ML19064B235

Section 316(b) Demonstration for PBAPS Units No. 2 & 3 on Conowingo Pond

ML19064B235
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	06/30/1977
From:	Exelon Generation Co, Philadelphia Electric Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Environmental Protection Agency
Hayes B, NRR-DMLR 415-7442
Shared Package
ML19064B212	List: ML19064B214 ML19064B215 ML19064B216 ML19064B218 ML19064B220 ML19064B221 ML19064B223 ML19064B225 ML19064B226 ML19064B227 ML19064B230 ML19064B232 ML19064B233 ML19064B235 ML19064B237 ML19067A109 NRC-2013-0232, Letter to Exelon Generation Company, LLC (P. Navin) Regarding 401 Water Quality Certification Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Extended Power Uprate, DEP File No. EA 67-024, NRC Docket No. NRC-2013-0232, York and Lancaster County
References
Download: ML19064B235 (139)

Text

PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION Materials Prepared For The Environmental Protection Agency 316 (b) Demonstration for PBAPS Units No. 2 & 3 on Conowingo Pond Prepared By PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY June 1977

PEACH BO'ITOM ATOMIC POWER S!A'IIOO MATERIALS PREPARED FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIW AGENCY 316(b) DEMCNSIRATICN FOR PBAPS Units No. 2 & 3 on Conowingo Pond PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY MAY, 1977

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 1-1

1.1 INTRODUCTION

• * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• l-5 1.2 DESCRIPrION OF STATION * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 1-9 2.0 ENTRAINMENT OF ORGANISMS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-1 2.l PHYTOPLANK'l'ON * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-1 2.1.l Methods * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-l 2.1.2 Results * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-2 2.1.3 Algal Composition. ...

• 2-3 2.2 ZOOPLANicrON * * * * * * * * , * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-8 2.2.l Introduction * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-8 2.2.2 Methods * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-8 2.2.3 Results * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-11 2.2.3.1 Species Composition * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-11 2.2.3.2 Estimates of Mortality * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-11 2.2.3.3 Impact of Zooplankton Entrainment * * * * * * * * *

• 2-12 2-21 2.3 2.3.l Introduction * * * * * * . . . . * * ** .* ** .* ** .* ** **

ENTRAINMENT OF FISH EGGS AND LARVAE * *

• 2-21 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 Methods * * * * * * * *

• Results * * * * * * * *

• Projected Losses *

• 2-21 2-24 2-25 2.3.S Impact of Entrainment * * *

• 2-28 3.0 3.1 IMPINGEMENT OP' FISHES * * * * * * *

• METHODS

....... ... 3-1 3-1 Species Com.position and Frequency of Impingement . .

3.2 RESULTS * * ** * * * * * *

• 5 * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 3-2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 Statistical Analysis * * * * *

• Projected losses * * * * * * *

• * * * * * * ... 3-2 3-5 3-7 3.2.4 Impact- *of Impingement * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 3-9 4.0 LITERATURE CITED * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 4-1 5.0 APPENDICES * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae: 1973 * * * * * *

... 5-1 5-1 Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae: 1974

• Intake Screen Velocity Survey * * * * * * *

. . . .. .. 5-4 5-16 i

LIST OF TABLES SECTION 1.0

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS Table Page l.l-l Circulating water transit time at Peach Bottom Station * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 1-11 SECTION 2.0 ENTRAINMENT OF ORGANISMS 2.l.l to Concentration of total chlorophyll ! and per-2.1-2 centage composition of common algal groups at the intake and discharge of Peach Bottom Station * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .. 2-5 2.1-3 to Results of covariance and multiple regression 2.1-4 analysis on concentration of total chlorophyll

! in Conowingo Pond * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-6 2*.2-1 to Density and estimates of percent mortality of 2.2-2 zooplankters at Peach Bottom Station, 1974-1976 2-16 2.2-3 Results of covariance analysis on zooplankton in Conowingo Pond, 1974-1976 * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-17 2.2-4 Estimates of number of zooplankton lost at Peach Bottom Station, 1974-1976 * * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-18 2.3-1 to

. 2.3-3 Densities of larval fishes at the intakes of Peach Bottom Station, 1975-1976 * * * * * * ... 2-30 at Peach Bottom Station, May-July 1975 * * * * . .

2.3-4 Estimates of percent mortality of larval fishes 2-33 2.3-5 Estimated number of larval and projected adult fish loss at Peach Bottom Station, 1975-1976 * *

• 2-36 2.3-6 Comparison of the preoperational (1969-1973) and postoperational (1974-1976) densities of larval fishes in Conowingo Pond * * * * * * * *

• 2-37 SECTION 3.0 IMPINGEMENT OF FISHES 3.2-1 to Species composition of fishes impinged at Units No.

3.2-3 2 and 3, November 1973-December 1976 ****** 3-13 ii

Table Page 3.2-4 to Range and mean lengths of the common fishes 3.2-5 impinged at Units No. 2 and 3, November 1973-December 1976 * * * * * * * * , * * * * * * * * * * .. 3-16 3.2-6 to Basic statistics for impingement of channel catfish 3.2-7 at Units No. 2 and 3, November 1973-0ctober 1976 * *

• 3-18 3.2-8 Frequency distribution of impingement of the common. fishes at Units No. 2 and 3, November 1973-December 1976 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 3-20 3.2-9 Stepwise multiple regression statistics for impingement of fishes at Units No. 2 and 3, November 1973-December 1976 * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 3-21 3.2-10 to Estimated losses of fishes at Units No. 2 and 3, 3.2-13 June 1974-December 1976 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 3-22 3.2-14 Comparison of average daily catch of the common fishes by anglers and the Peach Bottom Station .... 3-26 LIST OF FIGURES SECTION 2.0 ENTRAINMENT OF ORGANISMS Figure Page 2.1-1 Sampling locations for total chlorophyll .! at Station * * * * * * * . . ... . .. . .. .. ..

the intake and discharge of Peach Bottom 2-7 2.1-2 Limnological sampling locations in Conowingo Pond

• 2-7A 2.2-1 Sampling locations for zooplankton at the intake and discharge of Peach Bottom Station * * * * * * * *

• 2-19 2.2-2 Location of limnological stations in Conowingo Pond monitored since 1967 * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * *

• 2-20 2.3-1 Sampling locations for larval fishes at the intake and discharge of Peach Bott0111 Station * * * * * * * .. 2-38 2.3-2 to Spawning locations of fishes in Conowingo Pond * * *

• 2-39 2.3-8 iii

SECTION 3.0 IMPINGEMENT OF FISHES Figure Page 3.2-1 to Monthly impingement of three fishes at Units No.

3.2-2 2 and 3 * * * * *

• e e

• e I e *

• e * *

• e e e e *3-27 iv

1.0

SUMMARY

~ CONCLUSIONS Studies of the effects of impingement and entrainment on the aquatic biota of Conowingo Pond have been conducted since 1973. Analysis of the data indicate that no significant detrimental effects have occurred in populations of organisms in the Pond between preoperational and postoperational periods of study as the result of the operation of Peach Bottom Atomic Fower Station Units No. 2 and 3. 'lbe changes which have been observed in the Pond are due to natural causes.

The concentrations of chlorophyll .! and percent composition of the common algal groups (greens, blue-green and diatoms) at the intake and discharge of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units No. 2 and 3 (Peach Bottom) were determined in May through early November 1976 to assess the impact of entrainment on the phytoplankton community in Conowingo Pond. overall the mean chlorophyll

.! value at the intake was 1.43 mg/rr2 higher than at the discharge but this difference was not significant. Green ~lgae and/or diatoms were most abundant on all but one sampling date in intake and discharge samples. Blue-green algae were most abundant only on 1 of 13 dates. No &ignificant (P > 0.05) differences were observed in the common algal groups composition between the intake and discharge; no shift occurred from one group of algae to another in entrainment.

Visual examination of the phytoplankton cells in intake and discharge samples indicated that little or no mechanical damage occurred during passage through Peach Bottom.

The extent of physiological damage to phytoplankton cells is not known.

However, chlorophyll ! concentrations between the intake and discharge were not significantly different which indicates that physiological impact, if any, may be small.

Results of analysis of covariance on preoperational (1970-1973) and post-operational (1974-1976) chlorophyll! data show that no . significant change has o~curred between years in the Pond due to the operation of Peach Bottom.

l-1

Entrainment of zooplankton was studied at the Peach Bottom Station from 1974 through 1976. The species of zooplankton entrained were similar to those found in Conowingo Pond. Although a large variation in mortality occurred, a significant (P = 0.01) mean mortality of .3.21. at the discharge was observed. Cladocerans suffered a higher mortality than copepods.

No significant differences in mortality were detected between years.

The impact of zooplankton entrainment is minimal and non-detectable in the zooplankton population. A statistical analysis indicated no significant change in zooplankton densities between the preoperational and postoperational periods with the exception of two stations in 1975. These stations were in the lower portion of the Pond, far removed from the influence of Peach Bottom. The decrease in densities is attributed to predation by the gizzard shad.

Studies of the ent~ainment of fish eggs and larvae indicate that 20 species, including all "representative, important species", are subject to entrainment to a varying degree at Peach Bottom. Few fish eggs are entrained. Larvae of the gizzard shad, carp and quillback (rough fishes) comprised DIOst of the entrained fishes. The greatest densities of larvae were entrained from late May to early July. A 1001. mortality rate was assumed for all entrained eggs and larvae to calculate losses of adults.

Although extrapolation of entrainment losses indicated that different numbers of adult channel ~atfish, white crappie, sunfish and walleye would be lost each year as the result of the operation of Peach Bottan these losses are within the compensatory reserve of the population. The primary spawning areas are not affected by entrainment. The impact of entrainment is therefore considered to be minimal.

1-2

'.Lhe number and size of fishes impinged on .the vertical traveling screens at Peach Bottom Station were determined fr001 November 1973 through December 1976. At Unit No. 2 a total of 16,859 fish (196.87 kg or 433.11 lb) repre-senting 37 species was impinged in 240 12-hr samples. At Unit No. 3, 42,088 fish (1172.95 kg or 2580.48 lb) representing 35 species were impinged in 137 12-hr periods. 'lhe channel catfish, white crappie and bluegill were impinged most frequently at both units. Most were less than 120 mm.. Impinge*

ment was higher in November through April*. Most impingement occurred during the start-up phase of each unit. Stepwise multiple regression analysis revealed that the intake water temperature, daily river flow and Pond elevation accounted for most of the variation in the impingement of fishes. However, the variance explained by these variables was not large. 'l'h.e winter (January-March) mortality of white crappie and bluegill at the screens was equivalent to that of about five anglers ovP.r the same time period. 'lhe impingement losses of such magnitude are insignificant and may not be detectable in the fish populations in a body of water the size of Conowingo Pond. 'lhe impingement losses were predicted to be negligible and the field data have confirmed these predictions.

'lhe estimated effects of impingement and entrainment losses will be no different due to the operation of the two additional cooling towers due in service in the summer of 1977, because (1) impingement of fishes is not a function of tower operation and (2) entrairuaent losses are based on 1001.

mortality hence are not a function of the number of towers operating.

It is the conclusion of Philadelphia Electric Company that no ~rther impingement and entrainment studies are warranted. In* view of the extensive studies conducted to date, either referenced or set forth in this document, it is the view of the Philadelphia Electric Company that ample evidence exists 1-3

to support the conclusion that the intake structure at Peach Bottom reflects the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental effects.

This takes into consideration the date of design, construction and completion of the cooling water intake structures.

l-4

1.1 INTRODUCTION

'lb.is document is prepared in accordance with the "Special Conditions; Environmental Studies" of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Number Pa.

00097733 issued 31 December and revised 11 April 1977.

'l'he document includes the items discussed at the meeting of personne~ from Philadelphia Electric Company (PECO), Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources and Ichthyological Associates, Inc. (IA) at Hershey, Pennsylvania on 28 April 1976, and in a subsequent letter of 19 May 1976 from Mr. H. Ronald Preston, EPA, Wheeling Office to Mr. Walter E.

Rosengarten, Jr., Environmental Engineering Section, PECO. 'l'he following is a verbatim copy of portion of the letter addressing the Peach Bottom Station:

"On April 28, 1976, a meeting was held at the Hershey Motor Lodge in Hershey, Pennsylvania to discuss 316(b) require-ments at nine Philadelphia ~lectric Company power generating stations. Representatives from Philadelphia Electric, Ichthyological Associates, the Pennsylvania DER., and the U.S. EPA were in attendance (see the attached list for those in attendance). 'Ihe following items were discussed at the meeting:

1. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Susquehanna River:

we discussed the impingement program and frequency that had been conducted during 1973-75 for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and it appears to be satisfactory to meet the 316(b) program. The entrainment program appeared satisfactory except for three areas: (l) Data was not collected on zooplankton during the period of chlorination on units 2 & 3.

Ichthyological Associates did uot assume 1001. mortality on the entrained zooplank.ton but attempts to show the amount of survival of zooplankton passing through the condensers.

therefore, some sampling duri::ig chlorination should be conducted. (2) No phytoplankton studies involving entrainment and its impact have been initiated.

1-5

Since phytoplankton plays a niajor role in the trophic dynamics of Conowingo Pond, it is important that the cooling water impact on this community is evaluated. Such an evaluation may require a~ditional acquisition of data or the impact may be evaluated by examination of peripheral type information. If the latter course is taken, the rationale of doing so should be adequately documented. (3) Current data tabulations do not summarize entraimnent data for fish eggs and larvae for unit 3 and for certain months on unit 2. Future proposals should include this infoJ:mation.

It is suggested that the water user address these points in the proposed 316(b) monitop.ng program. and/or in the final impact evaluation of the cooling water intake."

IA, the !'ECO biological consultant, provided the field studies and analysis for the biological sections of this document. It has conducted a monitoring program o; the cooling water intake of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units No. 2 and 3 (Peach Bottom) since November 1973. 'lhe "Operating Environmental Technical Specifications and Bases of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC] for Peach Bottom Station" required samples of impinged fishes to be taken during four 12-hr perio4s a week for three months after the full operation of Unit No. 2 which began commercial operation in June 1974. Although the NRC requirements were completed in September 1974, additional impingement sampling has been conducted through December, 1976.

Entrainment sampling was conducted at least twice a month for zooplankton during the peak production period. During the spawning season, fish eggs and larvae were sampled weekly. 'lhese studies were conducted through December 1976, although NRC requirements state "studies will be terminated after the first year of Unit No. 3 operation (12 months after commercial operation begins)".

Unit No. 3 began commercial operation in December 1974.

l-6

At the Hershey meeting, EPA determined that the present impingement sampling frequency and design were satisfactory to obtain data for the 316(b) demonstration evaluation. The sampling design used by IA to determine the impact of the entrainment of fish eggs and larvae and zooplankton was also considered acceptable by the EPA. However, it was suggested that entrainment samples, particularly for zooplankton (designated "representative, important species"), be taken at the time of chlorination and data be obtained on the entrainment of the phytoplankton community. '11le standing crop of phyto-plankton. in Conowingo Pond has been monitored since 1970 by measuring the concentrations of total chlorophyll .!* Total chlorophyll ! had been designated as a "representative, important species" for Conawingo Pond. '11le entrainment of phytoplankton at Peach Bottom was monitored by sampling total chlorophyll

!. at the intake and discharge. Because chlorination is not done on a fixed schedule and is unpredictable it was not possible to obtain samples at the time of chlorination.

'lhe designated "representative, important species" of fish are the '

following: white crappie, channel catfish, bluegill, spotfin shiner, bluntnose minnow, gizzard shad (introduced in 1972), largemouth bass, smallmouth bass and walleye.

In this document the following subjects are discussed: (l) the results of impingement and entrainment studies at the Peach Bottom Station; (2) the relationships between physical factors and impingement; (3) an evaluation of the overall effects of impingement and entrainment on the resident biota, (4) consideration of the present cooling water intake structure as the best available technology for minimizing adverse environmental impact considering the dates of design, construction and completion of the cooling water intake 1-7

structure, and (5) intake screen velocity survey by Enviromnental Devices *.,

Corporation, PECO's the1:Dlal monitoring consultant (see Appendix C).

In compliance with the NPDES "Special Conditions" requirement, copies of reports submitted to the NRC in fulfillment of Sections 6.1.b "Impingement

-of Organisms" and 6.1.c "Entrainment of Planktonic Organisms" of the Environmental T.echnical Specifications for the Peach :Bottom Atomic Station Units No. 2 and 3 accompany this document. lhey include the following:

(1) Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Postoperational Reports 1 through 3 which were sent to the EPA with the 316(a) submittal in July 1975 and (2)

Postoperational. Reports 4 through 7 enclosed with this 316(b) submittal.

1-8

l.2 DESCRIPrION OF STATION Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units No. 2 and 3, operated at PECO, is located on the west shore of Conowingo Pond, a 9,000 acre impoundment on the lower Susquehanna River in southeastern Pennsylvania. Each unit is rated at 1065 megawatt (electrical). Both units have operated at varying loads up to full power.

Cooling water for Units No. 2 and 3 is provided by three 250,000 gpm (557 cfs) pumps per unit, for a total of six ptDD.ps with a capacity of l,500,000 gpm (3350 cfs). 'l'be water is drawn directly from Conowingo Pond through an intake structure approximately 500 ft in length and parallel to the Pond (Figure 1.1-1). The intake is protected from heavy debris and ice by 32 sets of vertical steel trash racks. *Behind the trash bars are 24 vertical traveling screens of 3/8 in. mesh. The total intake area was designed to be large enough to maintain a maximum velocity through the screens of less than 0.75 fps at the normal Pond level of 108.5 ft (Conowingo Datum). The set of 24 screens (12 for each unit) removes debris from the incoming cooling water before it enters two separate intake ponds which are approximately 3 acres each. A jet water spray disl~dges the debris and carries it into a sluiceway. Under normal operating conditions the screens rotate only when a specified pressure gradient is reached across the screens. However, the screens can be washed continuously when large amounts of trash accumulate and in the winter months to eliminate ice. 'lhe debris is dewatered as it paases over a vibrating screen at the end of the sluiceway and is collected in a trash bin.

!he cooling water enters the intake ponds and travels* to.the pump intake facility where it is again screened by a 3/8 in. mesh traveling screen before passing through the condensers. During the passage through the condensers 1-9

the water temperature is increased up to 21 F at full load. Approximately ~ '* .

601. of the heated water is pumped to three forced draft helper cooling towers. 'rtle remainder of the heated water passes directly into a 4700 ft discharge canal where it mixes with the water cooled by the three towers.

It is then discharged into Conowingo Pond via a discharge structure. transit times of the cooling water through the Peach Bottom Station are given in Tab~e 1.1-1.

1-10

TABLE 1.1-1 Circulating water transit time through plant cooling system. Data taken from Philadelphia Electric (1975).

Flow directly Flow through to discharge cooling tower Description canal system Retention in intake structure 24.3 min 24.3 min Circulating water piping to condenser 0.7 min o. 7 min Condenser 14 sec 14 sec Condenser to cooling tower pond 1.3 min 1.3 min First cooling tower pond 24.3 min Second cooling tower pond 16.3 min Piping from pond to cooling tower 22 sec Retention in cooling tower 64 sec Cooling tower discharge to canal 87.5 sec Transit in discharge canal 38.9 min 38.9 min Bypassing of cooling tower, time in 22.6 min discharge canal Total 88 min 109 min 1-11

2.0 ENTRAINMENT OF ORGANISMS 2.1 PHY:rOJ.lLANKTON A portion of the phytoplankton population found in Conowingo Pond is affected by entrainment from the operation of the Peach Bottom. To determine the effects of entrainment, the phytoplankton biomass and percentage composi-tion of the common algal groups (diatoms, green and blue-green) were compared between samples collected at the intake and discharge. The principal method used to indicate the standing crop of algae in Conowingo Pond has been by measurement of plant pigments, particularly chlorophyll.!* Determination of chlorophyll!. provides

• an indirect measure of algal biomass (Richards and Thompson, 1952) and bas been used by other investigators to eliminate some of the problems asso~iated with cell counts (Brooks, Smith and Jensen, 1974, Glooschenko and Moore, 1973 and Glooschenko, et al., 1974). A reduction or increase in the concentration of chloropnyll .! or a shift in the percent composition of the algal groups at the discharge of Peach Bottom would indicate an effect of entrainment on the phytoplankton cou:mnm.ity.

2.1.l Methods Chlorophyll ! concentrations were determined according to Strickland and Parsons (1972) on water samples at the intake (Station 690) and discharge (Station 692) of Peach Bottom on fourteen dates between 17 May and 2 November 1976 (Figure Z.1-1)." Percent composition of the algal groups was determined from samples collected for zooplankton entrainment studies. Phytoplankters were counted by units; 1 unit equals l cell, 1 filament or 1 colony. The units for each group were summed and percentages calculated. In addition, the overall condition of cells (i.e., broken frustules, disrupted colonies, color and 2-1

shape of chloroplasts) was observed. Samples for chlorophyll .! analysis and zooplankton were collected on the same day.

2.1.2 Results Total chlorophyll!. values ranged from 1.04 to 58.78 mg/m3 (X-a 20.75) at the intake and 1.22 to 52.48 mg/m3 (X = 19.32) at the discharge (Table 2.1-1). Values at the discharge were not consistently lower or higher than 3

those at the intake. Although the mean value at the discharge was 1.43 mg/m lower than that at the intake, the difference for the period sampled was not significant (P = 0.05). These results are similar to findings of other investigators. Fox and Moyer (1973) noted that although chlorophyll !.

concentrations in phytoplankton passing through the condenser and discharge canal of a fossil fuel-fired plant at Crystal River, Florida varied widely with time of day, no decline in chlorophyll !. was detected. Verduin (no date) noted similar results at the Waukegan Nuclear Station. Brooks, Smith and Jensen (1974) found slight changes in chlorophyll ! concentrations in the cooling water after passage through the Indian River Station, Delaware. They reported that the slight increase and decrease in concentration may have been related to sampling and analytical variance rather than any definite effect of the power plant. Elier and Delfino (1974) reported no decline iii chlorophyll !. in the discharge canal during periods of non-chlorination as opposed to periods of chlorination at the QUa.ds Cities Nuclear Station.

Beeton and Barker (1974) noted no obvious influence on concentrations of chlorophyll ! between the intake and discharge at the Oak Creek Power Plant on Lake Michigan. No significant change in chlorophyll !. occurred due to entrainment of phytoplailkton at Peach Bottom.

2-2

In order to detect the effects, if any, of the operation of Peach Bottom on chlorophyll .! in Conawingo Pond, an analysis of covariance w~s conducted in which the preoperational (1970-1973) and postoperational (1974-1976) means at ll stations (Figure 2.1-2) were compared after being adjusted for variation due to a control station. The analysis is described by IA (1977a). In addition, a regression model was described from preoperational and postoperational data for January through December to isolate the theonal

• and/or entrainment effects from those due to natural causes. Results of both analyses indicated that no significant change in chlorophyll !. concentrations occurred in the postoperational years due to the operation of Peach Bottom (Tables 2.l-3 and 2.1-4).

2.1.3 Algal Composition Algal composition, although not a part of the NRC required monitoring program for Peach Bottom, was determin~d along with chlorop~yll .! measurements.

Three common algal groups in the intake and discharge samples (taken for zooplankton studies) were gr~ens, diatoms and blue-green. overall, the percent composition revealed that green algae were dominant in both the intake (50.61.) and discharge (53.01.) samples, followed by diatoms (38.9 and 35.4%, respectively) and blue-green algae (9.5 and 11.41., repsectively)

(Table 2.1-2). Although the percent composition of each group varied between the intake and discharge, the differences were slight and not significant (P = 0.05).

Bush, et al. (1974) indicated that if light and nutrients are sufficient, a shift from one algal group to another could occur .if the temperature change is great enough and the retention time long enough. Although the temperature change (/l T) ranged from l to 20 F during the study (Table 2.1-1),

the retention time of water through Peach Bottom was short and no algal 2-3

succession was observed in the discharge canal. The common algal group in the intake sample was also the common group in the discharge sample on all dates except 3 August 1976 when diatoms were more abundant in the discharge (Table 2.1-2).

Examination of the phytoplankton cells did not reveal any evidence of visible mechanical damage (i.e., broken frustules, disrupted colonies, dis-colored chloroplasts, cell membrane separation from cell wall) from entrain-ment. The number of damaged cells appeared to be similar in both intake and discharge samples. Similar observations have been noted by other investi-gators such as Patrick (1969), Howell (1969), Verduin (no date) and Brooks, Smith and Jensen (1974). However, physiologic impail:ment of some phytoplankton may occur, but the extent (if any) is not known.

2-4

'!ABLE 2.1-1 COmparisoa of tota"l chlorophyll !! concentracion {mg/m3) and water temperature at the intake (Station 690) and discharge (Station 692) of the Peach Bottom Station, 17 May-2 November 1976.

