Text

326(b) Entrainment Demonstration Program for NPDES Permit PA 0047325 Special Condition C,Part C
	ML18031A384
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	07/31/1982
From:	; PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML18031A383	List: ML18031A384; PLA-1191, Forwards Results of Facility Entrainment Demonstration Program Developed to Meet Requirements of Special Condition C,Part C of NPDES Permit PA 0047325;
References
	PA-0047325, PA-47325, PROC-820731-01, NUDOCS 8208060302
	Download: ML18031A384 (53)
	v • d • e

SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 316(b)

ENTRAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM FOR NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT NO. PA. 0047325 SPECIAL CONDITION C, PART C

BY PENNSYLVANIA POWER 5 LIGHT CO JULY, 1982 8208060302 820803 PDR ADOCK 05000387 P

PDR

I.

INTRODUCTION Special Condition C of the NPDES Permit No. PA. 0047325, requires a

316(b) study program for impingement and entrainment at the Susquehanna SES.

To meet this requirement, a predictive model for impingement and entrainment was submitted to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (Pa.

DER) by the Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (PP8L) on January 9,

1980 (Appendix A).

Additional discussions were held between the Pa.

DER and PP8L on March 4, 1980 to elaborate on this model.

At this meeting, it was agreed that a 316(b) demonstration program should be only conducted for entrainment.

A proposed sampling program for the demonstration was submitted to the Pa.

DER on April 9, 1980 (Appendix B).

Both the Pa.

DER and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved the proposed program in a letter dated April 29, 1980 (Appendix C).

The objective of this 316(b) demonstration was to evaluate the estimated annual number of larval fish that would be entrained by the Susquehanna SES as calculated by the predictive model.

The predictive model was based on specific design information for the Susquehanna SES intake structure and larval fish entrainment data from other power plants with similar intakes on the Delaware and Susquehanna Rivers.

In addition, the model also incorporated ecological data from a survey conducted in the vicinity of the Susquehanna SES in 1974 (Ref. 1).

Results of the model indicated that few larval fish would be entrained by the Susquehanna SES as compared to those in the river. It was, therefore, concluded that no adverse impact would occur to the river fishes.

The following conservative assumptions were used to design the predictive model:

(1) highest number of larval fish collected per unit volume based on data in the vicinity of the Susquehanna

SES, (2) maximum intake flows, and (3) 100% mortality of entrained larval.

The demonstration program submitted to the Fa.

DER (Appendix B) was revised after the program was in place.

Comparisons between the proposed demonstration program and the actual 316(b) demonstration are listed as follows:

10.

Mean density of larval fish/10 m

collected in surface samples during 3

four diel sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

ll.

Comparison of a Predictive Model to a 316(b) Demonstration for entrainment of larval fishes at the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.

Plane view of river intake structure.

2.

Cross-section of river intake structure.

3.

Mean density (fish/10 m ) of larval fish collected at 0900 and 2100 3

hours at the Susquehanna SES intake (I), and 190 m upriver, near the river channel (R),31981.

Fishes which occurred in densities of less than 0.5 fish/10 m

during a sampling period, or which composed less than 5% of the overall mean were categorized as "other."

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendices A.

Pennsylvania Power and Light Co. letter, Predictive Model of Impingement and Entrainment, January 9,

1980.

B.

Pennsylvania Power and Light Co. letter, List of Entrainment Demonstration Program Objectives, April 9, 1980.

C.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Environmental Resources letter, confirming impingement and entrainment study plan, April 29, 1980.

II.

PROCEDURES All samples and associated field data for the 316(b) demonstration were collected by Ichthyological Associates, in the Susquehanna River at the Susquehanna SES intake structure.

The intake is of a standard design (Ref.

2) with two 11 x ll-ftbays (Fig. 1).

River water which is drawn into either the North or South bay, passes beneath a skimmer wall and then through 1-inch vertical bar screens followed by 3/8-inch mesh traveling screens before entering a wet pit area which houses four make-up section pumps A through D (Fig. 2).

Only three of these pumps are necessary to pr'oduce a maximum intake flow of 8,880 m /s (39,100 gpm).

During sample collection intake flows were limited to about one-third maximum because of other preoperational testing activities and pumps C and D located in the South bay were operated.

Therefore, to simulate more representative intake velocities, all sampling was done directly in front of the skimmer wall of the South intake bay.

Since it was not possible to isolate both bay channels before sampling, some flow could have entered via the North intake bay.

To evaluate the amount of flow which bypassed the South intake, water velocities were measured with a Gurley Pygmy Current Meter (Model No. 625) in the first three sampling periods.

Replicate measurements of water velocity were taken in the center of each bay at depths where samples were collected.

Larval fish samples were collected during four, 24-hour -'sampling periods on 20-21 May, 28-29 May, 11-12 June, and 16-17 July 1981.

Sets of replicate samples were taken at 3-hour intervals throughout P

each sampling period.

In each set, three replicate surface (within 1/2 meter below base of skimmer wall) and bottom (within 1/2 meter of river bottom beneath base of skimmer wall) samples were collected.

In all, 48 replicates (24 surface, 24 bottom) were obtained during each of the four sampling period.

Each replicate was collected by pumping water through a 216-p mesh net for 5 minutes with a high capacity (500 gal/min) trash pump mounted on a pontoon boat as described by Gale and Mohr (Ref. 3).

The 4-inch intake pipe of this sampler was modified by dividing it into two, 4-inch sample collection pipes so that surface and bottom samples could be collected without major adjustments for depth while sampling was in progress.

This was accomplished by attaching the pump's intake pipe to a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) "t-fitting"affixed to the bow of the boat.

From this fitting, two 4-inch pipes were directed downward with 90'lbows and then equipped with gate valves.

Prior to each sampling period, the length of each of these sample collection pipes was adjusted with various sizes of PVC pipe to within 1/2 meter of the sampling depth as determined by river level.

The collection of either surface or bottom samples was controlled with the gate valves.

For example, the change from surface to bottom collections, the gate valve on the bottom collection pipe was opened

Pro osed Demonstration Actual Demonstration 1.

Samples collection three times per 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period 1.

Samples collection eight times per 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period 2.

Two replicate 5 minute samples 2.

Three replicate 5 minute samples 3.

Six sampling periods two in May, June and July 3.

Four sampling periods twice in May, once each in June and July.

4.

Samples collected near skimmer wall and near bottom o'f intake opening 4.

Samples collected near skimmer wall and near bottom of intake opening 5.

Identify 1'arvae 5.

Identify larvae The actual demonstration criteria were the same or exceeded the proposal with the exception of four. sampling periods versus six.

Activities associated with station pre-operational testing limited the number of sampling periods, but the total number of samples collected was greater than originally proposed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I.

INTRODUCTION II.

PROCEDURES

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

~ ~ ~

~ ~

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION IV~

CONCLUSION

~

~ ~

~

~ ~ ~

~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

LIST OF TABLES Table 1.

Mean river temperature and flow, intake pumping rate, and current velocity for entrainment sampling periods in 1981.

2.

Larval fishes collected in entrainment samples at the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

3.

Number of larval fish captured with a pump sampler in the mouth of the South Bay channel of the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 20-21 May 1981.

4.

Number of larval fish captured with a pump sampler in the mouth of the South Bay channel of the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 28-29 May 1981.

5.

Number of larval fish captured with a pump sampler in the mouth of the South Bay channel of the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 11-12 June 1981.

6.

Number of larval fish captured with a pump sampler in the mouth of the South Bay channel of the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 16-17 July 1981.

7.

Total number of larval fish collected during four diel sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

8.

Total mean density of larval fish/10 m

collected during four diel 3

sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

9.

Mean density of larval fish/10 m

collected in bottom samples during 3

four diel sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

e III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Temperature and flow of the river, and pumping rate and velocity in the intake 'were measured while collecting entrainment samples (Table 1).

Seasonal warming of the river occurred throughout the four sampling periods and mean river flow decreased continuously until on the last sampling period in July, it was only 15% of the flow measured in the first period in May.

The maximum pumping rate'f intake pumps C and D was 0.82 m /s (13,000 gal/min).

These pumps created velocities up to 0.15 m/s (0.5 ft/s) in the South bay and no measurable velocity in the North bay. It was concluded from these data that essentially all of the river water was drawn through the South bay when entrainment samples were collected.

At least 18 species of larval fish were collected in the entrainment samples (Table 2).

Six species composed 82% of the total number captured.

Quillback was the most numerous (37%) followed in abundance by carp (22%), tessellated darter (11%), spottail shiner (8%), and spotfin shiner (4%).

Game fish larvae such as bullhead catfishes, sunfishes, and walleye composed less than 3% of the total.

A total of 3,374 larval fish (86% prolarvae) was collected in the four sampling periods (Tables 3 through 7).

In each sampling period, over 70% of the la'rvae were captured at night in collections from 0900 through 0300 hours0.00347 days 0.0833 hours 4.960317e-4 weeks 1.1415e-4 months .

Numbers were always greatest at midnight or 0300 hours0.00347 days 0.0833 hours 4.960317e-4 weeks 1.1415e-4 months .

Gale and Mohr (1976) documented similar diel variations in the abundance of drifting larval fish nearby in the river channe (Ref. 1).

After 5 June, the densities of larval fish in the river decreased substantially (Ref. 40) suggesting that the sampling period 20 May through 17 July was adequate even though the demonstration program initially was to include sampling in August.

Large fluctuations in the density of larval fish occurred among the four sampling periods (Table 8).

In the first period, 24% of the total catch was collected followed by 48% in the second, 26% in the third, and 2% in the last period.

As expected, the majority of the

larvae, about 60%, were captured in surface samples (Table 9 and 10).

The maximum mean density at the intake (35.1 fish/10 m ) was found in the second sampling period on 28-29 May which was similar to the peak density (34.4 fish/10 m ) found at a routine monitoring station located 190 m upriver near the channel on 27 May (Ref. 40).

In

general, fluctuations in mean density were similar to those in the river (Fig. 3).

The density,

however, was always greater in the intake (x = 34%).

This was due in great part to the fact that common

carp, one of the most numerous fishes in the intak'e samples, was seldom taken in the river samples.

In addition, Gale and Mohr (1976) found that drifting larvae tended to move shoreward at night.

while simultaneously closing the valve on the surface collection pipe.

The volume sampled in each replicate was determined by multiplying pumping duration (5 min) by pumping rate.

The pumping rate was measuied once in May and once in July by timing the filling of a 1,280-liter trough.,

During these tests, the pumping rate was checked with a hand-held tachometer (Stewart-Warner Model 757-W).

These tachometer readings were compared to those taken at 3-hour intervals during each sampling period to assure that the pump was functioning at near-maximum capacity.

