89 -957.49 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -44.34 -1374.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.04 1.16 Observed Change -11.66 -361.51 5-28

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.66 51.39 E. Seepage 25.43 788.46 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.79 86.45 Bottom Seepage 10.43 323.45 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 2.83 87.58 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.59 18.37 Blowdown 0.89 27.50 ID Pumping 15.39 476.96 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 60.01 1860.18 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.03 -0.97 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.54 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -29.36 -910.08 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -32.79 -1016.63 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -62.20 -1928.22 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.19 -68.04 Observed Change -9.98 -309.33 5-29

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.24 36.07 E. Seepage 12.17 353.03 N. Seepage 0.01 0.23 S. Seepage 2.04 59.02 Bottom Seepage 6.98 202.37 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 35.50 1029.63 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 15.17 Blowdown 0.78 22.68 ID Pumping 1.50 43.56 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 60.75 1761.77 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.65 -47.80 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -9.41 -272.99 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -31.84 -923.30 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -42.90 -1244.12 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 17.85 517.65 Observed Change 12.36 358.44 5-30

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.91 28.18 E. Seepage 18.19 563.76 N. Seepage 0.02 0.67 S. Seepage 2.86 88.75 Bottom Seepage 12.57 389.53 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 2.42 74.90 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.35 10.99 Blowdown 0.99 30.56 ID Pumping 4.10 126.99 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 42.40 1314.32 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.54 -16.60 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -7.89 -244.56 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -33.18 -1028.59 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -41.61 -1289.77 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.79 24.56 Observed Change -11.24 -348.30 5-31

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.45 43.59 E. Seepage 17.94 538.28 N. Seepage 0.01 0.25 S. Seepage 2.80 84.04 Bottom Seepage 14.20 426.09 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 50.85 1525.64 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.39 11.73 Blowdown 0.98 29.41 ID Pumping 9.76 292.86 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 98.40 2951.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.28 -8.41 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.05 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -13.20 -395.99 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -35.04 -1051.09 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -48.52 -1455.54 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 49.88 1496.35 Observed Change 33.69 1010.73 5-32

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.23 38.01 E. Seepage 0.55 17.06 N. Seepage 0.02 0.74 S. Seepage 0.93 28.94 Bottom Seepage 11.40 353.36 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 41.18 1276.57 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.41 12.61 Blowdown 0.97 30.04 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 56.69 1757.33 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -14.73 -456.50 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.02 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.04 Bottom Seepage -12.23 -379.01 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -33.39 -1035.06 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -60.34 -1870.64 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3.66 -113.31 Observed Change -2.89 -89.62 5-33

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components June 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.66 19.79 E. Seepage 3.72 111.63 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 1.65 49.57 Bottom Seepage 7.95 238.37 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 30.82 924.74 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.66 Blowdown 1.03 30.98 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 46.14 1384.22 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 E. Seepage -10.75 -322.64 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.02 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -13.23 -397.04 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -33.57 -1007.10 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -57.56 -1726.87 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -11.42 -342.65 Observed Change -3.50 -105.04 5-34

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components July 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.06 32.85 E. Seepage 0.02 0.63 N. Seepage 0.02 0.73 S. Seepage 1.05 32.46 Bottom Seepage 14.22 440.68 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 29.66 919.46 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.34 10.51 Blowdown 1.07 33.07 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 47.43 1470.39 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -12.89 -399.63 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.05 -1.46 Bottom Seepage -13.30 -412.33 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -39.84 -1235.10 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -66.08 -2048.51 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -18.65 -578.12 Observed Change -7.97 -247.19 5-35

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components August 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.09 33.71 E. Seepage 6.43 199.31 N. Seepage 0.02 0.64 S. Seepage 1.86 57.76 Bottom Seepage 12.81 396.99 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 40.10 1243.25 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.27 8.51 Blowdown 1.10 34.11 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 63.69 1974.28 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6.81 -211.21 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.67 Bottom Seepage -8.84 -273.91 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -39.04 -1210.28 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -54.71 -1696.07 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 8.97 278.21 Observed Change 21.72 673.22 5-36

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.74 22.06 E. Seepage 2.79 83.61 N. Seepage 0.01 0.37 S. Seepage 1.69 50.83 Bottom Seepage 7.98 239.35 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 30.04 901.31 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.73 22.00 Blowdown 0.96 28.93 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 44.95 1348.46 W. Seepage -0.01 -0.20 E. Seepage -11.11 -333.35 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.03 -0.77 Bottom Seepage -15.01 -450.33 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -38.60 -1157.98 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -64.75 -1942.63 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -19.81 -594.17 Observed Change -5.35 -160.61 5-37

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.31 9.61 E. Seepage 21.31 660.75 N. Seepage 0.02 0.63 S. Seepage 2.62 81.26 Bottom Seepage 15.41 477.83 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 14.29 442.88 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.89 27.69 Blowdown 0.94 29.23 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 55.80 1729.88 W. Seepage -0.02 -0.55 E. Seepage -4.96 -153.62 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage -0.01 -0.40 Bottom Seepage -7.18 -222.59 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -38.34 -1188.48 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -50.51 -1565.69 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 5.30 164.19 Observed Change 7.58 235.01 5-38

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.43 12.93 E. Seepage 8.63 259.02 N. Seepage 0.02 0.71 S. Seepage 2.20 66.04 Bottom Seepage 14.44 433.31 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 1.73 51.85 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.79 23.74 Blowdown 0.66 19.70 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 28.91 867.29 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.76 -82.85 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -3.44 -103.32 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -28.02 -840.52 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -34.22 -1026.70 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5.31 -159.41 Observed Change -3.88 -116.28 5-39

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.84 26.02 E. Seepage 0.48 14.75 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 1.07 33.05 Bottom Seepage 8.05 249.53 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 1.87 57.85 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.50 15.62 Blowdown 0.75 23.17 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 13.57 420.55 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -8.92 -276.63 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 Bottom Seepage -7.14 -221.42 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -22.81 -707.02 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -38.87 -1205.08 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -25.31 -784.53 Observed Change -28.66 -888.55 5-40

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.95 29.50 E. Seepage 7.94 246.29 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 2.38 73.65 Bottom Seepage 9.83 304.76 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 1.06 32.80 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 16.25 Blowdown 0.87 26.94 ID Pumping 2.40 74.25 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 25.97 805.01 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.66 -82.60 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -2.09 -64.77 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -23.85 -739.42 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -28.61 -886.79 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.64 -81.78 Observed Change -10.70 -331.69 5-41

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.07 30.08 E. Seepage 10.79 302.00 N. Seepage 0.01 0.35 S. Seepage 2.55 71.41 Bottom Seepage 9.59 268.52 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 5.45 152.71 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.34 9.50 Blowdown 0.82 22.83 ID Pumping 8.45 236.52 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 39.07 1093.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.25 -91.04 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -7.21 -201.87 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -22.90 -641.16 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -33.36 -934.09 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 5.71 159.83 Observed Change 1.10 30.86 5-42

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.88 27.34 E. Seepage 21.89 678.71 N. Seepage 0.01 0.18 S. Seepage 3.17 98.25 Bottom Seepage 16.08 498.39 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 5.20 161.33 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 16.05 Blowdown 0.96 29.83 ID Pumping 7.41 229.77 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 56.12 1739.86 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.13 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -11.23 -348.23 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -27.15 -841.74 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -38.39 -1190.10 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 17.73 549.76 Observed Change 3.84 119.01 5-43

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.09 32.79 E. Seepage 25.76 772.76 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 2.60 78.12 Bottom Seepage 10.33 309.85 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 23.05 691.63 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.71 21.24 Blowdown 0.96 28.69 ID Pumping 9.24 277.20 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 73.74 2212.27 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.14 -4.26 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.66 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -25.36 -760.88 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -37.37 -1121.21 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -62.90 -1887.02 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 10.84 325.25 Observed Change 12.76 382.66 5-44

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.02 31.48 E. Seepage 14.39 446.22 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.87 57.86 Bottom Seepage 4.02 124.74 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 49.66 1539.39 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.93 28.68 Blowdown 1.08 33.35 ID Pumping 6.15 190.71 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 79.11 2452.43 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.90 -59.04 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.41 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.69 Bottom Seepage -16.77 -519.88 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -42.31 -1311.46 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -61.02 -1891.48 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 18.10 560.95 Observed Change 22.68 703.18 5-45

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components June 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 1.07 32.22 E. Seepage 7.03 210.99 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.06 31.66 Bottom Seepage 2.24 67.19 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 18.55 556.60 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.56 16.94 Blowdown 0.99 29.80 ID Pumping 0.68 20.52 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 32.20 965.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -15.80 -474.03 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.66 S. Seepage -0.63 -18.87 Bottom Seepage -23.48 -704.44 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -45.17 -1355.04 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -85.10 -2553.03 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -52.90 -1587.12 Observed Change -31.07 -931.98 5-46

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components July 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.92 28.55 E. Seepage 15.42 478.03 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.04 63.12 Bottom Seepage 7.38 228.73 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 48.46 1502.27 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.95 Blowdown 1.02 31.72 ID Pumping 0.70 21.78 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 76.49 2371.18 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.03 -94.08 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.33 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -10.00 -310.06 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -51.16 -1585.93 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -64.21 -1990.40 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12.28 380.77 Observed Change 19.61 607.86 5-47

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components August 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.78 24.32 E. Seepage 22.08 684.41 N. Seepage 0.01 0.16 S. Seepage 2.50 77.35 Bottom Seepage 8.36 259.08 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 32.70 1013.62 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.70 21.73 Blowdown 1.28 39.82 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 68.40 2120.49 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.02 -93.58 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.29 S. Seepage -0.03 -0.78 Bottom Seepage -7.51 -232.82 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -73.27 -2271.47 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -83.84 -2598.94 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -15.43 -478.45 Observed Change -6.11 -189.45 5-48

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.27 7.98 E. Seepage 16.35 490.64 N. Seepage 0.01 0.43 S. Seepage 1.85 55.50 Bottom Seepage 12.61 378.33 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 21.01 630.35 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.36 10.89 Blowdown 0.73 21.80 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 53.20 1595.93 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.28 -8.28 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -0.63 -19.03 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -34.46 -1033.67 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -35.37 -1060.98 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 17.83 534.95 Observed Change 10.23 307.04 5-49