Chloro~hill a !!B/m32 Station 690 692 Tsarat:ure. {Fl Intake Discharge 6.90 692 Ar Date 17 May lS.37 14.06 67.0 79.0 12.0 27 May 23.62 24.97 63.0 64.0 l.D 1S Jml, 24.90 25.56 76.0 91 *.5 15.S 28 Jun 10.27 9.36 77.0 90.S 13.S 6 Jul 58.78 52.48 77.0 90.S 13.S 28 Jul 32.62 27.92 78.5 87.0 8,5 3 Aug 12.45 12.66 77.0 90.0 13,0 10 I.Jig 16,41 16.08 76.0 84.0 8.0 17 Aug 32..82. 26.82 7.5.0 88.0 13.0 31 Aug 26.74 23.67 75.0 89.S 14 *.5 21 Sep 11.02 10.22 71 *.5 84 *.5 13.0 6 Oct 20.88 21.14 61.0 77.0 16.0 18 Oct 3.63 4.26 so.o 61.0 11.0

2. Nov 1.04 1.22 44.0 64.0 zo.o KAian 20.7S l9.32NS ** 69.1 81.S 12.4 Min. 1.04 1.22 44.0 61.0 1.0 Max. S8.78 SZ.48 78 * .5 91 *.5 zo.o NS

• Nonaignificant, t

• 0.28, df

• 24

'UBL! 2 .1-2 Pe-r~ent composition of th* cOlllllOn algal group* found in samplea collected at the intake (Station 690) and discharge (Statian 692) at the Peach Bottom Station, 17 May-19 October 1976.

Station Station 690{intake} Station 692(Discha!]ie}

Greens Diatoma Blue-greens Greens Di&tOlll8 Blue*greihJ Gl (bl ("1.2 Gl ~'1l m Date 17 Ma7 16. 7 83.3 o.o 18.4 81.6 o.o 27 May 1.5. 2 83.8 1.0 32.7 66.8 o.s 1.5 .1WI 8.2 31.9 . 59,9 1.5. 2 19.3 6.5.4 28 Jun lS.7 83.3 o.o 18.6 78.S 1.6 6 Jul 63.0 31.0 5.9 S4.2 21.7 24.1 28 Jul S0.1 9,8 39.4 57.0 9.0 34.0 3 Aug 47.0 47.0 3.0 43.4 S2,7 3.9 10 Aug so.a 17.9 1.3 82,0 16,5 1.s 17 Aug 81.2 12.0 3.6 74,9 18.8 6.3 31 Aug 92.6 6,9 o.s 90.7 9.3 o.o 21 Sep 92,8 s.o 1.9 91.0 s.o 4.0 6 Oct 71.S 2s.s 3.0 71.4 21.9 6.7 19 Oct %2.Z 68.1 3.9 39.9 S9.7 0.3 Mean S0.6 38.9 9,.5 53.0 Ns& 3:5.4 NSb

• ll,4 NSc Min. 8.2 s.o o.o 1.5.2 5.0 o.o Max. 92.8 83.8 59.9 91.0 81.6 65.4 NS8

• Nonsignificant, t

• 0.21, df

• 24 NSb

• Nonsignificllllt, t .. 0.30, df = 24 NSc

• Nonaignificant, t ,. 0.26, df

• 24 2-5

'?:ABLE 2.1*3 Summary of covariance analysis for total chlorophyll ~ (Los 1nX +1) from January-December for preoperational (1970-1973) and postoperational {1974-1976) periods in Conowingo Pond.

Year 1974 1975 1976 Poatop Preop Prob* Postop Pre op Prob* Postop Pre op Prob*

Station Jan.wiry-December 604 l.021 l.028 0.851 0.952 0.984 0.335 0.943 l.007 0.052 605 l.057 1.048 0.736 0.978 1.013 O.lll l.030 l.034 0.885 607 1.082 1.038 0.336 0.954 0.977 0.579 l.008 l.012 0.907 611 0.960 0.938 0.614 0.986 0.913 0.080 0.975 0.935 0.389 604-611 l.054 l.009 0.021 0.966 0.972 0.122 0.987 0.995 0.674 All values are nonsignificant at P

• 0.01

'rABLE 2.1*4 Number of total chlorophyll ! values in January-December in 1974-1976 outside (X) the 9~ percent confidence interval by station for all stations.

Year 1974 1975 1976 D X* n X* ll X*

Station January-December 604 19 3 23 1 17 0 605 20 3 23 l 17 l 607 19 4 23 l 17 l 611 20 4 22 3 17 2 604-611 78 14 91 6 68 4

• All outliers are aonsignificant at P

• 0.90 2-6

Condenser Discharge N

I

~

Intake Unit No. 2 Intake Cooling Towers Station 690 D + E (Under Discharge construction) Primary Discharge Pond FIGURE 2.1-1 Sampllug lacatlan* far lntakll (St&tlan 690) and dlacb&rse (Btatlan 692) *ample* at the Peach Bottom Station.

MUDDY RUN RECREATION LAKE MUDDY RUN PUMPED STORAGE POND FISHING CREEi<

MUDDY CREEK PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION STONEY/ALL* POINT PEACH BOTTOM BEACH STATE LINE.;..PA;.,;;*;......._......;.;;;..;;.;~

MD.

WILDCAT TUNNEL 0 I . 2 ' S GLEN COVE I I I I SCALE IN MILES FIGURE 2.1-2 Lo~ation of limnological stations in Conowingo Pond.

2.2 ENTRAINMENT OF ZOOPLANKTON 2.2.1 Introduction Studies on the entrainment of zooplankton in the cooling water system of Peach Bottom began in June 1973. The initial objectives of the study were determination of the species, numbers and life stages affected; estimation of the entrainment mortality and evaluation of the effects of entrainment on the .zooplankton population in Conowingo Pond. Collections taken in 1973 established the feasibility of sampling the intake ponds and discharge canal (Figure 2.2-1). The studies were refined in 1974 and the entrainment densities and mortalities were determined. The impact of entrain-ment on the zooplankton was evaluated from the 1974, 1975 and 1976 data.

Studies by others (see below) indicated that mortality estimates could be biased due to settlement and disintegration of injured zooplankton in the discharge canal. The possibility that avoidance of the sampling gear by zooplankters could be greater in the intakes than the discharge was cousider~d in program design. Gear was selected that would minimize avoidance in the intake.

2.2.2 Methods Densities or ~ooplankton in January through May and in October through December were too low {less than l animal/liter) to determine mortality. Mortality and species composition of zooplankton was determined only for the period june through September when samples were taken at least every tW'o weeks. Attempts were made to obtain samples at the time of chlorination but the automatic chlorinator had operational difficulties ~d.chlorination was conducted manually on an un-scheduled basis. However, for determination of impact 100% mortality has been assumed for eutraic;neut.

A total of 106 samples of kn.own volume was collected with a VaoDorn bottle in 1974 and a Schindler plexiglass plankton trap in 1975 and 1976 at 2-8

the intake and discharge structure from June through September. Samples from different depths (surface to bottom) were integrated and filtered through a No. 20 mesh plankton net to represent zooplankton density . in the entire water column.

Samples were placed in one pint jars; Carmine Red and Neutral Red dyes were added until dye concentrations were 1% and 5%, respectively. The samples were maintained at ambient temperature in styrofoam. containers for one hour or longer to allow stain to concentrate in the live organisms before sorting.

Cladocerans and copepods ingested the Carmine Red and concentrated it in their digestive tract while the Neutral Red stained the tissue of live organisms deep red. Dead organisms remained clear or turned a pale pink. Motility also indicated if an organism was alive at the time of collection. Organisms were sorted in the laboratory within two hours after collection. A portion of the satnple was placed in a four chambered petri dish and the dead organisms removed by micropipette to a separate vial. This process was repeated until the entire sample was sorted. After sorting, the live and dead organisms were preserved in 40-501. isopropanol in separate vials for later identification and enumeration.

The vial of live organisms was conce!ltrated to a known volume from. which successive 1-ml subsamples were placed on a Sedgewick-R&fter counting cell until 200-400 organisms were identified and counted. The total number of live organisms was calculated from the number per volume in th& subsa1I1ple. All dead zooplankters we~e identified and co\Ulted.

In June 1976 a breach was made in the berm separating the primary discharge pond from Conowingo Pond. Most of the heated effluent entered directly into the Pond while the remainder went through the cooling towers and the discharge 2-9

canal. The bre~ch did not prevent estimation of zooplankton mortality.

The current in the canal was sufficient to prevent the build-up of a large resident population of zooplankton. Thus, the mortality estimate for June 1976 should l7e comparable to other mortality estimates.

Some investigators have reported that densities in discharges from power plants were lower than at intakes and attributed this to the settling of zooplankton in the discharge. Carpenter, et al. (1974) reported that zooplankton in the discharge of the Millstone Point Nuclear Power Station, Northeastern Long Island Sound exhibited a settling rate of 2-1/2 times that of zooplankton in the receiving water. Lauer, et al. (1974) concluded that organisms settled out in the discharge canal at the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant on the Hudson River. However, Davies and Jensen (1974) reported no significant densities at the Marshall Steam Station, Lake Norman, North carolina and Chesterfield Station, James River, Virginia. The discharge samples at the latter two stations were ~ollected within or i.mnediately below the discharge conduit from the condenser. This indicates that disintegration of zooplankton in the condenser may not be significant in estimating mortality. However, settling is considered important in calculating mortality.

In the present study mortalities for all taxa, except nauplii, were calculated from the densities of live and dead animals at the intake and discharge.

Densities were adjusted for settling or disintegration of dead animals in the discharge by adding the difference in densities between the intake and the discharge (when this difference was positive) to the densities of the dead animals at the discharge. Thus, the estimate of percentage mortality is maximized.

Since nauplii are too small to be accurately sorted into live and dead categories, 2-10

mortality was calculated by expressing the difference in density between the intake and discharge as a percentage of the density at the intake.

This estimated mortality is due to disintegration and settling.

The percentage dead in the discharge was calculated as the ratio of the density of total dead to the adjusted total density of animals in the discharge. Percentage dead at the intake was subtracted from the percentage dead in the discharge to obtain the percentage mortality due to entrainment.

2.2.3 Results 2.2.3.l Species Composition over 100,000 zooplankters were collected on 37 dates from June through September in 1974, 1975 and 1976. The common taxa and life history stages collected were: Diaphauosoma. leuchtenbergianum, Daphnia spp., Bosmina lougirostris, nauplii, cyclopoid copepodids and eyclops vernalis. Others were: Leptodora kindtii, ~ spp., Ceriodaphnia lacustris, Eubosmina coregoni, Ilyocryptus spinifer, Pleuroxus sp., Leydigia cilliata, ~* leydigia, Alonella sp., Chydorus sp., Camptocercus rectirostris, Tropocyclops prasinus, Diaptomus sp., calanaid copepodids and Harpacticoida. No evidence of selective mortality of species was observed. Common taxa in the Pond were most frequently entrained.

Total zooplanktou density during the study, exclusive of nauplii, ranged fr~

1.68 (15 July 1976) to 371.34 per liter (26 September 1974) at the intakes and 1.35 (3 July 1974) to 94.85 per liter (20 August 1974) at the discharge (Mc:Manus, 1975 and 1977). Total zoopla?lkton density at the intakes was l~est in 1976 (Table 2.2-1).

2.2.3.2 Estimates of Mortality Estimates of mor~ality on each date showed a large variation (McManus, 1975, 1976 and IA, l977b) for the common taxa and all other taxa combined (indicated 2-11

herein as "others"). They ranged from -100'7.. for "others" on 16 September 1975 to 100'7.. for Bosmina longirostris on 5 September 1975 and 15 July 1976 for eyclops vernalis on 18 September 1975. Mean annual estimates ranged from

-6% for "others" to 50% for Bosmina longirostris (Table 2.2-2).

Generally, cladocerans suffered greater mortality than copepods (Table 2.2-2). Combined mean mortality of total zooplankton from 1974 to 1976, exclusive of nauplii, was 327.. A paired t*test indicated that zooplankters entrained suffered a significant mortality (P < 0.01) in each year. Analysis of variance was run on percent mortality data transformed by the arc sine.

No significant differences (P > 0.05) occurred in the percent mortalities of total zooplankton between the three years (F

• 2.39, df = 2?33).

2.2.3.J. Impact of Zooplankton Entrainment Entrainment of zooplankton at Peach Bottom may have some impact on the zooplankton community of Conowingo Pond. However, the impact was not detectable in the Pond by statistical techniques. Any loss in zooplankton population' in the Pond would be greatest in the discharge canal and the im:nediate vicinity of

~he plume. Enhancement of zooplankton production by th~ heated effluent, particularly in periods of low (see below), can compensate for losses due to entrainment. Recruitment of zooplankters from upriver sources occurs quickly in the thexmal plume.

A zooplankton monitoring program designed to detect changes in the zoo-plankton population has been conducted since 1967. Zooplankton samples were taken at 11 selected locations throughout the Pond, including the thermal plume (Figure 2.2-2). Data obtained at these stations at about two week intervals were used to make comparisons between the preoperational (1967-1973) and postoperational 2-12

(1974-1976) pericds. The density of zooplankton at a control station was used as a covariate in analysis of covariance. The aim of the analysis was to isolate the natural variations from those caused by Peach Bottom. The results of the analysis of covariance indicated no significant (P > 0.01) changes in the Pond between the preoperational and postoperational periods except in 1975 (Table 2.2-3). The observed densities at most stations in 1975 were not significantly different than in the preoperational period. The exceptions were Stations 610 and 611 in the lower portion of the Pond, an area far removed from the influence of Peach Bottom. The probable reason for signi-ficant differences at these two stations may be attributed to predation by a strong year class of gizzard shad. The highest density of gizzard shad larvae was observed near these stations. Gizzard shad larvae are known to feed extensiv:ely on zooplankton. Thus, it is concluded that operation of the Peach Bottom has had no detectable effect on the zooplankton population of the Pond.

Consequently, the zooplankton losses estimated as a result of entrainment, at most, represent a minimal impact on the Pond.

The total number of organisms e~trained was calculated from multiplication of the volume of water which entered Peach Bottom and the average density at the intake (Table 2.2-3). It was assumed that (1) all six circulating water pumps were operating at all times with a cspacity of 250,000 gpm each and (2) the efficiency of the Clarke-Bumpus plankton sampler used to col!ect zooplankton at Station 602 and 612 was 601. compared to the Schindler plexiglass trap (Schindler, 1969). The density of zooplankton at Stations 602 or 612, located closest to the intake structure, was used

• to estimate the density of zooplankton entrained in May because n~ data on zooplankton were available from the entrain-ment study. Stations 602 and 612 are above and directly offshore from the 2-13

Peach Bottom intakes, respectively. A Clarke-Bumpus plankton sampler fitted with a No. 20 mesh net was used to collect the sample in a manner similar to that reported by Earle (1974).

The loss of zooplankton differed between the three postoperational years (Table 2.2-4). The greatest loss of zooplankton (l.4 x 1014 organisms) occurred in 1974 and the least wa.s in 1976 (l.l x 10 13 organisms). The relatively high estimated loss in 1974 resulted from a patchy distribution of ~* longirostris in September 1974 and of nauplii in August. Both organisms were not abundant either in the samples taken for the NRC monitoring program, particularly at Station 602, or at the discharge. However, inclusion of these data increased the estimates substantially. Consequently, the actual loss was probably much less than that indicated. As mentioned above, these losses were not detectable in the zooplankton community in the Pond.

Even though one may assume that the entrained zooplankton are lost to the ........,,

food chain, in reality they are available as food for detrital feeders.

Consequently, the energy tied up in the live zooplankton is retained in the ecosystem after mortality occurs. This is one of the mechanisms that will compensate, in part, for losses due to Peach Bottom operation.

Increased water temperature enhances the reproductive rate of zooplankton and decreases the time (tul:llover rate) between succeeding generations of zooplankton (Pratt, 1943; Hall, 1964; McLaren, 1966; Hutchinson, 1967; Heinle, 1969; Carlson, 1974). Thus; the addition of heated water to Conowingo Pond should stimulate production of zooplankton. This effect has been noted at power plants on Lake Michigan and Lake Malaren, Sweden (McNaught, et al., no date; Lanner and Pejler, 1973).

2-14

A potential exists for an increase in the zooplankton population in the Pond (Philadelphia Electric Company, 1975). This prediction is made lli.th the knowledge that in the Pond production of zooplankton population generally increases at water temperature greater than 60 F and when river flow is low (< 13,000 cfs). This has been observed both in the preoperational and postoperationa~ periods. At the time (November through May) when low temperature occurs, the river flow is generally high; the zoopltnkton popu-lation is low. In Conowingo Pond high zooplankton production_ has been observed with a flushing rate of seven days or more when water temperature is suitable for population development. The flow through the Pond must be below 25, 000 cfs before the exchange rate will exceed 7 days. Thus, when the release of the heated effluent will raise the ambient water temperature above 60 F and river flow is low, IA predicts an increase in zooplankton production.

2-15

TABLE 2.2-1 The density of zooplankton (number per liter) at the intake and ~~&charge of Peach Bottom Station, June-Septeu1ber 1974, 1975 and 1976, Tax& 1974 1975 1976 Mean Cladocerans Intake Diaphanosoma leuchtenbegiaii.um 9.18 16.23 2.12 9.18 Daphnia sp. 14.24 0.37 0.74 5.12 Bosmina longirostris 28.31 l.15 1.05 10.17 Copepods Nalplii 60.25 16.75 7.78 28.26 Cyclopoid copepodids 14.53 4.86 3.57 7.65 eyclops vernalis 6.10 0.55 o.66 2.44 Others 8.16 0.83 0.56 3.18 TotAl Zooplanktou* 80.51 23.87 8.66 37.68 Cladocerans Dischage Diaphanosoma leuchtenbergianum 9.10 9.62 1.64 6.79 Dapbnia sp. 10.61 0.32 1.16 4.03 Bosmina longi1:'0stris 2.64 0,69 0.81 1.38 Copepods Nauplii 33.35 16.19 9,00 19.51 Cyclopoid copepodids 10.47 4.94 3.70 6,37 .. ...,

Qyclops vernalis 4.49 0.89 o. 75 2.04 Others 4.3S 0,99 O.S7 1.97 Total Zooplankton* . 41.66 17.46 8.63 22.50 Exclusive of nauplii TABLE 2.2-2 Estimated percent mortality of zoopla.nkton entrained at the Peach Bottom Station, June-September 1974, 1975 and 1976.

Unweighted Year 1974 1975 1976 Mean (4) (7,) ex> (l>

Tm Diaphanosoma leuchtenber~ianum 33.87 33.03 19.66 28.85 Daphnia sp. 39.20 23.63 28.86 30.56 Bosmina lon~irostris 46,18 48.39 39.64 48.07 Cyclopoid copepodids 23.S9 17.85 16.82 19.42 pyclops vernalis 35.68 18.45 12.17 22.10 Others 43.31 5.96 30.55 22.63 Nauplii 47.89 12.34 17.60 25.94 Total Zooplankton* 44.08**'1 28.66**b 23,04**c 31.93

• Exclusive of nauplii

• • Significant st P a 0.01 a t

• 4.38, df = 14 b t

• 6.09, df = 10 c t

• 4.48. df .. 10 2-16

TABLE 2.2-3 Comparison of the preoperational (1967-1973) and postoperational (1974-1976) adjusted means of zooplankton densities in Ci:mowingo Pond, January-December.

1974 1975 1976 Station Postop Preop p Postop Preop p Po stop Pre op p 602 .835 .897 .387 .831 .861 .654 .774 .724 .532 603 1.068 .891 .005* .973 .854 .059 .883 .749 .041

.....I 604 1.148 1,013 .049 .980 .979 .991 ,994 .925 .401 605 .981 1.000 .786 .966 .962 .959 .906 .869 .618 606 .986 .954 .568 .995 .912 .191 .928 .844 .233 607 1.291. 1.158 .110 1.062 1.118 .506 1.063 1.026 .630 608 .949 .977 .684 .907 .929 .736 .939 .842 .168 609 1.061 1.037

• 771 .906 .998 .225 1.021 .992 .732 610 1.276 1.246 .682 .929 1.226 .0001* 1.069 1.215 .081 611 1.370 1.267 .186 .971 1.268 .0003* 1.342 1.217 .124 602-611 1.088 1.035 .015 .940 1.001 .0072* .990 .938 .029 Significant at P < 0.01

I TABLE 2.2-4 i

Estimated zooplankton losses due to entrainment at Peach Bottom Station, May-September 1974-1976.

I Year 1974 1975 1976 i

Amt. of 'water used per day in the cooling system (liters) 8.176xlo9 8.176xl0 9 8.176xl0 9 I

Amt. of. water used (liters) from Mayl-August lS (107 days) l.2s1x10 12 8.748xl0 11 a. 748xlo 11 l.385xl0 14 2.2a0x1013 13 Total no. of animals entrained l.089xl0 I

co

) .

' J

Condenser Discharge

,....I Intake Unit No. 2 Intake Cooling* Towers Station 690 D + E (Under Discharge c onstructron) Primary Discharge Pond FIGURE 2.2-1 Siuspltng location* for tutalr.a (Statlou 690) and dilcbaqe (Statlou 692) a&mplee at the Peach BottOll Stetiou.

MUDDY

• RUN RECREATION LAKE MUDDY RUN PUMPED STORAGE POND FISHING CREEK MUDDY CREEK

. PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER ca STATION *'

607

""605 .

STONEWALL POINT

• PEACH BOTTOM BEACH WIL~IAMS TUNNEL STATE LINE..;.P.,,.A.;..

MD.

WILDCAT TUNNEL 0 z SCALE IN MILES FIGURE 2.2-2 Location of limnological stations in Conowingo Pond monitored since 1967.

. 2-20

2.3 ENTRAINMENT Q£:, FISH LARVAE AND EGGS 2.3.l Introduction Studies on the entrainment of fish eggs and larvae in the cooling water system of Peach Bottom began in May 1973. The initial objectives of the study were: (1) determination of the species, numbers and life stages affected; (2) estimation of the entrainment mortality and (3) evaluation of the effects of entraimnent on the adult fish populations in the Pond. Collections in 1973 were taken to estab~ish the feasibility of sampling in the intake ponds and discharge canal (Anjard, 1974). '!he studies were expanded in 1974 and the deteanination of entrainment mortalities was emphasized. These mortality estimates may be biased due to differential avoidance of the sampling gear by the larvae. The ability of larvae to avoid sampling gear was apparently reduced after passage through the cooling system, thus increasing sampling efficiency in the discharge relative to the intake. Since unbiased estimates of entrainment mortality depend on the uniform efficiency of the sampling gear, further attempts to refine estimates of entrainment.mortality were considered futile. Consequently, in 1975 and 1976 estimates of entrainment mortality were obtained without the determination of collection mortality.

Although the densities and entrainment mortalities determined from the 1973 and 1974 data may be biased, they are included herein as Appendices A and B. 'lhe impact of en.t rainment, however, is evaluated from the data collected in 1975 and 1976.

2.3.2 Methods Weekly samples were taken at three locations (Figure 2.3-1) within the cooling water system from May through July (spawning season). Intake samples were taken by towing a 1.0 m plankton net in the Units No. 2 and 3 intake 2-21

ponds. Samples were also taken in the discharge canal, approximately 400 m downstream from cooling tower C with 0.5 m or 1.0 m plankton nets suspended from anchored buoys. All nets had a mesh size of 0.4 x 0.7 mm. In 1975, the Unit.No. 3 intake was sampled only when Unit No. 2 was not operating.

In 1976, both intakes were sampled whenever possible (see below). '!Wo surface and two bottom collections were taken at each location in the daytime and at night.

A General Oceanics Model 2030 flow meter mounted in the mouth of* each net was used to determine the volume of water filtered in each sample. In 37.

of the collections the meter became clogged with debris and the exact volume could not be determined. In these cases, the sample was assigned the average volume per collection for the entire season. Densities were expressed as the number of larvae per 1000 m3.

'l'he nets were set or towed for 10 minutes, retrieved and the samples processed. Intake samples were immediately preserved in 10% formalin and the larvae sorted at a later date. Fish eggs or larvae collected in the intake ponds were considered to be entrained. Discharge samples were emptied into individual, aerated styrofoam containers and live and dead larvae were separated on site. Specimens that showed movement when placed in 101. formalin were considered alive. The time from collection ~o sorting of live and dead larvae was usually less than one-half hour but never more than one hour.

Specimens were initially preserved in 107. formalin ~d later transferred to 40% isopropanol, counted and measured. Eggs and larvae were identified to species where possible. Larvae of bluegill and pumpkinseed could not be separated, thus data for these larvae were combined and categorized as sunfishes. Because of the low numbers of eggs and larvae in individual 2-22

samples, the data from all collections on a given date and location were pooled for analysis.

Temporary shutdowns or construction activities at Peach Bottom occasionally precluded sampling. Intake samples were not taken for a given unit if the circulating water pumps for that unit were not operating. Discharge samples were not taken if fewer than three pumps (of a total of six) were operating.

In addition, discharge smples were not taken in .June 1976 when most of the cooling water bypassing the discharge canal and was discharged directly into Conowingo Pond through a break in the berm of the primary discharge pond.

'!he distribution and abundance of fish larvae in the Pond were determined from data collected in 1969 through 1976 ichthyoplankton monitoting programs.

