ML17256B239

Biological Assessment of Power Plant Shutdown During Winter.

ML17256B239
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	01/31/1982
From:	Sawyko P ECO-LABS, INC., ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML17256B237	List: ML17256B235 ML17256B239 ML17309A289
References
B-13-073, B-13-73, NUDOCS 8209160445
Download: ML17256B239 (110)

Text

RGE REPORT NO. B-13-073 Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation A Biological Assessment of a Power Plant Shutdown During Winter (ILES

. Data Collected by Eco Research, Inc.

Report Prepared by Rochester Gas 6 Electric Corp.,

'Paul M. Sawyko 8209ih0445 8209i0 January, 1982 PDR ADOCK 05000244 D PDR gI:I@~II(II IIIII',I<H MI'II

Table of Contents Section Pacae List of Tables List of Figures Summary and Conclusions 1v I Introduction 1 II Procedures 3 II-1 Electroshocking in the Discharge Canal II-2 Cold-Shock Testing II-3 Measurement of Internal Fish Temperatures 6 II-4 Fish Tagging and Release 7 II-5 Personal Visual Observations 7 II-6 Underwater Television Monitoring 8 II-7 Tracking of Dead Fish from Discharge Canal 9 II-8 Gill Netting 9 II-9 Shutdown Procedure 10 IIIIII-1 Results and Discussion .

Ginna Nuclear Power Station III-2 Operating Conditions Electroshocking .

(GNPS) ll 13 III-3 Cold-Shock Testing 14 III-4 Internal Fish Temperatures 20 III-5 Fish Tagging and Release 25 III;6 Personal Visual Observations 26 III-7 Underwater Television Monitoring 27 III-8

~ ~ ~

Tracking of Dead Fish from Discharge Canal 27 III-9 Gill Netting 28 References 31 T ables ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ 34 F figures 41 Appendix A - Detailed Electroshocking and Cold'Shocking Results from GNPS Discharge Canal, December 1978 April, 1979

List of Tables Title Pacae Electroshocking Results: Numbers of Each Species Collected by Study Date Summary Table of Electroshocking/ 35, Cold-Shock Testing Comparison of Minimum Survival Temperatures 36 for Rainbow Trout Cold-Shock Test Conditions VS Predicted 37 Cold-Shock Based on Plant Operating Conditions Summary Table of Internal Temperatures 38 Measurements ('C)

Fish Tag Recapture Information 39 Summary of Gill Net Results, December, 40 1978 April, 1979 ll

~ ~

List of Figures Title Parcae GNPS Site Location Plan View of GNPS Discharge Canal and Associated Sampling Locations Gill Net (G) Locations near the Ginna 43 Site Rate of GNPS Discharge Temperature Decline During February 9, 1979 Shutdown Procedure Acclimation Temperatures VS Minimum Allowable Ambient Temperatures ill

~ ~

Summar and Conclusions An intensive aquatic biological survey was conducted at the Ginna Nuclear Power Station (GNPS) during the colder water months of December, 1978 through April, 1979. A portion of this program was designed to assess the ecological effects of a scheduled plant shutdown commencing on February 9, 1979.

(Section I)

2. A combination of sampling techniques were utilized to study simulated worst-case shutdown (i.e. rapid shutdown) effects as well as monitor actual effects occurring during the scheduled shutdown (i.e. a modified shutdown). (Section II)

3. Biological monitoring during the winter season of 1978-1979 indicated that salmonid fish species were present in the GNPS area and discharge canal, thus warranting the surveillance instituted for the February shutdown. In addition, normal shutdown procedures were modified in order to lower the rate of discharge temperature decline to as slow a rate as practically possible. (Section III-1)

Electroshocking results indicated that target species especially rainbow trout trout)

(i.e.'almonids, and brown were present in the discharge canal throughout the study period.

Target species were present in higher numbers during periods of thermal discharge than during periods of no thermal discharge. (Section III-2)

5. Cold-shock testing resulted in overall survival of 92.5% of the fish tested (n = 80), including 97.6% survival for brown trout (n = 41) and 87.5% survival for rainbow trout (n = 32).

These findings generally compare favorably with studies reported in the literature, however differences in seasonal thermal habits appear to affect results. (Section III-3)

6. Based on the cold-shock testing conducted, a cold-shock model developed from the literature, and actual operating conditions, it is predicted that there would have been at least, 50% survival of rainbow trout had an abrupt shutdown occurred during the January and February, 1979 period. This finding, in conjunction with the modified shutdown procedure utilized, suggests that adverse impacts to the target species due to cold-shock during the February 9, 1979 shutdown were minimal and survival would have exceeded the 50-90% survival rate predicted based on cold-shock studies alone. (Section

7. Internal body temperatures of the fish studied showed that the target. species had body temperatures very close to discharge'emperatures. However acclimation to discharge temperatures was not clearly shown, and again appeared to be seasonally dependent. These results further suggest that acclimation temperatures cannot be determined based on water temperature and/or body temperature alone. (Section III-4)

8. Fish tagging studies indicated that the target species have the abilities to withstand both sudden increases and decreases in water temperatures, thus suggesting no mortality due to these stresses in the long-term also. (Section III-5)

9. Visual observations during the shutdown indicated no apparent fish die-off or adverse impacts. (Section III-6)

10. While underwater television monitoring has been successfully utilized in the past, it was determined to be of lesser value than the electroshocking technique for determining species'resence in the discharge canal under certain conditions. (Section III-7)

11. Dead fish were released into the discharge canal and their dispersal pattern into the lake was observed. This technique identified flow pathways to be monitored in surveying for fish killed as a result of cold-shock; no dead fish other than those released were observed. (Section III-8)

12. Gill netting conducted from December, 1978 through April, 1979 indicated that rainbow and brown trout were present in the GNPS site area throughout this period, whereas lake trout, and coho salmon were not found until February. Overall findings suggest that of all species encountered during this study period only four species: rainbow trout, brown trout, rainbow smelt, and white perch, were found on a relatively consistent basis. Additionally, while there was evidence that those species were attracted to the thermal discharge, they were also in the site area when the plant was off-line during the winter. (Section III-9)

13. The results of experimental and theoretical cold-shock models, in conjunction with the GNPS site area gill-netting program, indicate that the effects due to rapid plant shut-down upon individual fish'f the target species would be quite limited and would not cause any detrimental impacts to these populations.

I. Introduction A widely cited concern regarding the discharge of heated water into a water body from an operating electric generating power station is the potential for "cold-shock" to fish during power station shutdown. Cold-shock may occur if fish become dependent upon the thermal plume during cold water months in order to maintain a certain body temperature, and are subjected to thermal stress and possible mortality in the event of plant shutdown (Templeton et al, 1974; Coutant, 1974, 1977; Reutter and Herdendorf, 1974a; Edsall and Yocum, 1972). Specific to the recent New York State Article VIII Case 80005 proceedings RGB'ituation, on the Sterling Nuclear Power Project focused on, among other items, cold shock potential. In addition, recent 316(a) Demonstra-tions submitted in support of the once-through cooling systems at RGB's Beebee, Russell and Ginna Stations (RGE, 1977a, 1977b, and 1977c) have also specifically addressed the cold-shock area. The above cited evaluations by RG&E reflect the fact that regulatory agencies continue to be concerned with cold-shock potential and its associated impacts. Therefore continuing investigations into the cold-shock situation appear to be appropriate in order to provide more quantitative information regarding actual shutdown effects in an attempt to confirm previously determined minimal impacts.

Past evaluations and techniques involving cold-shock prevention with respect to RG&E include (1) the utilization of electric screens in the Russell and Ginna Discharge Canals to prevent fish from entering and inhabiting these areas, (2) the theoretical evaluations presented in the above referenced 316(a) Demonstrations

which indicate that fish swimming capabilities are not sufficient to allow them to remain in the discharge waters for a length of time which will allow them to become susceptible to cold-shock, and (3) a further attempt to assure that there will not be fish residing in the discharge waters by increasing the proposed Sterling discharge velocity to 2 meters/second (6.7 fps) (NYS DPS; 1977).

Few reports are available from, actual shutdown situations which can be used to evaluate cold-shock effects. This is due to a number of"'reasons including difficulty in working on a lake such as Lake Ontario in the winter, the possibility of lethal effects manifesting themselves days following the actual thermal stress, and, as suggested by Brett (1970), the possibili'ty of fish merely sinking out of sight after dying. As a result of these problems, most evaluations for assessing cold-shock are based on theoretical analyses and laboratory findings (Spigarelli, 1974). In short, due to a lack of in situ studies, it is difficult to truly determine whether such theoretical cold-shock evaluations are accurate or even necessary. It is the objective of this study to provide those in situ evaluations.

This report describes two approaches utilized by RGB'uring the months of January through April, 1979 to study the actual effects of plant shutdown during the cold water months. The first method was to simulate an abrupt shutdown condition by c'ollecting fish from the discharge waters and placing them into ambient lake temperature waters where they were held and subsequent survival observed. The second method was a detailed biological

monitoring of the Ginna discharge area during an actual shutdown commencing on February 9, 1979. This shutdown incorporated a modified plant operating procedure which resulted in a gradual decrease in hT, (i.e., discharge temperature minus lake ambient temperature) spanning an eight-hour period. These two approaches included the following specific techniques:

1) Electroshocking in the discharge canal

2) Cold-shock testing

3) Measurement of internal fish temperatures

4) Fish tagging and release

5) Personal visual observation (including SCUBA operations)

6) Underwater television monitoring

7) Tracking of dead fish in discharge current

8) Gill netting In order to place these studies in context, necessary back-ground information is also presented from the larger overall biological monitoring program conducted at the Ginna Site area which was ongoing throughout this study period. Results from this larger program encompass the December 1978 through April 1979 period.

