ML19320C625

Eia Supporting Amend 26 to License NPF-3.State of Oh Re Mod of NPDES Permit B211*AD Encl

ML19320C625
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	07/02/1980
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML19320C619	List: ML19320C618 ML19320C625 ML19320C633
References
NUDOCS 8007170469
Download: ML19320C625 (38)

Text

.

[o UNITED STATES

, [d g

q NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y

E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 s

J ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE O

OrrICe Or NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENTkNO.2 6 4

TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3 THE TOLED0 EDIS0N COMPANY AND THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-346 Description of Proposed Action e

Appendix B t > Facility Operating License No. NPF-3 for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Statina, Unit No.1 (dated April 22,1977) requires that a study be undertaken ;o describe the number and species of fish impinged on the travel-ing screens The study (included as Section 4.2 of Appendix B) is divided into three phases, as follows:

Phase I To be conducted for the first year of ccmmercial cperation to determine if the fish being impinged, as a result of unit operation, are of significant number and value to adversely 4

affect the fish population in the vicinity of the site and the lake as a whole.

Phase II To be conducted during the second year of co.mercial operation if the Phase I study indicates that impingement losses are higher than anticipated; the Phase II study is designed to determine if the fish being impinged originate from the lake proper or from a resident population in the intake canal; if Phase II reveals that the majority of impinged fish are from a resident population of the intake canal, the impingement program could be terminated, pending NRC approval.

Phase III -

To be conducted during the third year of commercial operation if the Phase II study shows that a significant portion of.the impinged fish are from the lake proper; the Phase III study is designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a bubble screen around the offshore intake crib as a mitigative measure in 1

preventing entrapment (and thus impingement) of fish from the lake.

1 If the Phase I study determines that impingement is minimal and not of a level significantly high enough to cause adverse impact, Phases II and III need not be initiated, upon approval by NRC after the receipt of the Phase I results.

Cecision criteria for determining whether or not to proceed from one phase to the next are required to be developed during each phase of study.

800 R ~7 O ' 6

In fulfillment of the Phase I requirements of Appendix -, The Toledo Edison Company (TECO or the licensee) submitted to NRC the proposed decision criteria in November 19781 and the results of the Phase I impingement study in March 19792 which is based upon a study prepared for the licensee by his consultant.3 With the Phase I submittal, the licensee requested a termination of the impinge-ment program, indicating that impingement is minimal with an insignificant impact on lake populations.4 Appendix B (Section 3.1.2.a.5) to the Davis-Besse Operating License also requires that a 2 year study be undertaken to investigate the number and species of fish eggs and larvae entrained as a result or operation of Unit No. 1.

Study requirements include tanpling for fish eggs and larvae once every ten days during the anticipated spawning season (April through August) in the vicinity of the intake crib and at two control stations.

In addition, Appendix B, Section 3.1.2.a.4, requires ichthyoplankton 3ampling during the spawning season in the area of the thermal plume and at the Toussaint Reef offshore of Davis-Besse.

In fulfillment of this Appendix B requi results of fish egg and larvae farfieldgement, the licensee submitted the and entrainment studies conducted during 1978.5 Additionally, the licensee has prepared an impingement and entrainment demonstration for the State of Ohio under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act.6 The data contained in the demonstrati n are the same as 2

those contained in the submittals to NRC,3,4,5 under Ap endix B of the Operating License.

Environmental Imoact of Proposed Action I.

Final Environmental Statement (FES) Assessments of :maacts A.

Impingement of Fishes The FES related to construction (FES-CP) of Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station 7 discussed potential environmental impacts of fish impingement during station operation (Section 5.5.1, pages 5-12, 5-13, and 5-15).

It was stated that major adverse biological effects due to the intake of lake water were unlikely.

Further, it was noted that:

(1) Adult fish should be able to avoid being drawn into the intake, although young fish or weak adults swimming too near the intake probably will be entrained.

(2) Most fish that are entrsined in the intake water will be impinged on the traveling screens located in the intake structure at the end of the intake canal (3) Studies indicated that gizzard shad, alewife, freshwater drum, white bass, and shiners are likely to be the most abundant young fish near the intake crib, and thus potentially subject to impingement.

The FES related to operation (FES-OL) of Davis-Besse8 also discussed potential impacts of fish impingement (Section 5.5.1, page 5-5; and Section 12.2.2, pages 12-2 and 12-3).

It was concluded that the intake design represents a practical balance between technological and ecological considerations and will have a minimal environmental impact.

Further, it found the following:

i 2

(1) Emerald shiner, spottail shiner, gizzard shad and alewife will be impinged in greatest numbers.

(2) Survival of fishes washed from the traveling screens and sluiced through a trough to the holding basin is not expected to be high.

(3) Impingement losses are not expected to significantly affect the fisheries of Lake Erie.

To insure that unacceptable impingement losses were not occurring, the FES-OL required operational monitoring at the traveling screens and in the intake canal, as follows:

(1) Fish impingement should be monitored no less than three times each week to determine the number and size-distribution of each species impinged, and to assess local and regional impacts.

(2) A special study should be undertaken to determine the extent to which the intake canal supports a fish population and thus contributes to impingement losses.

(3) A special study should be undertaken to investigste entrainment of adult and juvenile fishes at the intake crib and the effectiveness of the bubble screen in reducing impingement.

B.

Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton The FES-OL for Davis Besses discussed the potential for impact to Lake Erie fishes from entrainment and station passage of planktonic fish eggs and larvae (Section 5.5.2, page 5-8; and Section 12.2.2, pages 12-2 and 12-3).

The FES assumed that all organisms entrained within the cooling system would be killed by a combination of mechanical, thermal, and biocidal ef fects.

It was concluded, however, that entrainment losses were not expected to significantly alter local fish populations.

That conclusion was based on:

(1) The low fish egg and larval densities at the site which indicate that it is not a major spawning area; (2) The distribution of known spawning areas along the southwest shore of Lake Erie; (3) The offshore location of the intake crib; and (4) The relatively small volume of water withdrawn from the lake by the plant.

To ensure that unacceptable entrainment losses were not occurring, the FES-OL required operational monitoring of ichthycplankton near the offshore intake and at control stations.

3 l

1 O

II.

Site and Station Descriotion A.

The Site the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is located on the southwest shore of Lala Erie in Ohio approximately 21 miles (s34 km) southeast of Toledo and 21 miles northwest of Sandusky in Ottawa County (Figure 1).

The 954 acre (386 ha) site borders the north side of the Toussaint River and has a lake frontage of 7,250 feet (2210 m).

This section of the shoreline is flat and marshy with maximum elevations only a few feet above the lake level.

The site includes a tract known as Navarre Marsh, as well as upland where the main station structures are located.

The graded and fenced station area, exclusive of the cooling tower, occupies about 56 acres (23 ha).

The station buildings are about 3000 feet (914 m) from the lakeshore and at least 2400 feet (732 m) from any point on the site boundary (Figure 2).

The site is located on Locust Point, a gently curving headland of the western basin of Lake Erie.

The lake bottom is gently sloping from shore out to a oistance of at least 4000 feet (1219 m), with a ten foot depth at a distance of 2000 feet offshore and a 12 foot depth at 4000 feet offshore.

Bottom sedi-ments vary with distance offshore and are predominantly sand, gravel and clay.

A series of shallow rocky reefs occur offshore of Loc *ust Point at distances between about 3-7 miles.

The most nearshore are the Locust Point and Toussaint Reefs (Figures 1 and 3).

More complete descriptions of the site and 6 and in vicinity are to be found in the FES-CP7 and the 316(b) Demonstration several of the other documents referred to in this report.

B.

The Station Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is rated at 906 MWe and consists of a single unit utilizing a closed-cycle cooling heat dissipation system.

The operating license was issued in April 1977.