These data are used herein to identify spawning patte~-ns and locations in the Pond, and to evaluate the impact of entrainment.

Since the results of the 1973 and 1974 programs indicated that attempts to determine collection mortality would be futile, only estimates of the minimum and maximum entrainment mortality were calculated for the 1975 and 1976 data.

The minimum estimate of mortality was defined as the percentage loss due to settling and disintegration of larvae between the intake and discharge.

'n&e maximum estimate of mortality combined settling and disintegration losses together with the oortalities observed in the discharge collections.

Minimum mortality = Density at the intake - Density at the discharge Density at the intake Maximum mortality .. Density of dead larvae at discharge + Density at the intake - Density at the discharge Density at the intake 2-23

2 .3 .3 Results Few eggs are taken in ichthyoplankton tows because most fishes in ~he Pond are nest builders or demersal spawners with adhesive eggs. A total of seven eggs was collected in entrainment samples over the two year period.

Thus, entrainment of fish eggs is not considered a potential problem at Peach Bottom.

Larvae of 20 species were entrained in the cooling system in 1975 and 1976. The most common were larvae of the gizzard shad, carp, quillback, channel catfish and tessellated darter (Table 2.3-1). 'l'he gizzard shad, carp and quillback (rough fishes) made up over 801. of the entrained larvae while larvae of sunfishes (bluegill and pumpkinseed}, smallmouth bass, white crappie and walleye (pan and game fishes) comprised 27.. 'l'he mean density of larvae in the 1975 and 1976 spawning seasons was l31.6 per io3m3 of which 57.97 per 103m3 * (441.) were gizzard shad.

Differences in the entrainment at Units.No. 2 and 3 were evaluated using the densities of fish collected at the intakes on dates when both units were sampled in 1976 (Table 2.3-2). Unit N~. 2 was shutdown for much of the sampling season, and data from four sampling dates were available for comparisons.

The densities of larvae at each unit were similar, and Spearman rank correlations indicated that the species ~ankings at the two intakes were the same (N "" 11, r8 ~ .793, PS .01). Since the samples from t~e two intakes apparently represented samples drawn from the same population, the data from both intakes were combined and mean intake densities calculated.

Entrainment varied over the three month sampling season. nt.e highest densities of the comnonly entrained fish larvae occurred between the last week in May and the first week in July (Table 2.3-3). From May through early 2-24

June larvae of the carp and quill back were abundant, while from mid-June until mid-July the gizzard shad and channel catfish predominated. 'l'he larvae of sunfishes were usually entrained in June and July; the shield darter and tessellated darter in June.

Estimates of entrainment mortality were determined for seven species

(!able 2.3-4). Since cooling tower .construction (break in the berm) prevented sampling at the discharge in June of 1976, only the 1975 results were used for mortality estimates. In general, smaller, more fragile larvae experienced.

higher mortalities than did larger, more robust larvae. Gizzard shad larvae (mean length 4 mm) experienced the greatest mortality (98-1001.) and channel catfish (mean length 17 mm) the least (75-79%). '!he entrainment mortality for all species combined was between 85 an~ 931.. Since these estimates did not include consideration of delayed mortalities resulting from the:cmal or mechanical shock, 1001. mortality was assumed for all species in assessment of impact. This is in accordance With studies cited by Marcy (1975) where, in all but one case, the mortality of entrained larvae was placed between 90 and 100'7..

Mechanical damage rath~r than heat shock appeared to be the common cause of entrainment mortality at Peach Bottom. '!he reductions in numbers of larvae between the intake and discharge accounted for about 90'7. of the estimated mortality. 'l'hese reductions were believed to have resulted from the mechanical destruction (disintegration) of larvae in the pumps, condensers or cooling towers, since sufficient turbulence is present throughout the cooling system to permit suspension of dead (although intact) larvae.

2.3.4 Projected ~ossea Estimates of the numbers of fish larvae lost each year through entraimnent (assuming 1007.mortality) were calculated from the mean intake densities over 2-25

the sampling season (Table 2.3-5) and a maximum water intake of 3350 cfs (1,500,000 gal/min). Entrainment losses were estimated for a 100 day period, which approximates the period fish larvae would be vulnerable to entrainment.

'lhese estimates were used to calculate the average number of adults lost per year (Table 2.3-5).

The most conservative (although unrealistic) estimates of the impact of entraiument on the populations of adult fishes would assume that the losses of adults were directly equal to the losses of larvae. A more reasonable estimate, however, would take into account that only a fraction of the numbers of larvae entrained would have survived to adulthood under natural conditions. Thi~ larval to adult survival rate can vary by several orders of magnitude depending on the fecundity and spawning habits of the species of concern as well as the geographic locality and year. Data on survival rates are not available for Conowingo Pond but are available from other studies ,--. . . . .

for some species. Survival rates have been ~eported as low as 0.0051. for the gizzard shad from egg to age II+ (Bodola, 1966) or as high as 2% for carp sucker from larvae to age III+ (Jester, 1972). Some environmental impact studies have based survival rates on fecundity estimates (Houston Lighting and Power Co., 1974) while others have assigned a "realistic" survival rate of 0.11. (Potomac Electric Power Co., 1973). Herein, a survival rate of 0.011. was assumed for larvae of species with high relative fecundities (gizzard shad, carp and quillback), while 0.1% survival was assumed for the larvae of the remaining species with low relative fecundities (Table 2.3-5).

Given the above assumptions, the estimated annual losses of adult pan and sport fishes would be as follows: 3,450 channel catfish, 1,130 sunfish (mostly blue-gill), 490 walleye and 380 white crappie (Table 2.3-5).

2-26

These lossus of adults, however, should be placed in some perspective by comparison with other known sources of mortality. For example, the estimated losses of adults resulting from the entrainment of larvae might be compared to losses which result from angler exploitation. In the present study angler exploitation data were only available for the white crappie. Generally, the white crappie supports the fishery in Conowingo Pond (Whitney, 1961) and is taken primarily in the winter months. 'lbe angler exploitation rate for white crappie during the winter of .1973 was estimated at 91. (Euston, et al., 1974). The bluegill was also caught in the winter fishery but ob-servations indicate that its exploitation was lower than that of the white crappie. Although the exploitation rate may vary greatly between years due to several factors including fluctuations in year class strength, 9% is the best available estimate of present angler exploitation. Data from Euston (1976) indicated that anglers took approximately 28,000 *bluegill and 25,000 white crappie from Conowingo Pond in the winter of 1975. The loss of 380 adult white crappie and 1,130 sunfishes (mostly bluegill) due to entrainment of larvae would represent an additional exploitation of less than 17.. The total exploitation rate (angler plus entraioment) would then approach 107.. Although exploitation rates are not available for the channel catfish and game fishes, McFadden (1975) indicated that exploitation rates of 25% and higher are common for freshwater fishes such as the channel catfish, bluegill, sma.llmouth bass and walleye. 'lhe fish populations in Conowingo Pond should therefore be able to compensate far the increased exploitation repre-sented by Peach Bottom. without significant reductions.

In addition to the losses of pan and game fishes, the yearly losses of rough fishes would approach 4,770 gizzard shad, 2,010 carp and 2,240 quillback 2-27

(Table 2.3-5). These species are present in large numbers throughout Conowingo Pond and, in their larval and juvenile stages, are used to some degree as forage by predatory fishes. However, the large adult populations and high fec\Uldity of these species (together with the dramatic increases in the gizzard shad populations in recent years) indicate that the expected losses should be well within the compensatory reserve of the populations.

2.3.5 Impact of Entrainment To detect the possible impact of entrainment on the Pond, comparisons were made between the preoperational (1969-1973) and postoperational (1974-1976) densities of fish larvae. The mean preopera't ional densities of larvae were calculated and compared to the postoperational densities. Consistent decreases from the preoperational mean were noted for the white crappie and sunfishes (bluegill and pumpkinseed) indicating decreased larval densities in the postoperational period (Table 2.3-6); Since the introduction of the gizzard shad and Tropical Storm Agnes occurred late in the preoperational period (1972) and may have influenced these reductions, the period prior to 1972 was compared to 1973 and the postoperational years (Table 2.3-6). 'lbe initial reductions in the populations of white crappie and other sunfishes occurred in 1973; the year following Tropical Storm Agnes but prior to initial start-up of Peach Bottom. No further declines were noted in subsequent years, despite the operation of Peach Bottom.

The location of cooling water intakes in relation to the known spawning areas is an important consideration in determining the impact of entrainment.

Spawning locations (Figures 2.3-2 to 2.3-8) were determined from the catches of newly hatched larvae at stations throughout the Pond. The presence of

~ ..

2-28

these larvae in a given area was considered evidence of spawning. The catch per tow of newly hatched larvae was then expressed as a density index:

Catch per effort at a station or area Average catch per effort at all other stations or areas An index of less than one indicated areas of less than average importance while an index greater than one indicated areas of greater than average importance (Robbins and Mathur, l976b).

All the "representative, important species." spawn to some degree in the vicinity of the intake (Figures 2.3-2 to 2.3-8). However, each uses other areas in the Pond as principal spawning sites. lhe creeks and coves in the southern section of the Pond are used extensively by the gizzard shad, sun-fishes (bluegill and pumpkinseed) and white crappie and walleye while the small.mouth bass and spotfin shiner concentrate in the northern sections or along the eastern shor~. '!he channel catfish spawns primarily along the eastern shore, DOrth of Peach Bottom and south of the discharge along the western shore.

In each case larvae in the primary spawning areas are not subject to entrain-ment. In at least one species (smallmouth bass) construction of Peach Bottom may have increased the area available for spawning. 'lhe rip-rap used to surface the sides of the berm provided a spawning habitat for this species.

This appears to be one of the *few areas in the central or southern sections of the Pond where the smallmouth bass spawns (Figure 2.3-5) although the densities of larvae are low and few are entrained.

2-29

TABLE 2.3-1 Mean densities of larval fishes ~ 25 mm) per l03m3 at the intakes of Peach Bottom Station, May-July, 1975-1976.

Year 1975 1976 Mean Volume Sampled (10 3 ml) 14.9 16.7 .15.8 Species Gizzard shad 34.78 78.57 57.97 Unidentified Minnows 3.30 0.60 . 1.87 Carp 6.93 35.31 21.95 Golden shiner o.oo 0.06 0.03 Comely shiner 0.07 0.06 0.06 Spottail shiner 0.07 0.06 0.06 Spotfin shiner 0.07 0.12 0.10 Creek chub o.oo 0.06 0.03 Unidentified Suckers 0.13 o.oo 0.06 QUillback 27.58 25. 73 26.61 White sucker 0.21 0.66 0.48 Yellow bullhead o.oo 0.12 0.06 Channel catfish 4.71 4.13 4.40 Rock bass 0.13 o.oo 0.06 -~""'

Redbreast sunfish 0.07 o.oo 0.03 Small.mouth bass 0.40 o.oo 0.19 White crappie 0.34 0.60 0.48 Sunfishes 1.48 1.44 1.46 Tessellated darter S.79 8.68 7.32 Log perch 0.07 o.oo 0.03 Shield darter 5.25 1.62 3.33 Walleye 0.74 0.30 0.57 Unidentifiable 0.54 8.14 4.56 Total 92.70 166.24 131.64 2-30

TABLE 2.3-2 Densities of larval fishes (~ 25 mm) per 103m3 at the Peach Bottom Station Units No. 2 and 3 intakes on 28 June, 6, 19 and 26 July 1976.

Unit No. 2 Unit No. 3 Volume Sampled (103m3) 6.0 6.0 Species Gizzard shad 2.83 3.19 Unidentified Minnows 0.50 0.50 Carp 2.49 1.34 Comely shiner 0.17 0.34 Spottail shiner o.oo 0.17 Spotfin shiner 0.17 0.17 QUillback o.oo 0.50 Yellow bullhead o.oo 0.34 Channel catfish 9.48 6.54 White crappie o.oo 0.17 Sunfishes 0.83 0.67 Shield darter 0.33 0.34

. Total '16.80 13.93 2-31

TABLE 2.3-3 Mean densities of common larval fishes (~ 25 lllll) per l0 3m3 at the intake of the Peach Bottom Station from May through July, 1975-1976.

!Ion th 11az Juno iutz

\"eek Samph4 ht 2nd 31'4 ith lat 2nd 31'4 4t.h 3th ht 2nd 5rd 4th Spech*

Cbcar* ahad 1975 o.oo o.oo 1.11 62,6S o.oo 1.60 lZ0.)6 41.41 Ul.71 14.26 7.51 o.oo 1976 11.11 u.10 13.07 n.n U.67 501.U 298.91 1.84 0.68 4.15 1.lO 1,60 Carp 1975 o.oo o.oo JZ.00 14.86 7.94 1.60 4.09 14.05 o.oo 5,17 l.00 o.oo 1'76 l.51 o.oo 4'8.40 4.54 0.11 zo.n 4.17 z.u 5.78 5.,4 o.oo o.oo C)llllback 1975 o.oo o.oo 16,90 22.68 237.63 16,02 4.09 4.44 1.'6 o.oo o.oo o.oo 1976 U.44 4.91 219.61 82.56 26.37 7.90 0.70 0.3' o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo N

I dwm*l catfhb l.o> o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo 0.00 1.64 Z7.l6 20.21 2.51 o. u 0.75 N U7' U76 o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo ll.43 LZ.5' U.24 4.SJ 1.92 Sunflaha1 1975 o.oo o.oo o.oo 1.56 0.72 o.OD o.a2 6.65 0.71 5.17 o.oo o.oo 1976 D.00 o.oo 0.17 D.Oo o.oo 1.58 B,J4 1.06 0.61 2.77 o.oo 1.H T**Hllatad dartar 197' o.oo 7,35 21.50 10.9' 8.'7 8.01 D.82 5.91 o.oo D.84 o.oo D.00 1976 16.45 o.oo 5.ZJ 8,ll 4.65 15.02 55.'2 o.oo 0,DO O.DO o.oo o.oo Shldd darter 197' o.oo 0,!14 2.67 7.82 U.72 29,64 3.27 2.22 o.oo 0.84 o.oo D.00 1976 0.12 z.u o.oo 9.15 1.55 0.79 l.41 o.n 0.34 0.69 O,lZ O.DD Totel DandtJ (All 1.arvao) i.91 '6,DD lJD,59 1975 1976 54.37 "*" 28,ll 7'2.17 207.54 290.33 71.)5 64.DI 557.16 139,99 379.65 104.26 U.6t 176.ll 21.D9 39.'8 ll.16 11.26 6.47 0.7' 5.12

T.\BL& 2.3*4 Daaitiu (llllllber p*r 1000 ,.3) of fiala larYH (S 25 -> in t.laa llltalal uad cl11chaqe c:anall, 111&Xiaa lllld aiJlima HtiutH of m t r U - mnt&litJ' tog*clau with atatiOll oparating collditiou at l'uch 1occm Station, trm Kar-Julr 1975.

W..:k of: 4""" 11 Hnl!: H HAY* l Jun* 8 Jun 15 J1111 Air 1\mp (F) Y.,U-611,0 u.s-n,o 72,S*ll~,ll 66,0*7Z,O S9.0*U*.S 69,U*7!1,0 Watar T"""' CF) lntaka S6,0*S8,0 60,0*62,0 72,S*74,0 74,0-75.0 6S.0*66.0 72.0 DLachar;e 73,0*73,S 7S,S*76,0 81,S-84,0 76.0-78,0 73.0*75,0 80,0-81.0 4T (F) 16.25 14,8 9,5 z.s 8,s a.s l'llrcent !IN&r 188 199 98-99 sz 91*115 10S* ll9 11o. Circul&cina

!'lap* 6 6 4 4 6 6 tco. Caolin1 Tow.n 2 3 2 3 2*l l Specba

.I!* ce2cdianum DuaitJ' Int aka 7.11 62,65 o.oo l.60 Dl.achars* o.oo o.oo 0.73 o.oo 1 Hart&lic,.

Haz1- 100.00 100.00 100,00 Klll!aa 100.00 100.00 100,00

~-~

Denaity Intaka o.oo o.oo 32.0 14,86 7,'4 1,60 Dilchaq11 1.03 1.66 6,Sl 4,*39 2.93 o.oo 1 HortalitJ' Maxi=- 93.22 100.00 100.00 100.00 ltl.niaa 79,66 70.46 63,10 100,00 i* cvpr:f.mq Deui.ty Illtaka o.oo o.oo 16.90 22.68 237.63 16,02 Dl.achaqa s.u 0.83 l.26 4,39 SZ,06 1.17 1 Kottality Mmdma 100.00 80,64 87.66 92.70 Ml~ 80,71 so.64 78.09 92..70

!* eunctatul Duuli.ty Iiitak& o.oo o.oo 0,00 Dbchaq11 .l.09 1.09 S,86 i "°rtali CJ' Haziam Hf.Diam

~'PP*

Dlluity Illcaka 0,00 1,56 0.12 Db charge 1.09 o.oo o.oo 1 Kort*litJ Kmd8D 100.00 100.00

!!!.D1aa 100.00 100.00

!- a la tedi Dlult7 Iau... o.oo 7.35 21.5 10.95 1,67 1.01 Db chars* 3.09 1.66 o.oo 2.19 o.oo o.oo 1 t'.orcaUt7 IWdaa 81,98 100.00 ao.oo 100.00 100.00 111.U- 77,41 100.00 d0.00 100.00 100,00

!* edraca Denlit7 lataka o.oo 0,94 2.67 7.82 ll.72 29.64 D1.1char11 l.Dl o.oo o.oo 2.11 5.13 0.58 1 ttortality Maxima 100,0D 100.00 86,06 8],97 98.04 tllaicua 100,00 100,00 72.U 62.61 91.02 Dther1 1111n11.tr Intake J,91 7.52 8,19 1D,t6 21.65 7.U Dhcharg1 l.09 4.99 1.09 o.oo 7.Jt o.oo 1 HDrtality Maxi- 74,U 08,96 87.74 100,00 79,72 100.00 Kln1- 22.36 33,64 87. 7lt 100.00 66,24 100.00 Tvtal Dl!nlity

?ncau 3.91 15,99 96,00 130.59 290,JJ 64,08 litlchuaa 19,51 9.97 U,04 14,24 74,02 1,75

2. Hortdlt1 Mllsb118 59,62 95,47 93,29 85,61 97,27 tu.nla.- 37,&J 86.42 19,10 74,JQ 97,27 contlnued 2-33

TABLE 2.3-4.

Continuacl.

l/ealc af: 22 Jun 29 Jun 6 .zul 13 Jul 20 Jul U Jul Air taap (I') 74,0-119,0 7?,0*81.0 70,0*82,U 1s.o-110.o 76,0*811,0 n.o-as.o Water Talp (I')

Intake 79,0*79.S 7S,O 79,S-80,0 77.0*78,0 80.s 11.0-82.0 D1scbarg11 81,5*83,0 84,o-as,o as.o-86,o 83,o-~.o 87,0 86,0*89,0

~ T (F) 3.0 9.S s.s 6,0 6,5 6.0 Percent Puvar 48 142 100 100 100 106 Na. Circulating PUmp* 4 6 6 6 6 6 Ila. Coo lina Tew en** 2-3 3 3 l 2 2.

Species R* cgdiant111 DaMlty lntalr.8 12.0.36 41.41 153.71 14,2.6 7.Sl Diacbari;e o.oo l.73 O,Bl l.56 2.11

'J. Mortality Kaxi- 100.00 100,00 100.00 100.00 100,00 100.00 Hinf.aa 100,00 90,99 99.47 89.06 70,97 97,61

.!:* C8!PiO Danaity Intake 4.09 14,05 5.87 3,00 111.acbar&* o.oo J,73 4.68 0.72

'J. Hartality Kax1mlm 100,00 89,40 73,42 100.00 93,07 Hin:l.mua 100,00 73.45 20,27 76.00 71.00

£* cyprlnus Duai.ty Intalr.* 4,09 4.44 1.56 Dl*cbaqe 1.46 0.74 0.111

'J. Mortality Kax1mm 64,30 100.00 100,00 86,tS IU.Dima 64,30 83,33 48,011 77,63 1* J!unctatus Deuity Int*lr.* 1.64 2.7.36 20.Zll  :?.51 0.75 0.7' nt.cbara* o.oo 2.91 0.111 0.111 0,72 o.oo

'J. Mortality Mui=- 100.00 91.81 100.00 611,92 100,00 100.00 79.41 Kl.llimm 100.00 19.11 96.01 68.92 4.00 100.00 74.9.5

!o!E2!!!!. *PP*

Density Intalca 0.12 6.65 0.71 5.11 o.oo Dhcllarge o.oo 2.24 o.oo 1.s6 o.67

'J. Mortality Hazl- 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100,DO Mtat.= 100.00 66.32 100.00 73,42 U,96

!* olmtedi Dauity Int aka 0.82 5,91 o.84 Dl*cbaraa o.oo 0.74 o.oo

'I. Monalicy Kax1- 100.00 100.00 100.00 93.96 Kint.. 100.00 87,411 100.00 90,50

!* paltace Den11ty lncake l.27 2.22 0.84 llhchargc o.oo 0,74 o.oo l Mortality Haxl.aua 100.00 100.00 100,DO 93.33 Kial- 100,00 66,67 100,00 84.19 CllDtlaucd 2-34

Continued.

Voak at1 2? Jun ~9 Jun 6 Jul 13 Jul 20 Jul 27 Jul Air TCllfl (F) 74.0-89.1> 12.0-u.o 10.0-112.0 7S.0*81>,0 76.11-81,0 12.0-as.o water Temp (F)

Intake 79.0-79.S 75.0 79,S*IO,O 77.0-71.0 80,S Bl.0-82.0 D1.aclu1rge 81.5-83,0 84.o-u.o 85.0*lli,O 13.0*84.0 87,0 86.0-89.0 AT (F) 3,0 9.S s.a 6,0 6.S 6,0 Petc:ent l'ovat 48 142. 100 100 100 106 Ho. Clrculatill; flaps 4 6 6 6 6 6 11o. eoouna lb<lera 2*3 3 3 3 2 2 Kti&11 Spticiu Otllen Dmllty Inuu 4.90 2.22 8.lt 0.00 Dl.*clulr1e o.oo o.oo 0.11 0.67

t. Mortality llax1ma 100,00 100.00 90.70 91.32

!llJlimm 100.00 100.00 10.10 65.60 Total Denaity Ill take 139.99 1or..26 176.ll 31.58 11.26 o.1s D1*cbarge 1.46 14.90 2.43 9,36 l.62 1.ll+

t. lfortality Hlld.- 91.96 96,42 100.00 93.93 100.00 9l.Ll lllllima 91.96 85.71 98,62 75.74 67.IS 84.68 111.nimua Hllttality

• Det11ity at the intake

• blnaitr at the diacharso Dauity at cne intake Kulma Hllttalit7

• Dauitr of dud l&nae at dhcharge + IJensitY at the intake

• Daaaity ar; the dhcharge Dmaity at th* f.llcalul 2-35

TABU: 2.3-5 htl.mated number of larvd f1*be* <s. 2' -> entrelnad end projected lauee of aclnlta at Peach Bott,. Statla11 111 1975 a11d 1976.

1975 1976 1975 AND 1976 No. Entr~ned* 2811 No. l!ntnJned* 281! Ha. l!ntraAnacl Adult a Larvae to adult x1 x lo6 x1 x 106 x 10 la at aurvival rate SpeclH Cf.surd ahad 27.91 30.23 67.40 74.17 47.66 4,770 0.01 carp s.10 4.49 34.57 62.08 20.14 2,010 0.01 I

~.

Spatfin ahlner Qulllback o.os 20.72 o.o3 31.117 0.10 24.16.

0,07 30.44 o.oa 22.44 80 2,240 0.1 0.01 ChaMd catflah J,64 15.10 3.26 2,BB 3.45 3,450 0.1 S11all111UUtb baaa 0.30 0.59 o.oo o.oo 0.15 150 0.1 llhlte crappie O.Z7 0.43 0,49 0.37 0,38 380 0.1 Sunflah *PP* 1.12 1.11 1.13 1.11 1.13 1,130 0.1 Walleye 0.72 1.01 0.2!1 0.2!1 0.49 490 . 0.1 No. adult* laat * (Ho. lame lost) lt (larval ta adult eurvival rate)

Ho. Entraiaed per tear * (Avans** ao./-3) X (93,11 113/a) X (B.64 a lo4a/da7) It (100 daya/yur)

• Caaputad uaf.na weekly ..... cleaaltiee

) l I

TABLE 2.3-6 Comparison of the preoperational (1969-1973) and poatoperational (1974-1976) denaities (per 103m3) of some larval fishes ($_ 25 um) at transect stations in Conowingo Pond.