Each sample was preserved in the field with 10% formalin containing rose bengal stain, and transported to the laboratory where larvae were sorted.

Identifications and life stages (prolarva or postlarva) of all larvae were determined using a dissecting microscope (10-70X).

Prolarvae were defined according to Hubbs, as fish with yolk and postlarvae were those without yok (Ref. 4).

After scalation began, fish were considered juveniles and not.reported.

Catfishes were considered juveniles when morphometrics, meristics, and pigmentation patterns resembled those of adults.

Larvae were identified to the lowest taxon possible by comparing them to our reference series of 31 species of laboratory-reared specimens and with developmental information given in Buynak and Mohr (Refs.

5 through 17).

We also used keys and descriptions for larval fish identification in Ref.

18 through 39).

Severely damaged fish which could not be identified were tabulated as fragments.

All specimens were stored in 10% formalin.

Larval fish data were calculated in terms of mean density and mean number.

II The mean density of each gpecies of larval fish was expressed as the number collected per 103m in the raw data tables.

The mean number of fish entrained per m

during the entire demonstration period was the mean density of the four sampling periods May through July.

The mean number of fish entrained per day during the demonstration period was calculated by multiplying the mean number of entrained fish per m

by the total volume of water withdrawn from the river for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months at maximum intake flow (0.82 m /s).

The projected mean number of fish entrained per day was calculated in )he same manner after adjusting for maximum intake flow (2.46 m /s).

Daily estimates of entrained larval fish using the demonstration data were then compared and evaluated relative to daily estimates generated by the predictive model.

The estimate of the mean number of fish entrained per m

derived from 3

data collected in demonstration program agreed closely with the predictive model estimate (Table ll).

The projected demonstration that 389,000 larvae could be entrained per day from May through July compared to the predictive model estimate of 350,000 larvae per day from May through August.

The projected demonstration estimate was slightly higher (11%) partially because August data were not included as they were in the predictive model estimate.

Moreover, it should be emphasized that even under conditions of maximum design intake flow (Table 13), less than 1.5% of the overall river flow would have been withdrawn for cooling purposes for the Susquehanna SES during the demonstration program sampling period. It is fortunate for the fishery that natural river flow is usually high during the period of greatest larval fish abundance.

IV.

CONCLUSION To meet Special Condition C of the NPDES Permit No. PA. 0047325, the Pennsylvania Power and Light Co. developed a predictive model (Appendix A) and conducted this demonstration program to determine the magnitude of larval fish entrainment at the Susquehanna SES.

Results of the demonstration program favorably support the estimated values of the predictive model.

Therefore, if the magnitude of larvae fish entrainment, as derived from the model (based on entrainment studies at other power generating stations with similar intakes and flows) was acceptable to regulatory agencies, it seems reasonable to conclude that the projected entrainment of larval fishes would also be acceptable at this station.

There should be no adverse impact from entrainment to the fish population in the Susquehanna SES from operation of this station.

0

REFERENCES

Gale, W. F.

and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1976.

Larval Fishes.

Pages 141 171 in T.V. Jacobsen (ed.), Ecological studies of the North Branch Susquehanna River in the iecinity of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (Annual Report for 1974).

2 ~

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1

5 2, Environmental Report Operating License Stage, Pennsylvania Power 8 Light Co., Volume 2, Subsection 3.4, May 1978.

3

~

Gale,.W. P.

and H. W. Mohr, Jr.

1978.

Larval fish drift in a large river with a comparison of sampling methods.

Trans.

Am. Fish.

Soc.

107(1): 46-55.

4,

Hubbs, C. L. 1943.

Terminology of early stages of fishes.

Copeia 1943(4):

260.

5.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1978.

Larval development of the

~W River. Trans.

Am. Fish.

Soc.

107 (4):

595-599.

6.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1978.

Larval development of the redbreast sunfish ~(Le omi,s auritus) from the Susquehanna River.

Trans.

Am. Fish.

Soc.

107(4): 600-604.

7.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1978.

Larval development of the white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) from the Susquehanna River.

Proc.

Pa.

Acad. Sci. 52(2):

143-145.

8.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W.. Mohr, Jr.

1979.

Larval development of rock bass from the Susquehanna River. Prog. Fish-Cult.

41(1): 39-42.

9.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1979.

Larval development of the shorthead redhorse (Moxostoma macrole idotum) from the Susquehanna River.

Trans.

Am. Pish.

Soc.

108(2):

161-165.

10.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1979.

Larval development of creek chub and fallfish from two Susquehanna River tributaries.

Prog.

Fish-Cult 41(3):

124-129.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1979.

Larval development of the o

)'"

">>""'o'ortheast Pennsylvania.

Proc.

Pa.

Acad. Sci. 53(1):

69-73.

12.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1979.

Larval development of the

~$ << )'" '"

'W'ataractae) from a Susquehanna River tributary.

Proc.

Pa.

Acad. Sci.

53(1): 56-60.

13.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1979.

Larval development of the promelas) from northeast Pennsylvania.

Proc.

Pa.

Aced. Scl. 33(2):

172-176.

14.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1980.

Larval development of stoneroller, cutlips minnow, and river chub with diagnostic keys including four additional cyprinids.

Prog. Fish-Cult.

42(3):

127-135.

15.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1980.

Larval development of golden shiner and comely shiner from northeastern Pennsylvania.

Prog.

Fish-Cult. 42(4):

206-211.

16.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1980.

Key to the identification of sucker larvae in the Susquehanna River near Berwick, Pennsylvania.

Proc.

Pa.

Acad. Sci.

54:161-164.

17.

Buynak, G. L. and H.

W. Mohr, Jr.

1980.

Larval development of the common shiner ~(Notre is cornutus) from northeast Pennsylvania.

Proc.

Pa. Acad. Sci. 54:

165-168.

18.

Fish, M. P.

1932.

Contributions to the early life histories of sixty-two species of fishes from Lake Erie and its tributary waters.

Bull. U. S. Bur. Fish.

47(10):

293-398.

19.

Norden, C. R.

1961.

The identification of larval yellow perch, Perca flavescens and walleye, Stizostedion vitreum.

Copeia 1961(3):

282-288.

20.

Mansueti, A. J.

1964.

Early development of the yell'ow perch, Perca flavescens.

Chesapeake Sci.

5(1-2):

46-66.

21.

Mansueti, A. J.

and J. D. Hardy, Jr.

1967.

Development of fishes of the Chesapeake Bay region.

An atlas'of egg, larval, and juvenile stages.

Part I.

Nat. Resour. Inst., Univ. Maryland, Baltimore.

202 PP

~

22.

May, E.

B. and C. R. Gasaway.

1967.

A preliminary key to the identification of larval fishes of Oklahoma, with particular reference to Canton Reservoir, including a selected bibliography.

Okla. Fish.

Res.

Lab. Bull. 5, Contrib.

164.

33 pp.

23.

Siefert, R. E.

1969.

Characteristics for separation of white and black crappie larvae.

Trans.

Am. Fish.

Soc. 98(2): 326-328.

24.

Taber, C. A. 1969.

The distribution and identification of larval fishes in the Buncombe Creek arm of Lake Texoma with observations on

spawning habits and relative abundance.

Ph.D. Thesis.

Univ.

Oklahoma; Norman.

120 pp.

25.

Meyer, F. A. 1970.

Development of some larval centrarchids.

Prog.

Fish-Cult.

32(3):

130-136.

26.

Gerlach, J.

M. 1973.

Early development of the quillback carpsucker, Millersville, Pa.

60 pp.

27.

Lippson, A. J.

nad R. L. Moran.

1974.

Manual for identification of early developmental stages of fishes of the Potomac River Estuary.

Martin Marietta Corp., Environ. Tech. Cent., Baltimore, Md. 282 pp.

28.

Hogue, J. J., Jr.,

R. Wallus, and L. K. Kay.

1976.

Preliminary guide to the identification of larval fishes in the Tennessee River.

Tenn. Val. Auth., Div. For. Fish. Wildl. Dev.

Tech.

Note B19.

67 pp.

29.

Fuiman, L. A.

1979.

Descriptions and comparisons of catostomid fish larvae:

northern Atlantic drainage species.

Trans.

Am. Fish.

Soc.

108(6):

560-603.

30.

Fuiman, L.A. and J. J. Loos.

1977.

Identifying characters of the cataractae (Osteichthyes:

Cyprinidae).

Proc.

Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.

129(2): 23-32.

31.

Fuiman, L.A.

and J. J. Loos.

1978.

Morphological changes during Trans.

Am. Fish.

Soc.

107(4):

605-612.

32.

Snyder, D. E., M. B. M. Snyder, and S.

C. Douglas.

1977.

~romelas, larvae.

J. Fish.

Res.

Board Can.

34 (9):

1397-1409.

33.

Taubert, B. D.

1977.

Early morphological development of the green sunfish

~Le ernie

~c anellus, and its separation from other larval

~Le omis species.

Trans.

Am. Fish.

Boc. 106(5):

445-448.

34.

Hardy, J. D., Jr.

1978.

Development of fishes of the Mid-Atlantic Bight.

An atlas of egg, larval and juvenile stages.

Vol. III.

Aphredoderidae through Rachycentridae.

Office of Biological

Services, Fish and Wildl. Serv.,

U.S. Dept. Int., Washington, D.C.

FWS/OBS-78/12.

394 pp.

35.

Jones, P. W., F. D. Martins, and J.

D. Hardy, Jr.

1978.

Development of fishes of the Mid-Atlantic Bight.

An atlas of egg, larval and juvenile stages.

Vol. I.

Acipenseridae through Ictaluridae.

Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildl.

Serv.,

U.S. Dept. Int.,

Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-78/12.

366 pp.

36.

Perry. L. G.

1979.

Part I:

Identification of nine larval cyprinids inhabiting small northern rivers.

Part II:

Spatial and temporal patterns of larval fish drift in the Upper Skunk River.

M. S.

Thesis.

Iowa State Univ., Ames.

73 pp.

37.

Cooper, J.

E.

1980.

Egg, larval and juvenile development of 469-478.

t 38.

Lathrop, B. F.

1981.

Key to larvae and juveniles of common fishes found in the lower Susquehanna River.

(unpublished manuscript).

39.

Bailey, R. M., J.

E. Fitch, E.

S. Herald, E. A. Lachner, C.

C.

Lindsey, C. R. Robins, and W. B. Scott.

1970.

A list of common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada.

3rd ed.

Am. Fish. Soc.,

Spec.

Publ.

No. 6.

150 pp.

40.

Mohr, H. W., Jr.,

G. L. Buynak and T. V. Jacobsen.

1982.

Larval Fishes.