Initial reactor criticality was achieved on August 8, 1977,9 but the station never operated at full capacity in 1977 and only achieved s 75 percent capacity in December.10 One hundred percent operating capacity was attained on April 4, 1978.34 A 493 foo. (150 m) high natural draft cooling tower is used to dissipate 98 percent of the total heat from the condenser to the atmosphere.

The remaining 2 percent of the heat is discharged to Lake Erie in the cooling tower blowdown.

Cooling water is withdrawn from the lake via a submerged intake crib located about 3000 feet i

(914 m) offshore at the 11 foot depth contour (Figures 2 and 4).

The crib is a cross-shaped structure rising 3-10 feet above the lake bottom with intake ports located at the ends of each of the four arms. Water enters the crib by gravity in a downward direction through the ports at a velocity of 0.25 fps (7.6 cm/sec) at the maximum intake flow rate of 42,000 gpm (94 cfs; 2.66 cms).

An eight foot diameter conduit buried beneath the lake bottom connects the offshore crib with an onshore intake canal. The intake canal is a 2950 foot l

(899 m) long open channel which conveys water from the intake conduit to the pumphouse (Figure 2).

The canal has earthen embankments and is separated from l

the lake by a sand beach and beachfront dike constructed of large limestone l

rip-rap.

The canal is approximately 40-45 feet wide at the bottom, with 3:1 i

side slopes-and a depth of 13-14 feet, except in the vicinity of the pumphouse i

l where it widens to form a forebay approximately 800 feet long, 200 feet wide 1

at the bottom, and 16-17 feet deep. At an intake flow rate of 42,000 gpm, the i

l 4

calculated velocity in the canal is about 0.11 fps (3.4 cm/sec).

The i

pumphouse intake structure is located at the extreme western end of the canal forebay where water enters through fixed trash racks (8 inch x 26 inch openings; s 20 cm x 66 cm) and one quarter inch (6 mm) mesh traveling screens,

..hich are automaticall pressure differential' y cleaned either on a pre-set time interval or by across the screens.

All station effluents (most of which is cooling tower blowdown) flow through a six foot diameter buried pipe to a slot-type jet discharge structure (4.5 feet wide x 1.5 feet high; 1.4 x 0.5 m) located on the lake bottom 1200 feet offshore (Figures 2 and 4).

The discharge exit velocity is about 6.5 fps (198 cm/sec) at the design maximum flow rate of 20,000 gpm (44.6 cfs; 1.26 cms).

The thermal discharge produces a plume in Lake Erie with a calculated surface area of 0.7 acres.

The discharge temperature of station effluents in the lake never exceeds 20*F (ll.l*C) above ambient lake water temperature.

This summary of station design features was extracted from the FES-CP,7 the FES-OL,a and the 316(b) Demonstration,8 where more details may be found.

t e

5

9[C~n ~~ y.-

Q

" )....r....m

..g --

s l

s.i!. P" VI:

..Y~

D'"{ "-

%.3NTARJ0..

0

-~ -

w.

x

. <4

1

\\

/::;f

/

\\

)-

[l et r.i..

.E.

/

3

/-

, uasi. si.i., is.

s. -

. :s-

.x

/

g

, c.si.i., i..

y

/

N x;;.-

N

w..

/

h..:,

,O fedar

,w si.e.,sa g

. F r.9 Pt G" **\\l

.......i u..... n.,

N'.y.~

Y=Ne

. 3. 4 m

l os

".4,.8 - ),kowo -

A DBNPS

.p 2

g Locust f

e... i..

Point

. I'l

.e.u.,..u. -

if F-="-=~

..T.$. ]=

5. " *"* a

.gstec*

f

~

sa ' " ?.

E.

s

1. Acne Power Station it..... n..(-

.8 ; u u.a.'..

}lfl

2. Bay Shore Power Stati(n s

... g- - -

2 7

y

. - 5

-

i

3. Ilonroe Power Plant

- -. s. B.....

Sendet,

C'P t d*

h

'k" -D'$

4. Fermi Power Plant E

,d_.

l

,,e

..,.s::

.-x

.,n-

-l FIGURE 1.

Location of Davis-desse Nuclear Power Station (DBNPS) at Locust Point in the western basin of Lake Erie. Also shown are the locations of the Acme and Day Shore Power Stations. Ohio; and Monroe and Fermi Power Plants. Michigan.

(From Reference No.18)

I

1-

/*

N y

.t'p N $D*.

Y i. '..

\\'~

^ k.-

<r= '-' k;U

~hA ~^!: *E':'.

,s,

A' 2

.$W i

I y

' r.

f LAKE

,;'g,,

7. " '. '....... _1%

se

.9

.(

-,../'..-

E

~g '.

?.,

E RIE

- e, p,/

2,. :.,,ys ',,

r s.

, w..

- m :3~.

,.............i...,

i

_. s '.__

s$:.0,','.v. U.,

,'.**'".ii......

.a i

i

i y,x,c*.

I L I., '

_.)

//

v u.i y

.i...

1'.

'M A

3.h

./.,

p,,1,11, s e............ c....

3 N

t,

• *. di t s....... a. i.

1 y

a s........

- l

-.-i..

ii i c..i..

gg'.

,a,..

_ __' J,...$.,g.

-t*

' A*..)

l

'l.

s 8.=..i.e sai.

is s.=.... s.. "u.a.

p

,g; ** -

s,. 4,;...

a j

i,.,.

• p 4 gg r, 4.,.3. _,,

e i s..... t i t....

. e.,.N i l,. e.....,

J,,

j ig....,~..

mAngH i

i

..y%.h3

':::=.:: ':::~-

j

~

-i s. :n c.,

\\

w:

e.

e_- - -

=.

.a,A 1

1 1

i~,

saws -ses.e.eut.sa. pos..e tsat cs.

IOUll AINI SIV8R 8888 '68

l) i i

i

'I

[

t i

f FIGURE 2.

Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station site plan. showing the offshore intake and discharge structures and the onshore intake canal and forebay.

(From Reference No. 7)

{

4 l

~

v gh e

D r BT & * *.* 6Qt!'..=3 j.y~

&.C3?3.STEamELF 4

k

_x*

LAKE ERIE N

f TRANC nEEF

k 'ty:." " % A.

i s u

eqca:L,nsu miacAnA wasp UTTL

cowcact,

• FL A T AOCK RECF g3 l

3 yng.2....

,: - - e 4-k Q"*""* """

N.%

Q m e....,7,

o A

Davit-Sets.

nl~ n v.n

' ' " ~

jr 7

B ATH Y METRIC MAP

~

DEPTM CCNTCUR5 IN fiET Ef LOW LOW WATEA D ATU2

+ LEAsf OtrTH OVEA REEF CONTOUR INTERVAL 5

'I T

I FEET

.. s.

,. m

. v[ ~.

a e

a a

r s

rew*

83*01

~

83* 5'

..-e.

FIGURE 3.

Bathymetric map of Lake Erie in the vicinity of Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, showing the location of the offshore reefs. (From Reference No. 33) 8 Tz1 Z' ~ TT

~

- ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~

- -^

i i

l l

l l

I ICE cannata O== ~ _2) l e/ \\

~

J h..*lL.1_G*LL.'.1.L...

es.....e Q

e.

m

,' e

(

d'eI' v'.

I av

)

4 LAILE anic

.. 1..3 t

.t L

• s~

' ' 'i?~'..,

lWN l

,s#

~,/.....

's,

..e..

..e..

'J#

'N I

etae or mia.i st.ucTuar

,:'~...,

9 s

s, h.-.

~ ~..

,, e.r 8s..: = = : a,a = s a = a:c.,.,

~.

S k

P

.p

,f

.ma.ca..

~ko_, m. { ""'" %

s. ',::'

e N.

R

n..