Year 1969-1971 1969-19731 1973 1974 1975 1976 1974-76 Kaan Specie a Gizzard shai 1.16. 0.23 156.10 210.03 122.12 N

Spotf:!.n shiner 0.35 0.28 o.os 1.02 0.43 0.48 0.64 I

Channel catfish 11. 7{1 10.52 6.98 5.65 18.22 10.32 11.40 Small.mouth baaa 0.19 0.15 0.02 0.04 0.20 0.08 White crappie 4.50 3.49 0.45 0.87 0.18 0.47 0.51 Gunfishes 14.13 11.10 1.98 1.52 2.04 2.23 1.93 Walleye 0.10 0.11 0.11 O.OI* 0.29 0.04 0.12 l - 1972 not included because of incomplete S8111pling 2 - Gizzard shad were not present prior to 1972

• - < 0.01

Intake Cooling Towers Intake D' E (Under Discharge construction)

Prim~ry Discharge Pond FIGURE 2.3-1 Diagnm of the cooling water *yatem of Peach Bottom Atomio Paver Station, Unit*

No. 2 and 3, on Conowt.nao Pond, lcbthyoplankton *-Pllaa *tatione ara 1ad1cated u dot1,

GIZZ.~RO .SHAD PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POW.ER STATION PA.

MD. STATE LINE DENSITY INDEX

• o.ot

• 0.15

.0.78. 1.25

@ t.26. 5.00

• :>5.00 Figure 2.3-2 Location of spawning areas of the gizzard shad, Conowingo Pond.

2-39

SPOTFIN SHINER PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION

---:-~-~ STATE LINE DENSITY INDEX 0.01

• 0.75 e 0.76

• 1.25

@ 1.26

• 5.00 t) > 5.00 Figure 2.3-3 Location of spawning areas of the spotfin shiner, Conowingo Pond.

2-40

CHANNEL CATFISH

\

---:-~-*. STATE LINE DENSITY INDEX 0 .01

• 0.75

.0.76

• 1.25 (31.2&

• 5.00

• )5.00 figure 2.3-4 Location of spawning areas of the channel catfish, Conowingo Pond.

2-41

.SMALLMDUTH BASS PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION

---:-~-.. STATE LINE DENSITY INDEX 0.01

• 0.75

~ 0.76

• 1.25 8 t.2s

• s.oo

• >5.00 Figure 2.3-5 Location of spawning areaa of the B111&llmoutb bass, Conowingo Pond.

2-42

WHITE. CRAPPIE PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION

_ _ _P_A_. STATE LINE MO.

DE~S ITY IHOEX

• O.Ot

• 0.75

• 0 .76

• t :25

• 1.26

• 5.00 9 > s.oo Figure 2.3-6 I.ocation of spawning areas of the white crappie 1 Conowingo Pond.

2-43

SUNFISHES PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER .......

STATION PA.

MD. STATE LINE DENSITY INDEX 0.01

• 0.75

" 0.76

• 1.25

• 1.26. 5.00 9 > s.oo J'igure 2.3*7 Location of spawning areas of the sunfishes (bluegill and pumpk:i:nseed),

Conowingo Pond.

2-44

WALLEYE PEACH BOTTOM\~

ATOMIC POWER 1.., *.

STATION ~:-:

---:-:-*. STATE L.INE DENSITY INDEX B.Ot

• D.75 ea.7&*1.25

.e t. 26

• 5* DO 8 >5.DD Plgure 2.3-8 Location of spawning areas of the walleye, Conowingo Pond.

2-45

3.0 IMPINGEMENT STUDIES 3.1 METHODS Fish samples at traveling intake screens for Unit No. 2 were collected twice a week from November 1973 through December 1976. From July through September 1974 sampling frequency was increased to four 12-hr samples a week to comply with the Environmental Te~hnical Specifications (NRC, 1973).

Weekly sampling at Unit No. 3 commenced in December 1974. Screens were surveyed for impinged fishes during two successive 12-hr periods (day and night). Prior to the start of each survey the screens were washed for about 15 minutes. Then a removable aluminum basket with a mesh size of 5/16 in. was placed in a trash bin that receives the screen wash. Fishes which accumulated in the hasltet constituted a sample.

During the start-up tests of Peach Bottom not all circulating water pumps were in service. Pumps were occasionally operated at the request of IA to determine impingement during maximum water intake. After Peach Bottom began commercial operation all six circulating water pumps were usually in service. Occasionally, samples could not be taken due to mechanical problems and/or accumulation of trash.

Fishes were identified, measured and weighed. ~otal number and weight were estimated from a random subsample when a large number of fishes '\Y&S im?inged. Intake water temperature, average Pond elevation, number of circulating water pumps in operation, average daily river flow, time of day and date were recorded with each sample.

3-1

3.2 RESULTS 3.2.l Species Composition and Frequency of Impingement In 240 samples of 12-hr duration 16,859 fish (total weight 197 kg or 433 lb) of 37 species were impinged at the screens for Unit No. 2 from November 1973 through December 1976 (Table 3.2-1). At Unit No.

3 between December 1974 and December 1976 some 42,088 specimens (total weight 1173 kg or 2580 lb) of 35 species were impinged in 137 samples (Table 3.2-2). The species composition of ~pinged fishes at both units were similar. Many species were rarely impinged and occurred in less than 10% of the samples. Of the 37 species impinged at Unit No. 2, the rate of impingement of 31 species (84%) averaged less than 1.0 fish/12-hr.

At Unit No. 3, 20 species (57%) were impinged for an average of less than 1.0 fish/12-hr. Data for both units are swmnarized in Table 3.2-3

• The channel catfish, white crappie and bluegill were impinged most frequently at both units (Tables 3.2-1 and 3.2-2 ). Most of these fishes were small and averaged less than 120 mm in length (Tables 3.2-4 and 3.2-5 ). These fishes comprieed 82% by number and 73% by weight of the total catch at Unit No. 2 and 78% by number and 84% by weight at Unit No. 3.

The channel catfish was the most frequently impinged fish and occurred in 97%

of the samples at Unit No. 2 and 99% of the samples at Unit No. 3. It formed the bulk of the biomass at Unit No. 3.

The white crappie composed most of the biomass at Unit No. 2. The carp, although impinged infrequently and in low numbers, comprised 16% of the biomass at Unit No. 2. Game fishes such as the smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, walleye and muskellunge were rarely impinged, particularly at Unit No. 2. Most of the yellow perch and smallmouth bass at Unit No. 3 were impinged during two days of high river flows in February 1975. The gizza~d shad which was accidentally introduced into the Pond in 1972, was seldom impinged.

3-2

The rate of impingement of the common fishes (channel catfish, white crappie and bluegill) differed considerably between months (Figures 3.2-l and 3.2-2). Impingement of the white crappie and bluegill was highest in November through February and negligible in March through October. The impingement of the channel catfish was highest in November through April.

However, in 1975 a large number of channel catfish was impinged in June through September. The impingement of the channel catfish was consistently higher than that of bluegill or white crappie. In most months the impinge-ment of fishes was greater at Unit No. 3 than at Unit No. 2.

Since two distinct periods of impingement were evident, the data were pool~d into high impingement (November through April) and low impingement (May through October) periods. The day*night differences were then examined (Tables 3.2-6 and 3.2-7 ). The data shewn are only for the channel catfish; similar analyses were run for the white crappie and bluegill. Little difference existed between day and night samples between periods although the impingement appeared to be slightly higher at night. Impingement increased when river flows were greater than 200,000 cfs, regardless of time. When data obtained above the latter flow were excluded, a marked change was noted in the basic statistics. For example, in May through October at Unit No. 2 the number of c~annel catfish impinged during the day averaged 36 per 12-hr (with a coefficient variation of 438%) when all samples were included. When the samples during the high river flows were excluded the mean was reduced to 16 per 12-hr (with a coefficient of variation of 102%). Similarly the mean day and night impingement of channel catfish in November through April at Unit No. 3 was reduced from 479 to 57 and 312 to 73 per 12-hr, respectively. The coeffi-cients of variation were reduced from 434 and 397 to 159 and 111%, respectively.

Similar reductions were observed for the other species. These differences were 3-3

more pronounc~d at Unit No. 3 than at Unit No. 2 and for the channel catfish than for the bluegill and white crappie.

The channel catfish was most frequently impinged; however only in 31% of the samples taken at Unit No. 2 were more than 25 catfish impinged per 12-hr period (Table 3.2-8 ). An impingement of greater than 200 catfish per 12-hr occurred in only 21. of the samples. The impingement.of bluegill and white crappie was more than 25 specimens per 12-hr in only 8 and 6% of the samples, respectively. The ~ate of impingement of the channel catfish at Unit No. 3 was more than 25 fish per 12-hr in 391. of the samples. The impingement of the white crappie and bluegill at Unit N:>. 3 was like that at Unit N~. 2.

The number of these two fishes impinged rarely exceeded 50 fish per 12-hr.

The imping~ment of fishes differed with the operating conditions at Peach Bottom. For example, high impingement at Unit No. 2 (particularly of the channel catfish) occurred during the early part of the sampli~g program when Peach Bottom was partially operational and circulating water pumps were operated at the request of I A. Of the first 34 samples taken at Unit No. 2 during the start-up phase in winter, 24 samples (711.)contained more than 25 channel catfish per 12-hr and 20 (591.) contained more than 50 fish per 12-hr. It is likely that the fishes concentrated in the vicinity of the screens prior to the start-up and thus were more vulnerable to impingement, particularly in winter *.

This became apparent when the 206 samples taken subsequent to the initial 34 were examined. Of these, 52 samples (22%) contained more than 25 channel catfish per 12-hr and5% contained more than 50 channel catfish per 12-hr. The same pattern was observed for the white crappie and bluegill, although the numbers were lower. This pattern was also observed during the start-up of Unit No. 3.

3-4

3. 2. 2 Sta tis t1.cal Analysis Although some loss was expected due to the operation of the Peach Bottom, we have attempted to isolate Peach Bottom operational f4ctors from environ-mentally related factors or conditions that may modify impingement. The relationship between number of fish impinged and physical factors was examined, The data on the number of fish impinged (log Y+l) per 12-hr period were analyzed by stepwise multiple regression~ The independent variables (Xi) were water temperature, daily river flow (obtained

!Tom Roltwood Dam), number of circulating water pumps in operation, Pond elevation, time of day, week after unit commenced operation and season.

The number of each species impinged was the dependent (Y) variable. Models containing the various interactions of the independent variables were also developed. H~ver, in most cases the simple models (without interactions) were equally informative, Therefore the simple models are discussed. 'l'he analysis was run separately for the channel catfish, white crappie and bluegill and total number of fish impinged at Units No. 2 and 3. All data were used in the analysis.

Together the average daily river flow, week and Pond elevation accounted for 261. of the variation (R2) in the impingement rate of the channel catfish at Unit No. 2 (Table 3.2-9). A total of 601. of the variation (R2) was accounted for at unit No. 3 by week, average daily river flow and temperature.

Season was the factor which most affected the impingement rate of white crappie at both units. River flow and Pond elevation were important in affecting the iI11pingement rate of the bluegill.

When the data for all fish combined were examined, the daily river flow, Pond elevation and season were found to be significant factors at Unit No. 2.

3-S

Daily river f~ow was also most important at Unit No. 3 but Pond elevation and season were replaced by week and temperature.

The percent variation (R2) explained by the factors examined at the two units differed considerably. For example, for all fishes 68% of the variation was explained at Unit No. 3, but only 39% at Unit No. 2.

Differences of similar magnitude were also observed for the channel catfish 2

and bluegill, but more variation (R ) was explained at Unit No. 2 than No.

3 for the white crappie. The reason, in part, for these differences is the greater number of observations taken at Unit No. 3 at river flows in excess of 200,000 cfs than at Unit No. 2. It should be noted that a large portion of the 2

variation (R ), particularly at Unit No. 2, is unexplained.

In all the analyses the sign of the regression coefficient indicated that the impingement rates increase with (1) an increase in river flow, (2) decrease in water temperature and (3) lowering of the Pond elevation. Impingement was ,-.,.

higher in the winter at the time of high river flows and low water temperatures.

Impingement was also higher on occasions when the Pond elevation was lowered about five feet below the mean normal elevation of 108 ft (Conowingo datum).

The analysis showed that time of day and number of circulating water pumps did not substantially affect the rate of impingement. Six circulating water pumps were usually in operation when the samples were taken; however, less were operated in early 1974 and occasionally when a unit was not at full power. Under normal operating conditions one would not expect the number of pumps to substantially ~ffect the impingement of fishes because this variable was more or less constant during most of the sampling period. The sign of the regression coefficient for the variable 11 pump 11 was positive and indicanted that impingement may increase with an increase in the number of pumps operating. However, inclusion of these variables in this analysis did not 3-6

significantly improve the R2 value or reduce the standard error. 'lherefore the inclusion of the two variables time of day and number of.pumps in the present analysis is of doubtful significance in assessing the impingement rate.

Intake design may be a major factor involved in low impingement rates at some power stations. 'lhe impingement rate at Peach Bottom was negligible.

'Ille design of the screens at Peach Bottom was based on the knowledge of the difficulties which were experienced elsewhere and the swimming speed of fishes in Couowingo Pond. 'lhe criteria for the design at Peach Bottom were as follows: (1) a mesh of 3/8 in. was used in the vertical traveling screens; (2) upstream and downstream escape routes were provided for fishes; (3) the screens were continguous with the shore so that no trap was formed in front of the screens; and (4) the approach velocity of the water was reduced in front of the screens to O. 75 fps at a low water stage (104.5 ft Conowingo datum). Studies were done on swim speed of resident fishes by IA (Hocutt, 1973 and King, 1969) to determine the criteria of 0.75 fps in front of the screens.

3.2.3 Project Losses The total monthly l~sses in number, weight and volume of fishes due to impingement were proj~cted from mean number, weight and volume of fishes impinged at screens for Units No. 2 and 3 (Tables 3.2-10 to 3.2-13). 'lhe monthly means were multiplied by the corresponding number of 12-hr periods in a month to estimate the total losses for the month. 'Ihe calculations were made only for the period June 1974, when Unit No. 2 began commercial 3-7

operation, th~ough December 1976. A:sl example of the calculations is given at the bottom of Table 3.2-10. Of 1,526 possible 12-hr periods in June 1974 through December 1976, 184 (12%) were sampled at Unit No. 2. Some

91. (137 of 1,462 periods) were sampled at Unit No. 3 between December 1974 {beginning of ccmmercial operation) and December 1976. Projected losses were not calculated for months in which samples were not taken.

due to tmit shutdown or mechanical problems. The estimates were made (1) including the data obtained during the high river flows (> 200,000 cfs) and (2) excluding them. The impingement increased substantially at high river flows (see Section 3.2.1). It must be noted that the estimates contain projections for continuous operation of Peach Bottom since June 1974. However, Peach Bottom did not operate consistently throughout the sampling period thus the estimates shown in Tables 3,2-10 to 3.2-13 are considered conservative (high in some months),

The estimated los~es of fishes exceeded 100 kg (220 lb) only in seven months (excluding high flows) for Units No. 2 and 3 combined. Most of the projected monthly l~sses were less than 50 kg (110 lb) particularly at Unit No. 2. Sections 4.1 of the Environmental Technical Specifications for Peach Bottom states that the number, size and species of fish impinged should be detexmined if more than 4 ft 3 of fish are collected in a single 12-hr period. This level was exceeded only in Februa-ry 1975 at Unit No. 3. The 3

high (322 ft ) projected loss for Februa-ry 1975 at Unit No. 3 occurred at river flows in excess of 300,000 cfs which prevailed over a period of 2 to 3 days. These conditions inflated the projected loss for the month. If the samples taken at high river flows are excluded the total loss for February 1975 would be reduced from 322 ft 3 to 4.9 ft3, Based on these data it is 3-8

believed that the impingement at.Peach Bottom is of potentially low impact and the design of the intake structure is consistent with the concept of best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.

Peach Bottom is not located in an area of unique biological value. The vicinity of the intake structure does not represent either the primary spawning or nursery area. Fishes feed throughout the Pond and thus no specific areas for feeding exist. No rare and endangered species occur in the Pond. No commercially important fish or shellfishes reside in Conowingo Pond. The fishery is primarily for the white crappie and is extensive in the lower portion of the Pond in winter. The white crappie moves seasonally in the Pond (Robbins and Mathur, 1974) but does not concentrate in front of the screens at any season.

3.2.4 Impact of Impingement Since the population estimates of fishes, particularly in large ponds and reservoirs, show extremely wide confidence intervals and thus are rarely reliable, the impact of impingement of fishes at cooling water intakes of power plants may be measured on a relative basis, such as angler or commercial harvest. If reliable population estimates are not available, it is not possible to determine what percentage of the total fish population is lost due to impipgement.

The impact of impingement at the Peach Bottom is quantified on a relative basis. Peach Bottom acts as a predator and the magnitude of predation varies with season. Thus, the impingement loss may be considered as fishing mortality and compared with that of angling mortality (Table

3. 2-14).

3-9

The angling mortality data used here were obtained from a creel census conducted in 1973 through 1976 by I A to determine the extent of the winter fishery (December-March) in Conowingo Pond. Creel census data were not taken 0

in other months in the present study, but Plosila (1961) conducted a c reel census on Conowingo Pond from April through October in 1958, 1959 and 1960.

From the winter fishery survey conducted by IA it was determined that more than 28,600 anglers fished the Pond in the winter of 1974, 1975 and 1976. They fished an average of five hours per trip. The average angler fishing time was multiplied by the catch per hour to obtain the daily harvest per angler. The average daily (5 hr period) harvest was then compared to the average daily impingement (24 hr period) of Peach Bottom (Table 3.2-14).

The fishes removed by Peach Bottom were much smaller in length than those kept by anglers (Robbins and Mathur, 1976a). Also, since most of the fishes taken at Peach :Bottom were yo'Uilg, only a relatively small percentage would have grown to a harvestable size. Because adjustment for natural mortality was not made , the number of fish harvested by Peach :Bottom is conservative.

The average daily catch of white crappie by an angler fishing in December, January, February and March 1974 through 1976 Tanged from 1.3 to 19.2. The Peach Bottom harvest ranged from 0.4 to 386.0 for the same time period.

The maximum harvest *occurred in December 1974;.less than 60 fish were

• taken per day on all other occasions. In all but two months the daily harvest at Peach Bottom was less than that of five fishermen.

The daily harvest of bluegill was higher at Peach Bottom than that of an angler for several seasons. First, Unit No. 3 was in a start-up phase in late December 1974 and January 1975 and it is likely that a concentration of bluegill occurred in front of the screens. Secondly, the exceptionally high exploitation by Peach Bottom in January and February 3-10

(Table 3.2-14) occurred when either the river flows were high or the Pond elevation was substantially lowered (see Statistical Analysis). The latter two conditions occurred only over a period of 2 to 3 days. However, the 1976 data indicate that impingement has declined considerably; less than 2 fish were taken per day. As of 1976 the impact was equal to that of one fishei:ma.n.

Few channel catfish are taken by anglers during ~he winter because its activity (vulnerability} decreases at water temperatures less than 50 F.

The channel catfish.population in Conowingo Pond is stunted and few large fish are available (Robbins and Mathur, 1974). However, it may be pointed out that the 1975 (postoperational) year class of channel catfish was the strongest and about 43 times more abundant than the weakest 1967 (preopera-tional) year class (Robbins and Mathur, 1976a).

Creel census data on white crappie, bluegill and channel catfish from other seasons are not ~vailable for 1974 through 1976. However, data gathered by Plosila (1961) in April through October 1958 to 1960 may be examined to identify the broad trends of the fishery in Coaowingo Pond.

His data were obtained 17 to 19 years ago. Plosila's (1961) data adjusted for 5 hou~ fishing trip for the catfishes, sun;ishes and crappies are shown in Table 3.2-10. Plosila did not distinguish the catch rates between species of the same genus; consequently, the data shown herein are for groups of fishes, viz. catfishes, crappies and sunfishes.

The data indicate that the number of crappies and sunfishes taken by both angler and Units No. 2 and 3 is low from April through October. Peach Bottom exploited crappies and sunfishes at a rate slightly more than a single angler in most months. '!'he data show that in general the impingement is lower in summer than in winter, as is the angler exploitation. The 3-11

exploitation of the catfish population by Peach Bottom was much higher than that* of a single angler throughout the year. However, as indicated above channel catfish is not fished extensively relative to its abundance in the Pond. The additional fishing mortality on the channel catfish population attributable to Peach Bottom is not expected to have a detrimental effect because removal of a segment of this st~ted population may even benefit its growth rate.

3-12

'?Al!LI 3.2 1 4

_ Frequency of occunwnce, total number, weight end percentage compoeitioa of fi.llhes impillged ill tvo hWldred-forty 12-hr periods at the Peach Bottom Statioa. Unit !lo. 2, Noveaaber 1973-December 1976.

Specf.e* J'requeace of Total Mem 1. Ho. Total Me&a. Wt. 't Wt.

Occurrence No. No. Wt. (kg) (kg)

Amricmi eel 1 2 2.19 0.01 1.3 American shad s s *

• ** 0.03 Alewife 2 2 0.01 4.0* 3,8*

Gi:i::i:ard .llhad 4.5 67.5 2.8* 7.23 0.03 Muskellunge 2 13

• 0.6*

0.33

• C&rp 29 96 0.4 30.76 0.13 16.S Coldea. shi!ler s 7 o.os Comely shiner 14 14 0.1* 0.1* 0.09 **

Spottd.1 shiner 31 121 0.5 0.7 0,87 ...... 0.4 Shallovt&il shiner B.oayface shiner 1

'1 12 2

• 0.01 0.04 **

• Spotfin shiaar 35 238 0.9

• 1.4* a.so ** 0.3*

Jluatnose minnow 1 1 0.01 **

Fathead minnow 1 1 * * ** *

'Blaclmose dace 1 1 ** *** ** **

• QU.11lback 4 s 0.59'** ** 0.3*

Whit* aucker Nortbem hogsucker Shorthead redhorse 1

1 1

1 1

1

• 0.01 0.01 White catfish 17 17

• 0.1 0.1* 0.98 ** 0.5*

Yellow bullhead 44 83 0.3 o.s 1.s1 **

0.01 o.a Brow bullhead 8 8 0.10 Chami.el catfish 232 8070 33.6* 47.9* 58.40 **

0.24 29.7 Margined 11111dtom 1 1 0.01 Mlmdchog 2 2 **

• 0.01 **

• Il.ock baaa 4 4

• 0.04 **

• Badbreasc sunfish 23 366 1.S *

• 2.2 1.19 ** 0.6*

Green sunfish 26 180 0.8 1.1 o.86 ** 0.4 Pumpkineeed 62 743 3.1 4,4 2.1.3 **

O.OL 1.l Bluegill 94 3686 15.4 21.9 19.12 o.oa 9.7

~-llmouth b4H 12 17 0.1 0.1 0.82 0.4 Largemouth bass 13 47 0.2 0.3 0.40 ** 0.2 Whit* crappie 119 2136 8.9 12.7 66.08 **

o.2s: 33.6 Jlack crappie 26 .51 0.2 0.3 1.04

• • o.s Tessellatacl darter 33 188 0.8 1.1 0.24 0.1 Yellow perch 9 60 0.3 0.4 0.64 ** 0.3 Walleye 2 2 0 * .57 ** 0.3 Totals 16,859 70.2 196.87 0.82 Leu than 0.1

• Leas

• • than 0.01 3-13 I

\

TABLE 3.2-2 Frequency of occurrence, number, weight and percentage c0111positiou of fi11hes

~inged in one hundred thirty-11even 12-hr periods at the Peach Bottom Station t No. 3, December 1974-Decamber 1976.

Species Frequenc* of Total Mean 'Z No. Total Mem 'Z Wt.

occurrence No. No. Wt. (kg) Wt. (kg)

American eel 2 2 3.490 0.03 0.3 American shad 2 2 *

• 0.009 Alewife 2 2 *

• 0.007 **

• Giz:z:ard shad 44 235 1.7* 0.6* 3.229 **

0.02 0.3*

Muskellunge 2 19 0.1 0.924 0.01 0,1 Goldfish Carp 12 1

80 1

0.6* 0.2*

• o.255 21.856 **

0.16 1;9 Riverchub .3 4 0.024 Golden *hi=r 11 48 0,4 0.1 0.220 Comely ahiuer 10 141 1.0 0.3 0.478 Spottail shiner swallowtail shiner loayface 1hiuer SpotfiD 1hiuer Bluntnoae minnow 30 24 1

1 6

2438 36 116 1

8 17.8 0.3 o.8 5.8 0.3*

15.239 0.002 0.180 0.458 0.11 1.3 0.029.