II. Procedures The Ginna Nuclear Power Station (GNPS) Site is located on Lake Ontario about 32 km (20 mi.) east of the city of Rochester, New York (Figure 1). Discharge canal configuration and lake sampling locations are shown on Figures 2 and 3, respectively.

Following are descriptions of the activities conducted with respect to this particular shutdown assessment.

II-1. Electroshockin in the Dischar e Canal These studies were utilized as the collection technique for the cold-shock testing, fish tagging and release, and internal temperature measurements, all of which are described below.

Electroshocking pertinent to these evaluations was conducted in the GNPS discharge canal area (Figure 2) on December 20, 1978; January 2, 25, 30 and 31, February 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 20, and 28, March 5, 8, 21, 28 and 29, and April 10 and ll, 1979. While some of these dates represent collections for other programs as well, the results of all shocking studies are utilized to assess and compare species abundance and composition of those fish residing in the canal before, during and after shutdown. It should be realized, however, that this phase of the program was directed towards obtaining gamefish (e.g. salmon and trout),

therefore, results of abundance and composition will be biased towards these species and will not be representative of other species (e.g. shad, smelt, etc.) that may have been present but only collected incidentally. The electroshocking technique utilized a pulsed d.c. mode, at variable voltages adjusted to effectively capture salmonids with as little harm as possible.

II-2. Cold-Shock Testin Cold-shock experiments were begun on January 2, 25, 30, 31, February 8 and April 11, 1979, (tests 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and 6, respectively) for a total of six studies. For these studies fish were electroshocked and netted from the discharge canal. These

fish were quickly transferred to a 133 gallon holding tank in the screenhouse which was maintained at discharge temperature. Water from the discharge canal was continuously pumped through this holding tank to maintain temperature and dissolved oxygen levels.

These fish were monitored for 30 min. to an hour, or until such time as all effects of the electroshocking and handling appeared to be overcome, i.e. the fish were swimming and acting normally.

In tests 1, 2 and 3, the volume of water in the holding tank was gradually reduced to about 20 gallons after which this water and the fish were allowed to flow rapidly into a 423.gallon test, tank. The test tank contained constantly flowing lake ambient water taken from the intake forebay. This transfer procedure was used in order to minimize fish handling and keep the temperatures in the test tank as close to ambient as possible. Temperatures in the test. tank were recorded every minute for five minutes and then at five minute intervals until 20 minutes. In tests 4, 5 and 6, the fish were netted from the holding tank and put directly into the test tank, thus test temperatures constantly remained at lake ambient.

Fish were held in the test tank (at ambient water temperatures) for 48 hrs in test 1, and from 92-166 hrs in tests 2, 3, 4, 5 and

6. Fish were monitored intermittently during the test period with dead fish being removed to reduce the chance of disease.

After completion of the test the remaining fish were tagged and released into the discharge canal.

The procedure described was designed to simulate actual conditions should the power station go off-line abruptly. That is, the fish tested were those normally found in the discharge

canal during the time of year when the cold-shock potential is of greatest concern. Further, these fish are at a level of acclimation that they have selected, i.e., there is no attempt to ensure that the fish is acclimated to the .discharge temperature since that may not be representative of the actual situation. By conducting a number of experiments consisting of numerous individual organisms, it is assumed that a representative sample of the fish population residing in the 'discharge canal would be collected. Thus, the actual acclimation situation would be studied and the chance of

'esting fish which have not yet reached their preferred acclimation temperature would be minimal. Holding the fish in discharge temperature water serves the purposes of assuring that the fish have recovered from initial sampling stresses, and also allows the uniform testing of all specimens with respect to holding time and temperature. It should be stressed that overall, sampling procedures are reflecting additional stresses (e.g. substantial handling) that the organisms would not be subjected to in the actual shutdown situation, thus introducing an element of conservatism into the experiment.

II-3. Measurement of Internal Fish Tem eratures On three occasions, January 31, February 9, and April 11, 1979 internal temperatures were obtained from fish electroshocked in the discharge canal. Anal temperature measurements were taken immediately upon collection with a Wahl thermocouple, digital readout thermometer. Whil'e this measurement was considered to be of value since it may give an indication of residence time in the discharge canal and possibly acclimation temperature, it was not

always taken due to the additional stress placed upon the subjected fish. This stress was not believed to be warranted in light. of higher priority testing such as the cold-shock experimentation or the tagging and release programs.

II-4. Fish Ta in and Release Most fish collected during electroshocking studies were tagged and returned to the discharge canal in anticipation of future capture. Tagging procedures were similar to those described in RGE, 1978b. Fish utilized in the cold-shock experiments were measured for length and normally tagged after the test was conducted, just prior to return to the discharge. Fish collected when cold-shock testing was not conducted were merely tagged, measured for length,. held for a period of time to insure recovery and subsequently returned to the discharge canal. It should be pointed out that fish which underwent. the cold-shock testing were released into the discharge canal, therefore these fish experienced an instantaneous increase in temperature at that time, which adds another aspect to this study.

The tagging and release study was intended to aid in understanding residency of fish populations in the discharge canal, as well as to indicate the behavioral migratory patterns of the fish after shutdown.

II-5. Personal Visual Observations Personal visual observations prior to shutdown (i.e. December-February 8) were confined mainly to those land-based observations made while electroshocking. During the afternoon of February 8, 1979 through 1200 hours0.0139 days <br />0.333 hours <br />0.00198 weeks <br />4.566e-4 months <br /> February 9, 1979, observations were more

frequent and included such areas as along the discharge canal, the catwalk on the canal, the mouth of the canal, and the discharge plume (Figure 2). Plume observations were made from the shoreline, from boats or using SCUBA. Both day and night observations were conducted utilizing lights as necessary.

Post shutdown observations were conducted through February 12, 1979 using boats and shoreline vantage points. SCUBA operations were carried out between 0130 and 0400 hours0.00463 days <br />0.111 hours <br />6.613757e-4 weeks <br />1.522e-4 months <br /> on February 10, 1979 across the mouth of the canal and at the shear zones to the east and west of the canal mouth. Divers were inhibited from moving farther away from the discharge canal due to the heavy lake icing condition at that time which combined with the strong discharge currents to create the potential danger of being swept away under the semi-solid ice covering. All non-SCUBA visual observations were hindered by lake flow-ice shifts and fluctuations in water turbidity.

Such visual observations were instituted in order to provide personal information on the shutdown procedure. While such techniques can provide little quantitative data, it is believed that this is one of the few methods available to actually determine whether fish were present and how they immediately reacted to the shutdown. Non-SCUBA visual observations are routinely used by fishermen, Conservation Officers, or other individuals who may report or investigate fish kills or related incidents.

lI-6. Underwater Television Monitorin This technique is normally utilized throughout the year in order to aid in monitoring fish residing in the discharge canal.

A detailed description of this method is contained in RGE, 1976.

In this case the camera was placed on the monitoring pole located along the east side of the canal in the final bend of the canal preceding its entrance into the lake (Figure 2). The camera was positioned about 0.3 meters from the canal bottom, facing downstream.

While previous results utilizing this techn'ice have been extremely useful in determining fish residing throughout the year, water turbidity during the period of this study limited the T.V. monitoring s effectiveness.

II-7. Trackin of Dead Fish from Dischar e Canal At 0100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> on February 10, 1979 between one hundred and two hundred dead gizzard shad were released into the discharge canal. These fish were to be identified by the observers in the boat at a later time as the fish were carried out of the canal and appeared in the lake. It was assumed that a fish dead from cold shock or any other reason would follow the same current generated by the discharge flow. This path of dead fish was followed by the boat and any fish, live or dead, were noted.

~11 The description of gill netting gear, netting locations and duration, and analyses were all done in the same basic manner as previous RG&E gill netting studies conducted at Ginna, and are fully described in previous fish program reports (RGE, 1978a).

In this particular study, gill nets were set in the plume area prior to shutdown on February 6, 1979 and were pulled on February 7, 1979. Nets set included the plume net and E-0 shore net (both at, 2M stations) (see Figure 3); ice prevented setting more. Post-

shutdown nets were set on February 12, 1979 and were pulled on February 13, 1979. Ice was considerably heavier on the thirteenth.

Due to the ice the plume net and E-0 2M net were set end to end (i.e., 91.44 meters (300 ft) of net) in, the center of the discharge current. Although this netting was l'imited in scope it provided information regarding the fish present in the area during this time.

Summaries of gill nettings done during the December, 1978 through April, 1979 period have also been presented in order to I

provide background data concerning which fish species were present in the site area during this portion of the year. It would necessarily be these species that would be subjected to plant impacts during this time of year. Complete results of these broader studies are reported in RGE, 1979.

II-9. Shutdown Procedure Since a number of shutdown operating procedures may be encountered at a plant such as Ginna, the following three types have been defined and. utilized throughout this report: 1) A~bru t shutdown refers to a situation in which the reactor vessel is brought to a cold state as quickly as possible. Based upon past experience the rate of temperature decline during such a situation at GNPS is -1.0'C/Min, 2) Normal Shutdown - refers to a scheduled shutdown during which time the reactor vessel is turned off at a slower rate, in the order of -O'C/hr (-0.065'C/Min), and 3)

Modified shutdown - refers to the situation tested during this study; designed to aid in preventing adverse ecological impacts until assessments of abrupt shutdowns can be made. In this case the average rate of shutdown is -1.1'C/hr (-0.018'C/Min).