Pages 124-169 in T. V. Jacobsen (ed.), Ecological studies of the North Branch Susquehanna River in the vicinity of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (Annual Report for 1981).

JSF:lm F-14

Table 1

Mean river temperature and flow, intake pumping rate, and current velocity for entrainment sampling periods in 1981.

Sampling Period a

Mean river temperature (C)

Mean river flow (m /s) 3 b

20-21 Hay

15. 4 440 28-29 May

21. 8 169 22.6 136 11-12 Jun 16-17 Jul 25.6 66 Pumping rate of intake pumps C

& D (m /s) 0.82 (13,000 g/m) 0.82 0.73 (11,500 g/m) 0.73 Intake Velocity Time South Bay (m/s)

Surface d

Bottome North Bay Surface Bottom 1540 h 0.12 (0.4 ft/s)

0. 12 1545 h

0. 12

0. 12 1500 h 0.15 (0.5 ft/s)

0. 15 aMeasured by continuous recording thermometer 465 m upriver at Susquehanna SES Biological Laboratory.

bCalculated from continuously recorded river level data at the Biological Laboratory.

cTime velocity measurements were initiated on first sampling date.

Within -'~ m below base of skimmer wall.

Within g m of river bottom beneath base of skimmer wall.

Table 2

Larval fishes collected in entrainment samples at the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

Names and order of listing conform to Robins et al.

(1980).

Cyprinidae - Carps and Minnows

~p~nus carpio common carp EPotropis hudsonius spottail shiner N. spi loptems spotfin shiner Semoti lus cot@or alis fallfish Unidentified Cyprinidae minnow spp.

Catostomidae Suckers Carpi odes cyprus quillback Catostomus commer soni white sucker Mozostoma macr'olepidotum shorthead redhorse Ictaluridae Bullhead Catfishes 2'ctaluvus catus white catfish punctatus channel catfish Centrarchidae Sunfishes Ambloplites mpest~s rock bass Sepomis gibbosus pumpkinseed L. macr'ochimcs bluegill Microptemcs dolomieui smallmouth bass Pomo~s spp.

crappie spp.

Percidae Perches

r. heostoma olmstedi tessellated darter Z. zonale banded darter Percina peZtata shield darter Sti zostedi on uitr'eum walleye

Table 3

Number oi larval fish captured with a pump sampler in the mouth of the South Bay channel of,the river water intahe of the Susquehanna Steam Electric

Station, 20-21 Hay 1981.

SAHPLING TINE H /AEPLICATE LOCATION 0901 0935 9.8 9 ~ 4 SURFACE BOTTOM 1156 1230 9,8 9 ~ 4 SU RFACE BOTTQ4 REPLICATE 1

2 3

1 2

3 COLLECTIOH HO.

TVJ 055 056 057 058 059 060 1

2 3

1 2

3 064 065 066 061 062 063 SPECIES SPOTTAIL SHINER PROLAAVA QUILLBACK PAOIARVA WHITE SUCKER POSTIARVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROLARVA BANDED DARTER PAOLARVA POSTI ARVA SHIELD DARTER PAOLARVA POSTLARVA WAI LEYE PROLARVA POSTL'ARVA TOTAI 1

0 0

2 0

0 2

0 1

2 0

0 0

1 0

1 '0 1

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

5 13 ll 4

4 2

0.

0 0

0 1

0 4

11 5

2 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

3 0

0 2

0 1

1 0

0 0

1 7

5 7

8 5

0 0

1 0

4 3

4 0

2 0

0 1

1 0

1 1

0 1

0 0

SAMPLING TINE H /REPI ICATE LOCATION 1500 1533 9.8 9.4 SURFACE BOTTOM 1802-1837 9,8 9 ~ 4 SURFACE BOTTOH REPIICATE 1

2 3

1 2

3 COLLECTION NO.

TVJ 067 068 069 070 071 072 1

2 3

1 2

3 076 077 078 073 074 075 SP ECI ES SPOTTAIL SHIHER PROI ARVA QUILLBACX PROLAAVA WHITE SUCKER PAOLARVA POSTI ARVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROLARVA BANDED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA SHIELD DAATER PROt ARVA WALLEYE POSTLARVA FISH

{FRAGMENTS)

TOTAL 0

2 1

0 0

0 2

2 3

2 1

1 0

0 0

2 0

0 13 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

I 0

0 0

I 1

0 0'

0 0

1 2

5 7

3 16 2

0 0

2 4

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 2

0 0

0 1

0 0

2 0

0 0

0 2

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 4

3 8

3 0

5 2

0 0

0

Table 3 (cont.)

SAHPI ING TIHE H /REPI ICATE 2109 2207 9.8 9.4 9.8 2356-0035 9,4 LOCATION REPLICATE COLI ECTION NO SURPACE BO'siM 1

2 3

1 2

3 TVJ-81 079 080 081 082 083 084 SURFACE BOTTOH 1

2 3

1 2

3 088 089 090 085 086 087 SPECIES SPOTTAII SHINER PROLARVA POSTLARVA FALLFISH POSTLARVA QUILLBACK P ROLARVA WHITE SUCKER PROLARVA POSTLARVA TESSELIATED DARTER PROLARVA POSTI.ARVA BANDED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA PISH (FRAGHENTS) 0 1

2 1

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

14 33 22 17 7

13 23 48 34 2

10 7

2 0

1 0

10 8

3 4

0 1

2 1

10 15 17 9

10 15 5

0 0

2 1

0 0

0 2

0 9

9 0

0 0

1 1

3 5

7 7

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

38 58 48 32 18 33 31 59 45 8

20 17 SAHPLING TIHE H /REPLICATE 0303-0337'.8 9.4 0557 0631 9.8 9 ~ 4 LOCATION SURFACE BOTTOH REPIICATE 1

2 3

1 2

3 COLLECTION NO.

TVJ 81-091 092 093 094 095 096 SURFACE BOTTCH 1

2 3

1 2

3 100 101 102 097 098 099 SPECIES SPOTTAIL SHINER PROLARVA FALLFISH POSTLARVA QUILLBACK PROLARVA

~

WHITE SUCKER P ROLARVA POSTLARVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROLARVA BANDED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA SHIELD DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA TOTAL 0

1 1

0 0

1 1

0 0

0 1

1 1

0 0

0 9

2 2

0 6

8 3

1 0

0 2

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 6

8 5

2 5

0 0

1 1

3 3

2 2

1 0

1 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 1

0 1

1 0

0 0

1 0

2 0

0 84 60 41 15 21 10 5

3 6

7 6

7 60 38 29 11 14 8

3 2

4 1

1 0

Within 4 m below base of skimmer wall.

Within 4 m of river bottom beneath base of skinner wall.

Table 4

Nurlber of larval fish captured With a pump sampler in the mouth of the south Bay channel of the river ~ater intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 28-29 Hay 1981.

SAHPLING TIHE H /REPLICATE LOCATION 1203 1237 9'

9,4 SURPACEa BOTTOHb 1504 153'7 9.8 9'

SURFACE BOTTCH REPLICATE 1

2 3

1 2

3 COLLECTION NO ~

TVJ-81 106 107 108 103 104 105 1

2 3

1 2

3 109 110 111 112 113 114 SPECIES CARP PAOLARVA SPOTTAII. SHINER PROLARVA QUILIBACK PROLARVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROIAAVA POSTLARVA BANDED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA WALLEYE POSTLARVA 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 5

7 2

0 6

6 0

1 0

0 0

2 4

1 1

1 2

6 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

1

.0 0

0 0

0 2

0 0

1 0

0 0

4 2

0 0

4 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

4 2

3 1

2 1

TOTAL 10 9

3 2

9 14 10 4

3 2

6 4

SAHP LING TIME H /REPLICATE 1805 1839 9,8 9 ~ 4 9o8 2101 2134 9.4 LOCAT!ON REPLICATE COI LECTION NO, TVJ 81 SURFACE BOTTOH 1

2 3

1 2

3 118 119 120 115 116 117 SURFACE BOTTOH 1

2 3

1 2

3 121 122 123 124 125 126 SPECIES CARP P ROLARVA SPOTTAIL SHINER PROLARVA POSTLARVA SPOTFIN SHINER PROLARVA HINllOW SPP

~

PROLARVA QUILLBACK PAOLARVA POSTLARVA WHITE SUCKER POSTLARVA SHORTHEAD REDHORSE P ROLARVA POSTLAAVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA Bh!lDED DARTER P ROLAAVA POSTLARVA SHIELD DARTER POSTLARVA PISH (FAAGHENTS)

TOTAL 4

4 1

3 2

0 4

7 15 5

9 6

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

6 0

0 2

3 15 1

0 0

0 5

9 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 1

0 3

1 5

5 0

0 0

0 3

3 15 14 21 12 0

0 1

0 3

0 9

9 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 a

o o

o 0

1 3

0 0

2 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

o o

a o

0 1

0 0 '

0 0

13 16 10 10 8

1 1

0 2

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 o

o o

a 0

0 3

0 1

2 0

1 0

0 0

1 1

0 0

0 1

.0 0

3 0

0 0

0 7

6 7

10 6

9 40 40 76 31 37 35'

Table 4 {cont.)

SAHPLING TIME M /REPLICATE LOCATION REPLICATE COLLECTION NO, 0034 0108 9.8 9.4 SURFACE BOTTOM 1

2

.3 1

2 3

TVJ-81 130 131 132 127 128 129 0303 0338 9.8 9 ~ 4 SURFACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 133 134"'135 136 137 138 SPECIES CARP P ROLARVA SPOTTAIL SHINER PROLARVA POST) ARVA SPOTF IN SHINER PROLARVA QUILLBACK PROLARVA WHITE SUCKER P ROLARVA POSTLARVA SHORTHEAD REDHORSE PROIARVA CRAPPIE SPP ~

PROLARVA POSTLARVA TESSEILATED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA BANDED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA SHIELD DARTER PROLARVA FISH t FRAGMENTS )

TOTAL 22 34 28 14 14 19 33 44 30 22 15 28 17 15 26 0

1 1

0 0

0 21 13 14 2

0 1

0 0

1 7

15 16 0

0 0

16 10 4

1 0,

1 0

0 0

0 37 48 51 29 19 25 18 28 29 16 12 13 0

1 0

3 0

0 0

1 0

1,0 1

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 1'

2 2

1 1

0 1

2 0

1 0

0 0

0 6

6 11 0

0 0

2 1

0 0

0 3

0 0

0 1

0 0

7 7

10 1

0 1

1 0

2 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 2

0 0

2 1

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

4 0

2 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 1

0 87 108 122 78 54 74 62 95 75 61 38 51 SAMPLING TIHE M /REPLICATE 9.8 0600-0635 9.4 0900 0940 9.8 9 ~ 4 LOCATION REPLICATE COLLECTION N02 SURFACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 TVJ 81-14 2 14 3 14 4 1 39 14 0 14 1 SURFACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 145 146 147 148 149 150 SPECIES CARP PROLARVA SPOTTAIL SHINER PROLARVA POSTLARVA QUILLBACK PROLARVA WHITE SUCKER POSTLARVA SHORTHEAD RED))ORSE PROLARVA TESSELIATED DARTER PROLARVA POSTI,ARVA BANDED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA SHIELD DARTER POSTLARVA FISH (FRAG')ENTS)

TOTAI 16 26 20 30 14 10 26 26 36 '1 12 16 0

0 2

1 5

0 0

0 1

0 2

1 3

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 1

0 0

6 1

0 0

1 0

0 1

3 5

1 2

3 0

1 0

0 0

1 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 3

1 0

0 0

3 0

0 0

0 1

1 20 33 27 48 36 24 29 29 37 23 14 19 2

3 1

4 6

4 1

0 1

1 1

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

2 2

0 0

0 Within

))

m below base of skimmer wall.

bWithin )) m of river bottom beneath base of skimmer wall.