Quillback 9 116 0.8* 0.3* 4.296 **

0.03

• 0.3 White sucker 7 343 2.5 0.8 1.742 0.01 0.1 Shorthead redhorse 1 126 0.9 0.3 1.~08 0.01 0.2 White catfish 10 10 0.1 0.518 . 'ft*

Yellow bullhead 26 249 1.8 0.6* 3.173 0.02

• 0.3 Bmvn bullhead 20 462 3.4 1.1 51.033 0,37 4.3 Channel catfish 136 ' 26,966, 196.8 .64.1 921.165 6.72 78.S Margined madtom 2 3 0.014 llock baH 14 106 0.8* 0.2* 0.658 Redbreast sunfish 26 673 2.7 1.6 3.965 **

0.03 0,3*

Green *=fish 12 421 3.1 1.0 3.087 0.02 0.3 PmapkiDaeed 41 1135 8.3 2.7 6.112 0.04 0.5 Bluegill 53 4820 35.2 11.s 36,485 0.21 3.1 Smallmouth base 28 554 4.0 1.3 5.070 0.04 0.4 La:rgemouth baas 9 69 0.5 0.1 0.491 White crappia 71 1070 7.8 z.s 30.657 **

0.22 **

2.6 Black crappie 17 53 0.4 0.1 1.102 Teaaellated darter 24 632 4.6 1.5 1.247 ** **

0.1 Yellow perch 9 1146 8.4 2.7 53.811 **

0.39 4.5 Log perch 1 1 0.011 Total1 42,088 307.2 1172.945 8.56 Leas than 0.1

• Leea than 0.01 3-14

TABLE 3.2*3 Frequency of occurrence, number and weight of fishes impinged in three hundred seventy-seven 12-hr periods at the Peach BottOlll Station Units No. 2 and 3, December 1974-Decembar 1976.

Specie* Freq. Total Mean t No. Total Mean 'X. Wt.

'Mo. No. Wt. Wt.

3 4 S.68 0.02 0.4 Alllericall eel Alewife 4 4 *

• 0.02 American ahad 7 7 *

• 0.04 **

• Gizzard 1had 89 910

• 2.4

• l.S 10.46 **

0,03

• 0.8 Muskellunge 4 32 0.1 0.1 l. 2S 0.1 Galdfiah 1 1 0.26 **

carp 41 176

• o.s

• 0.3 S2.62 **

0.14

• 3.8 River chub 3 4 0.02 Golden 1hiner 16 SS

• 0.1

• 0.1 0.27 **

• Comely sbiner 24 lSS 0.4 0.3 O.S7 **

• Spottail shiner 61 2SS9 6,8 4.3 16.11 **

0,04

• 1.2 svallC1Wt1il 1hi.11er 2 3 ** 0.01 Rasyfaca shiner 2 48

• O.l 0.1 0.22 **

• Spotfin shiner 59 354 0.9 0.6 0.96 **

• 0.1 Bli.mtDOH mimlav 7 9 0.04 *"

Fathead mimiov 1 l * * **

• Blackno1e dace 1 l * * ** **

• QUillback 13 121

• 0.3

• 0.2 *"

4.89 **

0.01

• 0.4 Whit* sucker 8 344 0.9 0,6 l.75 0.1 Northerii bagsucker l. 1 **

Shortbead redhor** 2 127

• 0.3

• 0.2 **

1.92 **

0.01

• 0.1 White catf11b 27 27 0.1 1.so O.l Yellow bullhead 70 332 0.9

• 0.6 4.68 **

0.01 0.3 Brown bullhead 28 470 1.2 0.8 Sl.13 0.14 3.7 Channel catfi1h 368 3.5036 92.9 59.4 979.56 2.60 71.5 Margined madtam 3 4 0.02 Mummichas 2 2 *'

• 0.01 **

• Rock baH 18 llO

• 0.3

• 0.2 0.70 **

• 0.1 B.edbreut sµnfi1h 49 1039 2..8 1.8 S.lS **

0.01 0.4 Green sunfish 38 601 1.6 l.O 3.9S 0.01 0,3 Pumpkinaeed 103 1878 .5 .o 3.2 8.24 0.02 0.6 Bluegill 147 S.506 2.2.6 14.4 SS.60 0.15 4.1 Smallmouth bus 40 .571 l.S 1.0 .5,89 0.02 0.4 Largemouth ball 22 ll6 0.3 0.2 0.89 0.1 White crappie 190 3206 8.s S.4 96.74 **

0.26 7.1 Black crappia 43 104 0.3 0.2 2.14 0.01 0.2 Tessellated darter '.57 820 2.2 1.4 1.49 0.1 Yellow perch 18 1206 3.2 2.0 54.45 **

0.14 4.0 Lag perch 1 1 0.01 Walleye 12 2 *

• 0 *.57 **

• Tota la 58947 1S6.2 1369.81 3.62 Lesa thm O.l

• Leu than 0.01 3-15

TAILE 3.2 ...

~** fan l1ath1 111411 rana* of th* -..oq flabaa t..,lqH at tM '9ach ~Ct09 lltatlon Unlt Ho. 2, lvw...M'r l973*Decaiber 117'.

Specl**

1."hlt* cuppl*

ctwnnd catH.ah

-H (U*lll!I) 7l l'7J 114 (51-240) 6Z Jan UI (iMJO) n Fob 12' (57-220) n

• tllr uo (ll0-170) 14 Apr

('1*H) 74 ltlJ 17 1'74 JIOI lat (162*211) 91 Jiil (U*UJ) 11' Aua 72

('5*10) 94 Bop 114 (100-12')

13 OCt 109 (79-12*)

97 Hav 107 (70*119) 72 111 (41*230) 71 (41*21*) (41-220) (!1*270) (31*2'7) (Jl-l7J) (41-240) (41*24') (51-214) (J5-2Z5) (JB*JOO) (Jl*210) (0*175) (41*12') (41-130) lluo1lll ,. H 77 12 H SI 52 54 ,, SI 70 (O*IJ) (ll*l80) (3'*111) (41-207) ('9-79) (40*19) (35*14) (U-70) *("4*105) (41*170)

Sp1cle1 JOD fob Hor Jaa Jul U7 Au1

• • • Oct ...

.lhlte cHppl1 125 192 106 LU 174 117 71 l54 (10-242) (103-252) (71-IJJ) (135-Ul) (110-204) (9J*ll0) (51-170) (71-230) w ., llJ '1 I

~

Cheu.el catfhh 14 (21-220) (41*20) 91 (41-170) "

(41-220) (U-190) 79 (31*230) 71 (41-210) 74 (41-200)

(51-230)

°' alu11UI 74 141-115)

H (41-90) 107 (47-171) 7' (52*106)

IZ

'° (21-71) (Jl-140) 109 Specl** Jm rob Hor Apr 1'71 J .. Jal Aua Sop Oct 1."hlt* crappl* 202 .,

lU (81-221) (201-204) (31*192) "

(11*210) 1111 (6'*111)

Ch.annal eat fbh 111 (41-HO) u (41-200) 71 (4l*lH) 10 136-1711 10 (31*210)

(Jl-ZJO) u (31-200) 71 (41-240) 7J 144*114) lluoalll ,,

(U-'1) 45 45 (43-41)

!1 (40*6')

51 H (40-140)

(Jl*l*o>

)

TAIL& J.2*J

• atlllJ .... fodl lc.qth* eQI) rana1 GI tlM c.-oa fl*b., t.,tn1 .. at tbl 1Uch ..tt* SUtiOlll Dnlt. lo. J, ~r 1114*DK--- lt1'.

VMt* crappl*

~

1'74 122 (Jl-240)

Joa U7 (ll*UO)

UJ (JDl*Ul) llH 107 (ll*Ut>

l4J (ff*2U) lH (UJ*IU) 1'75 10 (U,*llD)

J.al 11' (1'l*2DI) tu IH

... Oct H

1so-m

- 12 (64-JO)

Doc 146 (S6*11D)

Chaud catff.ah to (41*260) 7J (41-UD) 17 (Jl*UD) "

(41*100)

ID!

(ll*lll) 1119 (4l-21D)

IDJ (Sl-2U) (41*210) 14 (4l-2DI) 106 (Sl*Ul) 79

(!f*ISO)

!14 (Sl-UO)

IOI (41-270) aa... 111 n u IS n u (Jl-l70) "

(Jl-llD) (Jl-llD) (41HU) (~l-IJ)

(41*1J6) (44*tl)

SI (U*H) 67 (45*'4) 71 (41*104)

I s,.d.. Ju reE .... ..., lJll J* Ju[ Aul ac. .... ...

n 2J4 to

\lhlte Cl&fple lJ4 (llt7-lll) "'

(1$0-IH) l02 111 (Ul*UJ) 117 (71*117) 12 (Sl-lU) (U*llD) 14' (10-101) c:a..-t ID IU n n utfbll

'° (41*1'0) "

(4t-l4D) (41*llD) 101 (H*UO) (71-210) 71 (U*UI)

IO (ll*lDO) (41-100) (Jl-100) "

(U*llJ) 74 (U*UO) n 0 atuoalll 1J (JS-llO) (4J-!J)

'1 (Jl*lH) 7l

(~l*H)

TABLE 3.2-6 Basic statistics for impingement of channel catfish (no./12-hr) at the Peach Bottom Station Unit No. 2, November 1973-0ctober 1976.

November-A2ril Ma::i:*October November-October High values 4 High values 4 High values 8 Time . Item All Data excluded All Data excluded All Data excluded Day No. 53 53 64 62 ll7 ll5 Mean 41~7 41.7 36.3 16.1 38.8 27.9 Std. dev. 60.0 60.0 159.3 16.3 124.1 44.1 CV (7.) 143.7 143.7 438.3 101.6 320.0 158.2 Night N 51 51 63 63 ll4 114 w Mean 48.l 48.l 16.9 16.9 30,9 30.9

....co I

Std. dev. 57.1 57.1 17.0 17.0 42.9 42.9 CV (7.) 118.8 ll8.8 100.6 100.6 139.2 139.2 overall N 104 104 127 125 231 229 Mean 44.8 44.8 26.7 16.5 34.9 29.4 Std, dev. 58.4 58.4 113.7 16.6 93.2 43.5 CV (7.) 130.2 130.2 425.7 100.7 267.3 148. 1 a - Values obtained at river flowa > 200,000 cfa

)

TABLE 3.2-7 Basic statistics for impingement of channel catfish (no./12-hr) at the Peach Bottom Station Unit No. 3, December 1974-0ctoher 1976.

November-A2ril Ma:r:-October November-October High values 8 High values& High values4 Time Item All Data excluded All Data excluded All Data excluded Day N 33 31 33 32 66 63 Mean 479.2 57.3 19.2 17.3 249.2 36.9 Std. dev. 2080.9 91.0 29.2 27.6 1478.5 69.3 CV {'~) 434.2 158.9 152.6 159.8 593.3 187.4 Night N 31 29 33 32 64 61 Lot Mean 312.0 72.8 23.7 22.4 163.4 46.4 I

Std. dev. 1237.9 81.1 34.2 33.8 866.8

\0 CV ('X) 396.7 111.4 144.0 151.1 530.6 lt1*.%

overall N 64 60 66 64 130 124 Mean 398.3 64.8 21.4 19.8 206.9 41.6 Std. dev. 1713.6 86.0 31.6 30.7 1212.6 67.4 CV ('X) 430.3 132.7 147.5 154.9 585.9 162.l a - Values obtained at river flows > 200,000 cfs

TABLR 3.2-8 Frequency distribution of the impingement (no./12-hr) of the coD1110n fishes at the Peach Bottom Station Units No. 2 and 3, November 1973-December 1976. N represents sample size.

NW11ber Im~inged/12-hr Intervals

< 25 >25 >50 >75 >100 >200 >500 .

UNIT NO. 2 (N-240)

White crappie 222 18 7 6 4 1 1 Bluegill 226 14 10 9 6 3 2 Channel catfish 165 75 32 21 15 s 1 UNIT NO. 3 (N-137)a N

I White crappie 130 7 *5 4 4 1 0

Bluegill 126 11 10 9 9 8 3 Channel catfish 83 54 37 24 18 8 4 a Samples taken December 1974-December 1976

• )

I

TAllLB 3.2-9 Stepwi1a 1111ltlpla regra11lon 1tatlatlc1 for lmplngement of fl1hea (log Y + l) at the Peach Bott* Station Unlt1 Na, 2 and 3, November 1973-llllced>er 1976.

Unlt No.2 Unlt No. 3 Order of Order of Entty of Variable* P** Entty of Verlablaa P**

All FbhH N

• 240 N

• 138 Rlver Flow 0.252 0.0001 Rlver Flov 0.502 0.0001 Pond Elavatioo 0.346 0.0001 Weak 0.652 0.0001 Season 0.393 0.0001 Temperature 0.681 0.0001 Channel catfl1h N

• 240 H

• 138 Rlver Flow 0.171 0.0001 Week 0.446 0.0001

'week 0.225 0.0001 Rlver Flov 0.585 0,0001 Pond Elevatlon 0,257 0.0017 Temperature 0.603 0.0151 Whlte creppla N

• 240 N

• 138 Sea1on 0.266 0.0001 Sea a on 0.233 0.0001 Pond Elevatlon 0.356 0.0001 Week 0.275 0.0249 Rlver Flow 0,411 0.0001 Rlver Flov 0.288 0.1275 llluealll N

• 240 If - 138 Rlver Flow 0.370 0.0001 River Flaw 0.579 . 0.0001

• Pond Elevatlon 0.442 0.0001 Pond Elevation 0.627 0.0001

• a 2- Coefficlent of determlnltlon

• • p - Prabablllty level

ti.JIU 3,1*10 Kaathl7 a11111plo and total **timoccd lo11c* of fiahoa du* to illlpingCllllUlt *t the re*ch llottOll Station durio; c-rctal opDratioo, Juno 1974*Decc:mbar 1976.

Unit No. 2 llnit No. 3 l!nitl No. 2 !Rd 3 Kean Per l2*hr Period Heu Per 12*hr l'eri od E*tl.aated Louu l'or MOndi Kontb lfo, llt. Vol. No. lit. Vol. No. Wt. Yo~.

(kg) (fc3) (ks) (ftl) (kg) (ft )

1974 Jun 16 0.875 0.043 960 .52.5 Z.6

.11&1 16 0,36) 0.018 992. 2.2.5 1.1 AUi 10 0.17l o.aa8 620 10,6 0.5 Sep 31 O.l74 0.018 186a 22..4 1.1 Oct 9 0.130 0.006 558 8.1 0.4 Nov 34 o.zaa a.a14 2040 16.8 o.8 Diie 96 1.725 a.au 319 6.955 D.344 25730 538.1 26,6 1975 Jaa 72. o. 790 0.039 135 1.374 0.068 12.834 134.7 6.6 Feb 75 0.730 a.a36 2.44 1. 726 0.085 16856 137.6 6.8 Kn 3' 0.346 0.017 168 1.193 a.094 12.52.4 127.5 6,9 Apr 142. 1.826 a.090 8520 1a9.6 5.4 K17 94 1.243 0.061 5828 77.l 3.8 Jun 42 a.566 o.a21 26 a.642 a.032 4010 72..5 3.6 Jul 46 0.944 o.047 36 0.896 0.044 5084 114.l 5.6 AUi 31 o.470 o.a2.3 27 a.334 a.016 3595 49.1 z.4 Sap 21 a.502 0.02.5 5 0.104 a.005 1980 36.3 1.a Oc:t 37 0.273 0,014 13 0.210 a.010 3100 29.9 1.5 Nov 11 0.200 0.010 1080 12..0 0.6 Dae: 18 0.433 0.021 36 a.963 o.048 3341 H.5 4.3 Pell* 3557 116.367 5.750 199192 6516.6 32.2..0 Sep* 471 2.4'9 0.113 713 4.909 0.2.43 71460 444.4 u.o 1976 Ja 12. 0.405 0.020 767 u.1 1.2.

Feb 2l 0.461 a.au 48 1.060 0.052 4111 18,0 4.3 Kar 10 0.207 0.010 15 0.072 0.004 1552. 17.2 0.1 Apr 1l 0.111 0.006 682 6.7 o.3 K17 Jun Jul 6 0.069

. 0.003 5

4 6

0.133 0.117 0.102 0.006 0.009 0.005 289 231 8.4 11.2 Q,4 0.6 775 10.7 0.5 AUi 21 0,2.46 a.au 2.5 0,356 0.017 2977 37.4 1.8 Sap 12 0.189 0.009 u 0.171 o.ooa 1440 21.7 1.1 Oct* 121 0.5U 0.029 127 0,599 o.on 15856 73.4 3.6 Nov 57 0.574 0.021 16 0.120 0.006 4412 41.7 2.1 Diie: 155 1.418 0,070 75 0.979 0,048 14260 148.6 7.2 lllnllli1hted Haan* lhMightad Mani '.!'.!!!!!

llitbout Rish flow* 37.1 0.522. .02' 64,J 0,942 0,046 142993 2075.3 102. 7

'llitb Rish' 11.ov* 57.6 0.601 ,030 m.5o 5.520 . 0.273 429501 9109.7 450.3

• Data ac river f l - :> 200,000 llfa

!'Dnmla: Hancbl7 eatiuted 1o1ae1 (nllllber, Vllight or volUM)

• Kean number, vd;bt or vol...,. of f11he1 impf.n&*d per U*hT period at .. c:h ait l No, of, 12*br porioda in a _,,th.

Eaaloplll toa1e1 111 Deceun 1974

• No. of f1ah11 * (96x62) + (319d2)

• 23730 Wt. (ka) * (1.72Jd2) + (6.9SSIC62)

• 538,l vol. (ttl) * (0.085n2) + (0,34f+x62)

• 26.6 3-22

TAIL& 3,2-11 Monthly Hmple and toed uc:l.Nted lo1aa1 of ch&m1d cacf11h dua co impiaauient 1c tha fuc:h J!DCC.,.. St*CiDll durtaa c-'rl:ial oparacion, June 1974-l>dcllllbor 1976.

Unit 1!21 :z Unit No. 3 Uni.ti No. 2 and 3 M!*n Plr 12*hr Period Mean Per l:Z*br Period Estimated Lo11u Per Month

(~~;

llODCh No. we. No. we. Vol. llO. lie. Vol.

Ota> (1<1) (fcl) (k1) (fc3) 1914 Jllll 11 0.111 0.010 660 10.9 0.6 Jul 13 0,3U 0.016 106 20.0 1.0 0.151 0.001 558 9.1 o.s AUi kp Oc:C zz 6

o.:na 0.011 0.016 0,004 1320 37Z 19.0 4.8 1,0 a.z Nov 16 0.011 0.004 '60 4.9 0.2 Dn 20 0.102 o.oo.s 103 o.no 0.04.!J 7626 62,7 3.1 1'7.!J Ju 44 0.324 0.016 37 0.201 0.010 5022 33.0 1.6 rell 37 0.325 0.016 11.!J 0.945 0.047 8512 11.1 3.5 Har 29 0.211 0.014 U4 1,491 0.074 10106 110.3 5.5 Apr 132 1.615 0.083 7920 101.1 5.0 Mil' 13 0.971 0.048 51.46 60.6 3.0 Jllll 31 0.417 0.011 19 0.361 0.011 3000 46.7 2.4 Jal 40 0.101 0.035 31 0.521 0.026 4402 76.6 3.1 AUi 26 0.249 0.012 23 0.260 0.013 3031 31.5 1.5 Sep 2l 0.211 0.011 4 0.064 0.003 1620 16.9 0.9 Oct 14 0.107 0,005 s 0.054 0.003 1171 9.9 o*.s lfn 13 0.16.S 0.008 710  !!.t o.s Diie a o.136 o.oa1 19 0.411 o.o:o 1674 3:.., 1.6 ru* 2461 95.633 4.7ZS 137116 5355.4 264.6 Sep* 16J 0.992 0.049 .50 1.109 0.05.S 12900 U6,0 6.:Z 1976 Ju 10 0.212 o.ou 589 16.9 0.1 fell 21 0.147 0.007 45 0,419 0.024 3157 36.9 1.1 Mu 9 0.052 0.003 14 o.053 0.003 14.Sl 6 *.S 0.4 A~ 11 0.067 0,003 660 4.0 0.2 MaJ' 4 0.079 0.004 241 4.9 0.2 Jua 2 0.09% 0.005 120 5 *.S 0.3 Jul 5 0.062 0,003 s l'.O.!JI 0.003 631 7 *.5 o.4 Alli 21) 0.207 0.010 Zl 0.2l9 o.ou 2671 7.5 1.3 Sep 11 0.149 0.007 o.1oi o.oos Oc:~

llaV 34 0.139 0,071 o.006 O.OOo\

7 4

Q,037 0.017 o.ooz 0.001 1176 2541 21.1 u.o 0.7 o * .s llee '

14 0.111 0.006 31 0.285 0.014 751 27.59 10.9 15.0 o.J 1.3 11twet1htu !!!.... ua-f.15htad Mull*

llf.dlouc Ill.Sh Fl ova ll.1 0.209 0.010. 55.2 0.621 0,031 79626 819.0 44.1 111.tb 111.ab Fl ova 2'.3 0.239 a.au 11..5,3 6.9117 a.34.5 232190 6311.3 315.4

• Dita at river fl...,. > 200,~ efa 3-23

TAU l.2-12 tbuthly sample and total e>stl..mllt&d losses of vhitD crnppla dua to i*pift&CllDnt at tha Paach 8otta11 Staticna dllriD& cCllllDllrcial "P"raeian, .JWIA 1974*DecC!lllber 1976.

1l9it l!Oo 2 llftlE No. 3 llr\ita No. l and l Hee Per 12-!!r Period HHn Per l2*hr hrlod !atllllat!d l::!!Hn Per tlantb llOnch No. we. Vo!* No. we. Vol. No. Wt. Val.

Ck&) (ft ) (kg) (tel) (q) (tel) 1974 Jun Jill a.p

°"'

(0.3)

(0.25)

(O,l)

(0.4) l 8

0.230 0.010 0.001 0.007 0.010 0.149 0.011 0.007 110 19 16 11 2S 410 13.8 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.6 8.9 0.7 0.4 Dec 63 1.475 0.073 130 3.680 0.11% 11966 319.6 u.a 1975 Jan 9 0.271 0.013 Z4 0.745 0.037 20Wi 63.0 3.1 Feb 2 0.220 0.011 1 0.102 0.005 161 11.0 0.9 Kar l 0.021 0.001. 2 0.030 0.001 186 3.6 0.2 Apr l 0.03S 0.002 30 2.1 0.1 (0.l) 0.031 a.002 20 Juza Jul 0

1 o.ooo o.or.o o.ooo o.a02 1

1 o.on a.on a.004 0.004 60 124 1.9 4.6 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 .... ""

~-

Aul l 0.106 0.005 (0.3) 0.016 0.001 78 7.6 0.4 Sep O..t Kov l>ec fall*

2 6

4 0.236 0.042 0.232 0.012 0.002 0.'011 0

3 2

I 13 o.aoo 0.010 0.009 0.411 0.208 o.ooo 0.020 0.010 uo 558 uo 744 1020 14.2 3.2 o.s 39.9 11.6

- 0.7 0.1 1.9 0.6 SeP* 7 0.205 0.010 17 0.138 0.007 1148

• 20.6 1.0 1976 Jan 1. 0.091 0.005 6l 5.7 0.3 Fell Kar Apr 0

0 o.ooo o.ooo o.ooo o.ooo (0.2) ca.1) 1 a.au 0.001 0.026 0.001 0.001 29 12 6

1.4 0.1 1.s

• 0.1 0.1 Kay 0 0 o.o o.o Jim (0.4) 0.026 0.001 24 1.S 0.1 Jiil 0 o.ooo o.ooo (0.2] a.019 0.001 u 1.2 0.1 Sep Oct*

(0.2]

6 0

0.022 o.ooo a.036 0.001 o.ooo 0.002 1

1 4

a.OU 0.032 0.030 0.004 0.002 0.002 49 30 6.S 1.9 0.4 0.1 5BS 4.0 0.2

!kw t>ec 10 4

.0.116 o.oo:s 0.006

... 4 l 0.027 0.214 0.001 a.on 752 465 1.s u.s 0.4 0.1

!l!!!!i1htad Means n.ve1shud Mean*

Without High llova 4.8 o.137 0.006 a.o a.232 o.on 11409 552.S 27.0 With Riah 11- s.o 0.136 0.006 8.3 0.220 o.01a 21160 588.7 18.Z

• Dae& at rival' flov1 ;. 200,000 c;f1 IAH than 0.001

..,. Lt11 Chan Q,l 3-24

TAILI l.2-13 1toachly 1-rl* ud co~l uaut*d 101H1 of bluegill due co U.i111-ac *C th* l'uch Boccooa Station dlll'ina c-in:ial oporatiaa, JW>a 1974*Decabar 1976.

J:!ema Pu }2*hr Period lle*a fer 12-hr rarlad E*tlluced t.ouu Per l1oftch Hiracll No. lie, Vol. llo. lit. Vo}* 110. lie. Vol.

(kt) (fcl) (kl) (fc > (ks) (!cl) 1974 JUG 0 0.000 o.ooo 0 o.o o.o Jul AUi 541p Get lloY 0

0 1

1 I

o.ooo o.ooo 0.005 o.~

o.on o.ooo 0,000 o.ooz

-- 60 62 480 0

0 o.o o.o 0.3 0.2.

2..1 a.o o.o 0.1 Dec 9 D.107 o.oos 59 0.622 0.031 4216 45.2 2.2 1975 J&D 16 0.150 0.001 60 D.330 0.016 4712 30.4 1.,

F*b KU 16 (0.6) 0.099 0.023 o.oos 0.001.

91 7

o.46o 0.132 o.ou 0.007 5992 471 31.l 1.6 o.s Apr Kay Jim Jul (O.S)

(0.25) o.ooa 0.001 1

2 l

0 o.oo.