10

Beginning on February 9, 1979 at 1200 hours0.0139 days <br />0.333 hours <br />0.00198 weeks <br />4.566e-4 months <br />, the Ginna Nuclear Power Station commenced shutdown operations. Shutdown operations differed from previous normal shutdown procedures in that in this case a gradual (or modified) shutdown was planned which would result in a relatively constant and slow decrease in discharge temperatures over the entire eight hour shutdown period.

This modified procedure would thus slowly reduce the hT instead of the normal shutdown in which the temperature drop to near ambient levels occurs over only a 2-3 hour period. Continual reco'rding strip chart thermometers recorded the intake and dis-charge temperatures throughout the shutdown.

III. Results and Discussion III-1. Ginna Nuclear Power Station GNPS 0 eratin Conditions During late December, 1978 and into January, 1979 GNPS was operating at full capacity, with a hT of about 11-12'C. Towards the end of January the plant output started to decrease slowly, due to reducing fuel load, which was planned as part of the normal refueling shutdown scheduled to begin on February 9.

During early February, hT was at 11.1-11.6'C prior to active shutdown which commenced on February 9.

At 1600 hr, on February 9, 1979, the discharge temperature was 12.2'C with a bT of ~11'C. Figure 4 illustrates the rate of decline in discharge temperature (and thus hT) during this modified shutdown procedure. Overall, the rate of temperature decay was

-1.1'C/hr, between roughly 1620 on February 9 through 0220, on February 10. While the rate of decline appears to be on the order of -0.11 to -0.16'C/10 min (or -0.7 to -1.0'C/hr) throughout 11

this period, peak rates of -1.1'C/10 min (-6.7'C/hr) were calculated.

For comparative purposes, as stated in Section II-9, the overall rate of temperature decline during a normal shutdown is about -4'C/hr, or about 3.5x as fast as that allowed in February, 1979.

After 0220 on February 10, hT was essentially O'C and remained at that level until February 12 at 0548 hrs, when the main condenser circulating water pumps were shutdown for ~7.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />, due to maintenance in the forebay. This resulted in a hT of about 2.8'C during that, time period, due to the discharge of heat from various heat, exchangers cooled by the house service water pumps. However, the flow of water out of the discharge canal during this time was only 12,000 GPM, compared to a normal operating flow of 400,000 GPM. This maintenance also resulted in a bT of 4.4'C during 1530-1600 on February 13, and a dT of 1.7'C from 0700-1830 on February 14, 1979. bT then remained at O'C-1'C until April 3, 1979 when GNPS was brought back on-line and the bT subsequently returned 8-10'C.

The decision to reduce the rate of shutdown in 1979 over that utilized during normal shutdowns, was based on the facts that the 1978-1979 winter aquatic monitoring at GNPS indicated that important game species such as trout were inhabiting the discharge (Section III-9), and therefore a potential for cold-shock did exist. From the literature it was determined that the slower the rate of temperature drop, the less likely any'adverse impacts would occur (Speakman and Krenkel, 1972). Theoretically safe rates of decline, on the order of days, have been suggested by Brett. (1956). This could certainly not be accomplished since 12

it was felt that as slow a rate as practically possible, considering economics, operations, and environmental impacts, should be

'o utz.lized. Therefore the shutdown procedures were basically an attempt to meet available scientific criteria while the actual effects of a more rapid shutdown could be studied, analyzed and predicted. The remainder of this report generally concludes that the modified shutdown procedure is probably not necessary since the cold-shock testing in conjunction with literature results, indicates that over 50/ of the target species should survive even an abrupt shutdown.

III-2. Electroshockin Table 1 summarizes the electroshocking findings during this stu'dy; Appendix A presents the details of the electroshocking and the results of any subsequent cold-shock testing. As stated in the methodology, the catch is biased towards gamefish since these were the target species for this study.

While seven species (Table 1) were collected during the electroshocking, only two, brown trout and rainbow trout, were caught in large enough numbers to allow any type of meaningful cold-shock analysis. Electroshocking results for the GNPS discharge canal were quantified and analyzed by equating actual number of fish found to number of fish/1000 sec. of electroshocking time.

The findings show that both brown and rainbow trout were present in the discharge canal throughout the entire study period. These results further indicate that both brown and rainbow trout are found more frequently in the discharge canal during times of a thermal discharge than during times of no thermal discharge.

13

This result is more evident for brown trout than for the rainbow trout. It can be concluded that although the thermal component of the discharge does present an attractant to these species, there is also some degree of attraction offered by the flow alone, as evidenced by their presence when there is no thermal discharge. This finding has also been put forth by Spigarelli and Thommes (1979).

No other reports were found in the scientific literature describing similar winter biological monitoring studies, since most studies do not include the true winter season (e.g. Spigarelli and Thommes, 1979). Nonetheless, various investigators have suggested the presence of such species in winter thermal plumes (Spigarelli, 1975; Edsall S Yocum, 1972). The results of this study (including the gill netting results discussed under Section III-9, below) indicate that brown and rainbow trout are nearshore, from December through April, whereas lake trout and coho salmon were present in this area from February through April.

III-3. Cold-Shock Testin In this report acclimation refers to the complete physiological adaptation of a fish to a given temperature; this definition corresponds to that presented by Neill (1976). Neill further states that such acclimation requires a length of time on the order of days to achieve; this is also mentioned by Coutant (1977). Such a definition should be considered in light of work done by Spigarelli, et al (1974) which showed that a fish's internal body temperature increases rapidly when placed in higher temperature waters; on the order of hours for even larger fish

(e.g. ' 1000 g). Such results suggest that while a fish may have an internal body temperature close to or at. the discharge temperature, this fish may actually be acclimated to a lower temperature. In other words the fish's body temperature may be equilibrated to the discharge temperature, but may not be acclimated to it. In predicting cold-shock effects, acclimation and not equilibration is the key factor; however, as will become apparent, the determination of acclimation temperatures is difficult at present.

The results of the cold-shock testing'are summarized on Table 2 which shows that of the 80 fish tested (representing six species) 92.5/ survived the entire cold-shock test procedure.

Forty-one brown trout were tested with a resultant survival rate of 97.6/, while 87.5/ of the 32 rainbow trout tested survived.

These survival rates reflect an average holding time of 118 hours0.00137 days <br />0.0328 hours <br />1.951058e-4 weeks <br />4.4899e-5 months <br /> (nearly 5 days) per study, although holding periods ranged from 48-166 hours in duration. Table 3 contains the test conditions corresponding to each of these studies at Ginna; Appendix A provides detailed information on each test conducted.

In related studies, Becker, et al (1977) exposed rainbow trout to an abrupt cold-, shock test, very similar in method to that done at Ginna, and reported 96 hr TI temperatures of 3.3, 1.4 and ~0.5'C for acclimation temperatures of 20, 15 and 10'C, respectively. Additionally, Becker, et al found minimum temperatures for 90-100/ survival of rainbow trout to be 4.4, 2.0 and 1.2'C for acclimation temperatures of 20, 15 and 10'C, respectively.

The GNPS results provide neither TI nor 90-100/ survival information, since most tests resulted in 100/ survival and therefore the minimum lower temperatures may no/ have been approached.

15

However, while there is no proof that the lower temperatures were approached, there is some support for this conclusion.

Figure 5 graphically displays Becker, et al s findings on the relationship between acclimation temperature and 90-100/ survival temperatures. By-applying to these points a power curve fit of the form:

y=ax where y = the minimum temperature for 90-100/ survival, a 0.016 as derived from Becker, et al's data x acclimation temperature, andb = 1.834 as derived from Becker, et al's data, a portion of Table 3 was compiled which estimates the minimum temperatures for 90-100/ survival of the rainbow trout found in the GNPS discharge canal.

These findings suggest that the ambient temperatures were very near the minimum temperatures for 90-100/ survival, for in the case of 13.0 and 13.1oC discharge temperatures, the ambient was below the predicted minimum allowable temperature and likewise these were the only cases in which survival was in fact less than 100/. At 12.2'C discharge temperature, the actual and predicted allowable temperatures were equal and correspondingly I'inimum there was also 100%%u survival. These three cases could be con-sidered a confirmation of Becker's results. There is one test, however, i.e. 11.5 to 0.4'C, which definitely shows a higher survival ability than presented in the previous findings.

Whereas Becker, et" al found the 90-100/ survival for 10'C acclimation to be -1.2'C and the TL to be 0.5'C, the GNPS study found that all six of the rainbow trout removed from the 11.5'C discharge waters were able to survive an ultimate test temperature of 0.4'C. As Table 3 indicates, the minimum allowable temperature from Becker, et al would be predicted to be 1.4'C. This suggests that the acclimation temperature of the fish taken from the 11.5'C discharge water was substantially below the 10'C studied by Becker et al. By solving the power fit curve equation for x, assuming that 0.4'C is the minimum allowable temperature for 90-100/ survival (y), a predicted acclimation temperature of S.'7'C was found for these fish. Utilization of another technique, described in Section III-4, resulted in an acclimation temperature of 5.3'C for these rainbow trout from the April study. These extremely similar results add credence to the prediction that this was the acclimation temperature.

Whereas the January and February studies suggest that the rainbow trout in the discharge canal may have been acclimated to the discharge temperatures, the one April study contradicts this conclusion and instead suggests that at this time these fish are acclimated to a much lower temperature thus reflecting behavioral thermo-regulation. Reutter and Herdendorf (1974) have demonstrated that for a number of Lake Erie fish species temperature preferenda differ from season to season. In general they found that, winter

,temperature preferenda were the lowest followed by, in increasing order, spring, fall and summer. While a decreased acclimation temperature from January and February to April for rainbow trout 17

does not fit this pattern, this result may be indicative of some type of change in this species'emperature preferenda from season to season.