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.32 10.00 E. Seepage 20.94 649.25 N. Seepage 0.03 1.02 S. Seepage 3.47 107.62 Bottom Seepage 27.04 838.34 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 7.44 230.56 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.96 Blowdown 1.13 34.94 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 60.93 1888.70 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.70 -21.55 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -0.25 -7.81 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -53.02 -1643.73 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -53.97 -1673.08 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6.96 215.62 Observed Change -5.40 -167.52 5-50

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.30 8.93 E. Seepage 17.55 526.60 N. Seepage 0.03 0.82 S. Seepage 3.34 100.05 Bottom Seepage 22.26 667.85 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 32.66 979.94 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.49 14.56 Blowdown 0.90 26.92 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 77.52 2325.68 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 E. Seepage -0.97 -29.03 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.52 -15.71 Bottom Seepage -1.31 -39.43 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -42.96 -1288.94 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -45.77 -1373.13 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 31.75 952.55 Observed Change 13.98 419.29 5-51

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.38 11.64 E. Seepage 5.56 172.29 N. Seepage 0.01 0.21 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage 4.28 132.60 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 4.49 139.14 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.50 15.50 Blowdown 0.90 27.77 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 16.10 499.14 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4.05 -125.64 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage -3.28 -101.80 Bottom Seepage -6.13 -190.01 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -40.62 -1259.22 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -54.09 -1676.69 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -37.99 -1177.56 Observed Change -21.47 -665.45 5-52

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.66 20.51 E. Seepage 11.24 348.43 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 1.55 48.07 Bottom Seepage 9.95 308.55 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 8.57 265.64 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.47 14.68 Blowdown 0.84 25.90 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 33.30 1032.26 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.39 -43.04 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.59 -18.28 Bottom Seepage -2.37 -73.59 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -37.88 -1174.16 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -42.23 -1309.07 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -8.93 -276.81 Observed Change -6.40 -198.28 5-53

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.66 20.51 E. Seepage 11.24 348.43 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 1.55 48.07 Bottom Seepage 9.95 308.55 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 8.57 265.64 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.47 14.68 Blowdown 0.84 25.90 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 33.30 1032.26 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.39 -43.04 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.59 -18.28 Bottom Seepage -2.37 -73.59 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -37.88 -1174.16 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -42.23 -1309.07 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -8.93 -276.81 Observed Change -6.40 -198.28 5-54

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.79 22.17 E. Seepage 15.37 430.48 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 3.49 97.74 Bottom Seepage 14.67 410.76 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 10.41 291.45 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.48 13.58 Blowdown 0.81 22.76 ID Pumping 1.35 37.89 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 47.41 1327.40 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.41 -11.39 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -0.94 -26.25 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -51.37 -1438.25 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -52.71 -1475.89 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5.30 -148.49 Observed Change -7.95 -222.68 5-55

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.79 24.35 E. Seepage 16.02 496.70 N. Seepage 0.02 0.71 S. Seepage 3.19 98.98 Bottom Seepage 14.92 462.52 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 6.87 212.90 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.39 12.07 Blowdown 1.01 31.25 ID Pumping 1.93 59.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 45.14 1399.24 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.01 -0.37 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -1.40 -43.38 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -49.14 -1523.26 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -50.55 -1567.01 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5.41 -167.78 Observed Change -7.86 -243.70 5-56

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.75 22.64 E. Seepage 27.81 834.36 N. Seepage 0.02 0.67 S. Seepage 3.92 117.48 Bottom Seepage 22.82 684.73 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 2.40 71.92 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.33 10.01 Blowdown 1.21 36.35 ID Pumping 3.19 95.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 62.46 1873.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -5.24 -157.10 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -50.28 -1508.52 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -55.52 -1665.62 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6.94 208.31 Observed Change 1.08 32.37 5-57

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)

W. Seepage 0.76 23.63 E. Seepage 41.30 1280.37 N. Seepage 0.01 0.18 S. Seepage 4.24 131.29 Bottom Seepage 28.85 894.27 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 7.42 229.90 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.46 14.40 Blowdown 1.10 34.21 ID Pumping 7.00 217.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 91.14 2825.32 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -12.07 -374.12 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -67.69 -2098.40 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -79.76 -2472.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11.38 352.75 Observed Change 3.55 110.04 5-58

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.53 45.92 E. Seepage 2500.92 75027.64 N. Seepage 3.26 97.90 S. Seepage 104.83 3144.88 Bottom Seepage 1942.12 58263.66 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 114.36 3430.81 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4667.03 140010.82 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2444.34 -73330.24 N. Seepage -1.00 -30.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -3732.66 -111979.85 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6178.00 -185340.12 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1510.98 -45329.30 Observed Change 1464.29 43928.58 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

lb = Pound.

5-59

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.49 15.06 E. Seepage 149.53 4635.38 N. Seepage 1.03 32.01 S. Seepage 7.25 224.80 Bottom Seepage 1882.00 58341.96 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 87.08 2699.59 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2127.38 65948.81 W. Seepage -103.73 -3215.68 E. Seepage -9444.01 -292764.18 N. Seepage -2.35 -72.84 S. Seepage -14.68 -455.19 Bottom Seepage -9054.26 -280682.01 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -18619.03 -577189.91 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -16491.65 -511241.10 Observed Change -13790.42 -427502.87 5-60

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.72 21.47 E. Seepage 1143.70 34310.91 N. Seepage 1.02 30.47 S. Seepage 63.96 1918.87 Bottom Seepage 538.98 16169.37 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 58.36 1750.73 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1806.73 54201.83 W. Seepage -646.37 -19391.23 E. Seepage -2969.21 -89076.29 N. Seepage -1.36 -40.70 S. Seepage -8.71 -261.42 Bottom Seepage -5590.81 -167724.26 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9216.46 -276493.90 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -7409.74 -222292.08 Observed Change -2876.16 -86284.89 5-61

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.04 94.39 E. Seepage 4725.01 146475.21 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 302.77 9385.88 Bottom Seepage 674.69 20915.51 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 84.15 2608.67 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5789.67 179479.65 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -180.61 -5598.89 N. Seepage -4.76 -147.53 S. Seepage -1.76 -54.64 Bottom Seepage -5505.29 -170663.91 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5692.42 -176464.98 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 97.25 3014.68 Observed Change -1555.92 -48233.42 5-62

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.71 207.92 E. Seepage 2694.88 83541.26 N. Seepage 0.02 0.72 S. Seepage 260.16 8065.07 Bottom Seepage 805.49 24970.29 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 95.74 2967.93 ID Pumped Water 185.05 5736.69 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4048.06 125489.88 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1635.00 -50684.88 N. Seepage -5.83 -180.58 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -7338.77 -227501.97 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8979.59 -278367.43 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -4931.53 -152877.56 Observed Change -910.35 -28220.95 5-63

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 4.28 119.79 E. Seepage 6730.29 188448.01 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 469.04 13133.08 Bottom Seepage 2790.13 78123.66 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 81.20 2273.71 ID Pumped Water 73.70 2063.56 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10148.64 284161.82 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -169.22 -4738.19 N. Seepage -9.05 -253.36 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -8852.81 -247878.63 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9031.08 -252870.18 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1117.56 31291.64 Observed Change 1264.60 35408.76 5-64

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.25 224.79 E. Seepage 6208.79 192472.59 N. Seepage 0.57 17.59 S. Seepage 624.64 19363.87 Bottom Seepage 3113.68 96524.02 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 77.46 2401.17 ID Pumped Water 774.24 24001.46 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10806.63 335005.48 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -148.18 -4593.68 N. Seepage -2.15 -66.72 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -8266.32 -256256.01 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8416.66 -260916.41 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 2389.97 74089.06 Observed Change 2504.94 77653.08 5-65

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.97 239.04 E. Seepage 9397.48 281924.52 N. Seepage 0.96 28.87 S. Seepage 981.96 29458.82 Bottom Seepage 4763.76 142912.67 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 132.20 3966.02 ID Pumped Water 751.05 22531.49 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 16035.38 481061.43 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -0.90 -27.12 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -7890.82 -236724.70 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7891.73 -236751.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 8143.65 244309.61 Observed Change -4057.292603 -121718.78 5-66

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 26.21 812.61 E. Seepage 15905.29 493063.91 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1444.80 44788.85 Bottom Seepage 8038.52 249194.22 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 135.40 4197.49 ID Pumped Water 3405.55 105571.94 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 28955.78 897629.03 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -18.40 -570.36 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -24742.36 -767013.22 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -24760.76 -767583.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 4195.01 130045.45 Observed Change 6228.37 193079.32 5-67

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components June 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 39.65 1189.35 E. Seepage 13544.39 406331.65 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1490.22 44706.45 Bottom Seepage 8163.91 244917.21 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 119.17 3575.20 ID Pumped Water 4597.36 137920.85 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 27954.69 838640.72 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4.59 -137.70 N. Seepage -16.95 -508.48 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -21348.75 -640462.48 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -21370.29 -641108.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6584.40 197532.06 Observed Change 8658.55 259756.64 5-68

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components July 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 22.97 712.22 E. Seepage 1630.60 50548.47 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 475.00 14724.90 Bottom Seepage 1945.63 60314.59 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 131.92 4089.50 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4206.12 130389.67 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -5721.60 -177369.67 N. Seepage -6.85 -212.23 S. Seepage -23.87 -739.95 Bottom Seepage -8531.61 -264479.96 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -14283.93 -442801.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -10077.81 -312412.15 Observed Change 3237.34 100357.40 5-69

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components August 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.40 229.41 E. Seepage 5237.66 162367.43 N. Seepage 0.98 30.43 S. Seepage 370.58 11488.05 Bottom Seepage 3135.13 97189.15 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 121.55 3768.14 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8873.31 275072.61 W. Seepage -65.81 -2040.12 E. Seepage -56.73 -1758.59 N. Seepage -0.60 -18.59 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -1578.95 -48947.51 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1702.09 -52764.81 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 7171.22 222307.79 Observed Change 4028.64 124887.94 5-70

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.83 84.91 E. Seepage 2797.96 83938.71 N. Seepage 0.12 3.49 S. Seepage 270.92 8127.56 Bottom Seepage 1137.21 34116.32 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 114.36 3430.81 ID Pumped Water 406.90 12207.06 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4730.30 141908.85 W. Seepage -785.14 -23554.07 E. Seepage -805.76 -24172.71 N. Seepage -3.46 -103.68 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -3949.78 -118493.44 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5544.13 -166323.91 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -813.84 -24415.05 Observed Change -3663.57 -109906.97 5-71