0,016 o.oos 1).000 0.001 0.000 60 124 90 16 0.2 1.0 o.e 0.1 --...

0.1 AU& 0 0,000 o.oao 0 o.ooo 0.000 0 o.o o.o S*p 1 0.004 0 o.ooo o.ooo 60 0.2 Oct 0.003 13 0.051 2 0.006 930 4.0 0.1 Mn 2 0.021 0.001 120 1.3 0.1 DH (0.17) o.oor. 1 o.006 73 0.6

,.... 300 2.175 0.142 16100 111.1 e.o Sap* 156 0.549 0.011 306 l.llO 0.065 27710 111.s S.4 1976 J&D 0 o.ooo o.ooo 0 o.o o.o Feb 0 0.000 o.ooo 0 o.ooo 0.000 0 o.o o.o K:.r (0.5) 0.002 (0.2) 0.001 43 0.1

.\pr 0 o.ooo o.ooo 0 o.o o.o Mar 0 o.ooo o.ooo 0 o.o o.o Jim J11l (0.1)

(0.S) 0.001 (O.l)

(0.6) 0 o.aoz o.ooo o.006 o.ooo

..- 6 6

68 0.1 0.3 S*p (0.6). 0.002 (0.7) 0.002 71 0.1 occ* 70 o.zss o.ou n 0.301 o.ou 9108 J4.9 1.7 lift 1 0.033 0.002 (O.S) 0.004 84 2..1 c.1 Dec 0 0 o.ooo o.ooo 0 o.o o.o

!l!!!!!l1ht51! 1!!*11* llnlMlahttd Keane Vlthcnat ll11b Flan 1.9 0.024 0.001 9,9 0.010 0.003 177'1 uo.1 6.4 llttb 1U1b flan 11.4 0.05l 0.001 35.0 0.2.35 0.012 71379 4l7.6 21.6

..* Data at riwr flov :. Z00,000 ch I.AH chaa 0.001

... Lau tbaa 0.1 3-25

TADLI!: 3.2*14 O...pad101l of tha avora111 c1tch per effort of en an111er (ftahtnit trlp

• 5 hr.) nnd tho 1crecn1 at reach llottOlll (C11hln11 u-

• 2.:. hr.). DAta co11occo4 fl'Oll 1958 t.hro"fh 1940 and 1974 cl1roi;;h 1976.

llOftth Jaa rcb Har Apr Hay JUD J11l ,.... Sip Oct Nov Dec

,.,,,1ul Crappie*

19SI 4.7 l.O 2.s 0.1 0.2 0.4 19S9 4.4 4.7 1.7 0.3 O.l 2.S 2 * .S 1960 2.6 1.t 1.l 0.2 o*.s 2.0 0.2

'llht.te crappie 1974 u.o 19.2  %.l .s.o 1975 4.4 6.1 l.l 6,S 1976 10.6 a.a J.5 6.6 Awzaae 9.0 11.4 2.4 3.9 l.1 1.1 0,1 O,l 1.6 1.0 6.0 PHcla lotcOlll Uaitl !lo. 2 and l 19742 53.0 32.8 0.5 1.0 o.s 12..0 l.2 1.0 1.2 1.6 32.0 386.0 1975 59.2 6,0 6,0 2.0 0.6 2.0 4.0 2.6 4,0 11.0 4.0 24.0 30,0 *** 48.0***

1976 z.o 2.0 0.4 0.2 Q,O 0.1 0,4 2.4 2.0 20.0** 16.0 16.0 Awra1e Wt.tho11t High Fl""*'** 31.1 U.6 2.3 1.1 0.3 4.9 1.t 2.0 2.4 20.7 142.0 Wt.tb H11b Flava 31.5- 17.1***13.1***

AqlHl S1111fiabH 19.58 0.1 0.2 O.l o.s 0.1 0.2 1951 1.9 0.7 o.s o.s 0,4 0.2 o *.s 1960 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0,6 o.t lluaat.11 1974

• 0.4

• 7 * .S 1975 1976 2.1

.. 1.4 0.1 4.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 Awna* o.t o.s 1.7 o.a 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.1 O.l o.s 2.6 Paacb Iott*

~u lo. 1 md l U741 1.1 13.8 1.0 6.0 0.3 o.o o.o o.o 2.0 1.0 16.0 136.0 1975 1.52.0 ll4.0 15.2 2.0 4.0 3.0 o.s o.o 1.0 30.0 4.0 2.4 532,0- 924.0***

1t76 o.o o.o 1.4 o.o o.o 0.1 0.2 :i.2 2.6 194,0M 3.0 o.o A'119a&*

Vicbaut 8111h l"lava'** :11.3 75.t 2.7 1.4 Vt.ch Bigb FlDWll 2U.l- '*' 1.1 0.2 0.7 2.2 30t.5***10I. 1-7.7 46.1 Aqi.,l Cat.Uabu 1951 1.1 0.6 1.l 1.9 1.6 1.7 1959 1.l 1.1 1.0 1.7 1.2 1.4 0.1 1960 0.9 6,8 Qamal cattt.lll 9.7 o.t 1.l 4.0 1974 1975 o.o o.o o.o O,l o.o o.o o.o 1976 o.o

• o.o Awa.1a 0.1

• 1.l 2.4 4.0 1.s 1.4 2.4 l.1 o.o

'9uh Iott*

vat.ta llo. 2 and l 19742 210.0 260.% 57,S 61.4 15.0 ll.O 16.0 18.0 44.0 u.o 32,0 246.0 1975 19Z.O 304,0 326.0 264.0 166.0 100.0 142.0 91.0 Yl.O 38,0 26.0 54.0

• • 4'96.o*** 430.o-1976 20.0 134.o 46.0 u.o e.o 4.0 20.0 16.0 40,0 az.o~.o 90.0 Awrasa Without 111gh Flow"* 164.0 232.7 143,2 ua.1 66.l 42.0 62.7 '7.l 46,0 za.o uo.o With lllsh Flov1 1796.7*** 171.l*H44.D***

1 I.let* for 7eai-* 19511, 1959 and 1960 va1 taken froe rloaUa (1961), fl*h** cau,ht vora not it.cad b7 1ndlvld... l 1pedu 1 b11t were pruented u catflaha1, a11Rfhh111 and crappiu.

z llnlt 2 onl7 *<<*pt nee (l,.lta 2 & 3 cllllhlaed)

Leu than 0,1

• • '* Data collect*d wha11 rtvar n-

• zoo,oon c:ll not tncllld1d.

• • • Dita colloc:tld when i-lver flow .., 2IJU,llllU ch lucludad 3-26

• Channel Calli5h D White Crappie 180i

~

0 100 40 lI E!I Bluegill

r 30 d

z N D DJFMAMJJASON 1974 1975 1976 1973 flGUU J.l*l tlllnthly U.lnauant (11-.r **r l:Z*hr) of the cbasuMl oatH*h, vldte cnppl* aod UI bluaalll at che 1eu*aa* fo& thm Peach IOtta* IUr:lOG D\lt No. z, Jin'lllkr 117~..

I o...mer 1'76.

• 140 100 IL I I

• Channel Catfl5h

• 60 0 While Crappie

'40 r

L

i SI Blueglll 0

rI 30

~

";;' 2 z

s' 1974 1975 1976 ncuu i.z.z ttoa.thlr lapln1...a.t (ama..r per lZ*hr) of tM chunel catfllb, vtilta cr*nl* all Hue1ltt at the acre** for huh Iott- ltattoa DIU: ... 3, Dleuller 1175*

n...-arUJI.

4.0 LITERATURlZ ~

Anjard, C. A. 1976. Entrainment of fish eggs and larvae 1 p. 7-10 to 7-17.

INT. w. Robbins and D. Mathur, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station POstoperational Report No. 5 on the Ecology of Conowingo Pond for the Period July 1975-December 1975. Ichthyological Associates, Inc. 501 p.

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 (third edition).

Amer. Fish~ Soc. Spec. Publ. No. 6: 150 p.

Beeton, A. M. and J. M. Barker. 1974. Investigation of the influence of thexmal discharge from a large electric power station on the biology and near-shore circulation of Lake Michigan - Part A: Biology.

Special Report No. 18. Center for Great Lakes Studies, Milwaukee,*

Wisconsin, Bodala, A. 1966. Life history of the gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum (Lesuer), in western Lake Erie. u. s. Fish. Wildl. Serv. Fish. Bull.

65(2):391-425.

Brooks, A. S., R. A. Smith and L. D. Jensen. 1974. Phytoplankton and primary productivity, p. 77-93. IN L. D. Jensen (ed.) Environmental responses to thermal discharges *from the Indian River Station, Indian River, Delaware. Cooling Water Discharge Project (RP-49), Electric Power Research Institute. John Hopkins University, Baltimore.

Bush, R. A., E. B. Welch and B. w. Mar. 1974. Potential effects of thermal discharges on aquatic systems. Environ. Sci. Tech. 8(6):561-568.

carlson, D. M. 1974. Responses of planktonic cladocerans to heated waters,

p. 156-206. m '!. W. Gibbons and R. R. Sbaritz (ed.) Thermal Ecology .*

670 p.

Carpenter, E. ~., B. B. Peck and S. J. Anderson. 1974. Survival of copepods passing through a nuclear power *tat1on on northeastern Long Island Sound, U.S.A. ~rine Biology 24:49-55.

Davies, R. M. and L. D. Jensen. 1974. Entrainment of zooplankton at three mid-atlantic power plants, p. 131-155. IN L. D. Jensen (ed.)

Proc. 2nd Entrainment and Intake Screening Workshop. Rept. No. 15, Edison Elec. Inst., Palo Alto, Calif. 347 p.

Earle, J, 1974. Zooplankton, p. 2-48 to 2-71. IN T. w. Robbins and D.

Mathur, Preoperational Report on the Ecology-Of Conowingo Pond for Units No. 2 and 3. Ichthyological Associa~es, Inc., Drumore, Pennsylvania. xviii + 349 p.

4-1

Elier, H. o. and J. J. Delfino. 1974. Limnological and biologist studies of the effects of two modes of open-cycle nuclear power station ....,

discharge on the Mississippi River (1969-1973). Water Res. 8:995-1005.

Environmental Technical Specifications. 1973. Appendix B to Operating License for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units No. 2 and 3, York County, Petlilsylvania. Phila. Elec. Co. Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278.

53 p. .

Euston, E. T. 1976. Winter Fishery, p. 4-73 to 4-79. IN T. w. Robbins and D. Mathur, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Postoperational Report No. 5 on the Cology of Conowingo Pond for the Period of July 1975-December 1975. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Drumore,. Pennsylvania. 501 p.

Euston, E. T., P. G. Heisey, D. Mathur, G. A. Nardacci, T. w. Robbins and T. F. Rosage. 1974. Biology of fishes, p. 4-75 to 4-79. IN T. w.

Robbins and D. Mathur, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Preoperational Report on the Ecology of Conowingo Pond for Units No. 2 and 3.

Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Dnmiore, Pennsylvania. xviii + 349 p.

Fox, J. t. and M. s. Moyer. 1973. Some effects of a power plant on marine microbiota. Chesapeake Sci. 14(1):1-10.

Glooschenko, w. A. and J. E. Moore. 1973. Surface distribution of chlorophyll

! and primary production in Lake Huron, 1971. Tech. Rept. No. 406.

Fish. Res. Bd. Cs.nada.

Glooschenko, w; A., J. E. Moore and R. A. Vollenweider. 1974. Spatial and temporal distribution of chlorophyll a and phaeopigments in surface waters of Lake Erie * . J. Fish. Res. Bd. Cana.da 31:265-274.

Hall, D. J. 1964. An experimental approach to the dynamics of a natural population of Daphuia galeata mendota. Ecology 45(1):94-111.

Heinle, D. R. 1969. Temperature and zooplankton. Chesapeake Sci. 10(3,4):

186-209.

Hocutt, c. H. 1973. SWimming performance of three wa'tDIWBter fishes exposed to a rapid temperature change. Chesapeake Sci. 14(1):11-16.

Houston Lighting and Power Co. 1974. Environmental Report, South Texas Project Units 1 & 2. Docket STN 50-498.

Howell, G. P. 1969. Hudson River at Indian Point, Annual Report 4/16/68 to 4/15.69. Inst. Envir. Med., New York Univ. Med. Ctr., New York.

Hutchinson, G. E. 1967. A treatise on limnology, Vol. II. Introduction to lake biology and the limnoplankton. Wiley and Sons, N.Y. 1115 p.

Ichthyological Associates. 1977a. Limnology of Conowingo Pond, p; 2-1 i:o 2-*33, IN Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Postoperational Report No. 7 on the Ecology of Conowingo Pond for Units No. 2 and 3. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Drumore, Pennsylvania.

4-2

Ichthyological Associates. 1977b. Entrainment of Zooplankton, p. 7-1 to 7-9.

IN Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Postoperational Report No. 7 on the Ecology of Conowingo Pond for the Period of July 1976-December 1976.

Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Drumore, Pennsylvania.

Jester, D. B. 1972. Life history, ecology and management of the river carpsucker, Carpiodes carpio (Rafinesque), with reference to Elephant Butte Lake. Ag. Exp. Sta. Res. Rept. 243, New Mexico State Univ., Las Cruces. 120 p.

King, L. R. 1969. Swimming speed of the channel catfish, white crappie and other warmwater fishes from Conowingo Reservoir, Susquehanna River, Pa. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Bull. No. 4. 74 p.

Lanner, M. and B. Pejler. 1973. The effect of cooling water discharges on zooplankton in a bay of Lake Malaren. Inst. Freshwater Res.

Drottningholm Rept. No. 53, p*. 31-33.

Lauer, G. J., w. T. Waller, D. w. Bath, w. Meeks, D. Heffner, T. Ginn, L. zubarik, P. Kibko and P. c. Storm. 1974. Entrainment studies on Hudson River organisms, p. 37-82. IN L. D. Jensen (ed.), Proc. 2nd Entrainment and Intake Screening Workshop Rept. No. 15. Edison Elect. Inst., Palo Alto, calif. 347 p.

Marcy, B. c., Jr. 1975. Entrainment of organisms at power plants, with emphasis on fishes--An overview. l! S. B. Saila. Fisheries and energy produc~~~n. D. c. Heath and Co., Lexington, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

McFadden. J. T. 1976. Environmental impact assessment for fish populations,

p. 89*137. IN R. K. Sharzna, J. D. Buffington and J. T. McFadden (eds.)

Proc. NRC Workshop on the Biological Significance of Environmental Impacts. N'!IS, Springfield, Virginia.

McLaren, I. A. 1966. Predicting development rate of copepod eggs. Biol.

Bull. 131:457*469.

McManus, w. J. 1975. Entraimnent of Zooplankton, p. 7-1 to 7-7. INT. w.

Robbins and D. Mathur, Peach Bottom Atomic ?ewer Station Postoperational Report No. 3 on the Ecology of Conowingo Pond for the Period of July 1974-December 1974. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Drumore, Pennsylvania.

xxiv + 350 p.

McManus, w. J. 1976. Entrainment of Zooplankton, p. 7-1 to 7-9. IN T. w.

Robbins and D. Mathur, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Postoperational Report No. 5 on the Ecology of Conawingo Pond for the Period of July 1975-December 1975. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Drumore, Pennsylvania.

xxxiii + 501 p.

McNaught, D. C. (no date). Testimony for the AEC operating permit of the Commonwealth Edison Zion Nuclear Electric Generating Station. 21 p.

4-3

Patrick, R. 1969. Some effects of temperature on freshwater algae, p.

161-185. IN P. A. Krenkel and F. c. Parker (eds.), Biological aspects of thexmal""""Pollution. Vanderbilt Univ. Press.

Philadelphia Electric Company. 1975. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Materials prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency 316(a) demonstration for PBAPS Units No. 2 and 3 on Conowingo Pond. Philadelphia Electric Co., Phila., Pennsylvania.

Plosila, D. S. 1961. Lower Susquehanna River sport fishery survey, p. 55-78.

IN R. R. Whitney, The Susquehanna Fishery Study, 1957-1960. Md. Dept.

Res. Ed. Contrib*. No. 169.

Potomac Electric Power Co. 1973. Environmental Report, Construction Permit Stage, Douglas Point Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 & 2. Docket 50-448. . 572 P*

Pratt, D. M. 1943. Analysis of population development in Daphnia at different temperatures. Biol. Bull. 85:116-140.

Railey, E. c. 1973. Reasons for the expected environmental improvement in Conowingo Pond in relation to recreational activities of man, *p. 6-1 to 6-13. INT. w. Robbins and D. Mathur, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station-Preoperational Report on the Cology of Conowingo Pond for Units No. 2 and 3. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Drumore, Pennsylvania.

xviii + 349 P*

Richards, F. A. and T. G. Thompson. 1952. The estimation and characteri-zation of plankton populations by pigment analysis. II. A spectro- ........

photometric method for the stimation of plankton pigments. J. Mar.

Res. 11:156-172.

Robbins, T. w. and D. Mathur. 1974. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Preoperational Report on the Ecology of Conowingo Pond for Units No.

2 and 3. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Drumore, Pennsylvania.

xviii + 349 p.

Robbins, T. w. and D. Mathur. 1975. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Postoperational Report No. 4 on the Ecology of Conowingo Pond for the Period January 1975-June 1975. Ichthyological Associates, Inc.,

Drumore, Pennsylvania. xxiii + 322 p.

Robbins, T. w. and D. Mathur. 1976a. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Postoperational Report No. 5 *on the Ecology of Conowi'Jlgo Pond for the Period July 1975-December 1975. Ichthyological Associates, Inc.,

Drumore, Pennsylvania. xxxiii + 501 p.

Robbins, T. w. and D. Mathur. 1976b. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Supplementary Materials Prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency 316(a) Demonstration for PBAPS Units No. 2 and 3 on Conowingo Pond. 251 p.

Schindler, D. w. 1969. Two useful devices for vertical plankton and water sampling. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 26(7):1948-1955.

4-4

Strickland, J. D. H. and T. R. Parsons. 1972. A practical handbook of seawater analysis. Bulletin 167. 2nd edition. Fish. Res. Bd.

Canada.

Verduin, J. (no date), Testimony for the AEC operating permit of the Commonwealth Edison Zion Nuclear Electric Generating Station. Southel:Il Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois.

Whitney, R. R. 1961. The susqeuhanna Fishery Study, 1957-1960. Md. Dept.

Res *. Ed. Contrib. No. 169.

4-5

APPENDIX A ENTRAINMENT OF FISH ~ ~ LARVAE: 1973 Methods Sampling stations were established at the intake (immediately before the inner set of vertical traveling screens of Unit 2), discharge (at the bridge between the discharge pond and the discharge canal) and in the dis-charge canal. Sampling was regulated by the Peach Bottom start-up testing schedule.

Samples of 15 min duration were taken at the surface and bottom at each station simultaneously using l m plankton nets, held by anchored bouys or attached by lines to the shore. A General Oceanics Model 2030 flowmeter was motm.ted in the mouth of each net to determine the volume of water strained.

The intake an'd discharge were sampled once a week in daylight hours from 19 June to 7 August 1973. The circulating water pumps were operated at the request of Ichthyological Associates. The discharge canal was sampled only on 7 August because the cooling towers were not operational prior to this date.

Sampling was terminated on 7 August because the densities of larvae were too low to estimate U10rtality.

Specimens that showed some reaction to 101. formalin were considered alive while those not displaying any movement were considered dead.

Results Densities of larvae in each sample were extremely low (Table 7.2-1) and precluded estilllation of mortality due to mechanical damage. The combined average density of fish larvae at the three stations was 9.3 larvae per 3

1000 m

• As in the case of zooplackton, the number of dead fish larvae 5-1

in the samples taken at the intake generally exceeded those from the dis-charge, The most commonly entrained fishes were larvae of the carp, quillback and Lepomis spp. (bluegill and pumpkinseed less than 14 mm fork length). No eggs were collected.

5-2

TAIL! 1.Z*l Doadtl.a* af Uv,1 an* dHd larval fhha1 (ZJ

• ar laa1 la 11&1) pu 1000 al at th* 1urfaca and b*tt- at tha Intake, dl1cb*q* *nd dhch*r1* canal of Peach Iott* AtDlllo PoftT ltatloo '-*t-- 19 .Jun* and 1 Auauat 117.1.

scat loft JOU~ Dl1ahage DhcMr1* gut Doptb lurface lattam IUl'flCll Iott... lutflce Iott* Avara1a Avan1*

Ra. Suipl*a Allve 21 Dod Alb*a Zl _. Alive H _. Alh*

Z6 Dod AJ.iya J

D*. . .r.u...

J _. Dondt7 AUH Deo1tt7 DHd 4var*1*

Don1lt7 Sp1claa O.H 0.11 1.u O.ZI i;. earpto ll* apt loptan1a S.*

D.42 Z.09 0.41 0.66 0.11 1.40 o.lt Z.J4 ).Oft J.91 0.01 0.11 o.oa 4.IJ o.u c~pdnu1 0.55 1.51 0.40 1. 91 A

l* punctatua 1.97 O.IJ 0.12 0.1Z

' C.ntrarchl.Saa L. ucrachtn.11 O,ZI z.zz l.,l o.oa o.u o.oa o.16

! . !!!!l!!!.!!!! o.za 0.01 0.01 IApa*ll *PP* 0.4Z 0.14 l.U O.IJ 0.55 2.zz 0.56 0.40 o.n i;. al.. todl 0.31 0.55 i.n 0.32 0.32

~****lfl*bl* 0.3' 0.01 0.01 Totll* D.14 J.J4 J.M 1.17 11.H 0.11 lJ.U I.JI o.oo 4.44 l.tJ l.tJ 1.11 l.tl t.lO

APPENDIX B ENTRAINMENT OF FISH EGGS AND LARVAE: 1974 Methods Studies to detennine the mortality of fish larvae entrained in the cooling water system of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit No. 2 began in May 1974. Prior to 17 June, samples were taken when Unit No. 2 was operated at varying power levels (34-98%). After 17 June, Unit No. 2 operated at 98-1007. power during all but one sampling period (26 July; 70-76%). Temporary plant shutdowns and other problems related to station operation occasionally interrupted or prevented scheduled sampling.

. Samples were taken simultane~usly in the Unit No. 2 intake pond and in the discharge canal (approximately 250 yards downstream from cooling tower C). A total of four surface and four bottom collections was taken from each location both in the day and at night. Samples were taken twice weekly from 10 May until 21 .June and once a week thereafter until 2 August.

On 10 and 17 May, collections were taken in the intake pond in daytime only.

Larvae were collected using plankton nets of 1 m diameter and 0.5-mm.

mesh size. Nets were hung from a cable stretched across the Unit No. 2 intake pond. In the discharge canal, nets were suspended from anchored buoys.

The nets were set for 10 minutes, retrieved and the sample emptied into in-dividual, aerated, styrofoam containers. Live and dead larvae were separated on site. Specimens that showed some reaction to 101. formalin were considered alive while those not displaying movement were considered dead. The time lag from collection to sorting of larvae was usually less than one-bald hour and never .more

than one hour. Specimens were preserved in 10% formalin and later transferred to 40% isopropanol, identified and measured.

The volume of water filtered in each sampl~ was determined from a General Oceanics Model 2030 flow meter mounted in the mouth of each net. In 157. of the collections, the meters became clogged with debris and exact volume could not be determined. In these cases the sample volume was estimated. If only one daily sample was affected, the volume was estimated using the average sample volume fi>r the day. If more than one sample was affected, the average volume for the entire season was used. Because of the low overall density of larvae, the data from all collections on a given date from each location were pooled.

Densities were expressed as the number of larvae per 1000 m3 ,

Mortalities were calculated from the densities of live and dead larvae at the intake and discharge. Adjustments for settling or disintegration of daad larvae in the cooling ponds and discharge canal were made by adding the difference in densities between the intake and the discharge to the densities of the dead larvae at the discharge. The proportion dead at the intake was then subtracted from the adjusted proportion dead at the discharge to estimate the mortality due to entrainment.

The minimum number of larvae needed to detect a real difference between mortalities at the intake and discharge was calculated using ths formula (Sokal and Rohlf, 1969, p. 609):

where C ~ 17, 249 for 90% certainly, P < .OS; P1 *proportion dead at intake; P

2

= adjusted proportion dead at discharge. Estimates of entrainment 5-5

mortality were possible only on days where the number of larvae taken in the intake pond equalled or exceeded N.

Mortalities were calculated for the larvae of carp, quillback, channel catfish and tessellated darter. The densities of the remaining species were too low to adequately determine' mortality.

Densities of fish larvae immediately offshore of the Station cooling water intakes were established using the data from Transect Station 562.

This station was sampled weekly throughout the spawni~g season as part of the monitoring program in the Pond. However, the samples were not collected at the same time as the entrainment samples and the data provided for qualitative comparisons only.