Figure 5 also presents the information suggested by the USEPA (1975) for purposes of guiding cold-shock evaluations'for salmonids) in 316(a) Demonstrations. In this case a linear relationship is used, in the form of:

y = 0.5 (x) - 2.5 (2) where: y = ambient (or final) temperature, in 'C, which will allow survival, and x = permissible plume temperature (or discharge temperature), in C, to which the fish is acclimated.

As shown in Table 3, the EPA results are extremely conserva-tive since minimum temperatures for survival are > 2.0'C higher than those found by Becker, et al in all cases, as well as being higher than the GNPS results in all cases. Thus, while the EPA nomograph may be useful for guidance purposes, based on the evidence presented above it would apparently overestimate the expected impact of an abrupt shutdown.

Table 4 compares the results of the cold-shock testing with predicted survival based on actual operating conditions measured at the plant during the same periods as the cold-shock testing.

awhile the cold-shock temperatures attempted to duplicate the actual intake (or ambient) and discharge temperatures at GNPS at it

)

similar times, is apparent from this table that slight differences 18

dad occur.

In order to make the most conservative evaluation, thereby providing as large a margin of safety as possible for resident fish, the most extreme cases of temperature difference were utilized to predict fish survival should an abrupt shutdown of the plant occur. In most cases this condition was met by the plant intake and discharge temperatures. The results of this evaluation are shown in Table 4. The predictive model for 90-100 percent survival derived from Backer, et al and presented earlier indicates that on dates 1/2, 1/25 and 4/11 the predicted minimum allowable temperatures were below ambient, thus resulting in survival > 90 percent. On dates 1/30, 1/31, 2/8 and 2/9 ambient temperatures were below the predicted minimum allowable temperatures for 90-100 percent survival. However in all cases ambient temperatures were above the 1.4'C TG value for fish acclimated to 15'C found by Becker, et al, hence in these cases survival would be expected to be > 50 percent, yet less than 90 percent. This is indicated

,by the range of 50-90 percent survival presented in the table.

This table shows that in all cases the survival would be 50 percent or greater for the subjected rainbow trout. This result along with the results of Speakman and Krenkel (1971) which showed that a slower rate of temper'ature decrease will aid in survival (as was provided by the modified shutdown procedure),

provides an additional safety margin to ensure adeguate protection against cold-shock for rainbow trout. It would seem reasonable to

, extrapolate this entire assessment to brown trout as well, based on the fact that the studies at GNPS indicate better survival of 19

brown trout than rainbow trout when tested under the same conditions (e.g. Appendix A, Tables A-4 and A-5).

Based upon above discussions the results of the GNPS studies indicate that over 50 percent of the rainbow and brown trout would be able to survive an abrupt shutdown and that the modified shutdown procedure utilized was an additional conservative measure that. would have aided survival and prevented any adverse impacts from cold-shock to the fish residing in the canal during shutdown.

Additionally, merely based on Speakman and Krenkel's (1971) work, other species present. in the canal but not tested, e.g., gizzard shad, smelt, etc., should have also benefited from the slow shutdown procedure utilized. Although due to the scope of testing results are limited to rainbow and brown trout at this time, it would appear that no special procedures need to be followed in order to ensure the survival of those species not tested; moreover, an abrupt shutdown can be survived by ) 50%%u of the brown and rainbow trout tested. Only additional testing can determine whether this operational procedure is necessary to prevent adverse impacts upon other species.

Since differences in ambient water temperatures of only one or two degrees centigrade can substantially affect results, future testing should utilize test temperatures below ambient, i.e. in the order of < 0.6'C. This fact also underscores the importance of accurately measuring appropriate temperatures.

III-4 Internal Fish Tem eratures Results of internal fish temperature measurements for brown and rainbow trout are presented on Table 5., Of the 19 brown

- 20

trout studied, all temperatures were found to be within 0.6'C of the discharge temperatures. In the January and February studies some rainbow trout were found to be up to 1.3'C.below discharge temperatures. However, in April rainbow trout were all within 0.4'C of discharge, and, additionally, this was the only study in which rainbow trout had internal temperatures higher than brown trout. Overall, internal body temperatures were consistently close to discharge temperatures.

Considering that internal temperatures were normally some-what lower than discharge temperatures, minimum temperatures for 90-100/ survival would be somewhat, below those estimated on Table 3 from Becker et al. However, substituting the rainbow trout average internal temperature of January 31 (i.e. 12.6'C) for the January 31 discharge temperature of 13.1'C in the predictive model results in minimum temperatures for survival of 1.6-1.7'C, thus ambient temperatures would still be below this lower limit.

Assuming that the previous day', situation was similar, ambient temperatures again would be too low for 90-100/ survival. On the other hand, the April results showed that internal temperatures were near 11.5'C for rainbow trout and they were able to withstand a drop to 0.4'C, substantially below the predicted survival level of 1.4 C.

Spigarelli and Thommes (1979,) utilize the data presented by Cherry et al (1975) in order to predict acclimation temperatures of rainbow trout inhabiting a thermal discharge. Basically they state that internal body temperatures reflect the fishes'elected preference temperature which in turn is a function of acclimation

temperature. Therefore, based on the internal body temperature measured, the acclimation temperature can be predicted. From the data presented by Cherry et al (1975) for rainbow trout, this relationship is:

PT = 0.57 (Ac) + 8.18 (3) where:

PT = Preferred Temperature in 'C, and Ac = Acclimation temperature, in 'C.

During this study internal temperatures were, taken for rainbow trout on only three dates (Table 5). Since a gradient of temperatures higher than the discharge temperature was not available, it cannot be determined whether these fish were at their preferred temperature, at their acclimation temperature (i.e. their preferred temperature would have been above discharge temperature) or at, .

so'me point, in between (i.e. below their preferred temperature, yet above their acclimation temperature). Utilization of the cold-shock testing information may help in this determination, since minimum allowable temperature may indicate acclimation temperatures.

Since there were only two studies .(i.e. January 31, 1979 and April 11, 1979) during which internal temperatures were taken followed by cold-shock testing, the data base is extremely limited.

By placing the internal temperature data into equation (3), 'in one case as the acclimation temperature (AT) and in another case as the preferred temperature (PT), the following information is derived:

- 22

Minimum Januar 31, 1979: PT AT Allowable Temp.*.

12.6 C 7.S'C 0.70C Int. Temp = 12.6'C 15.4 C 12.6 C 1.7 C Cold-Shock Test Result (Test Temperature of 1.5'C) = 67% Survival.,

Minimum A ril 11, 1979: PT 11 2oC AT 5 3oC

'llowable 0.30C Temp.*

Int. Temp = 11.2'C 14.6 C 11.2'C 2 2oC Cold-Shock Test Result (Test Temperature of 0.4'C) = 100% Survival These results suggest that in January the rainbow trout tested were acclimated to temperatures equal to or nearly equal to discharge temperature's, whereas in April their acclimation temperatures were much lower than the discharge temperature.

Taking the April analysis one step further, one may be able to estimate the range of acclimation temperatures within which these fish may have been while still conforming to test results. This range is found to be 5.3-5.9'C, i.e. any acclimation temperature above 5.9'C would have resulted in <90-100 percent survival when tested at 0.4~C. Since it is not known at what temperature 90-100 percent survival would have been achieved in the January study, such a range for that study cannot'e determined. Theo-r'etically it would be at. acclimation temperatures which result in minimum allowable temperatures >1.5'C yet below internal body temperatures. This range would be 11.9-12.6'C.

• Derived from Equation (1), 'Section III-3

- 23

Obviously more study needs to be done to determine acclimation temperature. These studies indicate that neither water temperature nor internal body temperatures can be utilized to determine acclimation temperatures in a discharge canal situation. As pr'eviously discussed, since a fish s body temperature can equilibrate

'w'ith the discharge temperature in a matter of hours, yet acclimation takes days, other means of determining acclimation temperatures need to be found. Two possible approaches might be considered.

One would be to expose the fish to a gradient of water temperatures abo've discharge temperature to see which temperature they preferred,

'then apply equation 2. Assumedly the duration of such a study would need to be short in order to exclude the possibility of increasing acclimation temperatures at the same time. A second approach might be to continue the cold-shock testing in order to define minimum allowable temperature for 100% survival then back calculate to derive acclimation temperatures.

From the above discussion it can be theorized that during January and February the rainbow trout were actually acclimated to near discharge temperature levels, while during April the.

rainbow trout were acclimated to some temperature intermediate between discharge and ambient temperatures even though their internal body temperatures were, equilibrated to the discharge temperature. As previously stated this may be indicative of some change in the thermal behavior of rainbow trout between the w'inter and spring periods, although further testing is necessary to put more confidence in these results.

III-5 Fish Ta in and Release A total of 197 fish were tagged and released in the electroshocking studies during the December 1978 through April 1979 period; 103 were brown trout, while 80 were rainbow trout.

Through mid-May, 1979 there have been 13 recaptures of fish tagged during this period. Table 6 details these results.

The seven percent return rate of tagged fish is relatively high for this type of program, and these results can provide valuable information on fish movements and survival. For example, the rainbow trout. tagged on January 30, 1979 (Tag 023136) was utilized in the cold-shock studies which began on that date, released after a five-day holding period, and subsequently recaptured during the February 9, 1979 survey. Another example is the brown trout (Tag 523145) which was also tagged on January 30, underwent the cold-shock test, released on February 5, and subsequently caught by an angler on April 6, 1979, at a location approximately 20 miles to the east, of the Ginna Site. These results underscore the abilities of these species to undergo thermal stresses (both instantaneous drops and increases in temperature), and also indicates that longer term survival from these stresses, in the natural environment, is a fact.