Table 5

Number of larval fish captured with a pump sampler in the mouth of the South

'ay channel of the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 11-12 June 1981.

SAHPLING TINE H /REPI ICATE LOCATION REPLICATE COLI ECTION NO, 1459 1538 9'

9.4 suwace~

sovToz~

1 2

3 1

2 3

TVJ 81 151 152

)53 154 155 156 1806-1840 9.8 9.4 SURFACE BOTTCH 1

2 3

1 2

3 160 161 162 157 158 159 SPECIES CARP P ROLARVA SPOTTAIL SHINER PROI ARVA SPOTFIN SHINER PROLARVA QUILLBACK PROLARVA POSTLARVA ROCK BASS POSTIARVA BLUEGII L POSTLARVA CRAPPIE SPP.

POSTLARVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROLARVA BA'lDED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA TOTAL 2

3 0

0 0

2 0

0 3

5 0

0 1

0 0

2 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 1

1 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

6 4

4 5

3 12 2

1 I

1 4

7 0

0 1

0 0

0 I

0 1

0 0

1 2

0 0

2 0

3 0

0 1

0 0

2 SAHPLING TINE H /REPI ICATE LOCATION REPLICATE COLLECTION HO ~

2100~2133 9o8

9. 4 SURFACE BOTTOM

'1 2

3 1

2 3

TVJ 81 163 164 165 166 167 168 0008 0043 9,8 9+4 SURFACE BOTTOH 1

2 3

1 2

3 172 173 174 169 170 171 SPECIES CARP PROLARVA SPOTTAIL SHINER PROLARVA POSTIARVA SPOTFIN SHINER PROLARVA POSTLARVA HINNOW SPP

~

POSTLARVA QUILLBACK PROLARVA POSTLARVA SHORTHEAD REDHORSE POSTLARVA ROCK BASS P ROLARVA POSTLARVA SNALLNOUTH BASS POSTLARVA CRAPPIE SPPo PROLARVA POSTLARVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA BANDED DARTER PROI ARVA POSTLARVA SHIELD DARTER POSTI ARVA FISH (PRAGHENTS)

TOTAL 0

0 1

0 0

0 8

5 8

2 4

0 0

1 1

0 0

3 0

1 0

0 0

2 1

0 0

2 2

0 1

0 0

1 1

0 3

7 5

3 1

3 5

7 1

1 0

0 0

2 1

1 "0

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 I

0 4

2 1

1 3

1 0

2 55 25 50

'20 47 33 6

3 2

8 1

1 1

0 0

2 0

0 1

1 7

0 2

1 0

0 1

1 1

0 0

1 1

0 0

0 3

4 6

4 4

0 0

1 0

0 0

)

0 0

1 0

4 1

1 3

6 8

0 0

0 1

3 1

0 0

0 1

2 0

7 8

3 3

1 0

0 0

2 0

0 0

~

0 0

7 7

10 3

6 7

5 0

3 4

1 1

0 2

I 0

1 0

0 0

2 1

0 0

0 1

0 0

9 8

5 5

0 0

0 1

16 16 20 21 17 31 94 70 94 45 72 51

Table 5 (cont.)

SAHPLIHG TIME M /REPLICATE 0301 0336 9 ~ 8 9.4 0557 0631 9,8 9.4 LOCATIOH RE PI ICATE COLLECTION NOe SURPACE BOTTOM SURPACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 1

2 3

1 2

3 TVJ&1-175 176 177 178 179 180 184 185 186 181 182 183 SPECIES CARP PROLARVA SPOTTAII SHINER PROLARVA POSTLARVA SPOTFIN SHINER PROLARVA POSTLARVA OUILLBACK PROLARVA POSTLARVA WHITE SUCKER POSTLARVA SBORTHEAD REDHORSE POSTLARVA ROCK BASS POSTI.ARVA BLUEGII L POST LARVA CRAPPIE SP P POSTLARVA TESSELIATED DARTER PROLARVA POSTLARVA BANDED DARTER P ROLARVA POSTLARVA SHIELD DARTER POSTLARVA PISH

( P RAGMEHTS )

TOTAL 6

6 3

3 2

3 1

0 1

1 0

0 10 8

11 4

0 0

18 7

9 10 5

6 3

4 0

1 0

0 0

6 1

0 2

7 1

2 0

0 0

0 2

0 1

1 0

2 7

4 5

0 0

1 0

0 3

3 4

2 2

1 0

0 0

1 0

1 1

1 0

0 0

0 1

1 55 39 39 28 11 24 2

2 5

7 3

4 0

0 0

0 2

1 2

1 0

0 0

1 1

0 1

0 0

0 1,0 0

2 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

2 0

0 0

1 1

0 1

2 0

1 2

0 0

0 1

0 0

8 10 11 16 9

7 0

0 0

0 1

0 2

2 3

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 SAMPLING TIME H /REPI ICATE 0855-0932 9,8 9 ~ 4 1205 1238 9,8 9,4 LOCATIOH REPLICATE COLLECTIOH ND, SURFACE BOTTOM' 2

3 1

2 3

TVJ-81 187 188 189 190 191 192 SURPACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 196 197 198 193 194 195 SPECIES CARP PROLARVA SPOTF IH SHINER POSTLARVA QUILLBACK PROI ARVA POSTIARVA CRAPPIE SPP, POSTLARVA TESSELLATED DARTER PROLARVA BANDED DARTER POSTLARVA TOTAI 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

~

0 0

1 3

3 2

2 2

3 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

0, 1

1 0

1 2

2 1

0 1

0 0

0 1

1 1

1 0

'0 0

1 0

0 0

0 Within 4 m below base of skimmer wall.

Within Q m of river bottoa beneath base of skiauner wall ~

Table 6

Number of larval fish captured with a pump sampler in the mouth of the South Bay channel of the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 16-17 July 1981.

SAHPLING TINE H /REPI ICATE LOCATION REPLICATE COLLECTION NO ~

SPECIES PUMPKINSEED POSTLARVA TOTAL 1200-12 32 10 ~ 1 10 ~ 1 SURPACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 TVJ 81 202 203 204 199 20D 201 0

0 0

0 15D0-1,534 10 ~ 1

10. 1 SURPACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 205 206 207 208 209 210 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 SAMPLING TIIIE H /REPLICATE LOCATION REP LICATE COLLECTIOH NO, 1800-1833 10 ~ 1

10. 1 SURFACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 TVJ 81-214 215 216 211 212 213 2100 2132 10,1

10. 1 SURFACE BOTTOM 1

2 3

1 2

3 217 218 219 220 221 222 SPECIES SPOTF IN SHINER PROLARVA POSTIARVA WHITE CATFISH POSTLARVA CHANNEI CATFISH POSTLARVA BLUEGIIL POSTLARVA BAHDED DARTER POSTLARVA PISH (FRAGHENTS) 0 1

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 3

2 2

1 0

1 1

0

-0 0

0 1

0 0

D 0

0 0

1 D

0 0

0, 0

0 0

1 1

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 1

0 0

0 6

3 4

2 0

3 0

0 0

1 0

0 0, 1

0 0

Table 6 {cont.)

SAHPI INC TINE H /REPLICATE LOCATION REP I ICATE COLLECTIOH NO ~

0000W032 10 ~ 1 10' SURPACE BOTTOH 1

2 3

1 2

3 TVJ 81 226 227 228 223

'224 225 0300-0332 "

10 ~ 1 ~

10 ~ 1 SURPACE BOTTOH 1

2 3

1 2

3 229 230 231 232 233 234 SPECIES CARP PROf ARVA POSTLARVA SPOTF IN SHINER P ROLARVA POSTLARVA WHITE CATPISH POSTLARVA CHANHEL CATFISH PO STLARVA PUHPKINSEED PROLARVA BLUECILL PQSTLARVA BANDED DARTER PROf ARVA PISH (PRAGHENTS)

TOTAf 0

0 1

0 0

0 5

4 1

0 0

0 0 '

1 0

5 3

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 1

0 0

2 4

1 4

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

6 5

4 2

1 1

6 3

2 6,3 4

1 1

0 0

1 0

0 1

0 0

0 1

0 0

SAHPLING TIHE H /REPLICATE LOCATION 0600 0633 10,1

10. 1 SURPACE SOTTOH 0900 0932 10 '

10,1 SURFACE SOTTOH REPLICATE 2

3 1

2 3

COLLECTION NO, TVJ 81 238 239 240 235 236 237 I

2 3

1 2

3 241 242 243 244 245 246 SPECIES SPOTPIH SHIHER P ROLARVA PUHPKIHSEED P ROLARVA BLUEGILL PAOLARVA BANDED DARTER PROLARVA TOTAL 0

1 0

1 1

1 0

0 0

0 1

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 1

3 1

1 1

0 0

2 1

0 0

2 0

0 0

0'.0 0

0 0

Mi,thin b m below base of skimmer wall.

bWithin 4 m oi'iver bottom beneath base of skimmer wall.