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.49 46.05 E. Seepage 3112.09 96474.66 N. Seepage 0.39 12.19 S. Seepage 162.49 5037.32 Bottom Seepage 5213.92 161631.44 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 87.08 2699.59 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8577.46 265901.26 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1100.79 -34124.58 N. Seepage -3.96 -122.70 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -52.38 -1623.93 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1157.14 -35871.22 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 7420.32 230030.04 Observed Change -3871.33 -120011.08 5-72

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.52 45.49 E. Seepage 2565.58 76967.38 N. Seepage 1.24 37.31 S. Seepage 307.94 9238.14 Bottom Seepage 2510.60 75318.05 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 58.36 1750.73 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5445.24 163357.10 W. Seepage -2.99 -89.68 E. Seepage -439.02 -13170.52 N. Seepage -1.38 -41.50 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -1521.48 -45644.54 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1964.87 -58946.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3480.36 104410.86 Observed Change -3673.05 -110191.36 5-73

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.94 91.04 E. Seepage 3995.18 123850.50 N. Seepage 1.01 31.46 S. Seepage 519.26 16096.99 Bottom Seepage 2237.19 69352.75 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 84.15 2608.67 ID Pumped Water 431.13 13365.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7270.85 225396.49 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -110.41 -3422.62 N. Seepage -2.01 -62.16 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -6366.94 -197375.12 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6479.35 -200859.90 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 791.50 24536.58 Observed Change -3828.22 -118674.85 5-74

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.81 211.17 E. Seepage 6137.16 190252.10 N. Seepage 0.16 4.83 S. Seepage 611.10 18944.11 Bottom Seepage 3217.71 99748.94 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 103.64 3212.87 ID Pumped Water 2219.37 68800.40 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 12295.95 381174.41 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -15.97 -495.22 N. Seepage -8.30 -257.31 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -14015.44 -434478.71 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -14039.72 -435231.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1743.77 -54056.83 Observed Change -2625.35 -81385.79 5-75

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 5.52 160.15 E. Seepage 3019.88 87576.55 N. Seepage 1.78 51.48 S. Seepage 465.01 13485.18 Bottom Seepage 3938.11 114205.18 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 91.37 2649.68 ID Pumped Water 189.46 5494.29 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7711.12 223622.50 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -792.88 -22993.52 N. Seepage -0.50 -14.61 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -5050.78 -146472.57 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5844.16 -169480.70 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1866.96 54141.81 Observed Change 3362.46 97511.42 5-76

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 4.03 124.88 E. Seepage 5251.01 162781.35 N. Seepage 4.94 153.03 S. Seepage 666.34 20656.69 Bottom Seepage 4261.43 132104.46 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 115.17 3570.40 ID Pumped Water 187.62 5816.11 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10490.55 325206.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -271.03 -8402.01 N. Seepage -0.21 -6.62 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -3822.04 -118483.22 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4093.29 -126891.84 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6397.26 198315.08 Observed Change -500.48 -15514.87 5-77

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 14.59 437.77 E. Seepage 5648.88 169466.31 N. Seepage 1.97 59.07 S. Seepage 760.81 22824.26 Bottom Seepage 4206.65 126199.62 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 114.52 3435.57 ID Pumped Water 1035.51 31065.19 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 11782.93 353487.78 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -135.08 -4052.44 N. Seepage -0.98 -29.32 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -7211.96 -216358.94 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7348.02 -220440.70 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 4434.90 133047.07 Observed Change 4132.59 123977.58 5-78

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 8.43 261.37 E. Seepage 167.09 5179.69 N. Seepage 5.55 172.14 S. Seepage 120.42 3732.88 Bottom Seepage 3176.41 98468.64 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 113.23 3510.03 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3591.12 111324.74 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6338.52 -196494.19 N. Seepage -0.30 -9.32 S. Seepage -0.62 -19.08 Bottom Seepage -5139.67 -159329.63 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -11479.10 -355852.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -7887.98 -244527.47 Observed Change -4664.11 -144587.53 5-79

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components June 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.04 61.29 E. Seepage 816.37 24491.01 N. Seepage 3.75 112.60 S. Seepage 233.05 6991.63 Bottom Seepage 2430.80 72924.06 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 120.64 3619.20 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3606.66 108199.80 W. Seepage -37.06 -1111.94 E. Seepage -4366.87 -131006.04 N. Seepage -0.27 -8.24 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -5327.02 -159810.66 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9731.23 -291936.88 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6124.57 -183737.08 Observed Change -2740.38 -82211.41 5-80

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components July 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.64 81.86 E. Seepage 5.03 155.99 N. Seepage 5.49 170.22 S. Seepage 67.33 2087.08 Bottom Seepage 3725.02 115475.55 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 124.64 3863.85 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3930.15 121834.54 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -5218.31 -161767.61 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -19.14 -593.20 Bottom Seepage -5299.15 -164273.54 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -10536.59 -326634.36 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6606.45 -204799.82 Observed Change -2497.19 -77412.85 5-81

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components August 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.56 79.25 E. Seepage 1461.90 45319.00 N. Seepage 4.79 148.53 S. Seepage 121.94 3779.99 Bottom Seepage 3312.48 102686.78 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 128.56 3985.44 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5032.23 155998.99 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2580.57 -79997.52 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -8.82 -273.56 Bottom Seepage -3380.97 -104809.92 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5970.36 -185081.01 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -938.13 -29082.02 Observed Change 1642.83 50927.78 5-82

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.47 44.10 E. Seepage 623.77 18713.19 N. Seepage 2.87 85.98 S. Seepage 27.07 812.14 Bottom Seepage 1848.79 55463.79 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 112.67 3380.18 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2616.65 78499.38 W. Seepage -77.47 -2324.18 E. Seepage -4199.05 -125971.36 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.64 S. Seepage -9.90 -297.00 Bottom Seepage -5567.11 -167013.34 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9853.55 -295606.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -7236.90 -217107.14 Observed Change -2600.46 -78013.94 5-83

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.86 26.69 E. Seepage 3782.89 117269.47 N. Seepage 3.25 100.85 S. Seepage 453.51 14058.84 Bottom Seepage 3995.58 123863.13 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 110.18 3415.60 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8346.28 258734.58 W. Seepage -187.80 -5821.75 E. Seepage -1844.55 -57181.05 N. Seepage -1.16 -35.89 S. Seepage -4.83 -149.83 Bottom Seepage -2616.30 -81105.23 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4654.64 -144293.77 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3691.64 114440.81 Observed Change 6379.02 197749.67 5-84

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.11 93.25 E. Seepage 1982.22 59466.75 N. Seepage 4.16 124.84 S. Seepage 507.20 15215.92 Bottom Seepage 3748.30 112448.92 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 76.71 2301.26 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6321.70 189650.93 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1089.28 -32678.52 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -1345.04 -40351.31 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2434.33 -73029.83 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3887.37 116621.10 Observed Change 2368.82 71064.75 5-85

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.16 222.04 E. Seepage 120.97 3750.04 N. Seepage 4.21 130.51 S. Seepage 213.94 6632.26 Bottom Seepage 2162.13 67026.11 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 87.33 2707.18 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2595.75 80468.14 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3727.61 -115556.04 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.17 -5.27 Bottom Seepage -2787.01 -86397.17 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6514.79 -201958.48 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3919.04 -121490.34 Observed Change -7753.08 -240345.33 5-86

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.13 221.15 E. Seepage 2137.92 66275.51 N. Seepage 4.36 135.08 S. Seepage 509.08 15781.57 Bottom Seepage 2831.19 87766.98 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 101.55 3148.06 ID Pumped Water 60.40 1872.54 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5651.64 175200.90 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1194.63 -37033.67 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -886.76 -27489.51 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2081.39 -64523.18 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3570.25 110677.72 Observed Change 525.54 16291.69 5-87

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 9.73 272.46 E. Seepage 2944.36 82442.07 N. Seepage 2.94 82.31 S. Seepage 662.71 18555.81 Bottom Seepage 2727.16 76360.57 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 95.25 2667.00 ID Pumped Water 324.14 9075.87 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6766.29 189456.09 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1539.91 -43117.37 N. Seepage -0.14 -3.95 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -3737.34 -104645.54 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5277.39 -147766.86 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1488.90 41689.23 Observed Change 1710.98 47907.57 5-88

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 10.92 338.65 E. Seepage 6720.90 208347.99 N. Seepage 1.42 44.00 S. Seepage 907.96 28146.66 Bottom Seepage 2775.04 86026.14 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 112.44 3485.58 ID Pumped Water 347.21 10763.51 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10875.89 337152.53 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -2.06 -63.94 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -4630.17 -143535.30 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4632.23 -143599.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6243.65 193553.29 Observed Change 4065.17 126020.42 5-89

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 13.29 398.66 E. Seepage 7583.24 227497.21 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 621.43 18642.97 Bottom Seepage 3016.09 90482.64 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 111.74 3352.32 ID Pumped Water 478.94 14368.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 11824.73 354741.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -67.89 -2036.72 N. Seepage -10.84 -325.20 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -12414.68 -372440.38 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -12493.41 -374802.29 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -668.68 -20060.41 Observed Change 4774.59 143237.63 5-90

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.46 200.39 E. Seepage 4085.21 126641.42 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 458.41 14210.60 Bottom Seepage 1178.02 36518.75 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 125.70 3896.83 ID Pumped Water 287.40 8909.54 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6141.21 190377.53 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -829.74 -25721.93 N. Seepage -6.57 -203.76 S. Seepage -9.41 -291.63 Bottom Seepage -8045.67 -249415.76 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8891.39 -275633.07 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2750.18 -85255.55 Observed Change 1237.57 38364.62 5-91

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components June 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 4.14 124.17 E. Seepage 2150.78 64523.46 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 192.72 5781.63 Bottom Seepage 659.63 19788.97 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 116.04 3481.32 ID Pumped Water 15.15 454.46 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3138.47 94154.00 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6840.75 -205222.53 N. Seepage -10.10 -303.10 S. Seepage -272.05 -8161.40 Bottom Seepage -10583.21 -317496.26 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -17706.11 -531183.29 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -14567.64 -437029.29 Observed Change -4607.17 -138215.25 5-92

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components July 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.99 92.71 E. Seepage 4378.23 135725.17 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 385.67 11955.68 Bottom Seepage 2207.77 68440.94 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 119.57 3706.56 ID Pumped Water 16.53 512.41 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7110.76 220433.48 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1372.52 -42548.06 N. Seepage -6.19 -191.85 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -4865.49 -150830.09 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6244.19 -193570.00 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 866.56 26863.49 Observed Change 4833.38 149834.84 5-93