.j

,i Al*!L 11 M 'IrM.

i

.3LLIIM Al I

9 I.

I.,A.LL.T.LL.9.G.!Y. f.....

r-~ u 2co' sor.

u f

~

t r,

__ _r,.cw I. e j

ux-g L

~. -

p i

ARGlLAnet tipwCTW.1 J

macnnana l'

l

2""'**'"'' ' ' ' " ' "

oavis. stsst nuctsna rowta stato.

NOTE NOT To scatt Suswmoto.NTastt a otscMAmet aamAs.otwmis FIGURE 4.

Designs and locations of the offshore intake and discha ge structures of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.

(From Reference No. 7)

s III. Evaluation of OSterved !npacts A.

Impingement of Fishes The Phase-I fish impingem.ent study was conducted between January 1 and December 31, 1978.2 Appendix B requires that 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> samples be collected l-three days per week.

During 1978, sampling occurred on 144 days, or about 39.5 percent of the days.

Collections of impinged fish were made by placing a 1/4 inch mesh screening device into the traveling screen backwash sluiceway.

l The screening device had the same mesh size as the traveling screens at the intake structure.

Number and weights of impinged fishes were recorded and l

.xpanded monthly and annual estimates of total impingement losses were developed based upon fishes impinged per hour of station operation during the times of sampling.

Additionally, impinged fishes were collected using the above methods on 45 days during the period August 17 to December 31, 1977,10 or about 33 percent of the days.

Impingement sampling during 197710 and 19782 documented the occurrences of 15 and 20 species of fishes respectively on the screens, or a total of 23 species for both years combined (Table 1).

During 1977, the principal species impinged were gizzard shad, freshwater drum, white crappie, yellow perch, emerald shiner and goldfish.

The 4 1/2 month total for impingement was estimated to be 1,936 fishes weighing 25.8 kg (56.8 pounds).

Greater than 93 percent of the total impingement occurred during the period November 22-December 19, 1977.

A comparison of the 1977 impingement catches with trawl and gill net catches t1 12 indicates that the majority near the intake during preoperative studies of impinged fish species were common in the area.

Exceptions were white crappie, goldfish, and freshwater drum.

The licensee stated that impinged white crappie probably were residents of the intake canal, and the fact that many were young-of-the year indicates a probable spawning in the canal.10 Goldfish and drum were relatively more abundant in impingement samples than in gill net and trawl samples in the lake proper. Their presence in the intake canal was indicated by their low abundance there in previous canal netting studies.11 12 Additionally, a fish toxicant study of the intake canal during September of 1974 collected "25 gallons" of fish numbering 2,327 individ-ualsis.u (Table 2), far more than any of the canal trawl studies, which took 414 fishes on the day prior to toxicant use,11 and 420 fishes during June and September 1975.12 None of the above canal studies documented significant numbers of goldfish and drum, but crappies were found'in higher relative abundance (24-40 percent of 1974 canal trawl studies;11 16.5 percent of the 1974 toxicant study; and 81 percent of the 1975 canal trawl study 12),

Comparison of the 1977 impingement data with trawl and gill net catches near the intake during 19771s yielded results similar to those above, with crappies and goldfish occurring in very low levels of abundance in the lake.

Unfor-tunately, lake sampling was not performed during December 1977,is the time period of high impingement. Trawl catches indicated that fish populations could be slightly larger in the area encompassing the intake and discharge, compared with a control area, possibly due to the " cover" provided for fishes by the rip-rap material at the structures.15 During 1978, the principal species impinged were goldfish, yellow perch, emerald shiner, and gizzard shad (Table 1).2 Impingement estimates for white 1

i 10 1

crappie sad freshwater drum were much lower than during 1977, ichile goldfish t

estimates i.ere considerably higher duri.g 1978.

The estimated total annual a

i impingement for 1976 was 6,607 fishes weighing 30.5 kg (67.2 pounds).

Approximstely 78 percent of the total impingement occurred during the months of April and Decembee.

Although lake fish sampling did not occur during April and December 1978,38 a 2

comparison of the 1978 impingement catches with trawl and gill net catches near the intakels showed that with the exception of a few species, the fishes impinged were also common in the lake.

The most notable exception was goldfish which was far more abundant in impingement samples than in lake samples. White crappie was also somewhat more abundant in impingement samples. Black crappie was captured on the screens and not at all in lake samples.

It was suggested that these three species probably are now using the I

intake canal for permanent residence and for spnwning2 and thereby contributing to the impingement counts.

The spawning of white crappie within the intake canal was indicated during 1975 when ichthyoplankton sampling was performed during the spawning season in both the lake and the canal.12 Only during the period June 13-16 were white crappie larvae captured and then only in the intake cpnal. White crappie have not been represented in any of the ichthyoplankton samples thus far collected from the lake during studies at the site,10,11,12,17,4,s but crappies (not identified to species) were taken in ichthyoplankton samples collected during 1975 and 1976 in the western basin of Lake Erie near Davis-Besse.1s In addition to those fish species living in the canal (and the lake) that contribute to impingement counts, other canal fish might reside principally there.

For example, a small number of bluegill have been irrpinged each year and taken during the canal studies, but bluegill have not been captured during the lake sampling.

Similarly, one individual each of blackside darter and bluntnose minnow were impinged during 1978, but these species have not been captured near the site previously.

Conversely, black bullhead catfish have constituted significant portions of intake canal samples (especially during 1974), but have not yet been recorded in impingement catches and have been very rare in lake netting samples.

The ability of the canal fish populations to repopulate is demonstrated by the 1974 and 1975 netting and toxicant studies, as taculated below.

Following dewaterirg of the canal and tcxicant application on September 25,1974,just one individual fish was taken by trawl in the canal.

During the following year, the canal fish population increased in both numbers of individuals and, species, with white crappie constituting 81 percent of the population on September 16, 1975.

Repopulation of the canal must have been via fishes entering through the offshore intake structure.

9 11

Intake Canal Fishes Caught Date of Samoling No. of Individuals No. of Soecies June 18, 1974(a) 31 5

August 27, 1974(a) 33 4

September 24, 1974(b) 414 18 September 25,1974(c)-

2,327

> 15 October 23, 1974(a) 1 1

June 13, 1975(d) 20 4

~

September 16, 1975(d) 400 12 Total 3,226 (a)Two tows of an 8-foot otter trawl over the entire canal length.11 (b)More than 22 trawl tows were made in an effort to remove as many fish as possible prior to the toxicant study which took place the following day.11 (c) Toxicant study, see Table 2.

(d)Two 15-minute tows of an 8-foot otter trawl.12 It thus appears that the intake canal does provide habitat for several species of fish, some of which contribute to the estimates of impingement losses.

Davis-Besse is the only nuclear generating station now operating on Lake Erie and the only operating station (nuclear or fossil-fueled) on the lake utilizing closed-cycle cooling; thus, a cortparative examination of the impingement at Davis-Besse with data from similarly designed stations on Lake crie is not possible. However, impingement loss estimates are available for several Lake Erie fossil-fueled plants utilizing once-through cooling.

Four plants located in the central basin (to the east of Davis-Besse) on the southern shore of Lake Erie were estimated to have impinged between 560,000 and 11,940,000 fishes during 1976 (Table 3).19 During the period September 1976 to September 1977, impingement studies were conducted at two power stations located on the Maumee River and Maumee Bay to the west of Davis-Besse (Figure 1).

At Bay Shore Power Station, 52 species were impinged, with total estimates of 18,316,745 fishes (of which 506,112 occurred during a 12-hour fish run) weighing 173,144 kg (381,713 pounds).20 Principal species impinged included gizzard shad, emerald shiner, alewife, white bass, yellow perch, freshwater drum, and others (Table 4).

At Acme Power Station, 43 species were 12

impinged, with total estimates of 11,753,124 fishes (of which 6,024,060 occurred during seven fish runs of 44.5 total hours) weighing 102,221 kg (225,356 pounds).21 Principal species impinged included gizzard shad, emerald I

shiner, freshwater drum, and others (Table 5).