Hopefully more of these tagged fish will be caught, which will provide more information on the impacts of the power plant, and this shutdown, upon these fish.

- 25

III-6 Personal Visual Observations No fish die-off was observed during the GNPS shutdown com-mencing on February 9,. 1979. In fact only six fish sightings, all of which were fish jumping in the plume waters, were made between 1730 and 1845 hours0.0214 days <br />0.513 hours <br />0.00305 weeks <br />7.020225e-4 months <br /> on the ninth. These were noted by boat and shoreline observations. Two of these sightings were identified as salmonids, the other four remained unidentified.

Two floating gizzard shad (dead) were seen. A salmonid was observed to be actively swimming at the plume-lake water interface.

This was witnessed with the assistance of submerged lights.

Between 0130 and 0400 hrs on February 10, 1979, SCUBA diving operations were conducted cross the mouth of the canal and at the shear zones to the east and west of the canal mouth. White perch were seen swimming to the east and west. One gizzard shad from the fish release test (see Section III-S, below) was found entangled in the large mesh wire screen at the canal mouth., No other dead fish were seen. Discharge current velocity as well as hazardous ice flow conditions prevented SCUBA observations away from this area.

Edsall and Yocum (1972) described four situations which would preclude the discovery of fish kills due to cold-shock during the winter season. These are: (1) ice cover makes it difficult to observe dead fish; (2) cold-shocked fish tend to sink, or swim, near the bottom thus keeping them out of sight; (3) a lack of observers; and, (4) the fish kill may go unreported.

Although the ice cover did hamper reconnaissance by February 11, it is felt that the visual observations and SCUBA operations

- 26

conducted along with this entire survey were responsive to each of these cited problems and thus show that a fish kill due to cold-shock did not occur, nor were there any adverse ecological impacts observed due to the power plant shutdown.

III-7 Underwater Television Monitorin T.V. monitoring in the discharge canal during the mid-December 1978 through mid-April 1979 periods was conducted on 22 dates, however few results were obtained. In December, a number of gizzard shad were observed, along with lesser numbers of white bass and some unidentifiable fish. The only other sightings were a salmonid on January 22, another salmonid on February 20, and some unidentifiable fish on March 7, 1979. Overall, during this study period the TV monitoring program was subjected to mechanical malfunctions and turbidity problems. Although this type of study had frequently and successfully been utilized in the past (RGE, 1976), it seems that the electroshocking technique can be more efficient, under most conditions in the discharge area.

III-8 Trackin of Dead Fish from Dischar e Canal The marked, dead gizzard shad released into the GNPS Discharge Canal were followed to the east-northeast to a point about one hundred and fifty meters east of transect E-l. At this point the ice build-up prohibited further investigation. Twenty-six of the gizzard shad released were counted floating or in the water column being carried by the flow, and they were spread between the eastern edge of the ice pack west approximately three hundred meters. As mentioned under Visual Observations (Section III-6),

another of these released fish was found stuck onto the screen

across the GNPS discharge canal mouth. No fish, aside from those released, were seen while following the movement of these released fish. This segment of the Shutdown Survey indicates that the methods utilized would be capable of observing a fish kill of significant size.

The complete results of gill netting studies conducted during the December 1978 through April 1979 period are contained in RGE, 1979c; however, Table 7 summarizes the catch of each study and is presented in order to indicate lake populations potentially exposed to the shutdown situation. The presence of rainbow trout and brown trout in catch per unit efforts of 3 and 5, respectively, during the December 1978 and January 1979 catches pointed out the dominance of these species in the fish community at the Ginna Site during this time of year. The numbers of brown trout present were lower than found in the October-November, 1978 period, however rainbow trout concentrations were near the maximum found during the year. These findings supported the increased sampling effort undertaken during the winter, as well as the intensive shutdown investigations performed.

The February 7 net catch showed a decrease in the numbers of brown trout and rainbow trout present, however, single specimens of lake trout and coho salmon, species which had not previously Been captured during the fall-winter period, were caught. The February 13 catch, which was after the plant was shutdown, consisted of only one rainbow trout. The numbers of species captured dropped from five prior to shutdown, to one after shutdown.

- 28

While these results suggest that the fish had left the area after shutdown, it should be pointed out that due to winter conditions o'nly the plume 'net was able to be set, and this net also became clogged with ice; these facts may account for these findings.

The March 7, 1979 netting, during which time the plant was still shutdown, points out the limitations of reduced netting mentio'ned above. 1n this case, again only one fish was caught. in the plume net; however, in the 2 and 5 M nets which were also set on this date, there were numerous fish caught, including those species of major interest, i.e., rainbow and brown trout. The important point is that these species may have been in the area on February 13 also, although they may not have been concentrated around the unheated discharge plume.

The April 25-26, 1979 netting, conducted about two weeks after the plant went back on-line, showed generally increased species and numbers of fish present in the area. While three t

salmonid species, i.e., rainbow trout., brown trout and lake trout, were all found in the plume net they were definitely not concentrated there, for similar or higher numbers were also found in other nets throughout the study area.

Next, a qualitative comparison of the electroshocking in the discharge canal and the gill netting (relating Tables 1 and 7) was done for salmonids. No quantitative comparisons are presented due to the diverse nature of these two types of sampling and the lack of comparative relationships.

This evaluation suggests that the salmonids are generally inhabiting both the discharge canal and the discharge plume, and

- 29

are probably moving in and out of the canal and plume in a manner similar to that described by Spigarelli (1974) for other seasons of the year. The exception to this would be in April when it appears that they are much more populous in the canal than in the

/

plume or open water. The netting results obtained during the shutdown further suggests that the canal is still frequented by these fish species on occasion, which again indicates that factors other than temperature, such as flow,, shelter, food, etc., have an undeterminable effect on their presence.

T1ie gill net findings indicate that only foui species:

rainbow trout, brown trout, rainbow smelt and white perch, are found on a relatively consistent basis between December and Apr'il, and thus would be subjected to possible adverse effects fr'om a power'lant shutdown. Other species are found sporadically, and usually i'n lesser numbers. This result, together with the t5eory 'that these fish are moving in and around the discharge canal, plume and general site area will substantially reduce the concern for'old-shock to these species in the event of a power plant shutdown, since the numbexs of individual fish and species appear to be quite limited and apparently not concentrated in, or restricted to, the thermal discharge water of the plant.

REFERENCES Becker, C.D., R.G. Genoway, and M.J. Schneider, 1977. Comparative cold resistance of three Columbia River organisms. Trans.

Amer. Fish Soc., Vol. 106:2, pp. 178-184.

Brett, J.R., 1956. Some principles in thermal requirements of fishes. The Quat. Rev. Biol. Vol. 31:2, pp. 75-87.

1970. "Temperature". Section 3.32 Fishes. In: Marine Ecology, Otto Kinne, Ed. Vol. I. Wiley-Interscience Publish.

Cherr'y, D.S., K.L. Dickson, and J. Cairns, Jr., 1975. Temperatures selected and avoided by fish at various acclimation temperatures.

J. Fish Res. Bd. Can. 32:485-491.

Coutant, C.C., 1974. JFRBC 31, pp. 351.

1977. Cold shock to aquatic organisms: Guidance for power

'plant siting, design and operation. Nuclear Safety, Vol.

18:3, pp. 329-342.

Rdsall and Yocum, 1972. Review of recent technical information concerning the adverse effects of once-through cooling on Lake Michigan. USFSWS, Bur. Sport Pish. and Wild., Gr.

Lakes 5'ish LaS, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48107.

Fry, P.E.J., 1976. Thermal physiological effects in aquatic systems. Repo'rt of a workshop on the impact of thermal power plant cooling systems on aquatic environments. EPRI, SR-38, Vol. Ii., pp. 101-117.

- 31

Neill, W.H., 1976. Mechanisms of behavioral thermoregulations in fish. Report of a workshop on the impact of thermal power plant cooling systems on aquatic environments. EPRI, SR-38, Vol. II., pp. 156-169.

NYSDPS, 1977. Examiners'ecommended decision on application by Rochester Gas and Electric Corp. to the NYS Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment. Dated May 17, 1977 p. 156.

Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, 1976. Visual monitoring in the discharge canal, Ginna Nuclear Power Station, 1975.

Prepared by John'F. Storr, Ph.D. RG&E Report No. B-13-038.

,1977a. Beebee Station (Station 3), RG&E Corp., 316(a)

Demonstration. RGE Report No. BP-3-004.

,1977b. Russell Station (Station 7), RG&E Corp., 316(a)

Demonstration. RGE Report'No. BP-7-008.

,1977c. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, RG&E Corp., 316(a)

Demonstration Supplement. RGE Report No. BP-13-043.

,1978a. 1977 Fish Program Data Report, Ginna Nuclear Power Station. Prepared by J.F. Storr, Ph.D. and RG&E.

RG&R Report Mo. B-13-064.

,1978b. 1977 Fish Tagging Program Data Report. Ginna Nuclear Power Station. Prepared by J.F. Storr, Ph.D. and RG&E. RG&E Repoit No. B-13-065.

,1979. Winter 1978-1979 Fish Program Data Report, Ginna Nuclear Power Station. Prepared by J.F. Storr, Ph.D. RG&E Report No. B-13-100.

- 32

Reutter, J.M. and C.E. Herdendo'rf, 1974a. Environmental evaluation of a nuclear power plant on Lake Erie. The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research. Federal Aid Project, F-41-R-5.

1974b. Laboratory estimates of the seasonal final temperature preferenda of some Lake Erie fish. Proc. 17th Conf.