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components August 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.89 58.46 E. Seepage 4344.14 134668.40 N. Seepage 0.40 12.37 S. Seepage 323.17 10018.35 Bottom Seepage 1637.07 50749.12 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 108.99 3378.64 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6415.66 198885.33 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1329.80 -41223.88 N. Seepage -6.00 -186.11 S. Seepage -11.98 -371.29 Bottom Seepage -3824.23 -118551.19 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5172.02 -160332.47 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1243.64 38552.86 Observed Change 3101.52 96147.08 5-94

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.44 43.23 E. Seepage 5544.96 166348.73 N. Seepage 3.92 117.62 S. Seepage 550.99 16529.68 Bottom Seepage 4740.46 142213.90 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 127.36 3820.73 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10969.13 329073.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -149.50 -4484.98 N. Seepage -0.19 -5.75 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -375.37 -11261.16 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -525.06 -15751.89 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 10444.07 313321.99 Observed Change 5122.20 153666.00 5-95

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.11 34.27 E. Seepage 4338.18 134483.49 N. Seepage 7.80 241.71 S. Seepage 638.39 19790.19 Bottom Seepage 7719.11 239292.29 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 131.68 4082.17 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 12836.26 397924.13 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -351.11 -10884.34 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -127.96 -3966.81 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -479.07 -14851.15 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12357.19 383072.99 Observed Change 5172.10 160335.08 5-96

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.54 46.14 E. Seepage 3784.29 113528.78 N. Seepage 6.40 192.02 S. Seepage 788.22 23646.53 Bottom Seepage 4634.87 139046.00 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 104.86 3145.67 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9320.17 279605.14 W. Seepage -24.64 -739.25 E. Seepage -522.89 -15686.55 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -280.41 -8412.37 Bottom Seepage -1054.80 -31643.98 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1882.74 -56482.15 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 7437.43 223122.99 Observed Change 3117.41 93522.19 5-97

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.72 53.40 E. Seepage 1116.93 34624.86 N. Seepage 1.41 43.82 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage 1208.70 37469.70 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 104.66 3244.56 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2433.43 75436.35 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2138.71 -66299.91 N. Seepage -0.72 -22.30 S. Seepage -1832.93 -56820.81 Bottom Seepage -3278.69 -101639.42 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7251.05 -224782.44 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -4817.62 -149346.09 Observed Change -6529.12 -202402.80 5-98

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.72 84.28 E. Seepage 2474.28 76702.81 N. Seepage 3.76 116.46 S. Seepage 197.48 6121.95 Bottom Seepage 2808.39 87059.94 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 97.62 3026.14 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5584.24 173111.57 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -733.83 -22748.81 N. Seepage -0.11 -3.52 S. Seepage -322.82 -10007.33 Bottom Seepage -1256.16 -38940.86 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2312.92 -71700.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3271.32 101411.05 Observed Change -445.87 -13822.03 5-99

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.45 96.51 E. Seepage 4009.26 112259.16 N. Seepage 4.91 137.49 S. Seepage 305.60 8556.90 Bottom Seepage 4137.32 115844.97 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 94.98 2659.47 ID Pumped Water 26.82 750.88 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8582.34 240305.39 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -216.72 -6068.14 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -527.63 -14773.52 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -744.34 -20841.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 7837.99 219463.73 Observed Change 625.60 17516.93 5-100

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.87 120.12 E. Seepage 4519.76 140112.41 N. Seepage 5.56 172.22 S. Seepage 282.87 8768.83 Bottom Seepage 4212.27 130580.33 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 117.78 3651.18 ID Pumped Water 44.90 1391.85 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9187.00 284796.94 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -7.14 -221.35 N. Seepage -0.08 -2.45 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -949.86 -29445.56 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -957.08 -29669.35 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 8229.92 255127.58 Observed Change 3657.01 113367.46 5-101

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.46 193.90 E. Seepage 9135.31 274059.17 N. Seepage 5.79 173.62 S. Seepage 674.16 20224.71 Bottom Seepage 6679.44 200383.16 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 141.58 4247.38 ID Pumped Water 100.96 3028.93 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 16743.70 502310.88 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -3970.68 -119120.46 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3970.68 -119120.46 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12773.01 383190.43 Observed Change 5846.87 175406.11 5-102

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 19.46 603.27 E. Seepage 14107.29 437325.92 N. Seepage 1.45 44.98 S. Seepage 1396.99 43306.83 Bottom Seepage 8690.90 269417.84 Into CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 128.95 3997.50 ID Pumped Water 392.49 12167.09 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 24737.53 766863.42 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -1.50 -46.56 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage -9219.39 -285801.22 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9220.90 -285847.79 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 15516.63 481015.64 Observed Change 5312.43 164685.21 5-103

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 FIGURES

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.1-1. Averaged Daily Groundwater Elevations for TPGW-10 Wells.

5-105

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.1-2. Averaged Daily Groundwater Elevations for TPGW-11 Wells.

5-106

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.1-3. Averaged Daily Groundwater Elevations for TPGW-14 Wells.

5-107

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.1-4. TPGW-1 Groundwater and TPSWCCS-1 Surface Water Responses to Rainfall and Nuclear Unit Power Outages, January 2012 - May 2014. CCS Daily Flow Units are in Scientific Notation.

5-108

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.1-5. TPGW-10 Groundwater and TPSWCCS-1 Surface Water Responses to Rainfall and Nuclear Unit Power Outages, January 2012 - May 2014. CCS Daily Flow Units are in Scientific Notation.

5-109

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.2-1. Locations of Specific Conductance Cross Sections.

5-110

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.2-2. Specific Conductance Cross Section A-A, Historic and Current Concentration Isopleths.

5-111

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.2-3. Specific Conductance Cross Section B-B, Historic and Current Concentration Isopleths.

5-112

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.2-4. Shallow Well Pre-Uprate (Top) and Post-Uprate (Bottom) Average Specific Conductance Isopleths.

5-113

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.2-5. Medium Well Pre-Uprate (Top) and Post-Uprate (Bottom) Average Specific Conductance Isopleths.

5-114

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 Figure 5.2-6. Deep Well Pre-Uprate (Top) and Post-Uprate (Bottom) Average Specific Conductance Isopleths.

5-115

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 (A)

(B)

Figure 5.3-1. Flow (A) into and (B) out of the CCS, Shown in Cross-Section.

5-116

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 60 Modeled Flow Observed Flow 40 20 Water Flow (MGD) 0

-20

-40

-60 Figure 5.3-2. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Water for the CCS over the 45-Month Period.

5-117

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 20000 Modeled Flow 15000 Observed Flow 10000 Salt Flow (lb x 1000/day) 5000 0

-5000

-10000

-15000

-20000 Figure 5.3-3. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Salt Mass for the CCS over the 45-Month Period 5-118

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 2.5 Simulated Water Elevations 2

Measured Water Elevations 1.5 CCS Water Elevation (ft NAVD 88) 1 0.5 0

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2 Figure 5.3-4. Modeled versus Measured Water Elevations (NAVD 88) in the CCS over the 45-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation.

5-119

FP L Turk ey P oint Annual P ost-Uprate M onitoring R eport for Units 3 & 4 Uprate P roject - August 2014 Section 5 100 Simulated Concentration (g/L) 90 Measured Concentration (g/L) 80 CCS Salinity (g/L) 70 60 50 40 30 Figure 5.3-5. Modeled versus Measured Salinity in the CCS over the 45-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity.

5-120

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6

6. INTERCEPTOR DITCH OPERATION

6.1 INTRODUCTION

FPL has prepared annual reports on the Interceptor Ditch (ID) operation and groundwater conditions referred to as Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program in compliance with the Agreement between FPL and the SFWMD, dated July 15, 1983 (the Agreement). The Agreement outlined the criteria for operating the ID pumps and the groundwater monitoring including groundwater levels, conductivities, and temperatures in wells L-3, L-5, G-21, and G-

28. In addition, surface water levels were required to be monitored in the L-31E, ID, and westernmost CCS canal (C-32) at five transects (A through E). The operation of the ID is designed to prevent any seasonal inland movement of the saltwater into the potable portion of the Biscayne aquifer west of the site. The saline groundwater is intercepted by the ditch and pumped back to the CCS during the dry season when natural freshwater hydraulic gradients are low and the potential for saltwater intrusion exists. Pumping the water from the ID to the CCS creates a seaward gradient east of the L-31E, thereby restricting inland movement of cooling canal water in the upper zones of the aquifer. The monitoring program provides water level information that triggers the need to pump the ID, as well as assists in the evaluation of ID operations.

On October 14, 2009, the Agreement was modified to expand the monitoring program as part of the Units 3 and 4 Uprate Project and added well G-35 to the historical monitoring network. This modified agreement resulted in two annual reports being submitted: one for the ID operation/groundwater monitoring and one for the Units 3 and 4 Uprate monitoring. On August 2, 2012, FPL and SFWMD agreed to consolidate the annual ID reporting into the Turkey Point Plant Uprate annual reports. Combining the reports helps improve the efficiency and consistency of reporting and storage of data.

The information presented in this section pertains to the operation of the ID from June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2014 and includes the same type of information as presented in previous ID operation reports (i.e., Golder Associates Inc. 2010, 2011b; FPL 2012). For consistency, the focus of this section is the historical L and G wells, and the operation of the ID. Figure 6.1-1 shows the well locations and five surface water transects A through E. Information on wells installed as part of the Uprate Project can be found in Sections 2 and 3 of this report. Where appropriate, references to the data in these sections will be made.

6.2 OPERATIONAL OR STRUCTURAL CHANGES As discussed in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012), FPL initiated a more conservative, revised operation procedure for the ID in December 2011 that considered freshwater head equivalents for the surface water transects. This resulted in changes to 6-1

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 triggers/operational criteria for when pumping of the ID would occur. The operational criteria/triggers that have been used since December 2012 are as follows:

If the L-31E water elevation minus the C-32 water elevation is equal to or greater than 0.25 ft then no pumping of ID is necessary, and a seaward gradient exists.

If the L-31E water elevation minus the C-32 water elevation is less than 0.25 ft, a natural seaward gradient may still exist if the L-31E water elevation minus the ID water elevation is equal to or greater than 0.30 ft and the density of the water in the ID is less than or equal to 1.012 g/cm3. If a density in the ID is higher than 1.012 g/cm3, a higher elevation difference between L-31E and the ID is necessary and can be calculated by converting the surface water levels to freshwater head equivalents.