Table 7

Total number of larval fish collected during four dial sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

SPECIES 20 IIAY 28 HAY 11 Jftt 16 JUL TOTAL 4 'B7TAL CARP PIQIAWA KGKARVA SPCTTAIL SHItZR P IQIAP/A IQSKARVA SIOIPIN SltINER P/QIAWA KGKAWA FALIPISH

~A tHNtOW.SPP, P f0IAP/A KG'iLAWA 9/ILIBACR P fOLARVA KGILAP/A IIIITE SUCIZR PIOIARVA PCGKAP/A SIDRIIIEAD IGDIIORSE P lQLAP/A PCGILAWA lllf'IECATFISH KGI'LARVA QUV/t/IL CATFIStt PCGTLABVA IQCK BASS PIOIAP/A PCGTLAWA KIPIIINSEED PIOLAWA KGTLAWA BLUECIIf PIQLAPIA KG'ILARVA SttALltt3UIH BASS PCGIIAPIA CRAPPIE SPP, PIQIARVA PQSKAPIA TES6 ELLiTIED DARTER PIOIARVA KSKARVA BANDID CARIER PIOIAWA IQSKARVA SHIELD DAIHER PIQIARVA KGKARVA WC ISA PIQIAWA PCS TLARVA FISH (FRAQGt/IS) 0 652 0

0 18 236 1

10 0

2 0

0 2

0 0

2 0

0 457 478 0

4 22 79 0

22 0

2 0

0 0

2 0

1 166 131 4

10 17 31 15 15 10 1

3 2

1 5

2 11 84 2

'0 1

12 0

10 0'1 40 22 10 0

0 0

0 1

0 318 56 0

0 2

0 0

23 0

5 0

3 1

51 0

3 0

1 0

2 2

2 1

0 4

0 13 0

89 64 14 15 0

0 2

0 0

0 8

3 738 21.9 1

0.0 266 7,9 21 0.6 123 3.6 32 0.9 2

0.1 2

0.1 1

0.0 1253

37. 1 60 1.8 25 0.7 89 2.6 22 0.7 25 0.7 5

0.1 3

0.1 1

0.0 51 1.5 3

0.1 1

0.0 2

0.1 4

0.1 1

0.0 6

0.2 14 0.4 386

11. 4 78 2.3 64 1.9 46 1 ~ 4 11 0.3 7

0.2 1

0.0 6

0.2 24 0.7 802 1624 873 75 3374

Table 8

Total mean densitY of larval fish/10 m

collected during four diel sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

SPECIES CARP PIGLARVA NSKARVA SPOPIAI L QlIHER PRCLAWA IGSI'LARVA SPOIFIH QILHER PlGLARVA NSTLAWA FALLFISII POSTLARVA IClaiQI SPP, PIG LARVA NSTLAWA CUIILBACK P RCLARVA NSILARVA Iaaf SOma PIGLAWA NSKAWA QIORIHBAD.REQIORS E IRCLARVA NSKARifA EH I'K CATFISH PMILAWA GIAN(EL CATFIQI NSTLAWA IGCK BASS'RCLAWA IGSKAWA BRO'RIHSEED PRCLAWA NSILARVA BLUEGILl PIGLAWA POSTLAWA QlhLUDUIII BASS POSI'LARVA CRAPPIE SPP.

PNLAWA POSKARVA TC'>SELLAIED DARI'ER PRCLARVA NSKAWA IUV/DID DARIER PIGLAWA NSKAWA SHIELD DAIUER PRCLARVA

~A WALLEYE PIGLARVA NS1'LARVA FIQI (FRAG%?IIS) 0,00 0.00 0,39 0,02

0. 00 0,00 14.09 0,00

5. 11 0.22

0. 04 0,00 1.81

0. 00 0.26

0. 22 1.75

0. 47

0. 04 3 ~ 99 21 ~ 9 0,02 0.01 0,0

0. 00 1.44

7. 9 0,00 0.11 0.6 0,83 0.65 3.6

0. 21 0.17 0 o9 0,04

0. 00

0. 01 0 ~ 1

0. 00 0,00

9. 81 0.00

0. 47

l. 71

0. 00 0,00

0. 04

0. 00

10. 33

0. 09

0. 06

0. 17 0.47 0,04 0.00

0. 02

6. 89 1.21

0. 00

0. 04

0. 00 0.50

0. 00 0.01 O. 1

0. 00

0. 01 0+0

0. 00 6 ~ 76

37. 1 0.00 0.32 1.8 0,00 0.13 0.7 0.00 0.48 2.6 0.00 0.12 0.6 0.00

0. 13 0.7 0+00 0.00 0+00

0. 10

0. 03 Oo 1 O.GO 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.02 0 ~ 1 0,00

0. 00 0.00

0. 00

0. 00 0.00

0. 00 0,00

0. 00

0. 00 0.00

0. 02 1.09

0. 00

0. 04 0,00

0. 01 0.0 0.00 0.27 I~ 5 0.06 0.02 0.1 0.02 0.01 0.0

0. 04 0.01 0.1 O.OI 0.02 Owl

0. 00 0.00

0. 02

0. 00

0. 01 0.0 0.00 0.00 3.60 0,09 0,37 0.32

0. 22

0. 07

0. 04

0. 02 2.85 0.22

0. 68

0. 33 0.02 O,OI

0. 09

0. 28 1.94 1.39 0.31

0. 33 0.00

0. 04

0. 00

0. 03 0.2 0.00 0.08 0.4 0,00 2.10

11. 5 0.00 0.42 2.3 0.04 0.35 1.9 0.02 0.25 1.4

0. 00 0.06 0.3 0,00 0.04 0.2

0. 02 0.11

0. 04 0.00 0.02 0.24

0. 00 0.00 0,17

0. 00

0. 01 0,00

0. 03 0.06 0.13 0.0 0.2 0.7

17. 27 35.14 18.89 1.55 18.21 20 HAY 28 HAY 11 JUH 16 JUL HEAR l TOI'AL

Table 9

Mean densitY of larval fish/10 m

collected in bottom samples during four diel sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

SPIL'IES CARP PRXAWA KGILARVA SIITAIL SIINER

~A

~A SKIIFIN SHINER PRXAWA POS1'LAWA FALIFISH K8FLAWA IHNNOH SPP PNXAWA POSILAWA QJILIBACK PRCLARVA KSILIiWA I4II'IE SUCKLE PRCLAWA FOSFLAINA SICiMIEAD REIHO!HE HKXARVA IOSILARVA WIITS CATFISH KSILARVA 0!A!ZiEl. CATFISH KSILAWA KCK BASS POSTLAWA PUlPKINSIED IPOLARVA BIUEGILL PlQLARVA IOSFLAWA CRAPPIE SPP, PRCLAWA IOSI'LARVA

'IESSEILAIED CARTER PRCLARVA IOSI'LARVA BA'ID'ARIER

~A BHIFLARVA SHIELD CARIER PRCLAWA EOSILAWA 1iALLEYE

- PRCLARVA POSI'LAWA FISH (FRAQS2ITS)

0. 00

0. 00 0.35 0,00 0 00 0.00 11,35 0.00 4,74 0,27 0.04 0,00

1. 37

0. 00

0. 13

0. 13 1.24 0,22

0. Ol

0. 04 0.00 0.00 0.62

0. 08 3,19 21.6 0.01 0.1 L31 Be9 0e10 0 ~ 7 0.48

3. 2 0.08 0.5 Oi 04 0+ 00

0. 00 0.00 0.01 0.1 0,00 0.00 4.52

0. 00

0. 18 1,46

0. 00 0,00

0. 09

0. 00 8.20 0,00

0. 04

0. 13 0,22 0.04 0.00

0. 04 6.29

0. 84

0. 00 0.09

0. 00

0. 35

0. 00

0. 00 0 00

0. 00

0. 00 0 00 0.02 0.2 0.01 0,1 4.75 32.2 0.21 1.4 0.06 0.4 0,42 2.9 0.06 0.4 0.10 0.7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.1

0. 00 0,00 0.00

0. 04

0. 01

0. 1 0,00 0.00 0.44

0. 00 0.11

0. 8

0. 00

0. 12 0.03 0.2 0,00 0,00 0.00 0.00

0. 00

0. 04 0.04 0.01 0 ~ 1 0.04 0.02 0.1 0,00

0. 00 3.37

0. 09

0. 00

0. 04 3.15 0.31

0. 18 0.31 2.35 1;46

0. 00

. 0.00 0 00

0. 00 0.04 0.3 0,09 0.6 2.22

15. 0 0.47 3.2 0.31 0.22

0. 13

0. 09

0. 04 0.09 0,0l 0.93 0.49 0.00 0,04 0.00 0.00 0,27 0.4 4

0. 31 0 ~ 00 0 09 0.00 0,00 0.18 0.04

0. 04

0. 00

0. 00 0.00

0. 00

0. 08 0.43

0. 27 0 03 0,06

0. 01 0.02 0.14 2.9 1.8 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.2 1.0 10.95

30. 36 16.53 1.24 14.77 20 MAY 28 MAY 11 Jul 16 JUI MEAN

'1 %)PAL

Table 10 Hean density of larval fish/10 m

collected in surface samples 3

during four diel sampling periods at the river water intake of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

SPICIES CARP PIGLARIA SNITAIL SHI NER PNIARVA NSILARVA SBVIPIN SHINER PKILARIA NSILARIA fALIPISH PCSI'LAWA OUIILBACK PRXARVA NSFLARVA IOHTE SUCKER PROLAWA NSTLARVA SHORIMPAD REQKIISE PRCLAWA NSILAWA RIITE CATPISH NSTLARVA CHACIEL CATfISH NSILAWA IOCK BASS PROLAWA POSI'IAR'IA PUYPKINSEED POSTLARVA BUI GILL PICLAWA NSILARIA PPLL~QlIIH BASS POSI'LARIA CRAPPIE SPP.

PROLAWA NSILARVA TESSILLAKD DARKR PNLAWA

~A BANDID DARKR PRCLAWA NSTLAWA SHIELD DARKR PNLAWA NSILARIA HALLEYE NSl'LARVA fISH (fPACHBITS) 0,00

16. 84 2.25

0. 04 4.78 22.1

0. 43 0,04 0,00 0,00 5,48 0 17 0,04 0,00

0. 38 0,30 2.25 0.72 0,00

1. 57 7,3 0.00 0.13 0,6 103 0 ~ 83 38 0,33 0,26 1,2 0,04

0. 00

0. 01 0.0 15,09 0,00 0,77 l.96

0. 00

0. 00 12.46

0. 17 0,09 0,21 0.72 0.04 7,48 1.57 0,00

0. 00 0.00 0.64

0. 00 8.76 40 o4 0,00 0.44 2.0 0.00 0.21 1.0 0.00 0.54 2.5 0.00 0,18 0,8 0,00 0,17 0,8 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.17

0. 04 0.2 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.08 0.02 0,1 0,00 0.00 0.00 0,00

0. 04 1.74 0.00 0,01 0.0 0,00 0.44 2.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.0 0,00

0. 00

0. 04

0. 01 0.0 0.04 0.02 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.0

0. 00

0. 00 3.83 0 ~ 09 0.43 0.43 0.30

0. 04

0. 13 0,04

0. 09

0. 00

2. 55

0. 13 0.43 0,17 0,04 0.04 0,04 0.21 0.00

0. 26 1.53 1.32

0. 17 0,34

0. 00 0.00

0. 00

0. 17

0. 00 0,02

0. I 0.00 0.06 0.3 0.00 1,98 9.1 0.00 0.38 1.8 0.04 0.27 1.2 0.00 0,23 1 ~ 1 0.00 0,09 0.4 0.00 0,02 0,1

0. 00 0,04 0.2

0. 04 0.12 0.5 23.60 39.92 21.26 1.86 21.66 20 IRY 28 WY 11 JUN 16 JUL PSYCH 4 TOFAL

'0 Table 11 Comparison of a Predictive Hodel to a 316{b) Demonstration for entrainment of larval fishes at the Susguehanna Steam Electric Station in 1981.