Results The most commo~ly entrained larval fishes were the carp, quillback, channel catfish and tessellated darter (Table 7.2~1). The same species were common off the intake. Larvae of the gizzard shad, spotfin shiner, white sucker, rock bass, white crappie, Lepomis sp. {blu~gill and pumpkinseed less than 14 IDlll), logperch and shield darter were also entrained. No eggs were taken in the intake and discharge canal although a single carp egg was taken in the Pond off the intake. No larvae of the game fishes such as the walleye, smallmouth bass and largemouth bass were entrained.

Entrainment mortalities, excluding those where N was not exceeded and negative mortalities, ranged from 52-100% {Tables 7.2-2 to 7.2-5). The mortalities did not differ substantially between species. When few larvae were collected at the intake real differences in mortality would not 'be statistically detected. Negative estimates were confined primarily to the channel catfish and tessellated darter and were related to the vertical 5-6

distribution and relative size of larvae. The average size (Table 7.2-6) of larvae of these species (14-21 mn) was greater than that of the carp and quillback larvae (7-9 mn). Also, the carp and quillback larvae were dis-tributed more evenly throughout the water column (Table 7.2-7) than the channel .catfish and tessellated darter which were taken mostly in bottom collections.

'!1le demersal distribution of the chaDnel catfish and tessellated darter larvae required that the samples be taken close to the bottom to obtain reliable density estimates. The discharge station nets were one to two feet closer to the bottom than those in the intake. This difference in location of nets 1!18.Y have reduced the sampling efficiency of the intake nets for channel catfish and tessellated darter larvae and resulted in negative mortality estimates.

Negative mortalities may have also resulted from the large size of the chatm.el catfish and tessellated darter larvae. Noble (1971), indicated for the walleye and yellow perch that although net avoidance capability differed between species, it began at less than 10 mm and increased with increasing size. Thus, the avoidance capability of the channel catfish and tessellated darter larvae was probably considerably greater than that of the carp and quillback, based on their respective sizes. This potential for net avoidance may have been significantly raduced by the stress imposed on the larvae while being transported through the condenser system. Any significant reduction in avoidance capability between the intake and discharge locations would have increased the sampling efficiency of the discharge nets and resulted in negative mortality estimates.

5-7

TABLE 7.2-1 Mean densities (number per 1000 m3) of fish larvae ~ 25 mm) collected in the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit No. 2 intake pond, discharge canal, and at transect Station 562, 9 May - 7 August 1974.

Location Intake Discharge Station 562 No. Samples 197 184 48 Species

.!!* ce;eedianum 0.04 Cyprinidae 0.16 0.07 1.14 Q. carpio 6.29 1.43 8.41 li* procne 0.15 N. rubellus 0.23 li* spilopterus 0.16 Q. cyprinus 5.48 2.13 11.98 Q. commersoni 0.41 0.07 0.99 1* ptmctatus 2.70 3.71 12.51

!!* auritus 0.08 0.08

!!* macrochirus 0.08 li* dolomieui 0.23 P. annularis 0.08 0.04 0.15 ,.e I *-.... ~

Lepomis sp. 0.74 0.55 0.45 E. olmstedi 15.20 25.88 138.85

!. caprodes o.os

!* peltata 0.65 0.33 1.14 Unident~fiable 0.45 5-8

T.UU: 1.2-2 O.Ur **tl*et** llOrtdltJ "' hnal carp; ~ .!!!112. (15 - H .... la llH) du to eatnl.... t *t rucb lottaa Au.le ,.,., lt&tlOQ Unit *

• J, tc.r tbrouah Aupn, 1i74.

All d*ultl** * .,r. .. d H mmMr per 1000 * ,

.,. . lD MaJl u ...,a ID IUJ :14 ..., lD Jv,.2 14 J .. 11 Jva UJua II Jua l Jvl lZ hl lt Jol H Jtol I 1>>1 U.lab.t**

.a.. r*1*l lat*k*

Surface W"'tel' 1..., (fl 51.1 H.S H.J lD* .S-11.D 76.D 16,D n.a 11.0 **.s-n.J 1l.D 71.0-IO,O 71.0 .. IO,J 11 * .s-11.a 11.0-19,0 So, Collected 0 0 0 J ll H u s s J 0 2 0 0 Dea.U.7 U** o.o 0,0 o.o . J.JO Jl.IJ u.o la.so J.41 J.M J.40 o.o z.n D,O o.o s.10 Dlasttr DI** D.O D,D o.o o.o U.'2 z.10 7.DO 2.21 o.n o,o o,o o.o o.o o.o l.il I D<ad o.oo JJ.:14 1.u 40.00 J'*" 12.41 o.oo a.DO 22.02 LJ1 I

Of.ldMil'll

'° Sur faca Water T-.. (f) n.1 n.o *11.t ll.O 11.0 12.0 u.o 7'.J-71.0 19,S*ll.1 12,0*M.D 11.0-11.0 12.0.14.0 H.0-11.0 IC'*, C.llected l J 14 u l l J l l 0 D 0 U..HUy U.- o.:14 O,ID 6.11 z.H o.o o.o O.H o.o o.o o.o o.a o,o o.66 Deadt7 Dud 0,'7 0.40 i.n J,n 0.44 0.:12 o.o 0,0 O.Ja o.o o.o o.o o.n 51.~1 n.M I DH4

• • J*at** 1. Dt**

"*" Jo.53 72.41 so.oo

.,,,. n.o 100.00 100.00 l00.00 l00.00 U.'1 ll.'4 o.oo 11,47 l00,00 lDD.oo to,'7

1. htnlnDOat lbnalltr 72,42 sz.ao 16,1J 60,00 llO,IM ... 05 H,41 loo.GO M ll I

• s_,1., tall.la Ja th !at*ke c ... l . .dftl 41irU.Pt aalJ 2

• No alaht * ..,,.. r:u.. due u fMdt Iott* AtoU.o ,._r ltHl* .tmtdow J

• a.ca fre19 10 H* l1 lkr aat laal"4**

ff - Nmb1r of hn.. Mlde&t *t l*tab to detect

• nal dUl*n** la *rtalllJ et latab aM 4hcharp

L\111.E 7.Z-l 1

!:~!t*i;;::t*:,r~.:!~:r.: .~::!Ju!!l::=:r~ ~

(ZS - or IHI ln tlu) 611 to entral ... At at hach Iott* At-.lc PDvar SC.-t.laa Volt Mo. Z H17 throu&b Dote 10 ""'1 HlloJ 10 J ...2 " J... 11 Jun Zl .Jua 21 .rua I Jal 12 Jul U Jul 26 Jul z Au1 VelabH41 17 "" zo ""' A*ara1-3 Jataka S1.1rfac* VetH r.., (F) '1.1 ff., H.l 10.,-11.0 11.0 71.0 n.o 11.0 H.s-11.s JJ,O 11.0*IO.O 11,0*IO.S 11.s-11.0 11.0*Jl.O lio. Collecte* 0 ll IZ 14 0 4 I 0 2 I 0 0 0 0 U,H IJ,ll o.o 2,70 o.o o.o I

Denllt7 Uft Dl:ndt7 Dllatl 1 ***

o.o o.o 11.14 '*'° 4.00 41.'1 z.zo 14.ZI o.o 1.10 50,00 1.11 100,00 o,o 1.11 o.o o.oo 1.u o.o o.oo o.o o,o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o Z.ZI o.u zz.u DhchHI*

Surf1c1 Vater r-callecu4 er> '5.1 11.0 11.t 11.0 11.0 11.0 1),0 u.s-16,o n.s-11.1

• IZ.0-14.0 11.0-11.0. a.o-14.o H.0-11.0 Go. 26 16 1 l II I 4 0 0 0 0 0 Dl!nlltr U** S.OI l.H o.t1 l.IO 4.U o.sz o',46 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o 1.u Dlndtf DU* z.11 o.o o.o o... o.o o.o o,o o.o o.o o,o 0.10

\DI**

J.11 4Z.JO u.11 o.oo n.oo *.m o.oo

• l.31 n.n JZ.16

• • Ju.t** i O.** 41,H 7'.JZ 10.u -111.n 17.16 100.00 ss.12

1. !ntralrmut I

Jtartdlt7

..S.6Z H,Z6 IZ 20.u*

lit

-ua.n n.H 100.00 JJ.ll I ~ s.,.1.. token la tho lot*ka coaal .,.rl., ..,Uaht ...1, 2

• Ha nlaht 1apl** tabn dft to faacb Iott* Am.le fDwT lt*tiaa 1butdom l

• DeH froa 10 ... 17 Kq ut taclu41ad

• H_,,.r o! lanai *M*H at bltake to Utect a nal *UfH*nc* U. 9Clrtalltr at lntab aad H1char11

)

WLI 7.Z-4 Diily **U.. t** ..rtalitr of lanai cUwl Htfi1b, ICC*l*n* ~*

1 tltcvaah Mp *1 HJ4, All d*HIUH ,.,,..... 11 ..UH pet 1000

• 1 (JS - or hH ta dad *

• to entrai-*t at ,..di lattoa Al.lil91c ._... ltatl* h.&c Ko, 2, Kif

..... IQ Harl 17 Har1 10 Har 24 Har 10 _,. " J... l1 Jue 21- 21 Jua l Jul U Jal U Jal H Jul 2 .... V*l&htd

• . . , ***1 Int.aka Surhc* W*t*r 11,a 11,0-IO,O

• 71,0*IO.J Te., (P) lio, Col tact ..

57.7 0 "*'

0 a.o H,J 0

o,o 10.s-11.0 0

o.o 71.0 0

o.o 11.a Q

o.a u.a 2

2.3J

• l 1.14 61,5*71.J 4

n.a Zl n.11 l

o,H '

11.s-11.0 11.0-11,a

' l I

I-'

I-'

DlnaUJ UY*

0.Btltf Dad

\

o.a o.o o.o o.o o.o o,o o.o 0,0 a.ao o,o o.o J.'4 a.o a.oo o.o o.oo a.u JO.OD l.H a.a a.OD 1.10 o.a a.ao l,U a.a a.aa 2.'4

• o.a1 2.11 Dhr:har11 IYrf1c1 Water T*., IP) H.1 11.0 11.1 11.0 71,0 n.o IJ.Q u.s-11.0 n.s-11.a ll,0-M,O 11.0-u.o 12.0-M.o H.o-a1.o So, Celhct** 0 0 0 0 u

• 11 u 18 10 DH11C7 UYI Dlallt7 D11*

o.o o.o ***

a.o o.o o,o o.o o.o 10,ll 0.11 '*"

l."'

1.u o.u '*"

2.H 2.H o.o 2.H a.a 0

o.o a.a 4

l,21 0,41 J , Jl o.~o i ..... I.CM> 10,'3 J.J2 21.1' o.oo O.DO u.n 10.11 lclju.C .. I. DI** *JJ6,H *UJ.U -101.11 74.'4 *Jl.H -11.u 100.00 *ll,JO -s.u

1. ltatnlmMllC Hot'ullc7 *JH,H -61J.J2 -101.11 74,14 *J.H -11.u 100,QD *ll,lO -1.42 1

• SA11pl11 tabJ ta tM Intake canal 411rl*1 d17Upc onb J

• No nlaht 1..;.i.1 call.ea Ihle to PffCh letu. A'-lc rw.r ltaU.GD **tdDW J

• Date (l'09 lD i_. l1 Hl7 DOC latab I * .....,_S' of brr** u1d1* IC I.cl****

to .. c.. c a nal dlffar..a lo Mrtalltr at SateM ~ 'lHberp

TAIL& 7.l*l I

!!.:'!u':!:*,_;;~*=-~~'::!n'::::'!:~;t::~ ~ ti!!W.il.

(JS - ar lH* la llH) due to entral.-.st *t hub a.n* *~a hwr Statloa lhllt ... z. "-T

..... I 10 ...,1 11 ...,i 20 ""' 24 ""'

10 Jm 2 14.Jaa 17.Jaa 21 J .. 21 Jua I Jul 12 Joi 19 Jul 26 Jul 2 Au1 V1!S:Ht lot*lt*

Sudu* Vatar T - (f) lu.1 66.J 69.l 10.s-11.0 11.0 76,0 15.0 16.0 H.s-11.s n.o 11.0-ao.o 11.0-eo.s 11.s.. 11.o 71.0*1'.0 2 24 21 21 10 0 l l wo, Collecta*

Dl:tdtf '°1VI Io o.o s

J.76 2'

11.eo 2.20 l

2.6' 32.U "s.u 10.11 U.14 24.ll 11.11 o.o l.U 1.10 I

1.15 u.n DenlttJ Dead I. DH*

' o.o 2.Jl 40,0l u.,,

6.40 o.o o.oo o.o o.oo o.o o.oo 1,11 4.SS 14.ll 1.96 10,1J o.o o.oo o.o o.o o.oo o.o o.oo o.o o.oo 1.10 10.u l.n I DhchHI*

Suchu vuer  !

~ 1 - If) 10.1 11.0 11.1 11.0 11.0 n.o. 13,0 u.s-11,0 11.s:11.1 12,0-14.o 11.0-11.0 12.0-14,D 16.0-11.0

"°* Collecte41 Dlnalty Un Z6 4.U 24 7,24 0

o.o 24 U,24 lO U,H 224 106, lt 20 100,5' ID

)),DO 6

1.11 I

0.11 l

1,51 I

o,u u.u O.alltr D11d t

• II.to 2.41 0,0 O,)] loll 10.41 10,01 l.67 o.o a.a o.o o.o 4.16 De** a.u

'1 MJuetad l had II.JS 12,54 *Ut,OI 0.00 100.00 4.15 61,H 10,0l 12.Dl *2U,Ol t.CIS

• 264,H 10,0I

-1n.21 o.oo o.oo H,M a.oo

~1.11 o.oo 62,61

• U,11 I. lntrdm11t1at Mort.all tr 54,H -221.01 100,00 62.21 7J,H -n1.11 -216.ll *191.H U,14 -u.n 62,H *J6,2'

" lS l

• S-lu ..kao .;, the 1o..u uaal .iur1q do7Ulfst DlllJ 2

• Ho nhht .. -.1e1 tak1a dua to Peach Iott* Atoalc. hwr lbtt.Jma ahutllan l

• Data r~ 10 *rid 17 " aat l*clu...

R* ,._.,,r of bnu needed at latab to daC*ot

• Nd dUhnaca h mrtallt)' *t latab *IMI *leet.ar11 I

J )

TABLE 7.2-6 Mean fork length and range (nm) of the common larval fishes

(< 25 um) collected in the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station uii:i.t No. 2 intake pond, discharge canal and at transect Station 562, May-August 1974.

Station 562 Intake Discharge Species Q. carpio 1.1 (5-23) 7.7 (5-16) 7 .3 (4-21)

Q. cyprinus 7.6 (6-9) 8.3 (7-14) 7 .6 (5-10)

!* punctatus 20.3 (14-25) 14.6 (13-21) 14.9 (13-22)

!* olmstedi 19.4 (5-25) 18. 7 (S-25) 19.7 (4-25) 5-13

\

TABLE 7.2-7 Mean densities per io3m3 of larval fishes (~ 25 nm) taken at the surface and bottom in the intake and discharge of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit No, 2; and Transect Station 562, 20 May - 9 August 1974.

Sto.tion Sto.tion 562 Into.ke Discharge V1 Depth Surface Bottom Surfo.ce Bottom Surface nott0m I

!j;! Volume HJ 5,535 . 5,453 5,191 5,338 14,062 13,142

. Species

£. carpio 9.94 20.27 8.48 6 *.18 1.35 1.52

£. C?Erinus 8.31 4.77 1.54 4.87 1.99 2.28

!* 2unctatua

• 2.89 27.33 1.73 4.50 2.84 4.64

!* olmstedi 2.89 318.37 S.78 28.29 9.24 36.07

LITERATURE CITED Noble, R. L. 1971. An evaluation of the meter net for sampling fry of the yellow perch, Perea flavescens, and walleye, Stizostedion Y.*

vitreum. Chesapeake Sci. 12:47-48.

Sokal, R, R. and F. J. Rohlf, 1969. Biometry. W, H. Freeman Co., San Francisco. 776 p.

5-15

Intake Screen Velocity Survey for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 2 by Arthur S. Hunnewell and Edward C. Brainard, II Prepared for Philadelphia Electric Company May, 1974 Environmental Devices Corp.

Environmental Survey Division Marion, Massachusetts 02738

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Tables ii List of Figures iii

1. Abstract . * . .... ... l

2. Introduction 2

3. Methodology

a. Equipment ******** ... . .. 4

b. Fine Grain Current Survey 6

4. Results and Discussion * .. . . . .. .... 16

5. Summary * * * * * * *

• 18 Appendix A Type 110 Remote Reading Current Meter Data Sheet

List of Tables Page.

Table Title*

3. b. 1 Intake Screen Velocities - Unit 2, January 25, 1974, 10:30-11:45 Hr. E.S.T ** .... 7 3.b.2 Intake Screen Velocities - Unit 2, April 1, 1974, 09:45-11:45 Hr. E.S.T. . . . . . . . . 8 3.b.3 Pond Elevations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ii

List of Figures Figure Title Page 2;1 Intake Screens Location 3.b.1 Intake Screen Velocities, Vertical Distribution -

Unit 2. January 25, 1974) 10:30-11:45 Hr. E.S.T. . . . . * . * * . * . * .

• 12 3.b.2 Intake Screen Velocities, Horizontal Distribution -

Unit.2, January 25, 1974, 10:30-11:45 Hr. E.S.T. . * * * * * * * * . * * .

• 13 3.b.3 Intake Screen Velocities) Vertical Distribution -

Unit 2, April 1, 1974, 09:45-11:45 Hr. E.S.T. * * * * * * * . * * * * *

• 14 3.b.4 Intak~ Screen Velocities, Horizontal Distribution -

Unit*2,,Apri1 .1, 1974, 09:45-11:45 Hr. E.S.T. : ~ * * * * * * * * . * . , *

• 15 iii

1. ABSTRACT Two current surveys were made of the flows at the rotating trash screens for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 2 on January 25 and April l~ 1974 with Unit 2 circulation pumps running. With an average Pond elevation of 106.48 feet the maximum observed flow was 0.79 ft/sec with an average flow of 0.60 ft/sec for all twelve screens. Strongest flows were observed at the southern screens with lower velocities at the northern screens.

2. IHTRODUCTION On January 25 and April 1, 1974, ENDECO conducted a comprehen-sive field survey of the current flow distribution for the rotating trash screens of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 2 at Peach Bottom, Pennsylvania. The purpose of the study was to co~ply with sections 6.1.b and 7.4.2 of the "Appendix A to Operating License DTR-44. Technical Specifications and Bases for the Full Power Full Term Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units Number 2 and 3 Philadelphia Electric Company Docket Numbers 50-277 50-278 which 11 require that a single survey be made of flow velocities through each of the twelve rotating trash scree~s of Unit 2 with all three of the Unit's circulation pumps running.

The survey was conducted from a small boat located in the Unit 2 intake pond which is behind the trash screen building.* A Type .

110 Remote Reading Current Meter was employed to record velocity.

The instrument probe was lowered from* the.small boat which was .

anchored in each of the separate channels located behind each of the twelve screens. Readings were taken at the surface to fifteen feet* at five foot intervals and the observations were read in knots

{l knot= 1.6889 ft/sec}.

Although all three circulation pumps were supposed to be on

• Although the bottom profile showed a depth range of 20 to 23 feet behind the screens, to protect the instrument probe, the last reading was always taken five feet above the bottom. Depth sound-ings were taken with a lead line.

during the study, only two were operating during the survey made for Unit 2 on January 25. However this data has been treated as an exploratory preliminary study and the information h~s been used only to compare patterns of velocity distribution.

Figure 2.1 shows the relative location of the screens to PBAPS.

CONOWiNGO POND *,. .,

NORMAL POOL f£LE.V i09 SCALE If.I FEET HF?  :::::::J  :

1000 . 0 1000 tOOO . FIGURE 2 .1

3. METHODOLOGY

a. Equipment Although in the original program outline, it was stated that the current flow study would be conducted along the front of the rotating screens, the design of the screen building rest'ricted access to the front area. Each of the twelve rotating screens has its own channel separated from theothersand each rectangular channel cross-section is the same (12.5 feet wide x 24.5 feet deep at a Pond elevation of 108.5) both in front and back of the screen. The only exception is the southern-most rotating trash screen which ha*s a more restricted cross-section in front of the screen. In front of each of the screens, except for the southern-most on~, there has been constructed a flow regulating wall (18 inches high x 24 inches wide) on the bottom and built out and away* from the screens. Whether this varies the velocities is hard to evaluate since silting, which has occurred on both sides of the screen, appears to have buried the wall. In light of the fact that there was access by boat directly behind each of the screens, and because the channel cross-section wa~ similar on both sides, excpet for the southern-most screen, it was concluded that a satisfactory study with accurate results could be conducted from behind the trash s~reens.

An ENDECO Type 110 Remote Reading Current Meter (see Appendix A) was used from the small boat to obtain the fine grain data for the survey. The instrument was lowered over the side of the boat with a 20 pound weight suspended underneath it to depress the unit and to

~

maintain the 1owering line vertical. The base of the weight was about five feet below the horizontal center axis of the instrument.

Readings were taken at five foot intervals from the surface to fifteen feet and were read from the Type 110 Deck Readout. The rotor calibrations are traceable to calibrations made in the one meter square cross-section continuous flow channel at the Chesapeake Bay Institute of Johns Hopkins University. The compass was swung at ENDECO using the local Magnetic North as a reference, and a compass deviation curve, based upon 15-degree interval readings, was developed for the instrument for correction of current direction data.

b. Fine Grain Current Survey On January 25 with two circulation pumps running and April 1, 1974 with three circulation pumps running, a fine grain survey was made from a 16 foot boat inside the channel for each of the twelve rotating screens. The boat was anchored diagonally across the width of the channel, because its length exceeded the width of the channel.

After. the boat was anchored, the portable current meter was lowered over the upstream side of the boat at the center axis position of the

.channel. Velocity and direction were tabulated at each 5 foot depth interval. The elapsed time for each scr.een study, including set up and observation, was about ten minutes. Total time to complete the entire survey was about two hours.

Tables 3.b.l and 3.b.2 provide a sunmary of the information gathered on both dates.

The screens were numbered 1 to 12, south to north. for easy reference.

Table 3.b.l INTAKE SCREEN VELOCITIES - UNIT 2 January 25, 1974 (1030 - 1145 Hours E.S.T.)

(VELOCITY IN KNOTS)

Depth a 5 10 15 Ave TIME: Screen 1030 1 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.36 2 0.25 0.25 o. T5 0.30 0.24

• 3 0.25 0.25

• 0.15 0.16 4 0.25 0.20 . 0.10 o .1s 0.18 5 0.20 0.20 0 .10 0.15 0 .16 6 0.25 0.25 0. TS 0.15 0.20 7 0.25 0.25 0 .10 O.TS 0.19 8 0.20 0.25 0 .15 0.15 0. T9 9 0.15 0.25 0 .15 0.20 0.19 10 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.15 o .1a 11 o. 15 0 .10 o. lo 0.20 0 .14 '

12 0 .15 0.15 0 .15 0 .15 0.15 1145 Stop Maximum: 0.40 Minimum:

• Average: 0 .19 (VELOCITY IN FT/SEC)

Depth 0 5 10 15 Ave TIME: Screen 1030 1 0.51 0.68 0.68 0.59 0.61 2 0.42 0.42 0.25 0.51 0.40 3 0.42 0.42

• 0.25 0.27 4 0.42 0.34 0.17 0.25 0.30 5 0.34 0.34 0 .17 0.25 0.27 6 0.42 0.42 0.25 0.25 0.34 7 0.42 0.42 0.17 0.25 0.32 8 0.34 0.42 0.25 0.25 0.32 9 0.25 0.42 0.25 0.34 0.32 10 0*.25 0.34 0.34 0.25 0.30 11 . 0.25 0 .17 0.17 0.34 0.23 12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 1145 Stop Maximum: 0.68 Minimum:

• Average: 0.33 1.00 Knot= 1.6889 Ft/Sec

• Velocity bel:.Jw instrument threshold .OS knots (.08 ft/sec)

Table 3.b.2 INTAKE SCREEN VELOCITIES - UNIT 2 April 1, 1974 (0945 1145 Hours E.S.T.)

M (VELOCITY IN KNOTS)

Depth 0 5 10 15* Ave TIME: Screen 0945 1 0.41 0.45 0.47 . 0.47 0.45 .

1000 2 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.38 1010 3 0.37 0.43 0.40 0.40 0.40 1020 4 0.33 0.37 0.37 0.40 0.37 1030 5 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.37 0.33 1040 6 0.30 - *0.33 0.33 0.35 0.33 1050 7 0.37 0.35 0.37 0.35 0.36 llOO 8 0.30 0.37 0.35 0.37 .0.35 1110 9 0.33 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.34 1120 10 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.33 0 .31 1130 11 *. 0.33 0.30 *a.33 0.30 0.32 1140 12 0.35 0.33 0.30 0.30 0.32 *.