If a natural seaward gradient does not exist, create an artificial gradient by pumping the ID until the ID is maintained at an elevation of at least 0.30 to 0.70 ft depending on the density of the ID water.

The operation of the ID pumps is based on water level readings at each of the five surface water transects. Traditionally, FPL has taken manual water level readings at least once every week during the dry season and at least twice a month during the wet season (Appendix L). When the Turkey Point Uprate Monitoring Plan (2009) was approved by the Agencies, automated stations were installed at Transects A, C, and E. As discussed in Section 2, these stations currently report data at 1-hour intervals and typically transmit by telemetry to a database every day. FPL is still going out at least once every week at each transect during the dry season, and at least twice per month during the wet season, to manually record water levels to evaluate hydraulic gradients.

Additionally, FPL is using the automated data to determine if they need to visit the sites more frequently and operate the ID pumps (Appendix L).

6.3 Meteorological Conditions Meteorological data are set forth in Section 2.4 of this report and include data collected from TPM-1. Daily rainfall data have also been traditionally recorded by SFWMD at structure S-20F located along the L-31E, approximately 2.5 miles north of the CCS. Figure 6.3-1 shows the monthly rainfall at S-20F and TPM-1 for the ID reporting period from June 2013 through May 2014 and compares them to historical averages (1968 to 2012) at S-20F.

Rainfall for June 2013 to May 2014 was below the historic monthly average from July 1968 to May 2012 at Station S-20F. Additionally, rainfall at TPM-1 was well below that of the S-20F station for the June 2013 through May 2014 time period. It should be noted, however, that TPM-1 was offline for several weeks in June 2013. The rain gauge at structure S-20F recorded 40.1 inches of precipitation from June 2013 to May 2014, while 13 inches of rain were recorded at TPM-1. The annual average at S-20F from 1968-2014 is 46.60 inches.

As shown on Figure 6.3-1, the rainfall distribution for 2013 was concentrated in the months of June through November, which are the traditionally wet season months. During an average year, approximately 74% of the precipitation occurs during the wet season with the remainder occurring during the six-month-long dry season (November to May). During 2013, 6-2

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 approximately 70% of the annual rainfall occurred during the wet season at S-20F and TPM-1.

The 2013 hurricane season produced no significant storms during the monitoring period.

6.4 WATER QUALITY AND WATER LEVEL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 6.4.1 Groundwater Levels Groundwater levels are manually measured and samples are collected quarterly in the historical wells L-3, L-5, G-21, G-28, and G-35. For the Post-Uprate reporting period, water levels were measured in June 2013, September 2013, December 2013, and March 2014. Figure 6.4-1 shows the groundwater levels measured during this time period and the maximum and minimum levels recorded during the historical period. The start dates for the historical period for each well are as follows:

L-3: April 1974 L-5: January 1976 G-21: April 1972 G-28: April 1972 G-35: April 1972 The historical period for wells L-3, L-5, G-21, and G-28 was extended to include data through May 2014 for this report. Data were not recorded for well G-35 between 1983 and 2010; therefore, the historical envelope for this well covers a limited period.

The groundwater elevation at L-3 (-1.2 feet NAVD 88) was over 1 ft lower in June 2013 than any other time period. By September 2013, the groundwater elevation in L-3 had rebounded (0.4 ft NAVD 88) and was slightly higher than the elevation in L-5 but then exhibited the lowest groundwater elevations of all the wells for the rest of the monitoring period. The G-series wells (G-21, G-28, and G-35) exhibited groundwater elevations closer to their historical maximums with elevations in June 2013, September 2013, and December 2013 being within 1 ft of their highest levels. G-35 consistently had the highest groundwater elevations, including a measurement of 2.94 feet NAVD 88 in June 2013 that exceeded the historical maximum by 0.37 feet; however, the historical maximum is based on a limited time period. Groundwater elevations in the G-series wells were always higher than L-3 and L-5 elevations with levels ranging from 0.4 to 4 ft higher for this monitoring period.

6.4.2 Vertical Groundwater Temperature Profiles Groundwater temperatures are measured on a quarterly basis at 1 ft intervals throughout the water column in L-3, L-5, G-21, G-28, and G-35. For this monitoring period, temperatures were recorded in June 2013, September 2013, December 2013, and March 2014. Figures 6.4-2 through 6.4-6 show the temperature profile with depth and are compared with the historical envelope for each well where available. As reported by Golder Associates Inc. (2011b), the 6-3

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 historical envelope represents both the highest and lowest temperatures recorded during the period from July 1981 through June 1991.

All wells were within the historical envelopes (where established) for temperature except one location in September 2013. Well L-5 had groundwater temperatures close to 1°C higher than the historical maximum at a depth interval from -2 to -14 ft NAVD 88. There is no historical envelope for G-35, but the temperature profile for G-35 is similar to G-28 so the temperature is within expected values.

6.4.3 Vertical Groundwater Chloride Profiles The groundwater is measured for specific conductance at 1 ft intervals in the entire water column in all five wells. The specific conductance data are then converted to chloride values according to the procedures outlined in the Agreement. For this monitoring period, specific conductance values were measured in June 2013, September 2013, December 2013, and March 2014, and corresponding chloride values were calculated. Similar to the temperature profiles, chloride profiles have been developed and compared to historical envelopes when available (Figures 6.4-7 through 6.4-11). The historical envelope represents both the highest and lowest chloride levels recorded during the period from July 1981 through June 1991.

For the current reporting period, and similar to previous reporting periods, the chloride values at depth exceed the historical envelope. The calculated chloride values at L-3 began to exceed the historical envelope in September 2013 at -28 ft NAVD 88 and in June 2013, December 2013, and March 2014 at a depth of -33 ft NAVD 88. At L-5, the calculated chloride values begin to exceed the historical maximum at elevations of -24 ft to -28 ft NAVD 88 depending on the time of year. In the G-series wells, the depths of excursion from the historical maximum are deeper

(-42 ft to -43 ft NAVD 88 at G-21, and -32 ft to -35 NAVD 88 for G-28). The highest values are found at L-3 (34.1 parts per thousand [ppt]) and L-5 (31.6 ppt) at the bottom sample depth of approximately -50 ft NAVD 88. The lowest concentrations are at G-35 where the levels are minimal to about elevation -41 ft NAVD 88, below which they increase to values between 4 and 8 ppt. Golder Associates Inc. (2011b) reports that the historical chloride levels at those depths in the 1970s ranged to about 10 ppt.

What is clear from the vertical profiles is the quick change in chloride values with depth indicating a fairly sharp transition in water quality. This transitional boundary moves up and down depending on seasonal variations. The profiles also show the presence of a shallow predominantly freshwater (per FDEP, F.A.C.62-302.200) lens in L-3, L-5, G-21, and G-35. The chloride values at G-28 indicate higher chloride concentrations than found in the other wells in the upper 15 ft or so of the aquifer; however, that may be, in part, an artifact of the well construction. Unlike the other L and G series wells that have screen beginning near the surface, G-28 is hard-cased to 16.6 ft below the top of casing. Thus, water measured from the surface to the downward extent of the hard casing is predominantly reflective of the water quality at 16.6 ft below the top of casing.

6-4

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6.4.4 Interceptor Ditch Operation and Transect Surface Water Levels Surface water levels have been traditionally measured in L-31E, the ID, and C-32 as required by the ID operation procedure. The water levels are measured in these canals at pumping Lines A, B, C, D, and E, as shown previously on Figure 6.1-1. Water levels recorded during the past 12-month monitoring period are presented on Figures 6.4-12 through 6.4-16. The data for these figures are based on the manual readings by FPL staff at all five transect locations.

With a few exceptions, water levels in the L-31E were higher than in the C-32 at all transects.

The notable exception was in April and/or May 2014 when the CCS was higher for up to one to three weeks in transects A, B, and C. Table 6.4-1 shows the range in head differences in L-31E and C-32 at each transect. At all transects, the water elevations in the L-31E were higher than ID water elevations. Table 6.4-1 shows the range in head differences in L-31E and ID at each transect.

While none of the information presented in the above figures is corrected for density, Figures 6.4-17 through 6.4-19 illustrates differences in water levels between L-31 and the CCS (C-32) and differences between L-31E and the ID for transects A, C, and E, respectively, considering density differences (freshwater head equivalents). Basically, the figures show how much difference in elevation the L-31E canal is in relation to the CCS and ID, as well as the difference in water level between the ID and CCS. For these graphs, the undesired scenario is when both the black line and the orange line are less than zero (both the CCS and ID are higher than L-31E) and the black line is lower than the orange line (CCS is also higher than ID). This rarely happens and when it occurs, it is for a very short duration.

Operation of the ID pumps is shown on Figure 6.4-20, along with the measured rainfall. Table 6.4-2 shows how many hours and days each pump operated every month. Data in Table 6.4-3 identifies when pumping was required by the water levels and when such pumping actually occurred.

6.4.5 Pressure Gradient Density Correction In the previous reports for the ID, Golder Associates Inc. (2011b) and FPL (2012) presented analysis of the data to assess groundwater flow based on pressure gradients between L-3 and G-21 and L-5 and G-28. The analysis was to address the Agencies concerns that water level readings taken in wells and surface water bodies do not necessarily represent the actual pressure gradients within the ground or surface water because of differences in density and temperature between locations. Because surface water levels are being measured as proxies for groundwater levels in order to estimate groundwater movement, and groundwater levels are being estimated as proxies for pressure gradients, their analyses dealt with groundwater pressure gradients only.

This type of analysis lends itself favorably to the L and G series wells since they are screened across their entire (or nearly entire) depth, and temperature and specific conductance data are available at 1-ft intervals. This is important since the temperature and specific conductance do not vary linearly with depth. The temperature and specific conductance data can be used to calculate a density at each measurement point.