Botn power plants have shoreline intake channels and larger rated intake volume capacities than Davis-Besse (1149.3 cfs at Bay Shore;20 605.7 cfs at Acme 21).

During 1974 and 1975, impingement studies were conducted at six power plants (all with l

shoreline or channel intakes) located in Michigan waters of Lake Erie, Maumee Bay, and the Detroit River 22 (Figure 1).

Gizzcrd shad comprised between 51 percent and 87 percent of all species impinged at each plant, followed by

(

emerald shiner, alewife, smelt, yellow perch, and others.

Total estimated impingement ranged between 84,528 fishes at the Trenton Channel Plant and 1,410,286 fishes at the J. R. Whiting Plant (Table 6).

l By comparison, the impingement estimate of 6,607 fishes is 1-3 orders of magnitude less than other Lake Erie power plants.

Reasons for this probably l

are station design (low intake volume, offshore intake location) and site

~

location in a relatively unproductive area of the western basin (discussed below in entrainment analysis).

Sustained annual impingement comparable to that within the confidence intervals of the 1978 loss estimates at Davis-Besse should not add measurably to the total impingement impact to fishes resulting from the several power plants operating on Lake Erie.,

i Comparison of the fish impingement estimates at Davis-Besse with the recreational 23 and commercial harvests 24 for the Ohio waters of Lake Erie shows that the numbers and weights of impinged fishes were small fractions of the 1978 harvests (Tables 7 and 8).

The total number of fishes captured by seine, trawl, and gill net in the lake during preoperative and operative studies is shown below.

By comparison with fish catches due to environmental impact studies, the number of fishes estimated to have been impinged (6,607) during 1978 is small.

Using strictly numbers (not accounting for species or abundance differences), the total fishes taken by nets equals approximately 16.9 " impingement years," at an impingement rate of 6,607 fishes per year.

During 1978, the netted fishes numbered 2.9 times those estimated to have been impinged. All totaled, the fishes taken during lake, intake canal, and impingement sampling equals 123,534 individuals, or the equivalent of about 18.7 " impingement years," a time frame approximating one-half of the operating life of the station.

Year Numbers Caught Number of Species 197312 5,300 28 197412 31,405 34 197512 41,342 30 197715 14,697 26 1978is 19,021 25 Total 111,765 13

Even these numbers are lower (by about 75 percent) than the estimated impingement at the Lake Shore fossi) power plant during the year 1976 alone (Table 3). An examination of the numbers of netted fishes and the numbers of impinged fishes provides a useful comparison to highlight the relatively low level of impingement losses at Davis-Besse. Netted fishes, however, might undergo less stress with greater overall survival than impinged fishes; thus, the numbers of netted fishes do not represent loss estimates, but only numbers captur' The i,0 ands placed on the impingement estimates at the 95 percent confidence interval 2.to are narrow (Table 1) and indicate low variability of impingement over time.

It also suggests a reliability in the calculated estimates.

Recent developments in impingement study design suggest that the sampling frequency shculd be adjusted based upon the time period or seasonality of abundance of important fish species--high sampling frequency during periods of abundance and low frequency during periods of low abundance.2.s es Such a scheme is designed to reduce the variability and thus increase she precision in the impingement loss estimates.

In the absence of such a stratified sampling design, a simple random sampling program should include a sampling frequency not less than 20 percent (s 75 days in a year) and need not exceed 50 percent (* 180 days).2s The simple random sampling design and sampling frequencies of s 33 percent to 40 percent at Davis-Besse during 1977-78, therefore, appear to have been adequate for a reasonable determination of impingement loss e~stimates.

During both years, the 45 (1977) and 144 (1979) sample days most often represented impingement catches by the power station for time periods in excess of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, and often in excess of 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />.

Therefore, the total time periods sampled during each year were greater than the 45 and 144 days on which sampling occurred. The low numbers impinged and the low variability indicates that a stratified sampling design was not essential for reliable loss estimation.

14

/

~

~

/

lable 1.

Estimates of the numbers and weights and percent contributions of impinged fish species to the total estimates for 197/ and 1978 at Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.

The numbers impinged are those presented by the licensee.

The weights are derived fron the mean weight (in grams) presented by licensee multiplied by the estimated number impinged.

1977 Species Number /

Weight Numbers # _

1978 a

Weight Alewife 5.3 0.3 61.0 0.2 4

0.1 16 0.1 Black crappie 10.9 0.6 111.2 0.4 82 1.2 1,394 4.6 Blackside darter 1

< 0.1 1

< 0.1 Bluegill sunfish 15.4 0.8 78.5 0.3 5

0.1 50 0.2 Bluntnose minnow 1

< 0.1 1

< 0.1 Carp 6

0.1 12

< 0.1 Channel catfish 3

< 0.1 1.2

< 0.1 Emerald shiner 129.8 6.7 142.8 0.6 Sil 15.0 991 3.2 Freshwater drum 234.5 12.1 1,055.3 4.1 80

1. 2 320 1.0 Gizzard shad 875.1 45.2 11,551.3 44.8 391 5.9 2,737 9.0 Goldfish 135.1 7.0 2,148.1 8.3 3,299 49.9 16,495 54.1 Green sunfish 5

0.1 60 0.2 Logperch darter 42.9 2.2 111.5 0.4 12 0.2 24 0.1 g'nPumpkinseed sunfish 9

0.1 99 0.3 Orangespotted sunfish 17.5 0.9 35.0 0.1 Rainbow smelt 5.6 0.3 61.6 0.2 69 1.0 69 0.2 Spottail shiner 2.1 0.1 12.6

< 0.1 15 0.2 30 0.1 Stonecat madtom 1

< 0.1 1

< 0.1 Trout perch 29 0.4 116 0.4 Walleye 4.6 0.2 17.0 0.1 White bass 6.7 0.3 38.9 0.2 White crappie 231.1 11.9 9,036.0 35.0 22 0.3 176 0.6 Yellow perch 219.7 11.3 1,340.2 5.2 1,582 23.9 7,910 25.9 Totals 1,936.3 100.0 25,801.0 100.0 6,607 100.0 30,503.2 100.0 95% C.I.

(1316-2848.7)

(5447-8015) a.

Source:

Toledo Edison Company; Reference No. 10.

b.

Source:

Toledo Edison Company; Reference No. 2.

Table 2.

Species co.T. position of fishes collected from the Davis-Besse intake canal using a toxicant for complete removal of fishes on September 25, 1974.

- =__

Species or Group Number Counted

% of Total Yellow perch 19 0.8 Sunfish species 289 12.4 Bluegill 4

0.2 Goldfish 9

0.4 Minnows (cyprinids) 423 18.2 White bass 2

0.1 Gizzard shad 86 8

3.7 Smallmouth bass 4

0.2 Crappie species 385 16.5 Bullhead catfishes 812 34.9 Carp 275 11.8 Rock bass 4

0.2 Freshwater drum 5

0.2 Qui 11back 6

0.3 Channel catfish 4

C2 Total 2,327 100.0 Source: Ohio Department of Natural Resources; Reference Numbers 13 and 14.

16

Table 3.

Estimated annual impingement of fishes,pt four fossil-fueled plants on Lake Eria-

)

Avon Lake Lake Shore East Lake Ashtabula K Fish Number Percent flumber Percent Number Percent Number Percent Species (millions)

(millions)

(millions)

(millions)

Gizzard shad 3.90 86.4 0.26 46.5 10.59 88.7 4.75 98.0 Shiners 0.24 5.3 0.10 16.9 0.78

6. 5 0.02 0.4 Rainbow smelt 0.35 7.8 0.18 32.6 0.48 4.0 0.04

0. 8 White bass 0.02 0.4 0.02 2.6 0.01 J.1 0.01 0.2 Fresh.ater drum b

b b

1.3

0. 5 0.4 b

0.1 Carp b

b b

b b*

b b

0.1 Catfish b

b b

b b

b b

b Yellcw percnY 3,504 0.1 b

b 14,366 0.1 4,643 0.1 Trout perch b

c b

b b

Total 4.51 0.56 11.94 4.83

Capacity, Kie 1344 514 1372 500 3

Intake, m /sec(cfs)

Mean 30(1060) 19(670) 34(1200) 8(300)

Max 53(1870) 47(1664) 41(1461) 31(1100) aThese rough estimates were calculated from preliminary impingement data.