Study Sampling period Hean River Flow Hax Intake Plow Hax 4 River Hean Ho. Fish Hean Ho. Fish Flow Withdrawn Entrained Entrained/day m /s cfs m3/s cfs m3 ft3 Predictive

)4odel Hay-Aug 1974 199.5 7,047 2.46 87 1.23 1.64 0.0465 349,531 Demonstration Hay Jul 1981 170.2 6,010 0.82 29 0.48 1.83 0 0518 129,790 projected Demonstration (2 units)

Hay-Jul 1981 170.2 6,010 2.46 87

l. 44 1.83 0.0518 389,370 Haximum design intake flow, 8,880 m (39,100 gpm), at full load with two cooling towers operational.

Evaporation losses calculated at 73 F wet bulb and 654 relative humidity.

Concrete Fouadatioa of Rtvar fatale Shuctaze Stop Log Qoc B

Pump Wet Pit Intake Channel North Intake Bay C

Pump D

Pump Wet Pit Intake Channel South Intake Bay Summa Travettag Badcet Scree+

Pig., 1 Plane view of river intake structure.

Makeup Pump D Screen Nash S trainers Traveling Screen Bar Sc a

C.4

~ eQ

~ ~ O~yb ~, O

~ %g P

Skimmer Wall 0 ~

Oe

~ 'h ~

~ ~

~ ~ 0

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~'

~ ~

J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

River Level

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

fP jI South intake Bay

~ 4 ci~

~ g

~

~ 4 ~

~ P op'r'

~

+o 7 o~

q6Pgy op'.OR

~ 'Qo Q..

n"4'....

O~D:.'iS 0 r'~ ~"o+0.~~

oo,

.~.

Fig.

2 Cross-section of river intake structure.

~

0

~

~ '

~ ~

~

~ I~

~

Q UILLBACK COMMON CARP TESSELLATED DART'ER O

20.

SPOTTAIL SHINER OTHER O

IO

~

~'

~

R I9 20 27 28 MAY 9

I I I 5 I6 JUN JUL MEAN Fig.

3 Mean density (fish/10 m ) of larval fish collected at 0900 and 2100 hours0.0243 days 0.583 hours 0.00347 weeks 7.9905e-4 months at 3

the Susquehanna SES intake (T), and 190 m upriver, near the river channel (R),

1981.

Fishes which occurred in densities of less than 0.5 fish/10 m3 during a sampling period, or which composed less than 5% of the overall mean were categorized as "other."

APPENDIX A.

Correction 1.

Section V., paragraph 2, pg.

4 Hunlock SES mean river flow withdrawn was 1% and not 0.7% as originally listed.

Also, the ratio of fish impinged is 1% for Hunlock SES to 0.6% for the Susquehanna SES or 1:0.6 and not 1:0.86.

2.

Table 1; the max.

% river flow is 1% (see above).

The estimated no. of impinged fish per day for the Susquehanna SES is 13.68 and not 19.5.

Also, the weight is 0.84 pounds per day and not 1.18.

Revised July 1982

~

~ I, ~

p, ppcnlOI X'anuary 9 p3.9'opy to:

M.L.Bohaer L.3:.Ratzell C.H.Fretz R.G.Johnson N-R.Burir~

O'.S;FieMs File m-4 33-3 A3-3 Susq.

SZS A3-3

-'"A3-3~

f.~. Lawrence A. Pawlush Regiona3. Hater Qua1ity E!~ager Bureau o Hater Q,uc1ity management M~~s Barre Regional Office 90 Ea t Union St.-2nd Floor

>jilkes Barre, PA '8703-g'..

)CQ'4'~. 'L&

Bear i'd+ ~ Pavlush Special Condition C of our recently issued ILES P~mt for the Susquehanna PS (Permit Ho. PA0047325 Ju3y 33., 1979) requires submission of a specific study propria for monitoring imirgement and entrainment effects at the plant inta" s.

~ preparing such a study propre, studies conducted at oth'tations by PpM and other utilities'were reviewed for similarities of aq atic environs design arA operation.

Programs reviewed would then be used. as a basis for a imilar study to be conducted at the Susquehanna SiS.

Those progr~s reviewed included:

1) 2)

3) 4)

Hunlock SFS for similarity of river conditions and. intake flows.

partins Creek SES - for similarity of river irrta'-

structure design.

(Emote:

However, th re is aa inta'.c cana1 prior to the intake structur ).

Brunner 3:slaacl similarity of intake structure and, f3.ows.

Three i1ile Island nuclear Station -'similarity of intake structure and. flows Comparisons of results of studies at th se fou= stations and. projected i~ingment and entrainment for the Susquehanna SES are s~arized in the attachment to this le ter (Xmirgement and Entrainment Studies for Susquehanna S" S)

Pw~~sis of data from the various stations rcvieNM indicates the e was not an adverse impact to the aquatic environs from Bpingmnt and entrainment.

projected. r te for the Susquehanna PD a-.e similar to data collected. at these four other stations.

one projection of izp~e'ent and entrair ent based on intake tructure, location, design~ operation~

and river water witMawal rates M~icates the adverse impact from the Susquehanna KS wi3~ also b negligible.

I FPK woM~ like to meet with 3)K p rsonnel to discuss this study program and, any additions or ch~es you may request, and answer any question" at your convenience.

please contact 18chael R. Burig of my stQ'f at 215-S21-4o55 for any cuestions or to arrange the meeting referred to "bove.

QG~J'ruly your s+

rq ~

q ~ u p~l sr~

~

Gene H. Goal y "-

~fgr.-~viror~enta1'~t.

Att"chment c-li=. Richard L. Constriciano tGQ:Mid

IMPINGEMENT AND ENTRAINMENT STUDIES FOR THE SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION Purpose In response to Special Condition C of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit No. PA-0047325, the Pennsylvania Power 8

. Light Co.

{PPGL). is providing a study for projection of'impingement and entrainment effects at the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (Susquehanna SES) intake.

The purpose of this study was to determine impingement and entrainment monitoring requirements for the Susquehanna SES.

Study Area The Susquehanna SES consists of two boiling water reactors, each with an electrical generating capacity of 1,050 MWe. It is located on a

-1075 acre site in Salem Township, Luzerne County, about 5 miles northeast of Berwick, Pennsylvania.

Commercial operation of Unit 1 is scheduled to begin in 1982 and Unit 2 in 1983.

Aquatic studies have been conducted on the Susquehanna River near the Susquehanna SES by Ichthyological Associates, Inc. since 1971.

The Susquehanna River will be the source of make-up water for the station cooling system.

The overall objective of these studies has been to establish an ecological baseline of existing conditions in the river and on the site prior to operation of the Susquehanna SES (Ref. 1).

Most of the aquatic studies we're conducted within 1.25 miles of the intake structure and discharge diffuser of the Susquehanna SES.

The slope of the river bed in this stretch of the Susquehanna River. is 1.6 ft/mi and the average width is about 984 ft.

Depth is relatively shallow in most areas (less than 6.6 ft.), but some pools may exceed 16.4 ft.

even during low river flow.

During periods of low flow, which normally occur in late summer and early autumn, abandoned eel walls help maintain pools, some of which are several kilometers long.

In times of high flow the river level commonly increases 9.84 ft: or

more, and its flow characteristics resemble those of an open channel.

Upriver from the site, the "Wyoming Region" of the northern anthracite coal field lies beneath or adjacent to the river.

Acid mine drainages from this Area, which enter from abandoned strip and shaft mines, degrade the water quality at the site.

River Water Intake The river intake structure, as shown on Figure 1, River Intake Structure-Velocity Profile, consists of a structural steel superstructure above the operating floor and a reinforced concrete substructure that extend into rock below the level of the river bottom.

The superstructure houses the makeup water pumps and

associated equipment including switchgear, automatic operating equipment for trash handling screens, motor control centers, screen wash strainers and a debris handling facility. (Ref. 2)

The substructure contains two water entrance chambers that house the traveling screens and two pump chambers.

The two intake openings are formed by the floor and sides of the entrance chambers.

The top of the intake openings is formed by an inverted weir that extends one foot below the minimum river water level, elevation 484.0 ft., to intercept floating oil and debris.

The front of the intake is at the river bank with flared wing walls extending down the natural slope of the bank to provide for an even and gradual water approach velocity.

(See Figure 2, River Intake Structure Wing Walls).

A cost-benefit analysis was used in determining the best intake structure type for this station.

The standard intake structure was selected for the Susquehanna SES-over the alternate infiltration system (Ranney Collector) since the altnerate could not provide the required water supply for station operation.

The standard intake has also been used without adverse environmental impacts at other PAL and utility stations.

Based on environmental impact, location on the river and economic costs the standard intake structure was considered to be the best technology available (BTA) for the Susquehanna SES by PAL.

The intake flow velocity (0.37 fps, max) is perpendicular to, and considerably less than, the mean river velocity (1.22 fps mean, July 1974 through April 1975), which tends to move submerged aquatic life and floating debris past the intake (Ref. 1, 1974,

1975, 1976).

Figure 1 shows the average horizontal velocity of the water flowing from the river to the intake pumps.

Four nominal 33.33/ capacity intake pumps that have a capacity of-13,500 gpm (30 cfs) each are installed in the intake structure.

At 100/ station load operation of both units maximum intake flow under the least favorable (1%) meteorological conditions is 39,100 gpm (87

- cfs).

The two water entrance chambers are each equipped with automatically operated trash bar screens and traveling screens.

A trash bar screen is provided behind each of the inverted weir intake openings to prevent large debris from impeding operation of the automatic traveling screen located downstream.

The trash bar screens and traveling screens are operated automatically by differential pressure sensors or by a timer for periodic cleaning.

Water spray systems wash debris from the screens into a basin for disposal whenever the trash bar screens or traveling screens operate.

The trash bar screens consist of vertical bars with a 1 in. opening between bars.

The traveling screens have 3/8 in. mesh wire openings.

(Ref. 2).