Great Lakes Res. Internat. Assoc. Great Lakes Res. pp. 59-67.

Speakman, J.N., and P.A. Krenkel, 1972. Quantification of the effects of rate of temperature change on aquatic biota.

Water Res. Vol. 6, pp. 1283-1290. Pergamon Press.

Spigarelli, S.A., 1975. Behavioral responses of Lake Michigan fishes to a nuclear power plant discharge. Environmental Effects'f Nuclear Power Plant Cooling Sys., Proc. Symp.

Olso, Norway, 1974, IAEA-SM-187/18, pp. 479-498.

Spigarelli, S.A., G.P. Rhomberg, W. Prepejchal and M.M. Thommes, 1974. Body-temperature characteristics of fish at a thermal discharge on Lake Michigan. In: Thermal Ecology, Gibbons and Sharitz, Ed., AEC Symp. Ser. CONF-730505, pp. 119-132.

Spigarelli, S.A. and M.M. Thommes, 1979. Temperature selection and d

36:366-376.

'h 1 pl ..

estimated thermal acclimation by rainbow trout ~salmo

') d.

Templeton, W.C., et al, 1974. Effects of thermal and chemical discharges from nuclear power plants. BNWL-SA-5206, Battelle Northwestern Labs. Richland, Washington.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975. Quality Criteria for Water (Draft). USEPA, Washington, D.C. 501 pp.

33

/

'Table 1 1979 Shutdown Survey Electroshocking Results: Numbers of Each Species Collected by Study Date+

Ginna Nuclear Poser Station

~Scies Date 12/20 I/2 1/25 1/30 1/31 2/5 2/8 2/9 2/10 2/12 2/12 2/13 2/20 2/28 3/5 3/8 3/21 3/28 3/29 4/10 4/ll Total 0930 1645 Brovn Trout 6 4 6 7 6 0 9 5 4 2 4 4 0 0 I 1 0 1 1 39 10 110 Rainbmr Trout 9 5 8 10 3 5 2 3 4 2 8 1 0 2 0 8 0 1 0 16 6 93 I

Lake Trout 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 O

Coho Salmon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 I 6

%hite Perch 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 White Bass 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 1 Smallmouth Bass 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0

=

0 0 0 0 1

.Gizzard Shad Many 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1+

1158 1820 2649 1687 597 443 1297 NR 802 805 782 672 947 1445 850 869 840 1039 967 1056 551 Time (sec)

Total 220+

• Numbers are total caught, or observed and reasonably identified. Detailed information is presented in Appendix A.

Plant off-line with AT essentially 0 C. See Section III-1.1.

NR - Not Recorded

Table 2 1979 Shutdown Survey Summary Table of Electroshocking/Cold-Shock Testing Ginna Nuclear Power Station Total Total Total /0 S ecies Sam led Tested Survived Survival Brown Trout 110 40 97.6 Rainbow Trout 93 32 28 87.5 Lake Trout 100.0 Coho Salmon 100.0 White Perch 75.0 White Bass Smallmouth Bass 100.0 Gizzard Shad 0 Total 220+ 80 92.5

• Many additional gizzard shad observed on December 20, 1979 35

I

Table 3 1979 Shutdown Survey Comparison of Minimum Survival Temperatures for Rainbow Trout Ginna Nuclear Power Station Minimum Temperature For Cold-Shock Cold,-Shock Cold-Shock Test 90-100$ Survival EPA Allowable Test %

Dischar e Tem Ambient Tem estimated from Becker et al 2 Ambient Tem eratures 3 Survival 15.0 4.8 2.3 5.0 100

14. 2 3.2 2.1 4.6 100 13.0 1.3 1.8 4.0 70 13.1 1.5 1.8 4.1 67 12.2 1.6 1.6 3.6 100 11.5 0.4 1.4 3.3 100 1 All temperatures expressed in 'C 2 See Section III-3 for predictive model 3 Derived from Figure 4

Table, 4 1979 Shutdown Survey Cold-Shack Test Conditions VS Predicted Cold-Shock Based on Plant Operating Conditions Ginna Nuclear Power Station Test Measurement Conditions GNPS Measurement Conditions Discharge Test Rainbow Trout> Discharge Intake GNPS Predicted Date Tem erature Test Survival Te erature 1/2/79 15.0 4.8 100> 14.9 4.2 > 90ro 1/25/79 14.2 3.2* 100% 14.8 2.5 > 90r 1/30/79 13.0 1 3* 70 13.6 1.4 50-90r 1/31/79 2/8/79 4/ll/79 13.1 12.2 11.5 1

0 5*

1.6 4*

100~

100r0 13.6 126 f

12.5

'4 1.3 4.2 50-90ro 50-90

) 900r0 0

Conditions at Time of Shutdown Commencement:

2/9/79 ~1620 hrs. 12.2 1.3 50-90+0

l. All Temperatures in C

2. Test survival as presented on Table 3, GNPS predicted survival as determined by Becker, et al and discussed in Section III-3.

• Ice added go test tank to reduce temperature.

37

Table 5 1979 Shutdown Survey Summary Table of Internal Temperature Measurements ('C)

Ginna Nuclear Power Station Date Brown Trout Rainbow Trout Discharge Temp. ('C)

Intake Tem . C 13.1'ange January 31, 1979:

1~3 Number measured Average 6

12.6-13.00 12.90 3

12.1-12.9'2.6'ebruary 12.2'ange 1 4o 9, 1979: Number measured Average 3

11 6 11 8o 11 ~ 7 10.9-11.30 3

11.0 April 11, 1979: Number measured 6 11.54 Range 11.1-11.5 4.24 Average 11.2 38

Table 6 1979 Shutdown Survey Fish Tag Recapture Information Ginna Nuclear Power Station u'*'" Tag Date*

Comments Rainbow Trout 23390 12/20/78 43.3 1/2/79 GNPS Discharge 43.5 Used in 1/2 cold-shock, (12/20/78) released 1/4 Rainbow Trout 23136 1/30/79 25.0 2/9/79 GNPS Discharge 25.0 Used in 1/30 cold-(2/5/79) shock, released 2/5 Rainbow Trout 23144 1/30/79 29.1 2/5/79 GNPS Discharge 28.8 Used in 1/30 cold-(2/5/79) shock, released 2/5; recaptured and released 2/5 Brown Trout 23145 1/30/79 38.2 4/26/79 Chimney Bluffs, Used in 1/30 cold-shock, (2/5/79) NY released 2/5

'o Brown Trout 23133 1/31/79 44.3 2/7/79 GNPS Discharge 44.5 Used in 1/31 cold-I (2/7/79) Plume Net shock, released 2/7 Rainbow Trout 23125 2/28/79 42.0 4/14/79 Webster Park, NY (2/28/79)

Rainbow Trout 23797 3/8/79 22.1 5/8/79 Webster Park, NY Tagged from GNPS (3/8/79) Discharge Mouth Brown Trout 23878 4/10/79 50.8 5/4/79 Bear Creek, NY (4/10/79)

Coho Salmon 23884 4/10/79 54.2 4/ll/79 GNPS Discharge 54 0 Used in 4/11 cold-(4/10/79) shock, released 4/16, Rainbow Trout 23902 4/10/79 51.2 5/8/79 GNPS Discharge 50.1 (4/10/79 Brown Trout 23930 4/10/79 39.3 4/14/79 Ginna Discharge (4/10/79) Plume Brown Trout 23938 4/10/79 41.5 5/11/79 Hamlin Beach, NY (4/10/79)

Brown Trout 23920 4/11/79 53.1 5/18/79 0.25 mi off Used in 4/11 cold-shock, (4/16/79) Maxwell Creek, NY released 4/16 Wag Location GNPS Dis charge Canal, unless otherwise noted.

Table 7 1979 Shutdown Survey Summary of, Gill Net Results*

December 1978 - April, 1979 Ginna Nuclear Power Station GILL NET STUDY Dec. Jan. Feb. Feb. Mar. Apr.

SPECIES 13 9"10 7 13 7 25"26 0.1 O.l Gizzard shad (Dorosoma ce edianum) 0.3 1.9 1.0 0.5 0.3 Rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) 3' 2.7 1.5 1.0 0.3 0.4 Brown trout (Salmo trutta) 5.0 5.0 2.5 0.3 '.9 Lake trout (Salvelinus ~name cush) 0.5 0.5 Rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax) 1.0 0.6 1.1 49.1 Northern pike (Esox lucius) 0.2 0.1 lake chub (Couesis Elumbeus) 0.3 0.9 6.5 Carp (~C rinus 'carRio) 0.2 0.1 0.2 Spottail shiner (N~otro is hudsonius) 0.3 2.9 White sucker (Catostomus commersoni) 0.3 4.6 O.l O.l White perch (Morone americana) 0.3 2.2 5.5 0.1 0.8 White bass (Morone chrh~so s) 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 Yellow perch (Perca flavescens) O.l 0.1 3.4 Total CPUE for Study Date 9.9 14.3 10.5 1.0, 7.4 67.9

• (Expressed as Catch Per Unit Effort) 40

77'HGSTO 4'anada / Oe 4' PORTHOP COBOUR

/

/

Lake /

Ontario /

~

Can.

~

~W U. S.