Final estimates must be derived from completed EPA 316b demonstration.

bless than 10,000 and/or 0.1% of total.

cActual number estimated.

Source:

Ohio EPA, as presented in Reference No. 19.

I 17 i_

~

Table 4.

S'_ mary of Fish I.rpir.gcment by Number and Weight at the Bay Shore Power Station from September 15, 1976 to September 15, 1977 No. of Individuals Weight Species

• Number

% of Total Kilograms

% of Total Gizzard shad 11,347,255 63.7 122,358 71.8 Emerald shiner 3,282,597 18.4 8,098 4.7 Alewife 1,375,911

7. 7 10,741 6.3 White bass 624,078 3.5 2,766 1.6

~

v llow perch 437,260 2.4 15,311 8.9 e

Freshwater drum 365,779 2.1 5,807 3.4 Spottail shiner 212,515

1. 2 1,661

1. 0 Rainbow smelt 87,374 0.5 352 0.2 Walleye 12,187 0.1 1,220 0.7 Channel catfish 20,995 0.1 1,037 0.6 Others 44,682 0.3 1,357 0.8 Total 17,810,663 100.0 170,708 100.0

" Ten most prominent species.

To be listed a species represented at least 0.1%

of the total number and 0.2% of the total weight.

These are estimates.

Does not include impingement during fish runs.

Source:

J. M. Reutter, et al., The Ohio State University; Reference No. 20.

l l

18

Table 5.

' Summary of Fish Impingement by Number and Weight at the Acme Pc.er Station from September 1, 1976 to September 15, 1977 No. of Indiviluals Weight Species

• Number

% of Total Xilograms

% of Total Gizzard shad 4,709,444 82.1 39,261 90.1 Emerald shiner 823,791 14.4 1,702 3.9 Freshwater drum 114,152

2. 0 1,285 3.0 White bass 21,549 0.4 427

1. 0 Alewife 21,412 0.4 170 0.4 Spottail shiner 15,789 0.3 105 0.2 Yellow perch 6,063 0.1 216 0.5 Channel catfish 3,225 0.1 32 0.1 Walleye 454

<0.1 131 0.3 Goldfish 746

<0.1 66 0.2 Others 12,439

0. 2 140 0.3 Total 5,729.064 100.0 43,535 100.0

• Ten most prominent species.

To be listed a species represented at least 0.1%

of the total weight.

This data does not include fish runs.

These are estimates.

Source:

J. M. Reutter, et al., The Ohio State University; Reference No. 21.

19 mwe m.e-ese-m**

= = _ _ _ _

Table 6.

Total Estimated Numbers of Fishes Impinged at Six Power Plants (Along with Their Design Intake Volume Flows) located in Michigan t.'aters of Lake Erie, the Detroit River, and Maumee Bay During 1974 and 1975.

Total Estimated Plant Name Design Intake Number of Fishes Time Pe--iod (location)

Flow, apm (cfs)

Inpinged Sampled Enrico Fermi I 130,152 223,575 June 1974 -

(Lake Erie)

(291)

August _975 Trenton Che.nnel 956,842 84,528 June 1974 -

~

(Detroit River)

(2136)

August 1975 River Rouge 450,595 271,041 June 1974 -

(Detroit River)

(1006)

August 1975 Delray 767,472 453,831' June'1971 -

(Detroit River)

(1713)

August 1-75 Connors Creek 489,192 484,422 June 19 4 -

(Detroit River)

(1092)

August _975 J. R. Whiting 107,000 1,410,236 January 1974 -

(Maumee Bay)

(239)

March 1L/5 Source:

R. S. Benda and W. C. Houtcooper; Third National Workshop on Entrain. tant and Impir.gement; Reference No. 22.

l l

t l

l 1

20

O Table 7.

1978 Recreational Harvest of Fishes From the Ohio Waters of Lake Erie Species Nu.T.b e rs Pounds (kg)

Yellow perch 11,A83,000 2,459,000 (1,115,395)

Walleye 1,652,000 3,339,000 (1,514,560)

White bass 1,533,000 737,500 (334,528)

Freshwater drum 668,000 800,000 (362,878)

Channel catfish 218,000 189,500 (85,957)

Smallmouth bass 32,000 44,500 (20,185)

Total 15,586,000 7,649,500 Source: Ohio Department ' " +"ral Resources; Reference No. 23.

s 21

Table 8.

1978 Commercial Harvest of Fishes in Ohio Waters of Lake Erie and in Ohio Statistical District 1 which have been Recorded in Impingement Samples at Davis-Besse Ouring 1977 or 1978.

Lake Erie, Ohio DISTRICT la Species Total Pounds (kg)

Pounds (kg)

% of Total Carp 1,545,925 726,490 47.0 (701,227)

(329,534)

Channel catfish 204,844 119,200 58.2 (92,617)

(54,069)

Freshwater drum 1,189,315 219,596 18,5 (539,470)

(99,608)

Gizzard shad 1,557,104 137,429 8.8 (706,298)

(62,337)

Goldfish 757,162 113,500 15.0 (343,446)

(51,483)

Smelt 13,690 0

0 (6,210)

White bass 1,637,345 1,422,485 84.3 (765,375)

(645,235)

Yellow perch 2,110,859 161,Et1

7. 6 (957,479)

(73,143)

Total 9,312,528 3,060,534 32,9 all species (4,224,135)

(1,338,249)

• State of Ohio Fishery Statistical District 1 encompasses the Ohio waters cf Lake Erie from Toledo to Huron, which includes Maumee Bay, Sandusky Eay, the offshore island and reefs, and the Davis-Besse site.

Source:

Ohio Department of Natural Resources; Heference No. 24.

i l

1 22

O 8.

Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton During 1978, fish eggs and larvae were sampled in Lake Erie in the vicinity of Cavis-Besse on ten occasions between April 30 and September 1.4 Sampling was to be conducted approximately once every two weekt (weather permitting) using 0.75 meter diameter plankton net (No. 00, 0.75 mm mesh) equipped with a calibrated flow meter.

Samples were collected in duplicate from surface and bottom via a 5 minute circular tow (at a speed of 3-4 knots) at five stations:

the intake (sta. 8); the discharge (sta. 12); two control areas, one northwest (sta. 3) and one southwest (sta. 29) of the intake and discharge area; and at Toussaint Reef offshore of Locust Point (Figures 2 and 3).4 Similar studies were conducted in 1977 between April 20 and September 2.

Densities of ichthyoplankton for entrainment loss estimatos were o'otained using the above techniques, except that samples were collected at the offshore intake in quadruplicate via oblique (bottom-to-surface) plankton tows made at night.s,s Oblique tows were used due to requirements for sampling at Lake Erie water intakes by tne U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Night sampling was also required by those agencies for minimization of net avoidance by larvae and to more accurately assess populations of species which reside near the bottom during daylight.s,s Density estimates were computed and presented aa the ' number of ichthyoplank-3 ters per 100 m of water for each sampling date and a mean density was computed for the time period during which each species was captured.

The mean value was then multiplied by the volume of cooling water withdrawn by the power station during the period of plankton occurrence to estimate the numbers entrained.

This method assumed that all ichthyoplankters observed at the intake were entrained and also that all entrained plankters were killed.

During 1977) 13 taxa of ichthyoplankters were collected during lake samplings.1 The most abundant larval species were: gizzard shad (55.9 per-cent of the total larvae collected); yellow perch (25.5 percent); walleye (11.1 percent); and emerald shiner (3.0 percent). Overall, maximum larval densities occurred on June 2, with the period of greatest abundance between April 29 and June 25.