1145 Stop Maximum: . 0.47 Mini1tu.1m: 0.27 Average: 0.35 (VELOCITY IN FT/SEC)

Depth 0 5 10 15 Ave TIME: Screen 0945 1 0.69 0.76 0.79 0.79 0.76 2 0.51 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.63 3 0.63 0.73 0.68 0.68 0.68 4 0.56 0.63 0.63 0.68 0.62 5* 0.59 0.51 0.51 0.63 0.56 6 0.51 0.56 0.56 0.59 0.55 7 0.63 0.59 0.63 0.59 0.61 8 *o.51 0.63 0.59 0.63 0.59 9 0.56 0.56 0.59 0.56 0.57 10 0.46 0.51 . 0.56 0.56 0.52 11 0.56 0.51 0.56 0.51 0.53 12 0.59 0.56 0.51 0.51 0.54 1145 Stop Maximum: 0.79 Minimum: 0.46 Average: 0.60 1.00 Knot= 1.6889 Ft/Sec

Table 3.b.3 POND ELEVATIONS January 25, 1974 Apri1 1 1974 J

Time: Elevation: Time: Elevation:

1030 108.48 ft 0930 106.08 ft 1100 108.46 ft 1000. 106.26 ft 1130 108.44 ft 1030 106.40 ft 1200 108.43 ft 1100 106.56 ft 1230 108.41 ft 1130 106.72 ft 1300 108.41 ft 1200 l 06 .85 ft Average Elevation = 108.44 Average Elevation = 106.48 Natural River Flow= 1_16,100 cfs* Natural River Flow =89,900 cfs*

Screen Depth** Screen Depth***

1 23.58 ft 1 22.18 ft 2 23.58 ft 2 22.09 ft 3 22.58 ft 3 20.54 ft 4 23.42 ft 4 21 .co ft 5 23.42 ft 5 20.95 ft 6 23.75 ft 6 22.07 ft 7 23.58 ft 7 22.51 "ft 8 23.58 ft 9+ 23.04 ft 9 23.33 ft 9 22.49 ft 10 23.so* ft 10 21 .68 ft 11 23.58 ft 11 21 .88 ft 12 23.33 ft 12 22.17 ft

• 24 Hour Average

• • Reference Pond elevation is 108.41 ft for January 25.

• • • Reference Pond elevation is 106.85 *ft for April 1.

Deviation of depth readings between January 25 and April 1 when using 108.41 ft as the reference elevation averages +0.46 ft (+5.6 in). Maximum variation was 1.02 ft (12.24 in). Reading variat'ion is due-to bottom penetration by the weight of the measuring line and irregular bottom topography due to silting.

All Pond elevation readings were taken from Conowingo Hydro Log.

POND ELEVATIONS (Continued)

+ Expected depth with *no silting for January 25 was 24.41 ft at a Pond elevation of 108.41 ft.

Expected depth with no silting for April 1 *Was 22 .85 ft at a Pond elevation of 106.85 ft.

However at Screen 8 on April 1 the depth behind the screen exceeded the predicted depth by +0.19 ft. If there was no silting at this screen, then the 0.19 ft variance is due entirely to the delay in r.esponse time of Pond elevation at the Conowingo Dam to rising water level upstream.

Because there is no way to check the variation in elevation between Conowingo and Peach Bottom for both dates, no allowance was made for this error.

FORE-SCREEN DEPTHS April 1, 1974 Screen Depth 2 23.58 ft 4 20.-83 ft 6 20.83 ft 8 20.42 ft 10 20.67 ft 12 20.50 ft Reference Elev: 108.41 Error of Reading: + 0.50 ft Predicted Depth: 24.41 ft (with no silting)

River and Pump Conditions for Intake Screen Velocity Survey January 25, 1974 Natural River Flow= 116,100 Unit 2 - 2 Circulation pumps runni_ng.*

Unit 3 - 1 Circulation pump running.**

April .1, 1974 Natural River Flow = 89,900

. Unit 2 - 3 Circulation pumps running - A, B, C.

Unit 3 - 1 Circulation pump running - B.

• Circulation pump A was out for maintenance on Unit 2.

• • Log does not state which pump was operating.

rr1*~).~. ;Bl-c JAMLl*Ar 1 ~s.*,;i.. ... .... . lliJJffi:l . ,.+ . =w '=*J =... *~*:1* .... ;i* :i~:

• *~ ,

• .. .~~=.- 1¥*~:

[i~I *r.. '", t:-...

. "r=: *.* :m_

~ .~ ~~-": . :Jj::L.~~~*.>t.':.*~?.* .... : .*~ .:.p_ ...=::*: *: =: U~J 1

. = ' ...

-r! , 1 ***

t . ..l:J i-r.*, *. ,.. .. ,.. . . .. .. .. . , .. .. . .. . ... _ ..

.i=::  :~r: ..;T+.i ~i:.J, l: ."(.*:***

• 1: . *..1r.1.I-': r:: *It. 1*1. . j.... ::, .*' ,!:::::- ..::: .. :.a'~ .. 1 ,. _

• *, -_  : ~ -*.**::~* : Ht ..1-ili-_ '.! * .}1... _J: J~ ~--~ :. ~ ~.}.IJf~!:~~1~1 J~i:t ~*i~ ~~L

,_: *010-11hm .. * ::'.

__:.__:.: . ~ .2£_ ~jj~~~ ~:41 ~*1~:

. *

• i: . 1

. : : :.:;:, .i::i; il~::...j:l-* 1 -f . [*

• J=_f.

.. !*.i:t: u::: ..:::;  :;:.j : *I****,.,

~- :. :~J;E:~.E~~IG 1 * * *::: :

• _:...r Ys ... . 50 - ... ,.. 1.. :,1 if.*+

• r. r. *

.. r- .. - . .. -f ~t-- .1 1 l - .. i~n 11.r:** ~., .*.. -****  ;~ ***- , ...

- ..... lscc-:~ .-:- - * ": .. ::r; * :.f-l. q: * * - ~ - * - - ':. t. *- *j.J f I ~ i H-~ -~j.;.1 tJL~* +i:p : Li:. ;.:..: :. '-': 1.. _

05

.. : - M' * * -

• ~-~-7 : ~ i~ 1r . t*1, *.:*1r J.

. 2 l : t':!! ~* "1* i" 'f..' "' t :I t~J:j *n'.

1 :IJ- .-- i* :;,c,*

1 rf . 1tt1-1roo*1n.tt~1ntF~t1t-n1n~:-T "J" 1" '* rr*-1*= I (1.11w* "I.:.,,.,,,, ... , . ... "'"' ... I .....

-~ts I!--*-~- I

• ____:..J_:_uiI.:_.:.:.L *. ..1*.. _.:_. ..:".:..:.:...~..:.t.L 1

• 1t 1j4*J I. - J* i .. 1*1*1 * *1+1 r 11' * -1*_:,:*. , .*.::_: _: :-

8 .. -:-*. . H ..:: .-j~i..:....:.;.._:

I . ....,.

I . I . ..,.. .. *1 .. - .. , r ,+/-*J.. L*'*i *'l

...i.i.1 .. . f . . +:,,I.

1*!U "* **t *1 F . .. . *.tr

-. -- t.1**' .

. ' *"'l* *n .. ,

'Li'

~

n., t*'**I

• ~ . . * -

i~i~ _; ~[*t 1.: ::-*. ~ ~~:; *r~ ;. ~r.~,r~~~~: ~-~-; ;~->~ ;.:* :* ;.*~ *'. :;: -.,. . -

, J. ~! /It~ 1**tf*l .J * * * '*1~

• m H._ + ., "t ....1, ,_, r- -,.. * . .... .......... *.

• +.:.; .. ,.._, . ***** -** ..... , ...

r"";'.'},.~.l:~ >.--:;.: I~-: ~~ _;;t;~- -~i1 ~~,~~I ~I iil. :; -t *:: .*~.~ -j': / _j. '. . . . : +.

_...: ....:.::..L.:...: ... ..:-.ci**~tT .* .,I ~ . H -**t . --fr.+ 1 :I:  ;.:+:1-11 i*-, .... + .. i+* "-*** ........_ ...--**- ... ********-*

I  ::::.--: .....  ;*:  :<J~~ . T *:- :j:. *I~ 1"1 :* -1 .*~q :l*f.j : 11-1

!ll:~-h .. .-:.!:ffr1

• t;f..~*1*j.t! .\~~*: ~~~: ::f :::: :::;'.:.::: .. ::; .. :.

..:..:.:.J_

' btt'*I . Fl':

- , -.: : l.!

0

. "*J :*-

.. .. , .. ** ' * * *1*

'*::.:* *1*~*~*. ':':. +*:.

.: :::.,,.,t T;:!*j l - .. ~-~ l.i

"I!

- .. : '*]*l '\,,..* :-._ .. :.*

I * * ..

• 0

1. [,. ** "-' 1.,.

~

- .. * -t- -I * *-. ~ "i * ., * *- * .. ... -

.1r I

• t J"t:; .r: ...:. ;;_-:-:: : * : :; : . : : "i: .:: : ser-.en :*

~- .. 1i11 1

,t.i-: *~1-....... .. . .... '""I'"" .

• ,--..*;*****..... -~:~*~:~: :; ..-::; :-~-l~!-f* ~~:: :-~ .:'.* :-.:J '.I . :** .... ::_

~I - " ... : .,.. _ .-tJ-aJ.111 :1 -:1 * * *

> 1* :j*

tt*:  :*r :i;jti."f-*~:1*~1 ~~~.~-~~~;::~ ~~:-~~.; ~~*;_;~7-:: ~~l ;;~

I , **

• • l

• 1:t * * *J-tt*I' r.J.: :t:h10;._,__ * .....,. ...... 1........ , .....

JiA, -*

-* - ;-*.-: _;:* '_; :zo...1 *_*_*1: *_:*::: ;;;;*,,_.,*.: L ~!~ :ri*** - : :* '* ' ' . * " _:** **: :~ ; r* -.Lj: * ;~,: - i:r !*, \~~ ~+/-i~. ~~; ~=~ ~., -. ,;~ *::;~; .~::: :~:- .. *.. --

• * *I . **I ...

1_.:_;_ __ .. _:_*_ _ * *-

• i..::./..*

---

* *-'"* rJ:f.r~

• • *- 1* T ' *1*

m+

.. ..,'=I-* *

• r:i.1:~ **,Pr - * *

• 1it1 **.** k-~*~!-f.l-*

.*.* v:..:1 .. ~i:L! 1.1.l*rlf. i.t*-*r*

t':1-*

-~

• LI ... .. ***. ..:..:..:.__:_-1..:....:.....

• • 4...f-'--**- ** - * - -

I I ... ::'.

1

..... : * -** ....  : J+i- - 1* ... ~;.,. .

~ -. os :; .1b :-;.:. _:~ ::.- cs:J:b,'IO

-* t*y~+ -'*+ r*t*': '-H*r 11* " I t tJJ.: .. ~- ,.., *-*-* ..... ..... .. . ....

• t D' -r ~- *;10* - t. ~W ~ :1i~ *fftfl-' :.:* <!:. ~:.:.11<r 1:: :.:.: .. :.:05.-10: ...

1

~- .

• 1_:" .." I~ '. '~-p* - l' *:_:.-. <*,-~ t;*~: ..  :;1' .*; f1

" '4 - .__1- **~ ~:*:1*:

1** ** - ... . ..:t~"i*: r:n'  :}.~:*.'.::.::

• **. r i: - . I 1t*-"~ 1u~*1' *,*.'.;;~ -r*:~-;  ;~_~;: .*;*:  ::*+:.:

• *l1,.W...... . '"* .........

.*: ~;~:~ - "' :-.::

I

.. . .' . ** l ...... ..... ,. . l**

• I-

,.,. *f * - .

"I * *.

T. ' {.

~-. 1- ** -~ . ....... *' - . . . .

J .. ..

• ft.1-~* :;i~ t. -I* ... . . tt. i I -t~.. lit~. +/-; ~;~:: ~:'.~ ~~*;~ :~~: ;~~-: . -:::;::~~

J ... .

!I .. :. *:*:**:-:-:I,

......::.:.+~:_

I.

• . '. f;; ::~ .; ~~~*

.1 .. ,: ... ~, ..!

,;~

r,i,.

!'. [

tt  :. L:l_' 'JI. . .-*.->-sl

f: . . . (11 1*1'1 I. .. I;~ .pl:J l d -~~+--l:1-1 .,_ .. ' ** ......... . ... ' - - - - - *

-*~1' -:~*;:_:;l;O . *:1 ;~.;; ;;~~ ~~~; ~: J: .~ '-t: *. _:.t* ..;_ ii1 ..... : *~ ~:.':1- ~_. :11.: : . ?'*-'. ~l~~::i.t.~ .tj~~~&.~~ ;. :~ ~;"~~>:~.~.:;.~~::: B~T~~~~~

1...:.:.:L:.:.;:*->l.:...:..:....._ ..1 ... , ... ;....cA:i- ...;.;i'.:l:. t u. . .ti~ t-t .. ~ . nn .,.*. :t1-m-:rW . . :. . ........_........ !.-... -"-*~~c:..::

! *F:::J:::

1 -: 1 . .

, ......:*:*::::.:d;:

,,,. -~ .... ;-i*

lrL 1.. :r:.H: *.: -i'*ltflq_*J:1:1T:*+1:i:11..1 :;*1;J:*:-H-:* :-:-:*:: ::: .. ** :.-: ;:*: -*

-* . . Ii . *n. 1 ... 1 ;t .ti:n .... dl :i* l'"'-i1 . ,.... ..... __ _

1

. _ screen  :-

---

:~

• 20 * * --;-=--.*: ;:_:_:I~<>[ ~ :-:=;. _'i;*i* *t . :r i;c, *lf*i. t .'1-. ~ ;. ~ ': :~J'f  ;  :~. H*~-1 *1 *:H f~~ .: ': ~: '.:;-~ .-~*;-:, ~-.: .:.. -. :* : : : .* .

• I)___ :.. . . , ., ,.. 1.1..::..*..:c:* l*+11 .. ;1l:.%:_f*4u ..J.i':i:i*,*i.,..i.!* "'!..:-l*lll*!1*11~ ::.i '-;.:- .. ,, . , - I.I~ . . _ _. . . I ... I 11

ft. . *

... *;-. 0 0.5-1_*;. ...,...1-:~i~r  :*;:o~; :: o~:!;'li.f~.: i:~~ ;.; :~+f1* *fn<, ;~015; i.: :~*F11'1,:1J~+1:>:~;0;5. ~~--1~-~i :r>: ..05

.. ... . . " * ... "', ,.1.:*1*:1 .. I* ; *. Ti I1 . . ***.m**1 , ,, +*: 1 ,.....

I I*; 'I I '  ; l*I *' ' . . ol' . .. ' "' .. . .. . .. -

I 10--*-F.IG. U-R~_E:..__3:._b-111

• ---*** _ _ _ _ _ J .. _--2. . ** ... ***a*;' .. ; *: * .* "T' 1

• *  : . . !2.--L--------***-_J

\

i

~;

. !r H

} )

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Tables 3.b.l and 3.b.2 summarize the velocities obseryed on January .25 and April l. Figures 3.b.l, 3.b.2, 3.b.3, and 3.b.4 show the vertical and horizontal flow distributions on both dates. Table 3.b.3 summarizes the change in Pond elevation on both dates and shows the channel depths that were observed. The channel. depths are only*

an approximatfon of the silting which has. occurred. The fore-screen observations were made by noting the water-line mark on the lead line and therefore may be in error by _as much as 1 foot due to water current effects o~ ~he lead line. Pond ~levations o~served on April 1 may be higher than recorded because it was rapidly rising due to the increased river flow and the natural delay in response of Pond elevation from Peach Bottom to Conowingo Hydroelectric Pl~nt where the elevation recordings were taken.

With the survey completed on Apri'l 1, 1974 with three circula-tion pumps running and an average Pond elevation at Conowingo Dam of 106.48 feets maximum velocity was 0.79 ft/sec (0.47 kts) which was observed at screen #1 {southern-most) at ten and fifteen feet. The average screen velocity for all depths was 0.60 ft/sec {0.35 kts).

However the greatest velocities occurred in the southern section, gradually reducing northw~rd to screen #12 with the minimum velocity occurring at screen #10 at the surface which was 0.46 ft/sec (0.27 kts). There appears to be a tendency for the subsurface flows to be slightly higher than the surface, but this is not always the '

case.

The information gathered on January 25 lends further support to pattern of stronger flows occurring at the southern screens and decreasing velocity the further north a gate is located. On both dates, screen il had the maximum velocities. One difference however was the fact that velocities observed On the 25th tended to show a

• decrease at the 10 foot depth with sometimes an increase in flow at 15 feet. In one case, .screen #3, there was almost no trace of current at all. It may have been due to an obstruction caught in the screen which was impeding flow at that depth. With pond elevation at an average level of 108.44, maximum flow was 0.68 ft/sec (0.40 kts), aver.age* was 0~33""ft/sec -.(o. 19 kts) and* the minimum was. a trace for two ci*rcul ar pumps running on January 25th.

Fl ow di re~ti ans were westerly, staying within a 20° .range.

However it was noted that those direction readings taken in 'the higher numbered screens showed an increased deflection (northerly) the greater the screen number. It was assumed that this northerly d~flection of the instrument's compass was caused by the steel separation wall between the intake ponds for Unit 2 and Unit 3 which was nearest screen twelve where the greatest deviation occurred.

5. SUMM.l\RY In conclusion it appears that the greatest flows will occur along the southern-most screen for Unit 2. There is a marked decrease in flow between this screen and its neighbor. Afterward, the decrease is very gradual. In the vertical plane flows appear to be slightly greater below the surface, although the total range difference does not appear to be greater than 0.17 ft/sec (0.10 kts) with only one .exception.which.may possibly have been due to an obstructed screen. All velocities observed were below 0.79 ft/sec (0.47 kts) and exhibited parallel flow. Bottom silting .has occurred*

on both sides of the screens which may restrict flow and cause slightly higher velocities.

APPENDIX A Type 110 Remote Reading Current Meter Data Sheet

2-1-7:~

EMVIROf-!;\EilTAL DEVICES CORP.

M!rion Massachusetts 02738 1

TYPE 110 P,Ei*i'JTE READii'!G CUflRE!ff METtR Ge~2ral Description Tl:a Typa 110 Remote Reading Current Meter provides a co:wenient, reliable.

a~d cccun.te system to measure current speed," direction, temperature and depth 'frcm stationary platforms, moored boats.and in other applications

\';hich ne::d rem::ite indications in real tim~. Basically, the Type 110 Remote Reading Current ~~eter is based on the proven ENDECO*Typa 105 P.ecording

• Current M:ter w~ich was developed specifically for the environmental rnoni-.

taring field. Th~ Type 110 utilizes the same pressure case and impeller design which has beer. extensively tested at the Chesapeake Bay Institute of

• Johns Hopkins University flow channel. In addition, the same all-plastic cons tree ti on is emp 1oyed which provides a light weight instrument which is vary durable, ideally suited for typical rough handling found in the fi.e ld.

The Type 110 Remote Reading Current Meter uses sensor-s which permit tele-metering of the data via cable for deck monitoring.. . ..

• l ** *.' \

1. Current Speed: A ducted impeller turns in corrosion *resistant*

glass ball bearings running in delrin races. A multipoled magnet axially mounted on the rotor closes a magnetic reed.

switch four times per revolution within the pressure case.

The switch closures are transforliied to electrical pulses of fixed amplitude and duration. These pulses are summed* using an

• integrating circuit and driva in output meter at the Ded~

P-eadout. *

2. Current Direction: Current direction is measured relative to magnetic North using a magnetic compass \'lhich is periodica.lly *

• energized by a solenoid to make electrical contact *with a poten-tiometer elemant. In this way, the compass elemant is fre~ to rotate with minimum torque requirem~nts and is only momentarily cla~ped to the potentiomet~r at the time of the reading.

11 11

3. Depth: Depth is sensed using a pressure operated potentiorr:etar.*

The voltage developed across the potentiometer is sensed by the pressure-activated wiper and is transmitted via cable to the Deck Readout. *

4. Temperat1Jr-e: Temperature is .measured using a linear glass bead thermistor element, mounted in potted assembly, mounted on ti1e oressure case and in direct contact with the water medium. Data

~s transraitted via cable to the Deck Readout.

5. Recorder Output: An optional recorder output is avdflable upo~

request. The Type 110 Ueck r..eadout pro vi des a convenient means to man i tor tile output of the Type 110 Current M~ ter.

• Trade Mark

Data Sheet #7 2-1-7t..

Type 110 Remote Reading Current Meter The re<idout unit provid~s the necessary po'i1er to drive the circuitry within tl1e R~.:i.dout ar.d Curr~nt Meter . . Eight 1.5 volt 11 11 0 c.ell batteries provide a

• 2 vCJlt !J.C. po\*1er supply for many months of typica1 operation.

Tile Type 110 Deck Readout contains 2 readout meters ~ Ona is for monitoring current speed and direction. A second meter is used for monitoring temperature and C:~pth. Current speed is continuously indic~ted when directio~ is not being sampled. Direction is sampled using a push button switch. The Deck Read.:>ut is packaged in a water resistant carr.ying case.

The Type 110 sensor package and Deck Readout units are interconnected using

• a 10-cor.ductor polyurethane covered cable. Cable lengths of up to 500 feet may be used \*1ithout adjustments of the readout circuit. Longer lengths may be u~ed with adjusti11ents o.f the circuitry.

The telemetering cable enters the instrument through a packing gland below ..

the nose of the instrument. No electrical swivel is required since the flexible service cable allows up to five revolutions of the instrument without strain on**

the cable or restraint of the sensor pack.age. A weight may be attached to the .

• base of the instrument tethar*to depress the current meter~ The weight is free to pivot using a swivel which is incorporat~d i.n the tether assembly.

Detailed Specifications TYPE 110 REMOTE READING CURRENT METER:

Current Speed Sensor: Ducted Impel1er/ree'd switch with voltage readout.

Range: 0 to 5 knots Accuracy: +3% of Ful 1 Scale * . .

Threshold: Less than .O? knots (1.9 crrr./sec.) ..

Current Direction Sensor:

• Magnetic Compass with potentiometer

• for monitoring pressure case orien- .

tation relative to magnetic north.

Range: 0 - 360° (0 - 357° Electrical)

+3% of Fu11 Scale

-as knots**

Depth Sensor: Pre~sure operated potentiometer Hange: 0 to 1000 feet. Other ranges available *.

Accuracy +2% of Full Scale Overpressure: T. 5 x Fu 11 Sca 1e .

Isolation: Oil filled isolation with neoorene diaphragm.

• Temperature Sensor:

Type: Linear Glass Bead Thermistor r~m1ge: 0° to 40°C Accuracy: +o.5°C

ua Cd .:lneei: rr-/

2-1-74 Typ~ 110 Remote Reading Current Meter -

Operating Envi ronm.:nt Salt, fresh ~r polluted water~

Operating Medium:

Operating Temperature Range: 0° to 40°C (32° to 104°F)

Storag~ Temperature Range: -34 to 65°C (-30 to 149°F)

Maximum Pressure: 500 psi (Pressure cases to 10,000 psi available)

Maximum Mooring Tensile Load: 250 pounds Instrument Housing Material: All plastic ,

Finish: Painted with anti-fouling surface.

Hardware: *300 Series Stainless Steel Physical Size (Sensor Package)

Height: 35 pounds {in *air) * .

Weight in sea water: Approximately neutral

• Dimensions: .

• See outline drawing. * . .

Shipping \*teight:* Approximately 40 pounds. *.

Shipping dimensions: 38 11 long x 22 11 diameter .. :*

• TYPE 110 DECK READOUT Readout M2ters: 6 11 square Meter Calibrations~ *

• O to 5 knots: Speed . ".

0 to 360° t*1agnetic North: *Direction*

0 to 40°C: Terni:ierature

o. to 100 feet: Depth Batteries: 8, 1-1/2 volt "D" cells Operating Environment Operating Medium: Far*.use on board small boats.

Operating Temperature Range: 0°C to 40°C (32°~ to 104°F}

Storage Temp~rature Range: * -35°C to 65°C {-30°F t~ 149°F)

D~ck Readout Housing Material: Corrosion resistant formica -case.

Hardware: 300 Series Stainless Steel .and chr~med plate brass.

Phvsical Size

\-lei ght: Approximately 14 pounds.

Dimensions: 10 11 high x 13 11 \*tide x 10 11 deep.

Shipping t*!eight: Approximately 30 pounds.

Shipping Dim:nsions: 17 11 X 20 II X 17 11

• For further information contact: Environmental Devices Corp.

Instrument Division To*der. Building, :larion, Massachusetts 02733 Telephone: 617-748-0366

IYr'~ 110.

Dt:.CK UNIT 16 .

IENDECOI .' .. **---** ....

DIA DEPTH SENSOR . . .

\ . 7

'l Ci TEMP. . "* . ..

1 l*!

• SENSOR.

. 4' _ ____,.,,.._____ 25" - - - - - -.L---.....i,

/_ , TRl~v1MING

-.3/8 SWIVEL Vv'EIGHTS TO VVEIGHT TYPE 110 REMOTE Rt...4Di~JG CURRE1\JT tv*lETER AI00281R~V. I.

. .r

\

I

\