6-5

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Using specific conductance and temperature data collected from the September 2013 sampling event, the water densities by depth for wells L-3 and G-21 have been calculated and are plotted on Figure 6.4-21. Based on the densities shown on Figure 6.4-21, the pressure over depth (pressure gradient) for wells L-3 and G-21 for the September 2013 sampling event has been calculated and is shown on Figure 6.4-22. The data shown on Figure 6.4-22 indicate that the pressure gradient at well G-21 is slightly higher than that at well L-3 from the surface down to about -43 ft NAVD 88, below which that gradient is slightly higher at L-3 than at G-21. Because the pressure gradients are close in value, it is easier to see the difference when plotted as shown on Figure 6.4-23, which illustrates the pressure excess or deficit between the G and the corresponding L series wells. Similar analyses were performed for wells G-21 and L-3 during the March 2014 sampling event (Figure 6.4-24). These same analyses were also conducted for well G-28 versus well L-5 during the September 2013 sampling episode (Figure 6.4-25) and for well G-28 versus well L-5 during the March 2014 sampling episode (Figure 6.4-26).

In all of the cases examined (G-21 and L-3 in September 2013, G-21 and L-3 in March 2014, G-28 and L-5 in September 2013, and G-28 and L-5 in March 2014), the groundwater gradient is seaward in the upper levels of the aquifer, down to approximately -43 ft to -45 ft NAVD 88 for well G-21 versus well L-3, and down to about -33 ft to -38 ft NAVD 88 for well G-28 versus well L-5. In the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report, March 2012 was noted as having a landward gradient from L-3 to G-21 for the entire water column; however, further assessment indicates that was not the case: a seaward gradient existed down to an elevation of -13 ft NAVD 88. The operation of the ID still maintains a seaward gradient from the L-31E and/or the L-series wells in the upper levels of the aquifer.

6-6

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 TABLES

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-1 Range in Surface Water Head Differences Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 6/5/13 0.42 0.3 0.45 0.25 0.42 0.19 0.61 0.19 0.63 0.17 6/17/13 0.47 0.29 0.48 0.3 0.48 0.22 0.8 0.25 0.87 0.22 6/26/13 0.21 0.29 0.11 0.25 0.29 0.05 0.73 0.25 0.84 0.22 6/27/13 0.17 0.49 0.18 0.43 0.23 0.41 0.64 0.31 0.73 0.24 6/28/13 0.14 0.28 0.18 0.24 0.24 0.21 0.68 0.26 0.8 0.22 7/1/13 0.01 0.29 0.08 0.23 0.19 0.24 0.65 0.27 0.82 0.21 7/2/13 0.01 0.47 0.02 0.4 0.14 0.37 0.61 0.37 0.79 0.3 7/5/13 0.36 0.38 0.28 0.24 0.3 0.18 0.71 0.2 0.82 0.15 7/8/13 0.28 0.28 0.32 0.21 0.36 0.16 0.75 0.2 0.84 0.14 7/16/13 0.38 0.24 0.44 0.22 0.38 0.15 0.72 0.15 0.78 0.09 8/1/13 0.54 0.28 0.6 0.2 0.63 0.17 0.86 0.19 0.84 0.12 8/19/13 0.36 0.19 0.46 0.18 0.5 0.12 0.78 0.12 0.83 0.09 9/3/13 0.43 0.27 0.47 0.17 0.52 0.12 0.78 0.16 0.83 0.11 9/19/13 0.5 0.2 0.52 0.17 0.52 0.03 0.74 0.08 0.74 0.04 10/2/13 0.64 0.18 0.67 0.17 0.63 0.09 0.78 0.08 0.76 0.02 10/16/13 0.6 0.14 0.63 0.11 0.63 0.07 0.81 0.08 0.9 0.08 12/3/13 0.42 0.14 0.44 0.1 0.45 0.05 0.6 0.08 0.56 0.04 12/10/13 0.36 0.18 0.37 0.12 0.43 0.1 0.58 0.12 0.57 0.06 12/16/13 0.35 0.15 0.39 0.12 0.43 0.08 0.62 0.11 0.54 0.06 12/23/13 0.37 0.19 0.47 0.16 0.57 0.14 0.7 0.2 0.74 0.16 1/2/14 0.28 0.18 0.37 0.17 0.48 0.16 0.6 0.16 0.64 0.14 1/6/14 0.37 0.19 0.47 0.16 0.57 0.14 0.8 0.17 0.7 0.12 6-8

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-1 Range in Surface Water Head Differences Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 1/13/14 0.4 0.21 0.45 0.17 0.51 0.13 0.7 0.17 0.65 0.11 1/21/14 0.32 0.25 0.39 0.15 0.51 0.18 0.78 0.22 0.7 0.18 1/27/14 0.29 0.24 0.36 0.2 0.49 0.21 0.76 0.22 0.73 0.17 2/3/14 0.32 0.19 0.31 0.08 0.5 0.14 0.7 0.12 0.73 0.11 2/10/14 0.35 0.24 0.44 0.23 0.52 0.22 0.76 0.2 0.74 0.14 2/17/14 0.44 0.2 0.49 0.19 0.57 0.15 0.82 0.2 0.73 0.15 2/24/14 0.32 0.24 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.78 0.22 0.77 0.15 2/26/14 0.2 0.19 0.3 0.21 0.41 0.18 0.73 0.19 0.77 0.15 2/28/14 0.2 0.51 0.3 0.53 0.42 0.17 0.42 0.17 0.73 0.12 3/3/14 0.24 0.19 0.32 0.19 0.43 0.17 0.72 0.19 0.75 0.14 3/4/14 0.23 0.65 0.34 0.67 0.39 0.21 0.69 0.25 0.7 0.21 3/6/14 -0.07 0.21 0.2 0.22 0.38 0.19 0.69 0.2 0.73 0.13 3/7/14 0.28 0.8 0.4 0.82 0.58 0.2 0.83 0.21 0.79 0.17 3/10/14 0.26 0.21 0.32 0.21 0.44 0.15 0.69 0.16 0.67 0.08 3/11/14 0.18 0.19 0.32 0.21 0.41 0.14 0.69 0.17 0.68 0.09 3/12/14 0.16 0.73 0.25 0.75 0.38 0.17 0.66 0.17 0.72 0.12 3/13/14 0.24 0.23 0.32 0.24 0.38 0.14 0.66 0.11 0.64 0.08 3/14/14 0.26 0.74 0.34 0.74 0.35 0.17 0.62 0.2 0.65 0.15 3/17/14 -0.08 0.22 0.1 0.22 0.27 0.17 0.59 0.14 0.6 0.08 3/18/14 0.07 0.2 0.14 0.22 0.22 0.04 0.62 0.03 0.7 0.01 3/18/14 0.2 0.25 0.29 0.24 0.37 0.25 0.68 0.18 0.69 0.09 3/19/14 0.29 0.41 0.36 0.42 0.46 0.34 0.68 0.22 0.68 0.18 6-9

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-1 Range in Surface Water Head Differences Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 3/24/14 0.44 0.23 0.49 0.2 0.48 0.14 0.61 0.16 0.61 0.09 3/31/14 0.56 0.18 0.61 0.21 0.58 0.12 0.73 0.14 0.68 0.08 4/7/14 0.13 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.09 0.52 0.1 0.61 0.05 4/8/14 0.04 0.59 0.15 0.57 0.27 0.21 0.53 0.2 0.64 0.14 4/9/14 0.31 0.19 0.39 0.22 0.39 0.11 0.59 0.11 0.58 0.06 4/14/14 0.06 0.26 0.17 0.27 0.12 0.1 0.49 0.13 0.6 0.04 4/15/14 -0.06 0.46 0.08 0.5 0.07 0.26 0.42 0.15 0.54 0.11 4/16/14 0.1 0.26 0.16 0.28 0.08 0.07 0.41 0.05 0.52 0.02 4/17/14 0.15 0.67 0.23 0.67 0.06 0.36 0.35 0.15 0.42 0.08 4/18/14 0.01 0.13 0.11 0.15 0.34 0.18 0.67 0.19 0.82 0.12 4/19/14 0.04 0.54 0.14 0.56 4/21/14 0.16 0.22 0.24 0.23 0.25 0.12 0.55 0.12 0.62 0.04 4/22/14 0.16 0.33 0.22 0.4 0.23 0.28 0.54 0.19 0.6 0.07 4/22/14 -0.01 0.24 0.17 0.24 0.06 0.08 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.03 4/23/14 0 0.37 0.03 0.4 0.04 0.28 0.51 0.16 0.6 0.14 4/23/14 -0.01 0.19 0.1 0.22 0.08 0.08 0.52 0.08 0.63 0.02 4/24/14 -0.1 0.42 0.01 0.44 0.03 0.31 0.49 0.17 0.57 0.07 4/25/14 -0.04 0.2 0.04 0.22 0.08 0.1 0.48 0.08 0.48 0.06 4/26/14 -0.08 0.4 0.04 0.42 0.05 0.3 0.45 0.13 0.55 0.05 4/28/14 -0.08 0.18 0.01 0.17 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.11 0.6 0.04 4/29/14 -0.06 0.4 0.03 0.43 0.11 0.33 0.45 0.15 0.59 0.11 4/29/14 -0.11 0.19 0.08 0.2 0.13 0.12 0.51 0.11 0.62 0.05 6-10

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-1 Range in Surface Water Head Differences Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 4/30/14 0.45 0.19 0.62 0.13 4/30/14 -0.13 0.41 0.03 0.42 0.13 0.4 5/2/14 -0.16 0.17 -0.06 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.44 0.09 0.71 0.05 5/3/14 -0.22 0.52 -0.08 0.52 0.03 0.48 0.43 0.2 0.76 0.12 5/5/14 0.09 0.19 0.15 0.2 0.19 0.09 0.54 0.08 0.77 0.01 5/6/14 -0.01 0.45 0.09 0.48 0.08 0.34 0.45 0.13 0.41 0.06 5/7/14 -0.04 0.24 0.08 0.26 0.02 0.08 0.38 0.06 0.4 0 5/8/14 -0.1 0.44 0 0.44 0.03 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.04 5/9/14 -0.12 0.2 -0.04 0.24 -0.05 0.05 0.3 0.08 0.39 0 5/10/14 -0.14 0.5 -0.04 0.6 -0.06 0.44 0.26 0.13 0.36 0.06 5/12/14 -0.19 0.28 -0.1 0.25 -0.14 0.04 0.24 0 0.35 -0.04 5/13/14 -0.18 0.48 -0.06 0.6 -0.15 0.32 0.28 0.31 0.34 0.08 5/13/14 -0.15 0.21 -0.02 0.24 -0.12 0 0.2 -0.02 0.32 -0.06 5/14/14 -0.22 0.52 -0.1 0.56 -0.13 0.36 0.21 0.28 0.34 0.08 5/15/14 -0.26 0.26 -0.1 0.31 0.04 0.32 0.57 0.19 5/16/14 0.08 0.12 0.17 0.14 0.31 0.15 0.41 0.31 0.66 0.08 5/17/14 0.14 0.5 0.28 0.54 0.39 0.21 0.64 0.14 0.68 0.12 5/19/14 0.18 0.18 0.25 0.19 0.34 0.14 0.67 0.21 0.69 0.09 5/20/14 0.25 0.59 0.27 0.57 0.34 0.2 0.65 0.15 0.65 0.15 5/20/14 0.17 0.17 0.28 0.2 0.37 0.18 0.59 0.19 0.69 0.11 5/21/14 0.2 0.63 0.25 0.61 0.36 0.24 0.63 0.17 0.65 0.15 5/21/14 0.19 0.23 0.28 0.24 0.38 0.19 0.62 0.22 0.66 0.1 6-11