Control station No. 3 exhibited the greatest mean 3

larval density (57.4/100m ), while control station No. 29 showed the lowest 3

mean density (15.8/100m ) of those stations near the power plant.

Overall, the Toussaint Reef station exhibited the lowest mean larval density 3

(11.6/100m ).

No eggs were collected on any of the sampling dates.

During 1978, eleven taxa of ichthyoplankters were collected during lake sampling.4 The most abundant larval species were:

gizzard shad (68.7 percent of the total); emerald shiner (14.3 percent); walleye (10.8 percent);

freshwater drum (2.5 percent); and yellow perch (2.1 percent).

Overall, maximum larval densities occurred on June 6, with the period of greatest abundance between May 22 and July 5..The discharge plume station (No. 13) 3 exhibited the greatest mean larval density (76.1/10Cm ), while the intake 3

station (No. 8) showed the lowest mean density (31.9/100m ) of those stations near the plant. Overall, the Toussaint Peef station exhibited the lowest mean 3

larval density (26.1/100m ).

Fish eggs were collected from the bottom of Station Nos. 3 and 13 and only en June 8, with densities of 8.7/100m3 and 6.3/100m3 respectively.

The eggs were not speciated.

Eggs were not collected near the intake.

23

~

During 1977 and 1978, walleye contributed to increasingly greater prcportions on the larval catches than during previous years, probably due to noted increases in the adult populations throughout the western basin of the lake.4'17 Con.ersely, yellow perch larval densities decreased from 1977 to 1978,4'17 as did the itundance of young-of-the year in Ohio Statistical District I.23 During the spawning seasons of 1975 and 1976, a study of ichthyoplankton distribution was coaducted throughout much of the western basin (Ohio waters) for the USEPA.18 The study utilized sampling equipment and procedures similar to those used at Davis-Besse during 1977 and 1978, and sampled the waters of Maumee and Sandusky Bays and the lake proper from nearshore to approximately 20 miles (32 Km) offshore. A total of 20 larval species were collected, with the most common being gizzard shad, rainbow smelt, emerald shiners, spottail shiner, carp, freshwater drum, white bass, yellow perch and walleye.

The study recommended the use of replicate tows, surface and bottom samplirg, and night sampling, as done at Davis-Besse during 1977 and 1978.

The study also found that separate surface and bottom tows produced greater larval densities than did oblique tows at the same station.

At Davis-Besse during 1978, surface-bottom sampling at the intake yielded lower mean densities (during the periods of occurrence) of gizzard shad, freshwater drpm, and walleye, and higher densities of emerald shiner and yellow perch than did oblique sampling.4,5 s One result of the study was the identification of areas of the lake used for spawning.

It found that nearly all nearshore areas appear to be used by one species or another, and the area where the least amount of spawning and/or nursery activities were taking place was identified to be from Locust Point west to the mouth of Maumee Bay.

It was suggested, therefore, that water intakes sited in this area would have the least impact on fish larvae.

Intakes placed offshore as far as ecencmically possible were stated as the most desirable, since the fewest larvae were collected offshore.18 Entrainment sampling at the intake station (No. 8) during 1978 indicated that ichthyoplankters were entrained by cooling water withdrawal from May 6 through August 17 (Table 9).s,s Based upon the densities of plankters caught and the volume of intake water withdraw during the periods of occurrence, an estimated 6,310,890s to 6,311,3715 larvae and 44,278s,s eggs were entrained by the power station in 1978 (Table 9). Of the larvae total, gizzard shad constituted 76 percent, walleye 15 percent, and emerald shiner 5 percent.

Fish eggs (unspeciated) were captured during entrainment sampling only on June 7 at a 3

'8 density of 2.4/100m.

One approach to assessing the impact of entrainment of fish larvae is to estimate the number of adults that the loss represents.27 Using the sim-plistic approach, the number of adult fish that would have resulted from the entrained larvae is equal to the survivorship from larva-to-adult multiplied

' y the number of larvae entrained.27,2s Based upon survival estimates ranging u

from 0.1 percent to 1.0 percent during the life stages from late larva to 3 year old adult, the licensee estimated that the 35,259 entrained yellow perch larvae could have produced between 35-353 adult fish.

Similar survival estimates for entrained walleye larvae resulted in an estimated loss of 917-9167 adult fish.s,s These estimates probably are conservative, however, since the entrained larvae of both species were entirely early stage or pro-larvae (yolk-sac larvae)5'8 which would have lower survival rates to adulthood than would late stage larvae.

For example, survival from early 24 e

o mm

larva to adult (4 year old) for sauger (a species closely related to yellow perch and walleye) in the Mississippi River near the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Station was estimated to be between 0.023 percent and 0.34 gercent, I

based upon site-specific life history considerations for that species.*8 Other early larva-to-adult survival rates for fishes at Prairie Island which t.are entrained at Davis-Besse also are estimated to be less than 1 percent:

i gizzard shad (0.01 percent); carp (0.0006-0.12 percent); and freshwater drum (0.00175-0.01 percent).29 Corrparison of the estimated losses of equivalent adult yellow peren and walleye with the Ohio recreational and commercial I

fishery harvests for 1978 (tables 7 and 8) shows that they are small propor-tions of the harvests (which are themselves portions of the total populations).

Assuming that compensatory mechanisms are operating within the populations, the numbers of equivalent adults lost could be reduced.

The bounds placed on the entrainment estimates at the 95 percent confidence intervals,s are wide (Table 9) and indicate a high variabil'ity of larval densities over time.

Sampling frequency also could have contributed to the wide intervals. The State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) guidelines for entrainment sampling 30 suggest that for " low risk" intakes, sampling frequency should be between once per-7 days and once per-10 days, with the latter required by OEPA and the USNRC ETS for Davis-Besse. During 1978, entrainment sampling was conducted on eight occasions between April 30 and August 11 at frequencies ranging from 10 to 27 days.

During the period of maximum larval abundance (s May 22 to July 5), the frequencies of entrainment sampling were 15,17, and 27 days, when indeed, more frequent sampling at the prescribed level would have been desirable.

Examination of the far field lake ichthyoplankton data 4 shows that overall peak densities occurred during late May early June and during ea-ly July of 1978, when entrainment sampling did occur.

During latter June (when entrainment sampling was not conducted), far field sampling documented the peak in larval abundance of freshwater drum.

Densities near the intake, however, were lower than at any other station 3

sampled (1.7/m ) and lower than the concentration used for entrainment 3

estimates (2.00/m, Table 9) for that species.

It thus appears that the sampling frequency and a lack of entrainment sampling from early June (7th) until early July (4th) probably contributed to the wide confidence intervals around the entrainment loss estimates.

Entrainment sampling was conducted for yellow perch larvae during May-August 1975 at the Monroe Power Plant (once-through cooling; with an intake volume of 3

3 110m /sec or 3885 cfs 1), located in Michigan waters of Lake Erie (Figure 1).

Loss estimates of yellow perch larvae were between 85,000,000 and 110,000,000.32 Entrainment sampling was conducted at Acme and Bay Shore Power Stations during the periods September 1-15, 1976 and from March 16 to September 1, 1977 at both plants.20 21 Sampling was conducted via submersible pumps at the intakes for a continuous 24-hour period once every seven days during 1976 and from June 16 to September 1, 1977. During the period March 16 to June 16, 1977 sampling occurred once every four days.

Entrainment loss estimates for Bay Shore Power Station were 284,717,618 larvae and 426,150,109 eggs (Table 10)20 and for Acme Powar Station were 79,492,563 larvae and 178,048,309 eggs (Table 11).21 Ninety-five percent confidence intervals around the entrainment losses were relatively narrow and never included zero, probably due to a high frequency of sampling effort and perhaps to an abundant plankton population exhibiting relatively low variability in density over time. By comparison, 25

. ~. -...

a the 1978 loss estimates at Davis-Besse are 1-2 orders of magnitude icwer for fish larvae and 3-4 orders icwer for fish eggs.