OSWEGO C

MILTO irma Station 43'IAGARA 0 FALLS ROCHESTER 430

'= BUFFALO Nevr York LA KE'RIE

~ ~

7 7 77'IGURE 1 GINNA STATION SITE LOCATION

C D FIGURE 2 PLAN VIEW OF GNPS DISCHARGE CANAL AND ASSOCIATED SAMPLING LOCATIONS

DEPTH 12M Intake e 5M WI W3a G

0 200 400 600 SOO 1000 El SCALE III fKET E2 GlNNA NUCLEAR POWER STATlON FIGURE 3 Gill Net (G) Locations near the Ginna Site

C I

'I

jj II II f ffl fj Ij ls" jj jj Il I I jl j'f II j jj j' II tin Il ij ft j. fi fi If Ij I ta Illj I'ts fj ijf

)I I I I I!I ji j f

!I I"!I slit sell liII I I' ~ I j'I ti! '

j J ~ ~

j) sj

.j I

}j l!! jj ii f jjI tf

'!jism fl fjI tt tl l.

jl llj ft,lII flit I ~~ I

.Ifa t.

I!; II I I

jtij 'tf stll

~

ji I ~ I ~

II I j

jii ji jii Ilii

~4 Iit! 'Iltj ttli

~ ~

alit Il ljij Ij.t i j it!I 4 I ~' I:si lsi II el I jjji

~

ts I~ ~ ~

!I! ~ ~

~

i ~ ~ ~ I slee Ij I I I!: I,lel I; ~

ljt Issl,!I ~

.";I: fi.i ll; I ~ f,s ls lif:

I!I I I 4 ~

I Its tll ' ~ ~

jts ft t ~ es

~

lie ~

I;44 ~ ~

~

':.It; ~ ~ F 4 ~ ~ ~

I

~

It!I I::I 4 4 i ,'! I',ii fj iN

~

!1 '1

~

lail f~ I fl!I

~ ~

.sl< ll I

It III IIts

~ ~

"f I i!i't. late O0I'j:

~ ~ 4 ~

I~ ~ ~ I I . ~

ti 4 ~ ~ ea I! stif If 4 ~ 4 ljs

ll "ifi ', 1 4 ~

4 ~ '

\ I': I 4* i ~ ~

-:ij t ~ ~I ~~ l'.!.ll'I ~ ~ ~ ~ t>>"~

t I ~~ ~ ~ i'lf! ~

I: ~ ~~ 4 I ~ it II

~

jf I

il Eall

~

I I e ~

~

~

I I 'f;, 4 4

4 I I:

~

t! II ~

! I'.j I ~ ~ :I ti o'::.'IE 4

I I

'd 4

' ~ 4 0, 2 0 I ;0 d 3

~ ~ ~ ~4 4 ~ ~

tf - ~ ~

• tf I ts '7 t.I,i 9: 4 4 ~ ~

UA Y: ~ ~ 4

~

'll X 4 \I Is i,'st ttf; 4

tti I  ; 'll I ~ ~

~ ~

~

I I

I j I t

V 5

8 l5 8 ~ ~

C4 6 4 3 '

I

~,

y I

C)

.C)

CD 2

I I

0 0 1'0 15 20 Acclimation Temperature( C)

X Data obtained from Becker, et al 1977, curve based on power curve Wit of the orm y = axb.

FIGURE 5

based 0 Redrawn from USEPA, 1975 on y = 0.5(x)-2.5 for cold-water species ACCLIMATION TEMPERATURES VS MINIMUM ALLOWABLE AMBIENT TEMPERATURES

APPENDIX A Detailed Electroshocking and Cold-Shocking Results from GNPS Discharge Canal December 1978-April 1979 46

Table A-1 Plant Discharge Temp: 13.9 C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.94C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS December 20, 1978 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 1158 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S eci.es Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( m) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23382 NS 44.2 NS NS 23386 NS 40.2 NS NS 23391 NS 46.7 NS NS Scarred 23392 NS 62.2 NS NS NS 41.5 NS NS Poor NS &2700 NS

~ Rainbow Trout 23378 'NS 46.6 NS NS 23379 NS 51.1 NS NS Scarred 23380 NS 51.0 NS NS Ripe male 23381 NS 64.5 NS NS 23383 NS 63.2 NS NS Male 23384 NS 45.5 NS NS 23385 NS 44.5 NS NS Short operculum 23387 NS 73.2 NS NS Ripe male 23390 NS 43.3 NS NS Lake Trout w

• NS &2300 NS White Perch 23388 NS 22.6 NS NS 23389 NS 18.7 NS NS Gizzard Shad Many observed (hundreds), not collected NS - Not Studied

• - Not captured, thus identification and measurements are best approximations.

A 1J

Table A-2 Plant Discharge Temp: 14.94C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 4.2 C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: 15.04C Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: 4.8oC January 2-4, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: 48:00 hours Electroshocking Time: 1820 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number T erature 4C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23323 NS 36.5 720 23393 NS 52.2 >1100 23394 NS 45. 4 >1100 23395 NS 50.5 >1100 Rainbow Trout 23321 NS 75.5 >1100 Deformed operculum 23322 NS 42.0 920 23324 NS 42.0 980 23325 NS 44.8 >1100 23390 NS 43.5 1080 Tagged and released 12/20/78 NS - Not Studied

Table A-3= Plant Discharge Temp: 14.8 C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 2.54C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: 14.2 C Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: 3.2 C+

January 25-29, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: 92:22 hours Electroshocking Time: 2649 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition "

S ecies Number Te erature( C (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23309 NS 45.0 >1000 Good 23315 NS 29.5 300 Good 23316 NS 63.2 >1000 Good 23317 NS 56.2 >1000 Good 23319 NS 43.2 >1000 Good 23320 NS 42.8 880 Good Rainbow Trout 23308 NS 26.6 439 + Good 23310 NS 36.8 472 + Good 23311 NS 23.7 168 + Good 23312 NS 28.3 248 + Good 23313 NS 28.1 235 + Good 23314 NS 22.6 122 + Good 23318 NS 26.2 236 + Good NS 42.1 880 NS Killed before test White Perch 23307 NS 26.1 320 Good NS - Not Studied

• Approximately 13.6kg ice added to test tank.

1 Table A-4 Plant Discharge Temp: 13.6 C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.44C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: 13.04C Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: 1.34C+

January 30-February 5, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: 142:50 hours Electroshocking Time: 1687 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature(~C) cm) ( ) Survival~ Comments Comments Brown Trout 23135 NS 43.2 >1000 V. good 23137 NS 67.2 >.1000 V. good 23139 NS 49.8 >1000 V. good 23141 NS 40.2 >1000 Good Lamprey scar 6 fungus 23145 NS 38.2 740 V. good 23146 NS 52.0 >1000 V. good Lamprey scar 23148 NS 41.2 1020

~ Rainbow Trout 23136 NS 25. 0 250 V. good 23138 NS 25. 7 250 V. good I

23140 NS 34.2 '10 V. good 23142 NS 36.1 490 Poor 23143 NS 30.4 260 Good 23144 NS 29.1 310 Good 23147 NS 22.6 120 V. good NS 44.0 >1000 Poor NS 60.0 >1000 NS 20 ' 91 White Perch 23149 NS 26.2 140 V. good NS 19.0 126

• 136 kg of ice added to test tank

~ A few

~ -Alive, but in very NS fish dropped, or jumped to Not Studied floor poor condition when released; thus counted as dead

Table A"5 Plant Discharge Temp: 13.6 C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.3 C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: 13.1 C Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: 1.54C+

January 31-February 7, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: 166:03 hours Electroshocking Time: 597 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23126 12.6 43.6 NS Good 23127 13.0 45.2 NS Removed 2/1 23129 12.8 48.2 NS Good 23130 13.0 25.2 NS Good 23132 13.0 43.2 NS Good 23133 13.0 44.3 NS Good I

Rainbow Trout 23128 12.1 43.0 NS Poor 23131 12.9 30.1 NS Removed 2/5 23134 12.8 27.2 NS Good

• 136 kg of ice added to test tank NS - Not Studied

1 Table A-6 Plant Discharge Temp: 13.1 C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.44C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS February 5, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 443 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Rainbow Trout 23121 NS 23.5 NS NS 23122 NS 26.2 NS NS 23123 NS 24.1 NS NS 23124 NS 54.5 NS NS Scarred 23144 NS 28.8 NS NS Tagged 1/30/79 released 2/5/79; recaptured and released 2/5/79 NS - Not Studied

Table A-7 Plant Discharge Temp: 12.6oC 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.44C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: 12.2 C Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: 1.6 C February 8-14, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: 139:00 hours Electroshocking Time: 1297 sec.

Tag Internal Iength Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Tem erature( C) (cm) ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23343 NS 54.5 >1000 Good 23344 NS 54.2 >1000 23347 NS 46.5 >1000 Good ~0 23349 NS 46.6 Good Scarred 23350 NS 44.4 + Good Deformed body 23751 NS 43.9 Good 23752 NS 46.0 >1000 Good 23753 NS 42.4 Good NS NS Bleeding from gills, fungus, lamprey scar Rainbow Trout 23348 NS 27.4 262 Good NS 30.3 367 NS Dead from electro-shock White Perch 23345 NS 25. 6 >1000 I,oss equilibrium for 10 min Smallmouth Bass 23346 NS 44.5 >1000 Initial loss of equilibrium NS - Not Studied

Table A-8 Plant Discharge Temp: 12.24C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.34C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS February 9, 1979 (Prior to Shutdown)* Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: NS Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature(4C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23114 42.6 NS NS 23117 42.5 NS NS 23118 11.6 42.4 NS NS 23119 11.7 48.0 NS, NS 23120 11.8 57.5 NS NS Deformed jaw m Rainbow Trout 23115 11.3 21.1 NS NS 23116 10.9 20.6 NS NS 23136 10.9 25.0 NS NS Tagged 1/30/79, released 2/5/79

• Fish were tagged and released into GNPS discharge canal prior to shutdown.