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-1 Range in Surface Water Head Differences Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 5/22/14 0.15 0.63 0.22 0.62 0.35 0.26 0.63 0.17 0.68 0.29 5/22/14 0.08 0.2 0.18 0.23 0.29 0.19 0.63 0.26 0.64 0.22 5/23/14 0.02 0.42 0.12 0.46 0.24 0.32 0.59 0.19 0.54 0.18 5/27/14 -0.04 0.21 0.1 0.17 0.07 0.05 0.52 0.25 0.45 0.01 5/28/14 -0.14 0.44 -0.04 0.45 -0.05 0.3 0.52 0.25 0.38 0.1 5/29/13 -0.12 0.2 0.02 0.24 0.02 -0.02 0.38 0.05 0.39 0 5/30/14 -0.09 0.4 -0.02 0.43 -0.08 0.28 0.27 0.14 0.3 0.06 6-12

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-2. Hours and Days of ID Pump Operation per Month ID 2013 2014 Pump Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May N1 24 (1) 24 (1) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43 (1.8) 62 (2.6) 62 (2.6) 84 (3.5)

N2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 (0.2) 43 (1.8) 134 (3.5)

S2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22 (0.9)

Note:

Values are reported as 'Hours (Days)'.

Key:

ID = Identification.

N# = North.

S# = South.

6-13

PL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-3. Pumping Summary Date Pump 1 Pump 2 Pump 3 Pump 4 Performed Pumping 6/26/2013 Yes X 6/27/2013 Yes X 6/28/2013 Yes X 7/1/2013 Yes X 7/2/2014 Yes X 2/26/2014 Yes X 2/28/2014 Yes X 3/3/2014 Yes X 3/4/2014 Yes X 3/6/2014 Yes X 3/11/2014 Yes X 3/13/2014 Yes X 3/17/2014 Yes X 3/18/2014 Yes Yes X 3/19/2014 Yes X 4/7/2014 Yes X 4/14/2014 Yes X 4/15/2014 Yes X 4/16/2014 Yes Yes X 4/21/2014 Yes X 4/22/2014 Yes X 4/23/2014 Yes X 4/24/2014 Yes X 4/25/2014 Yes X 4/28/2014 Yes X 4/29/2014 Yes Yes X 4/30/2014 Yes X 6-14

PL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Table 6.4-3. Pumping Summary Date Pump 1 Pump 2 Pump 3 Pump 4 Performed Pumping 5/2/2014 Yes X 5/5/2014 Yes X 5/6/2014 Yes X 5/7/2014 Yes X 5/8/2014 Yes X 5/9/2014 Yes Yes X 5/12/2014 Yes Yes X 5/13/2014 Yes X 5/14/2014 Yes Yes Yes X 5/15/2014 Yes X 5/16/2014 Yes X 5/19/2014 Yes X 5/20/2014 Yes X 5/21/2014 Yes X 5/22/2014 Yes X 5/23/2014 Yes X 5/27/2014 Yes X 5/28/2014 Yes X 5/29/2014 Yes X 5/30/2014 Yes X 6-15

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 FIGURES

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.1-1. Historic ID Monitoring Wells and Transects.

6-17

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 14 12 10 Rainfall (inches) 8 6

4 2

0 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Month S20F (Historical 1968-2013) S20F (2013-2014) TPM-1 (2013-2014)

Figure 6.3-1. Comparison of ID Monitoring Period to Average Monthly Historic Rainfall.

6-18

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-1. Historical Min and Max, and Quarterly L-3, L-5, G-21, G-28, and G-35 Groundwater Levels.

6-19

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Temperature (°C)

Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-2. L-3 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-20

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Temperature (°C)

Mar-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-3. L-5 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-21

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Temperature (°C)

Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-4. G-21 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-22

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Temperature (°C)

Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-5. G-28 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-23

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Temperature (°C)

Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Figure 6.4-6. G-35 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-24

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60

-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Chloride Content (ppt)

Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-7. L-3 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-25

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 Chloride Content ppt)

Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-8. L-5 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-26

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 5

0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 Chloride Content (ppt)

Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-9. G-21 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-27

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Chloride Content (ppt)

Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope Figure 6.4-10. G-28 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-28

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 0

-5

-10

-15

-20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

-25

-30

-35

-40

-45

-50

-55

-60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Chloride Content (ppt)

Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Figure 6.4-11. G-35 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.

6-29

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-12. Transect A Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.

6-30

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-13. Transect B Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.

6-31

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-14. Transect C Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.

6-32

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-15. Transect D Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.

6-33

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-16. Transect E Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.

6-34

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-17. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and -C32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) - Transect A.

6-35

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-18. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and C-32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) - Transect C.

6-36

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 Figure 6.4-19. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and C-32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) - Transect E.

6-37

0 Pump1N1 Pump2N2 Pump3S1 Pump4S2 5 6 7 06/01/13 06/07/13 06/13/13 06/19/13 06/25/13 07/01/13 07/07/13 07/13/13 07/19/13 07/25/13 FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report 07/31/13 08/06/13 08/12/13 08/18/13 08/24/13 08/30/13 09/05/13 09/11/13 09/17/13 09/23/13 09/29/13 10/05/13 10/11/13 Rainfall 10/17/13 10/23/13 for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 10/29/13 11/04/13 11/10/13 N1 11/16/13 11/22/13 Figure 6.4-20. Interceptor Ditch Pump Operation and Rainfall.

11/28/13 6-38 12/04/13 12/10/13 N2 12/16/13 12/22/13 12/28/13 01/03/14 S1 01/09/14 01/15/14 01/21/14 01/27/14 S2 02/02/14 02/08/14 02/14/14 02/20/14 02/26/14 03/04/14 03/10/14 03/16/14 03/22/14 03/28/14 04/03/14 04/09/14 04/15/14 04/21/14 04/27/14 05/03/14 05/09/14 05/15/14 05/21/14 05/27/14

-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

-15 -14 -13 -12 -11 -10 Rainfall (in)

Section 6

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 66.0 65.5 65.0 64.5 Density (lbs/cu ft) 64.0 63.5 63.0 62.5 62.0 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

L-3 Density lbs/cu ft G-21 Density lbs/cu ft Figure 6.4-21. Density vs. Elevation Wells L-3 and G-21 During September 2013 Sampling Event.

6-39

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 25 20 15 Pressure (psi) 10 5

0 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

L-3 Pressure (psi) G-21 Pressure (psi)

Figure 6.4-22. Pressure vs. Elevation Wells L-3 and G-21 During September 2013 Sampling Event.

6-40

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 28 0.40 Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-21 Relative to Well L-3 (psi) 0.35 24 0.30 20 0.25 0.20 Pressure (psi) 16 0.15 0.10 12 0.05 8 0.00

-0.05 4

-0.10 0 -0.15

-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

L-3 Pressure (psi) G-21 Pressure (psi) Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-21 (psi)

Figure 6.4-23. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-3 and Well G-21 during September 2013 Sampling Event.

6-41

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 28 0.35 Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-21 Relative to Well L-3 (psi) 0.30 24 0.25 20 0.20 0.15 Pressure (psi) 16 0.10 12 0.05 0.00 8

-0.05 4

-0.10 0 -0.15

-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

L-3 Pressure (psi) G-21 Pressure (psi) Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-21 (psi)

Figure 6.4-24. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-3 and Well G-21 during March 2014 Sampling Event.

6-42

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 28.000 0.30 Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-28 Relative to Well L-5 (psi) 24.000 0.20 20.000 0.10 Pressure (psi) 16.000 0.00 12.000

-0.10 8.000

-0.20 4.000 0.000 -0.30

-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

L-5 Pressure (psi) G-28 Pressure (psi) Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-28 (psi)

Figure 6.4-25. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-5 and Well G-28 during September 2013 Sampling Event.

6-43

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 28 0.40 Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-28 Relative to Well L-5 (psi) 24 0.20 20 0.00 16 Pressure (psi) 12

-0.20 8

-0.40 4

0 -0.60

-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)

L-5 Pressure (psi) G-28 Pressure (psi) Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-28 (psi)

Figure 6.4-26. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-5 and Well G-28 during March 2014 Sampling Event.

6-44

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7.0

SUMMARY

, INTERPRETATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with the Turkey Point Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009a) and the Fifth Supplemental Agreement (SFWMD 2009b), FPL is required to assess the groundwater, surface water, ecological, and meteorological conditions in and surrounding to the Turkey Point Plant Cooling Canal System (CCS). The purpose of the effort is to assess Pre-Uprate conditions prior to the uprating of the Turkey Point nuclear Units 3 and 4 and to assess effects following the Uprating (Post-Uprate).

Monitoring was initiated in June 2010 and has continued through May 2014. FPL notified the FDEP of commencement of the Uprate of nuclear Units 3 and 4 on September 24, 2010. Uprate modifications were performed on both Unit 3 and Unit 4 over a period of time. One unit was uprated at a time. The final modifications for Unit 3 took place during February 26, 2012 to September 5, 2012 and the unit reached full uprate power on October 31, 2012. The final modifications for Unit 4 took place during November 5, 2012 to April 17, 2013 and the unit reached full uprated power on May 8, 2013. Both units were operating together within their uprated capacities starting May 27, 2013. Data collected prior to February 26, 2012, are part of the Pre-Uprate period, while data collected between February 26, 2012 and May 27, 2013, are referred to as part of the Interim Operating Period. Data collected after May 27, 2013, are referred to as part of the Post-Uprate period.

This annual report incorporates findings from the Post-Uprate monitoring period from June 2013 to May 2014 and, where applicable, makes comparisons to the Pre-Uprate monitoring period.

This section provides a summary and interpretation of the results.