Similarly, larval entrainment at Davis-Besse during 1978 was low compared with annual estimates (1975-1977) for the Acme, Bayshore, fionroe, and Whiting plants and roughly equivalent with the Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit I which constituted less than one percent of the 5 plant estimated entrainment losses (Table 12)35 Differing years, sampling techniques, site locations, and station designs undoubtedly contri-bute to the differences.

Since Davis-Besse and Locust Point are located in an area of relatively low fish productivity,is the site vicinity probably is influenced by the input of plankters from other areas (carried by water currents) such as the offshore reefs, the Detroit River, and surrounding near shore areas where productivity is nigher,ts and perhaps from Maumee Bay where water flow is from the Bay toward the east around Cedar Point 20 21 (Figure 1).

As such, the wide confidence intervals around the Davis-Besse entrainment estimates might be reflecting a true variability of the plankton populations there which are influenced as much (or more) by input (or lack of it some-times) from surrounding areas, as by production in that area.

The lower 95 percent confidence interval values of zero also are reflective of the capture of no organisms on some samplings days during the periods of occurrence used for entrainment loss estimates Sustained annual entrainment losses comparable to thode within the confidence intervals of the 1978 loss estimates at Davis-Besse should not add measurably to the total entrainment impact to fishes resulting from the several power plants operating on Lake Erie.

The site location in a relatively unproductive area of the western basin should further minimize impacts.

c6

Table 9.

Ichthyoplankton Entrainment at the Davis Besse Nuclear Power Station - 1978 Volume of b

3 Number of Larvae Entrained Water (100m )

Larvae /100m3 Period Ouring Which Withdrawn 95T Confidence Interval 95% Confidence Inte. val Species Entrainment Occurred During Period" Mean Lower Limit Upper Limit Mean Lower Limit UpperiXIt Carp June 21 - July 12 20443 0.32

-0.69 1.32 6542 0

26985 Emerald shiner June 21 - August 17 73704 4.68

-7.70 17.05 344935 0

1256653 0

457052 Freshwater drum May 16 - July 12 49951 2.00

-5.15 9.15 99902 Gizzard shad May 30 - Au0ust 17 91598 52.36

-38.38 143.00 4796071 0

13098514 Rainbow smelt May 16 - August 17 103211 0.92

-0.80 2.64 94954 0

272477 Spottail shiner May 30 - August 17 91598 0.18

-0.04 0.40 16488 0

36u39 Walleye May 6 - May 30 22037 41.60

-436.15 519.35 916739 0

11444915 Yellow perch May 6 - May 30 22037 1.60

-0.94 4.14 35259 0

91233

-l

TOTAL LARVAE 6310890 26684468 EGGS May 30 - June 21 18449 2.40

-5.24 -

10.04 44278 0

185228 aEstimated by multiplying daily discharge rate by 1.3 and adding all daily estimates for the specific period.

DAverage concentration during their period of occurrence.

CValues which would have been less than zero were rounded back to zero.

Source:

J. M. Reutter and C. E. llerdenorf, The Ohio State University; Reference No. 6.

{

fable 10.

Total Ichthyoplankton Entrainment at the Bay Shore Power Station:

September 1, 1976 to September 1, 1977 Species Total o al LOWTOT UPTOTY a/

f Bluegill sunfish 28201 0.01 4678 169998 Carp 8251539 2.90 4159814 16368014 Channel catfish 564532 0.20 164699 1935025 Emerald shiner 142572 0.05 34151 595207 Freshwater drum 13479134 4.73 7372574 24643639 Gizzard shad 223290406 78.43 134749933 370008388 Logperch darter 28778 0.01 4774 173487 Rainbow smelt 897099 0.32 387843 2075032 l

Spottail shiner 238132 0.08 44203 1282868 Troutperch 12747

<0.01 981 165631 Unidentified 88078 0.03 28585 271388 Unidentified crappie 28778 0.01 4774 173487 Unidentified shiner 166784 0.06 17593 1581135 Unidentified sucker 357889 0.13 132394 967447 Unidentified sunfish 493434 0.17 82108 2965329 Walleye 441614 0.16 206873 942721 White bass 33107856 11.63 13496529 81215709 White sucker 673614 0.24 249356 1819709 Yellow perch 2426431 0.85 875124 6727696 TOTAL LARVAE 284717618 100.00 Drum eggs 425804375 99.92 238919134 758872292 Other eggs 346034 0.08 TOTAL EGGS 426150109 100.00

-239225361 759133204 M ower bound of 95% confidence interval for number entrained.

L kupper bound of 95% confidence interval for number entrained.

Source:

J. M. Reutter, et al., The Ohio State University; Reference No. 20.

28

=-

1

~

g Table 11.

Total Ichthyoplankton Entrainment at the Acme Power Station:

September 1, 1976 to September 1, 1977

% of a/

Species Total Total LOWTOT UPTOT5 Carp 1144648 1.44 472245 2774446 Channel catfish 92377 0.12 28932 294954 Freshwater drum 26513645 33.35 13381549 52533031 Gizzard shad 44930220 56.52 19516220 103438300 Logperch darter 130032 0.16 22907 738130 Spottail shiner 41401 0.05 6931 247314 Unidentified 114022 0.14 34034

'381997 Unidentified madtom 15517 0.02 3627 66392 Unidentified shiner 7853 0.01 1325 43414 Unidentified sucker 141043 0.18 21637 919410 Unidentified sunfish 341613 0.43 75247 1550884 Walleye 195311 0.25 82488 462446 White bass 5777732 7.27 2369161 14364576 White sucker 33025 0.04 12231 89170 Yellow perch 14394 0.02 3394 61049 TOTAL LARVAE 79492563 100.00 Drum eggs 39968543 22.45 18996413 84094001 Other eggs 138079766 77.55 TOTAL EGGS 178048309 100.00 53425199 593375433 8 Lower bound of 95% confidence interval for number entrained.

5 Upper bound of 95% confidence interval for number entrained.

Source:

J. M. Reutter, et al., The Ohio State University; Reference No. 21.

29

.. _.. _ ~

O f

i Table 12.

Estimated Entrainment of Fish Larvae (All Species) l at Major U.S. Power Plants in Western Lake Erie during 1975-1977.

I I

Year

'I Power Percent of I

Plant 1975 1976 1977 Total The Total 8

8 7

8 Acme 2.52 x 10 1.90 x 10 7.90 x 10 5.21 x 10 15.22 9

8 8

9 i

Bayshore 1.10 x 10 2.09 x 10 2.85 x 10 1.50 x 10 43.94 6

6 6

I Fermi I 2.00 x 10 6.00 x 10 5.00 x 10 1.30 x 10 0.38 7

7 8

8 Monroe 7.10 x 10 7.70 x 10 7.16 x 10 8.64 x 10 25.24 8

8 7

8 Whiting" 2.52 x 10 1.90 x 10 7.90 x 10 5.21 x 10 15.22 9

0 9*

9 Total 1.587 x 10 6.720 x 10 1.164 x 10 3.423 x 10 100

• Insufficient data were available for the Whiting plant, so estimates duplicate those of Acme due to the comparability of the two plants in size and environmental location.

Source:

R. L. Patterson, University of Michigan; Reference tio. 35.

e 30

1 IV.

Conclusions The observed impingement losses during the Phase I study were low in numbers and primarily were non-fishery species.

Those fishery species which were impinged also occurred in low numbers and were small fractions of the recreational and commercial harvests.

The intake canal appears to provide habitat for several fish species, some of which apparently contribute to impingement losses. Most notable during 1978 was goldfish, which occurred in low abundance in lake netting studies, but comprised almost 50 percent of the estimated impingement losses. Since the canal apparently permits survival (and subsequent impingement) of some species at levels which exceed those from the lake, the impingement of those species cannot be considered as losses of or impacts to the lake populations.