The velocity of water through both intake structure passages when three pumps are operating (39,100 gpm maximum) is as follows:

o Through the entrance openings (i.e. under inverted weir) is independent of river level: 0.37 fps.

o Through the clean bar screen openings at minimum river level 484 ft. above msl: 0.58 fps.

o Through the clean traveling screen openings at the minimum river level 484 ft. above msl: 0.64 fps.

Under the worst case anticipated (general maintenance and repair) with three pumps operating at a flow of 39,l00 gpm and with only one passage

open, the inlet velocity would be 0.75 fps (Ref. 2).

The worst case situation should occur less than once per year and be of short duration since maintenance of this type is normally scheduled during outages.

After passing through the intake structure river water goes through the stations circulating water system.

There are two hyperbolic natural draft cooling towers for cooling.heated condenser cooling water.

Cold air enters the bottom of the tower, mixes with the circulating water in the tower fill (water dispersal material),

removes heat from the water and the warm air-water vapor mixture rises to leave the tower at the top.

The towers are suitable for year-round operation.

(Ref. 2).

The maximum volume of water withdrawn by the Susquehnna SES from the Susquehanna River as indicated previously will be 39,100 gpm (87 cfs) while the annual average will be 32,365 gpm (72 cfs).

IV.

51ethods for Determinin Im in ement and Entrainment Calculations The equation used for calculating entrainment is as follows:

$f larval fish/ft (X) gj max. intake flow ft /sec(X) 60 sec/min(X) 60 min/hour (X) 24 hour/day = 8 larval fish entrained/day NOTE:

(X) = multiply An example of entrainment at Hunlock SES is as follows:

0.03 larval fish/ft (X) 145 ft /s (X) 60 s/m (X) 60 m/hr (X) 24 h/d = 375,840 larval fish entrained/day The equation used for calculating weight of impinged fish is as follows:

lbs. fish sampling time lbs. fish day

0 An example of,an impingement calculation for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station can be shown as follows:

5.4 lbs

=

lbs fish

= '.3 lb. fish impinged/day 480 hr 24 hr/day

'o facilitate comparisons of data collected from the various impingement and entrainment studies the data was normalized.

See Table 1, Impingement and Entrainment Data from Power Stations, for the appropriate parameters.

The calculation for impingement at the Susquehanna SES however, is based on a direct ratio'ith Hunlock SES impingement data.

V.

Assum tions used in Determinin Im in emeat and Entrainment Pro ection for the Sus uehanna SES Since the Susquehanna SES has a closed cycle heat dissipation

system, PPSL conservatively assumes that the mortality of all entrained

.organisms is 100%.

The critical months for development of fish eggs and larvae in 1974 were May through August.

The year 1974 was selected since three separate methods (fixed net, push net, and pump) of larval fish collection were used at the Susquehanna SES (Ref. 1, 1974).

By using these methods both drifting and swimming larvae were collected.

The most larval fish were collected with the push net technique (0.0465 larval fish/fthm), and this data was used in determining entrainment for the station.

Impingement studies betwe'en July 1974 'and April.1975 at the'nearby Hunlock Steam Electric Station, (Hunlock SES) indicated that fish were considered to be the critical organism (Ref. 3).

During this period approximately 1.0% of the mean river flow was withdrawn by Hunlock.

SES.

This is similar to the flow to be withdrawn by the Susquehanna SES of 0.6% (87 cfs).

Based on Hunlock SES impingement data a direct ratio of >.O / to 0.6/

(1:0.6) was used in projecting estimates for the Susquehanna SES.

VI.

Im in ement and Entrainment Stud Data 1.

Sus uehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 8 2 Susquehanna SES, Units 1 and 2 are two-1050

>Re boiling water reactors operated by PPGL.

The station will utilize a closed cooling system with a maximum flow of 87 cfs of Susquehanna River water with an intake velocity of 0.37 fps.

Larval fish data have been collected for over seven years in the vicinity of the Susquehanna SES intake structure (Ref. 1).

Larval fish data collected between May and July of 1974 were used for this analysis-There were 275 push net samples (0.0465 Revised July 1982

larval fish/ft~) average about five minutes each 276 fixed net samples (0.0277 larval fish/ft~), and 343 five minute pump samples (0.0177 larval fish/ft~).

Larvae of 22 species of fish were collected with a majority being suckers, minnows and carp, and perches.

The push net data of 0.0465 larval fish/ft was used in projecting that approximately 350,000 larval fish/day would be entrained.

About 1.23$ of the mean river flow willbe withdrawn by the station during the spawning season.

(See Table 1, for additional information.)

Projected'mpingement, data for the Susquehanna SES are based on the nearby data collected at the Hunlock SES between July 1974 and April 1975 (Ref. 3).

Seventy six fish were collected during an 80 hour9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months sampling period and it is estimated that approximately 23 fish were impinged per day.

Also, the estimated weight per day of these impinged fish was 1.4 lbs.

Since the Susquehanna SES withdraws about 86/ as much water from the Susquehanna River as does Hunlock SES (0.6% vs. 0.7/) the projected number of fish impinged per day was approximately 20 with a weight of about 1.2 lbs.

2.

Hunlock Steam Electric Station The Hunlock SES is a small one unit coal-fired station (46 MMe) operated by the Luzerne Electric Division of UGI., Corporation. It is located about 9.3 miles up river from the Susquehanna

SES, and utilizes a once through cooling system that draws in about 145 cfs of Susquehanna River water through two intake canals with

'elocities up to 0.75 ft/s.

Larval fish were also sampled at the Hunlock SES once per month in May through July 1974 to determine entrainment losses.

Mean densities of entrained larvae were less than 0.03 larval fish/fthm or about 375,000 larval fish/day.

This was concluded to be an acceptable loss because less than 2g of the mean river flow was drawn into the station during the sampling period..

Once each month, from July 1974 through April 1975, impingement samples were collected.

Seventy-six fish were collected in an 80 hour9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months period.

Extrapolation of results from these samples showed that 23 fish were impinged per day and approximately 1.4 lbs. of fish were impinged per day. It was concluded that-impingement losses would have a negligible affect on the sport fishery of the Susquehanna River (Ref. 3).

3.

Martins Creek Steam Electric Station Units 1 6 2 Martins Creek SES is located about 6 miles north of Easton, Pa.

on the Delaware River (Ref. 4).

Martins Creek SES Units 1 8 2 are two-150 51We coal fired units and Units 3 8 4 are two-800 HWe

oil fired units operated by PAL.

Units 1 6 2 utilize a combined maximum of 268 cfs of Delaware River Water for once through cooling with an intake velocity of 0.8 fps.

Units 3 6 4 utilize 80 cfs for cooling tower makeup and station service water.

Since Units 3 6 4 are used only for cycling, impingement and entrainment studies were monitored only on Units 1

8, 2.

The water withdrawn by Units 1 R 2 during the entrainment sampling period of April through June 1976 was 3.5'/ of the mean river flow.

The number of larval fish entrained was 0.0012/fthm.

About 28,000 larval fish were entrained at Martins Creek per day and the impact of entrainment was not considered adverse for the aquatic environs.

The impingement program was conducted from March 1976 through February 1977.

During a sampling period (26 hours3.009259e-4 days 0.00722 hours 4.298942e-5 weeks 9.893e-6 months ) it was projected that about 3 fish per day would be impinged or about 4

lbs. per day.

Impingement was not considered an adverse i'mpact'ince so few fish were impinged.

Brunner Island Steam Electric Station.

The Brunner Island SES located on the Susquehanna River about 8

miles north of York, Pa. is owned and operated by PP&I..

Unit 1 is rated at 300 MWe, Unit 2 at 350 MWe and Unit 3 iq rated at 790'We (Ref. 5).

This station has a once through cooling system with a maximum intake flow of 1,154 cfs.

The entrainment survey was conducted between April and July of 1976.

The river water withdrawn during the entrainment study was about 3.7'/ of the mean river flow.

The number of larval fish entrained per day was about 500,000 and this was not considered to be an adverse environmental impact on the Susquehanna River.

The impingement study was conducted between March 1976 and February 1977.

The data collected for this study was limited however 47 fish were impinged over a 267 hour0.00309 days 0.0742 hours 4.414683e-4 weeks 1.015935e-4 months sampling period.

The number of fish impinged per day was 43 or 7.88 lbs. per day.

It was evident that impingement losses on the traveling screens were not substantial (Ref. 5).

Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (Unit 1)

The Three Hile Island Nuclear Station (Three Mile Island NS) is located on Three Mile Island about 10 miles Southeast of Harrisburg, Pa.

and is owned and operated by Hetropolitan Edison Company (Ref. 6).

Unit 1 is 792 HWe pressurized water reactor with an intake flow of 60 cfs and a velocity 'of 0.2 fps.

This station used a closed cooling system with two natural draft

'ooling towers.

An entrainment survey of larval fish was conducted between April and August 1977.

About 0.2/ of the mean river flow was used for

station, cooling (two natural draft cooling towers).

The number of larval fish entrained was 0.075 larval fish/ft The number of larvae estimated to be entrained per day was 388,800 and was not considered an adverse. environmental impact.

The impingement studies indicated that mainly diseased or dead fish are impinged while healthy fish avoid the screens.

During the period March through December

1977, 168 fish were impinged per day (0.27 lbs./day).

This was not considered to be an adverse impact to the aquatic environs.

VII. ~Summar Impingement and entrainment surveys have been conducted at several power stations including those mentioned in this study.

In all cases with the exception of the. Martins Creek SES the projected estimate for fish impinged and entrained at the Susquehanna SES is similar to the data collected at the other stations.

At Martins Creek which is on the Delaware River the number of organisms entrained 0.0012/ft was very low and this may be due to a very small number of larval fish in the vicinity of the station or the period in which the larval fish were sampled.

Samples collected at Martins Creek were April through June while at other stations the entrained samples were collected in July and some also in August.

Table 1, lists both the appropriate impingement and entrainment data.

The intake structure design selected for the Susquehanna SES was based on environmental as well as economic costs meeting BTA requirements (Ref.

7 6 8).

The Susquehanna SES intake structure location and type were based on availability of water and topography in the vicinity surrounding the station.

The location of the intake on the river is in an area which has tended to limit the types and quantities of organisms present (Ref. 1, 1974).

I Comparisons of flow volume, available organisms, flow rates, design of the intake structure, river conditions and sampling data indicate that the Susquehanna SES intake is not unique.

The projected estimates of impingement and entrainment values for the Susquehanna SES are similar to data collected for studies at Hunlock SES, Martins Creek

SES, Brunner Island SES and Three Mile Island NS.

Based on data collected from field impingement and entrainment studies at similar electric generating stations which indicated that the impacts are not adverse,,

an impingement and entrainment" field study at the Susquehanna SES should not be required as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit.