NS - Not Studied

\

Table A-9 Plant Discharge Temp: 1.14C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.14C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS February,10, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 802 sec.

Tag Internal Iength Weight Survival Condition S ecies 'umber Te erature(oC) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23106 NS 51.7 NS NS Good, very fat 23108 NS 39.4 NS NS Good 23109 NS 48.2 NS NS Good 23113 NS 48.5 NS NS Good I Rainbow Trout 23107 NS 27.8 NS NS Good 23110 NS 22.4 NS NS Good 23111 NS 22.6 NS NS Good 23112 NS 45.1 NS NS Good NS - Not Studied

Table A-10 (0930) Plant Discharge Temp: 3.74C 1979 Shutdown Survey (0930) Plant Intake Temp: 1.44C Electroshocking (1645) Plant Discharge Temp: 1.44C Ginna Nuclear Power Station (1645) Plant Intake Temp: 1.44C February 12, 1979 Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS Cold Shock Testing Holding Period: NS (0930) Electroshocking Time: 805 sec. (1645) Electroshocking Time: 782 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature C cm Survival Comments Comments Conducted 0930-1030 hrs*

Brown Trout 23104 NS 46.4 NS NS Good 23105 NS 54.0 NS NS Good Rainbow Trout 23102 NS 25. 7 NS NS Good 23103 NS 21.4 NS NS Good Conducted 1645-1745 hrs~

Brown Trout 23326 NS 40.6 NS NS 23329 23330 'SNS 48.5 44.2 NS NS NS NS NS 47.5 NS NS Died, scarred Rainbow Trout 23327 NS 27.6 NS NS 23328 NS 54.2 NS NS 23331 NS 27.2 NS NS 23332 NS 40.7 NS NS 23333 NS 26.8 NS NS 23334 NS 27.2 NS NS 23335 NS 28.0 NS NS 23396 NS 45.2 NS NS Scarred NS - Not Studied

• Fish tagged and released

~ Fish held 24 hrs, tagged, and held 24 hr additional hrs prior to release on February 14, 1977

Table A-ll Plant Discharge Temp: 1.44C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.44C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp; NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS February 13, 1979* Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 672 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23336 NS 47.0 NS NS 23339 NS 47.9 NS NS 23340 NS 42.0 NS NS 23341 NS 44.0 NS NS Operculum distorted Rainbow Trout 23342 NS 48.1 NS NS - Not Studied

• Fish h'eld 24 hrs arid released on February 14, 1979

I Table A-12 Plant Discharge Temp: 2.24C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 2.24C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS February 20, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 947 sec.

Tag Internal Length Height Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments NO FISH COLLECTED

Table A-13 Plant Discharge Temp: 1.7 C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 1.7 C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge .Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS February 28, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 1445 sec.

Tag Internal I,ength Weight Survival'urvival Condition S ecies Number Te erature(4C) (cm) ( ) Comments Comments Rainbow Trout 23125 NS 42.0 NS NS Rainbow Trout+ 42.0* NS Gizzard Shad

• 25.0* NS NS - Not Studied

• Not captured, thus identification and measurements are best approximations.

Table A-14 Plant Discharge Temp: 2.84C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 2.8 C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS March 5, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 850 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature(4C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23306 NS 68.2 NS NS NS - Not Studied

Table A-15 Plant Discharge Temp: 2.24C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 2.24C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS March 8, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 327 sec. Canal Mouth 542 sec. Discharge Canal Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Rainbow Trout + 23793 NS 22.7 NS NS 23794 NS 24.5 NS NS 23795 NS 22.5 NS NS 23797 NS 22.1 NS NS 23798 NS 19.0 NS NS 23800 NS 22.5 NS NS w Rainbow Trout+ Observed not caught I

Rainbow Trout Observed in discharge canal, not caught Brown Trout+ Observed not caught NS Not Studied

• From lakeside of GNPS discharge canal mouth

Table A-16 Plant Discharge Temp: 3.34C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 2.5~C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS March 21, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 840 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature(4C) (cm) ( m Survival Comments Comments NO PISH CAPTURED

Table A-17 Plant Discharge Temp: 3.34C 1979 Shutdown Survey 'lant Intake Temp: 3.34C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS March 28, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 1039 sec.

Tag Internal Iength Weight' Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature C) (cm) Survival Comments Comments Rainbow Trout 23304 NS 26.7 NS NS Brown Trout 23305 NS 48.3 NS NS NS - Not Studied

J Table A-18 Plant Discharge Temp: 3.3 C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 3.3 C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS March 29, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 967 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23303 NS 46.0 NS NS NS - Not Studied

~t Table A-19 Plant Discharge Temp: 11.74C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 3.14C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: NS Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: NS April 10, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: NS Electroshocking Time: 1056 sec.

Tag Internal I ength Weight Survival'ondition S ecies Number Te erature(oC) (cm) ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23876 NS 48.9 NS NS 23877 NS 35.7 NS NS 23878 NS 50.8 NS NS Lamprey scar 23879 NS 45.4 NS NS 23880 NS 44.2 NS NS Lamprey scar 23881 NS 44.0 NS NS Lamprey scar 23882 NS 47.0 NS NS Lamprey scar (fungused) 23883 NS 45.8 NS NS 23885 NS 44.4 NS NS 23887 NS 49.2 NS NS Lamprey scar 23889 NS 41.8 NS NS Lamprey scar 23890 NS 47.8 NS NS 23891 NS 44.6 NS NS 23892 NS 44.9 NS NS 23895 NS 45.0 NS NS 23896 NS 41.3 NS NS 23897 NS 58.7 NS NS Scars; tail fungused 23898 NS 47.6 NS NS 23901 NS 43.0 NS NS 23903 NS 45.1 NS NS 23906 NS 47.2 NS NS 23928 NS 46.9 NS NS 23929 NS 44.6 NS NS 23930 NS 39.3 NS NS Deformed tail 23932 NS 45.5 NS NS Lamprey scars 23933 NS 42.5 NS NS 23934 NS 47.7 NS NS 23938 NS 41.5 NS NS

Table A-19 (Continued)

Tag Internal Iength Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature(4C) -(cm ( ) Survival Comments Comments Brown Trout 23941 NS 44.1 NS NS 23942 NS 42.3 NS NS Deformed tail 23943 NS 41.1 NS NS 23944 NS 45.9 NS NS 23945 NS 47.3 NS NS 23946 NS 46.2 NS NS Lamprey scar 23947 NS 39.7 NS NS 23948 NS 40.6 NS NS 23949 NS 50.2 NS NS Lamprey scar 23950 NS 48.7 NS NS NS 47.8 NS NS Died in tank I

Rainbow Trout 23886 NS 45. 8 NS NS, 23888 NS 57.2 NS NS Lamprey scar 23893 NS 54.8 NS NS Scar 23894 NS 44.5 NS NS 23899 NS 59.9 NS NS 23900 NS 57.0 NS NS Lamprey scar 23904 NS 49.8 NS NS 23927 NS 57.2 NS NS Lamprey scars 23931 NS 52.5 NS NS 23935 NS 55.8 NS NS 23936 NS 46.6 NS NS 23937 NS 49.6 NS NS NS 47.6 NS NS Died in tank, lamprey scars NS 48.0 NS NS Died in tank NS 52.2 NS NS Died in tank NS 49.7 NS NS Died in tank

h i(

\

I r

Table A-19 (Continued)

Tag Internal Iength Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number Te erature( C) (cm) ( m) Survival Comments 'omments Coho Salmon 23884 NS 54.2 NS NS 23902 NS 51.2 NS NS 23905 NS 51.8 NS NS 23939 NS 53.5 NS NS 23940 NS 51.0 NS NS White Bass 23926 NS 31.8 NS NS NS - Not Studied

Table A-20 Plant Discharge Temp: 12.54C 1979 Shutdown Survey Plant Intake Temp: 4.24C Electroshocking Cold-Shock Discharge Temp: 11.54C Ginna Nuclear Power Station Cold-Shock Test Temp: 0.44C+

April 11-16, 1979 Cold-Shock Testing Holding Period: 119:45 Hrs Electroshocking Time: 551 sec.

Tag Internal Length Weight Survival Condition S ecies Number T erature(4C) (cm ( ) Survival Comments Conments Brown Trout 23912 11.2 45.2 NS V. good I amprey removed, fungus 23913 11.0 48.6 NS V. good Lamprey scar, fungus 23915 11.1 44.1 NS V. good Deformed operculum 23917 11.2 43.5 NS V. good 23918 11.1 36.5 NS V. good 23919 11.0 43.6 NS V. good 23920 11.1 53.1 NS V. good Scars 23921 11.0 47.0 NS V. good 23922 11.1 48.0 NS Poor 23923 11.1 49.5 NS Poor Lamprey scar, fungus Rainbow Trout 23907 11.1 40.5 NS V. good 23909 11.3 51.6 NS V. good Lamprey scar 23911 11.1 48.6 NS V. good 23914 11.5 47.6 NS V. good 23916 11.2 53.1 NS V. good 23924 11.2 54.0 NS Poor Lamprey scar, fat Lake Trout 23910 11.0 49.0 NS V. good Coho Salmon '3884 54.0 NS V. good Tagged and released 4/10/79

• 272 Kg ice added to tank NS - Not Studied NOTE: Four fish in poor condition before being put into test tank, another fish was dropped. Initially many fish showed overt signs of disorientation upon placement into test tank. Within 20 minutes all but 5 fish swimming normally. After 18 hrs, 3 fish still in bad condition, i.e. only operculum moving. Prior to release all fish swimming, although 3 severely affected fish still showed some ill effects.

1 4

Pl Y'ig k

<a