7.1 Groundwater Major Findings In the Post-Uprate period, the salt constituents have remained relatively consistent for most wells; however, notable increases in chloride and sodium were observed in two deep wells (more than 100 feet below Bay bottom) in Biscayne Bay (TPGW-10D, and to a lesser extent in TPGW-11D) at the start of the Interim Operating period. The specific conductance also increased in response to the increase in saltwater constituents in these two wells. The effects were not observed in the shallow and intermediate depth wells.

Chloride, sodium, and specific conductance at TPGW-7D were higher during the Post-Uprate period compared to the Pre-Uprate. This well was previously fresh at depth. It is 7-1

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 not clear if the increase in specific conductance is the result of the long-term operation of the CCS, lag effects of the 2011 drought, or some other factor.

The extent of CCS water in the groundwater does not appear to have changed appreciably between Pre- and Post-Uprate beyond the deep Biscayne Bay well, TPGW-10D; however, further verification with tritium data is still needed. The Post-Uprate results still indicated hypersaline water immediately adjacent to the west in the groundwater.

Further west from the CCS, there is evidence of saline water present in decreasing ionic concentrations at depth out approximately 3 miles. The outermost wells to the west, TPGW-8 and TPGW-9, were fresh at all depths.

Nearly all of the observations made in the Pre-Uprate period regarding groundwater quality and levels, the influence of meteorological conditions, operation of the CCS, and operation of the ID (FPL 2012a) are the same during the Post-Uprate period. The higher water densities in the CCS will impact groundwater flow and gradients, but seasonal changes and rainfall have a greater impact on groundwater levels. There was no discernable evidence of CCS operations on water levels at nearby wells TPGW-1 and TPGW-10.

7.2 Surface Water Major Findings Specific conductance in the CCS has been rising since the beginning of the dry season in 2014 and reached over 120,000 µS/cm (salinity of 95 PSU) in May 2014. The average Post-Uprate value for all stations was 92,594 µS/cm. The maximum value was over 25,000 µS/cm higher and the average value was over 15,000 µS/cm higher than that reported in the Pre-Uprate period. For comparison, Biscayne Bay surface water stations from June 2013 through May 2014 had specific conductance values that ranged from 23,315 to 63,186 µS/cm.

The temperature has also increased in the CCS during the Post-Uprate period and on average was 3°C to 5°C warmer than during the Pre-Uprate period. The increase in CCS surface water temperatures during the Post-Uprate period cannot be explained by the Uprate since the total heat rejection rate to the CCS from Turkey Point Units 1, 2, 3, and 4, operating at full capacity prior to the Uprate would have been higher than the Post-Uprate heat rejection rate to the CCS for Units 1, 3, and 4, operating at full capacity. Unit 2 has been dedicated to operate in a synchronous generator mode (i.e. not producing steam heat).

Nutrients (TKN) have increased in the CCS since June 2013 and may have contributed to algal blooms in the CCS. The algal species in the CCS is known to be a nitrogen-fixer, which may be contributing to the TKN observed. FPL is currently assessing the cause as it may be attributable to a number of factors unrelated to the Uprate.

7-2

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 In conjunction with specific conductance, data indicate there is no measurable contribution of nutrients to the Bay that can be attributed to the CCS.

There continue to be no discernable effects of the CCS on Biscayne Bay surface water quality.

Some of the potential seepage effects reported in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012) at TPSWC-4 and TPSWC-5 were not as evident in the Post-Uprate period based on temperature and specific conductance.

With the exception of the CCS, the majority of observations made in the Pre-Uprate reporting period (FPL 2012) regarding water quality and stage are still the same.

7.3 Water Budget Major Findings The model simulates a net water loss of 3.26 MGD from the CCS during the Post-Uprate period and a net salt gain of 2,216 (lb x 1,000)/day within the CCS over the same period.

This has resulted in decreased water levels and increased salinity within the CCS.

A significant lack of precipitation and increase in evaporative losses have contributed to the decline in water levels in the CCS during the Post-Uprate period.

Reductions in CCS water levels and the amplified role of saline groundwater inflow during the Post-Uprate period have increased the salt content (and salinity) in the CCS.

7.4 Interceptor Ditch Major Findings The use of freshwater head equivalents provides a more rigorous approach to the operation of the ID.

FPL is operating and maintaining a net seaward gradient in the upper zone of the aquifer.

7.5 Ecological Major Findings Ecological monitoring in Biscayne Bay and the marsh and mangrove areas surrounding Turkey Point show no evidence of impacts from the CCS. Changes appear to be more seasonally and meteorologically driven.

7-3

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 Findings were similar to those previously summarized in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012).

7.6 Recommendations Based on data consistency over the monitoring duration in the groundwater stations, FPL recommends reducing the automated recording of groundwater quality data and level measurements at non-tidal stations (TPGW-1, -2, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 well clusters) from hourly to daily.

Based on the lack of ecological changes from the Pre-Uprate to the Post-Uprate, FPL recommends eliminating all (Biscayne Bay, marsh and mangrove) ecological monitoring.

7-4

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8

8. REFERENCES Biscayne National Park. 2007. Salinity sampling in Biscayne Bay (2005-2006). Annual Report to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for the Monitoring and Assessment Plan of the Comprehensive Everglades restoration Plan for RECOVER Assessment Team Southeast Estuary Subteam. 151 pp.

Chang, C. Y., P. V. McCormick, S. Newman, and E. Elliott. 2009. Isotopic indicators of environmental change in a subtropical wetland. Ecological Indicators 9:825-836.

Childers, D. L., D. Iwaniec, D. Rondeau, G. Rubio, E. Verdon, and C. J. Madden. 2006.

Responses of sawgrass and spikerush to variation in hydrologic drivers and salinity in Southern Everglades marshes. Hydrobiologia 569(1):273-292.

Coronado-Molina, C., J. W. Day, E. Reyes, and B. C. Perez. 2004. Standing crop and aboveground biomass partitioning of a dwarf mangrove forest in Taylor River Slough, Florida. Wetlands Ecology and Management 12:157-164.

Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). 2014a. Florida Power & Light Company Semi-Annual Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 02/28/11. February 2014.

__________. 2014b. Turkey Point Power Plan Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Project -Groundwater and Surface Water Audit Report. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., December 2013

__________. 2013a. Florida Power & Light Company Semi-Annual Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 07/13/13. July 2013.

__________. 2013b. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: July 2013.

__________. 2012. Florida Power & Light Company Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., October 31, 2013.

__________. 2011a. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 12/05/11. December 2011.

9-1

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8

___________2009. FPL Turkey Point Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan. October 14, 2009.

Fourqurean, J.W. and J.C. Zieman. 2002. Nutrient content of the seagrass Thalassia testudinum reveals regional patterns of relative availability of nitrogen and phosphorus in the Florida Keys USA. Biogeochemistry 61: 229-245.

Golder Associates Inc. 2011a. Saltwater Orientation in the Biscayne Aquifer in the Turkey Point Plant Vicinity Prior to Installation of the Cooling Canal System. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. April 22, 2011.

__________. 2011b. 2011 Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. August 2011.

__________. 2010. 2010 Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. August 2010.

JLA Geoscience, Inc. 2010. Geology and Hydrogeology Report for FPL, Turkey Point Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan, FPL, Turkey Point Plant, Homestead, Florida. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. October 2010.

Kohn, M. J. 2010. Carbon isotope compositions of terrestrial C3 plants as indicators of (paleo) ecology and (paleo) climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

107(46):207-226.

Lugo, A. E. and S. Snedaker. 1974. The Ecology of Mangroves. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 5:39-64.

McKee, K. L., I. C. Feller, M. Popp, and W. Wanek. 2002. Mangrove Isotopic (15N and 13C)

Fractionation Across a Nitrogen vs. Phosphorous Limitation Gradient. Ecology 83(4):1065-1075.

Olmsted, I. and T. V. Armentano. 1997. Vegetation of Shark Slough, Everglades National Park.

SFNRC Technical Report 97-001. 39 p.

Quiros, R. 2002. The nitrogen to phosphorus ratio for lakes: a cause of a consequence of aquatic biology? In: Cirelli, A.F., and Marquisa, G.C. (eds). El Agua en Iberoamerica: de la Limnologia a la Gestion en Sudamerica. CYTED XVII, Centro de Estudios Transdisciplinarios del Agua, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Buenos Aires.

Buenos Aires, Argentina. Pp. 11-26.

Robblee, M. B. and J. A. Browder. 2007. Year 2 Annual Report. USGS Work Order #19 NOAA Work Order #3 for MAP activities 3.2.3.5 and 3.2.4.5. South Florida Fish and Invertebrate Assessment Network. 84 pp.

9-2

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 Ross, M. S., J. F. Meeder, J. P. Sah, P. L. Ruiz, and G. J. Telesnicki. 2000. The Southeast Saline Everglades revisited: a half-century of coastal vegetation change. Journal of Vegetation Science 11:101-112.

Ross, M. S., P. L. Ruiz, G. J. Telesnicki, and J. F. Meeder. 2001. Estimating above-ground biomass and production in mangrove communities of Biscayne National Park, Florida (U.S.A). Wetlands Ecology and Management 9: 27-37.

South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). 2013a. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated June 3, 2013, regarding Units 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of groundwater/surface water monitoring), to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.

__________. 2013b. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated July 17, 2013, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of ecological monitoring), to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.

__________. 2013c. Email from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated July 23, 2013, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (clarification of sampling frequency for ecological nutrients), to Stacy Foster, Manager, Environmental Licensing, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.

__________. 2009a. FPL Turkey Point Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan (Exhibit B). Prepared by SFWMD, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management. October 14, 2009.

__________. 2009b. Fifth Supplemental Agreement between the South Florida Water Management District and Florida Power & Light Company. October 2009.

__________. 2008. 2007 Cumulative Annual Report for the Coastal Water Quality Monitoring Network (Agreement 46000000352) for the period January - December 2007. Prepared for the South Florida Water Management District Water Quality Analysis Division by Southeast Environmental Research Center (SERC). May 23, 2008.

TestAmerica, 2014. Letter from Terry Hornsby, Quality Assurance Manager, dated August 22, 2014, regarding Bicarbonate Alkalinity Data Revision, to Stacy Foster, Florida Power &

Light Company, Juno Beach, Florida.

9-3

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 Weather Underground. 2014. Weather History for Homestead AFB, FL, July 1, 2013 through May 21, 2014.

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KHST/2013/7/1/CustomHistory.html?day end=31&monthend=5&yearend=2014&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=N A. Accessed July 2014.

9-4