~

VIIIReferences 2.

Ecological Studies. of the North Branch Susquehanna River in the vicinity of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Progress Reports 1972-1978, Ichthyological Associates, Inc. for the Pennsylvania Power 6 Light Co.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1

R 2, Environmental Report Operating License Stage, Pennsylvania Power 8 Light Co.,

Volume 2, Subsection 3.4, May 1978.

3.

Hunlock Steam Electric Station Ecological Study, Progress Report for the Period llay 1974 - April 1975, by Ichthyological Associates Inc.

for Luzerne Electric Division of UGI Corporation, September 1975.

4.

An Ecological Study of the Effects of the Martins Creek S.E.S.

Cooling Water Intake, for Pennsylvania Power 6 Light Co.,

Roy F. Meston, November 18, 1977.

5.

An Ecological Study of the effects of the Brunner Island SES Cooling Water Intakes, for Pennsylvania Power 8 Light Co.,

Roy F. Meston, November 18, 1977.

6.

An ecological study of the Susquehanna River in the vicinity of the Three Nile Island Nuclear Station, Annual Report for 1977, Ichthyological Associates, Inc., for Hetropolitan Edison Co., April 1978.

7.

USEPA, 1976.

Development document for best technology available for the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures for minimizing adverse environmental impact Washington, D.C.

8.

Review of Best Technology Available for Cooling Mater Intakes, NUS Corporation, for the Department of Mater and Power City of Los

Angeles, March 1978.

JSF:JI,I JSF127:3

Stottoo Sampling Pottod TABLE 1 Impingement and Entrainment Data From Power Stations Hax Hean

?lax Intake Hex g River Flow Intake Flow Velocity River Flow cfs cfs E?)s Withdrawn

)

No. Organisms No. of Fish No. of Fish lbs. of Fis Entraingd Entrained Imping)'d Impinged Pcr Day Pcr 0;)v I.

'Susquehanna Stcam Eleg~ic Station (Units 1 & 2)

I, llpnlock Steam Electric Statioa E-Hay " July 1974 I-July 1974-April 1975 8,514 14>519 E-Hay " August 1974

-7,041 I-July 1974 - April I975 14,519 87 81 145 145 0.37 0.5

0. 75 0 75 1.23 0.6 1.7 1,0 0.0465 0.03 349,531 13'8 0'4 315) 840 1.4 3.

?hrtins Creek Stcam Electric Station (Units 1 & 2)

E-April - Junc 1916 I-Harch 197G-February 1977 7,133 9,28G 268 268 0.8 0.8 3.5 2,9 0.0012 27,78G 2.8 4

4.

Brunncr Island.Stcam Electric E-April - July 1976 Station (Units 1, 2, 3)

I-?larch 1976 February 1977 31,353 31,716 1>154.

'1,154 2.2 2.2 3.7 3.6 0 005 498)528 43.4 7.88(b)

S.

Three Hile Island Nuclear Sta.

E"April - August 1977 29,148 (Unit 1)

I-Harch " December 1977 39,118 60 60 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.15 0.075 388,800 168 0.27 K~e!

E Entrainment I - Impirigcment Notes:

7 a.

Pro)ected impingement & entraiameac values based oa far field studies at Susquehanna SES

& Hunlock SES data.

b.

Weights vere aot measured aa part. of this study; therefore they vere assigned to thc 47. fish collected in a 26 hour3.009259e-4 days 0.00722 hours 4.298942e-5 weeks 9.893e-6 months period between Harch 1976-F b 1977 T

f th fish 1 ngcr than 10 cm vere given estimated veights of largest fish collected (white sucker 30 cm - 380 g).

Thc 37 fish less Chan 10 cm in 1.ength vere assigned the vcight of the most common fish impinged (14 out of 37) the lue g

(

g.

e Iuary

~

en 0 e

0 b ue ill (5 cm 2

).

The vcight of fish impinged per day may be an overestimated by a factor ot 2 high.

JSF:DES 22-J Revised July l982 I

l I

I

PUMP t XQUBl' Bey] n T.NVhl<L >lhII(.~l yE<pQ.'[TY Pho!"llZ TRAVELING SCAEEiV d

GAOUiVD LEVEL

~

TAASH BAR

~, 'l~,

MINI!i ii

~ > ~ ~

> ' 'I

~ ~

~ ~ ~

R ~

1 ~ ',

1'i AVCAAGCHOAI~.

VCLOCITY FPS'.00gr 1.35.

1.20 1.10 1.00

.90

'..80 SECTION n A AIVEAVELOCITY IPEAPENDICULAA TO INTAI'.E FLOW)

MAXIMUM AVEAAGE

.70

.GO

,55 i40

.35

.20

.10 0

&0 te V1 04 ea & rO

~A 04 ~ ~ Qa ~ ~ ~

~o ee no~

1 CHANNELOPEN MINIMUM 2 CHANNELS OPEN ~

'I'iATRR RAY "L RELEVANTVFLOCITIES SHOV'iV IN SOLID LINES ATMINIMUMY/ATEALEVEL>>39.100 GPM TOTAL FLOW

April 9, 1980 Jim Ulanowski pppe~n

~ x s'opies to:

S.J.Berger R.J.Shovlin

'G.H.Gocklcy

.lf.E.Barberich J.S.Fields S.H.Cantone R.P.Janoso R.A..Rebater J.P. Yahony R.E.Featenby TN2 N4 A3-3 N4 A3-3 N4 A3-3 Susq.

SZS Susq.

SES Susq.

SES 4

P SUSQEIQNAA SES DPINGE Q.'NT/EiVZIVLIN!.IEVT File 100450 012

Dear ?Ir. Ulanowski:

During our meeting of ?Iarch 4, 19SO at lfilkes Barre we discuss d our submittal of January 9,

1980 regarding Special Condition C of our NPOES Permit 00047325.

Our submittal included a predictive model to satisfy this condition.

During this meeting you requested that PPf<L submit a program for confirmation of predicted organism entrainment value's.

You also concurred with our conclusion that inpingcmcnt losses would be negligible and that further monitoring would not be required.

Accordingly, we are submitting a proposed verification program for entrainment values for fish larvae which we feel certain willverify our predictive model.

This pxogram as as follows:

Sampling Frequency -

~ o Fish larvae will bc sanpled at thc intake bay at which t>>o puiops are operatang'*

2 ~

Three tines pex 24 nour day (including daylight and nighttime) at approximately 8 hour9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months intervals)."*

Approximately five minutes duration per replicate.

3.

Two sample days pcr month.

II..

Sampling Lovel-o Samples will bc withdrawn at two levels l.

Near the botton of the skimmer wall.

2.

Near the botton of thc intake aperture.

%herc are two bays with t>>o full capacity pumps pcr bay.

Normal two unit sta ion operation rcquircs three of these four pU-";.ps to operate..

These tests will bc condiucted with three pumps oporating.

=

~Current plans are to conduct sampling at 0200,

1400, 2200 hrs.

Page 2 IXX. Sauolc Vo~

-o

%.~1i.heated voluc", de1ivcry pump>>wth a cKschar e.co3.3.ection

'~ adll be used which delivers approximately 500 gallons per Since thc samle m3.1 bc of about 5 a'ates

duration, each aanplc vol~ will be about ~~00 gallons.

XV.

~ Xden~caxian o.

FMx 2ax>m collected m.l3. bc identifi&to th lowest feasible

~AIL pro~ DQx3.tion o

Tais pre~ >>wll be conducted for a period of three months damn thc spa>>ning season which at the Susq.

SZS is Way, Junc and July.

Vl.

Reportin~-

lfe villsupply yuu cooics of thc draft report upon review and

- completion.

'-- Final-results

>>>11 be reported to you as an-addendum to our routin=

annual report >>lu.ch is completed prior to lhy 1st of.the year following data collection.

Copies will be sup>>lied to your office

'Ber pr"paration.

Although you suggested a sampling frequency of four hours rather than.thc eight hour frequency describ d above, we have determined that this cannot

. bc accomplished witlout significant dvcl se epact on the ln Lcc pUlilps Since Qio cooling towers will not bc.in operation d mng this sm".pling period there>>111 bc no evaporation and th inta1;e rate will exceed the blowdown rate.

As a result it will be necessary to cycle tncsc pcs on and off to permit blowdown of water accumulated in the cooling to>> r basins between sawling periods.

Those pimps are designed for continuous

-operation and,a 1iruted nu."ber of cycles arc permitted.

lac have thcxefore proposed a eight hour intcrv 1 between sapling periods.

t

" You suggest 8 also in our meeting that we should consid r s"n.iling at bottom, ~ddle and surface levels.

4'c cmmot at this tine dctcrninc a

,practical method for sax>@ling at three different levels.

l'te l.ave dctcnxincd however from our data on existing river concentrations of fish larvae that thos organis'as t nd to group at either thc bottom or surface lcvcl.

lic ccnsider thai there>>~ll bo no loss of -confidence in verification ox the program with thc dcscrib d sampling.

Since this is not normal op'rational mode as described in our NPDiS permit midwpplicaxiou we also request your approvaWfor this pumping and'rt:lease*

concept.

C

'I Pago 3 4

lfc'rust th"t tigris verification progm as describe ii&1 serve to veri y oux initial p~ rm subnittal of January 9, 19BO.

Uc request your approva1 of t3cs jro~rw ~w c!cscribci> at your earl'est convenience siz.cc ve xully

~tend to procc~~ auring lay or" 19SO

Xr",you have any questions please do not hesitate to call ne at 215-2S3.-

4785.

. Very tnQy youxs ah.chael R. Burin~

i&8 NLF vi%8]03: 6 Copies to:

Q(l

-Paul Swerve PA DER 1'iilkcs Barrc PA DL'R Nil};es Barre I

~

APPENDIX C

~, ppPe/UD IP' COMMONSEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPAR'RiIENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 2063 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania l7 I20 (7 I7) 787-96 I4

" April 29,1980

~

N

~

her hNchgel R. 9uring Pennsylvania Power and Light Company 2 North 9th Street Allentown, PA I8 I0 I

Dear Mr. Buring:

Ed Kypsky, myself, and Jim LaBuy, V.S. EPA hove reviewed your proposed impingement/entrainment study plan for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station as contained in your letter dated April 9, I 980.

0/e find the proposal to be acceptable.

Paul 5werdon, Facilities Engineer, Wilkes-Barre Office, has approved your request for the pumping and release operational mode.

cerely, y, /.

James T. Vlanoski Aquatic Biology Section Division of Water Quality

'

ML18031A384

Text

Dear ?Ir. Ulanowski:

Dear Mr. Buring:

Navigation menu

Search