No fishes listed as endangered by either the U.S. Department of Interior or the State of Ohio were impinged during 1977 and 1978.8 However, two species listed as endangered by Ohio have been taken during farfield sampling at Davis-Besse:

silver club (Hybopsis storeriana) and the Great Lakes mus-kellunge (Esox masquinongy masquinongy).

Silver club has been taken by gillnet in very low numbers (1-3 per year) during every year since 1973,is while the Great Lakes muskellunge was collected (one individual specimen) during 1976 only.as Based upon the above analyser, the impact of impingement at Davis-Besse on Lake Erie fish populations is judged to be insignificant and acceptable. The Phase I studies and foregoing analyses have confirmed the FES predictions.

The fish species predicted by the FES to be impinged generally have been realized, except for spottail shiner, white bass and alewife which constituted insignificant portions of the impingement estimates for 1977 and 1978.

In view of the adequacy of the Phase I sampling program and the insignificance of impact resulting from fish impingement, Phase I may be terminated anet Phase II (canal study) and Phase III (bubble screen evaluation) need not be initiated.

Although a program specifically designed to determine the contribution of canal-resident fishes to impingment has not been conducted, studies undertaken to date do suggest.that the phenomenon is occurring.

In the absence of adverse impact due to impingement, an evaluation of a bubble screen at the intake crib (as a mitigative measure) is unnecessary.

The impact of ichthyoplankton entrainment to Lake Erie fish populations is judged to be acceptable.

Few fish eggs were entrained and densities of fish larvae near the intake generally were lower than nearby control areas.

The site location on Locust Point appears to be in a relatively unproductive area of the Ohio shoreline of Lake Erie.

The FES recognition that the immediate site vicinity is not an important spawning or nursery area is still valid.

The FES further recognized that plankters of emerald shiner and gizzard shad were dominant forms, with walleye, smallmouth bass, and yellow perch in lesser abundance.

Operational sampling generally confirmed this, except for

'smallmouth bass which was not captured in 1978 during either lake or entrain-ment sampling.

Overall, walleye was less abundant than gizzard shad and emerald shiner in lake samples, but during its peak was the most abundant ichthyoplankter, and was the second most abundant species entrained (following gizzard shad).

In view of the acceptability of the impact resulting from entrainment, the ichthyplankton entrainment program may be terminated.

31

9 The OEPA 316 Guidelines 30 classify cooling water intake structures with respect to " risks." Criteria for determining whether an intake is high or low risk include:

design, capacity, location; and the the probability of involvement (i.e., being entrained or impinged) cf resident aquatic organisms with the intake.

Criteria applicable to Davis-Besse are as follows:

2 (1) Facilities located on Lake Erie with shoreline intakes and a maximum cooling water demand of less than or equal to 500 cfs will be considered low risk.

(2) Facilities located on Lake Erie with submerged offshore intakes may be considered intermediate between low and high risk.

(3) Submerged offshore intakes will usually be considered low risk, but distance offshore, depth and the interrelated factor of biological richness will influence the risk a 'sessment; as a general rule, the greater the distance offshore the lower the risk factor; capacity of offshore intakes is also important and wil'. influence the risk factor.

The intake risk classification for Davis-Besse appears to be low for the following reasons:

(1) Low cooling water demand (94 cfs);

I (2) Low levels of fish impingement and ichthyoplankton entrainment; (3) The relative low productivity of the area of the western basin in whsch the site occurs, thus a relative low probability of involvement of.

important biota with the intake.

The analysis confirms the FES conclusions that the intake design represents a practical balance between technological and ecological considerations, with minimal environmental impact.

This analysis addresses items of NEPA concern with respect to impingement and entrainment impact to Lake Erie fishes, as identified in the NRC Final Environmental Statements.

These subjects have been discussed with the Ohio Ensironmental Protection Agency (0 EPA) and this analysis has included a consideration of OEPA requirements and the 316(b) study results provided to the State.

On January 16, 1980, OEPA formally determined that the cooling water intake at Davis-Besse represents best available technology for the minimization of impingement and entrainment of fish as required under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act.

This determination is included as Appendix I of this assessment.

Conclusien and Basis for Negative Declaration On the basis of the foregoing analysis, we conclude that there will be no environmental impact attributable to the proposed action. The changes assessed herein are to the environmental monitoring programs and do not l

involve any change in plant design or operation or involve an increase in l

effluent types or quantities. The impact of the overall plant has already been predicted and described in the Commission's FES for Davis-Besse Unit 1.

On this basis and in accordance with CFR Title 10, Part 51.5, the Commission 1

32

concludes that no environmental impact statement for the proposed action need be prepared and a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.

j l

References f

1.

Letter dated November 16, 1978 from James S. Grant, Vice President Energy S'.pply, The Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio; to James G. Kappler Director, Region III Office of Inspection and Enf5rcement, USNRC, Glen i

Ellyn, Illinois. 2 pages.

2.

Letter dated March 28, 1979 from J. S. Grant, Vice President Energy Supply, The Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio; 3rcement, USNRC, Glen to J. G. Keppler, Director, Region III Office of Inspection and Enf Ellyn, Illinois. 2 pages plus 13 page attache.cnt entitled " Phase I Fish Impingment Study, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1.

Environmental Technical Specifications Appendix B Sections 4.2 and 4.2.1."

3.

Reutter, J. M. February 1979.

Fish Impingement at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station During 1978.

Environmental Technical Specifi-cations Sec. 3.1.2.a.6 Fish Impingement. CLEAR ' Technical Report No.103.

Prepared for Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

13 p.

4.

Reutter, J. M. February 1979.

Ichthyoplankton Studies from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station During 1978.

Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a.4 Ichthyoplankton.

CLEAR Technical Report No. 108.

Prepared for Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio.

The Chio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

9 p.

5.

Reutter, J. M. February 1979.

Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station During 1978.

Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a.5 Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment.

CLEAR Technical Report No. 104.

Prepared for Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

7 p.

6.

Reutter, J.

M., and C. E. Herdendorf.

September 1979.

Impingement and Entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit 1.

316(b)

Demonstration. CLEAR Technical Report No. 130.

Prepared for Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

83 p.

7.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. March 1973. Final Environmental Statement Related to Construction of Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Toledo Edison Company and Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company.

Docket No. 50-346.

USAEC Directorate of Licensing, Washington, D.C.

8.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. October 1975.

Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation of. Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit 1, Proposed by Toledo Edison Company. Docket No. 50-346.

NUREG-75/097.

USNRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C.

33 l

l

t 1

9.

NALCO Environmental Sciences. March 1978.

Preoperational and Operational Environmenhl Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Pcwer i

Station, Oak Harbor, Ohio.

Annual Report, Summary and Interpretation January-December 1977.

Report to Toledo Edison Company.

Project No. 5501-07786.

Northbrook, Illinois.

42 p.

10.

Toledo Edison Company. March 1978.

Davis-Besse Unit No. 1, Annual j

Environmental Operating Report, January 1,1977-December 31, 1977.

l Toledo, Ohio.

I 11.

Reutter, J. M., and C. E. Herdendorf.

July 1975.

Response of Fish and Invertebrates to the Heated Discharge from the Davis-Besse Reactor, Lake Erie, Ohio.

Project F-41-R-6, Study No. I.

The Ohio State University, Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

79 pages.

I 12.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research.

February 1976.

Pre-Operational Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Program for the 7

Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1.

Progress Report July 1 to I

December 31, 1975. Prepared for Toledo Edison Company under Contract No. 1780. Submitted on March 1, 1975 as part of the Fourth Semi-Annual Report of Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1.

13.

Letter dated July 28, 1976 from Paul C. Woner, Pollution Spec.ialist, Ohio Department of Natural Resourcei, Columbus; Es two page document entitled to C. R. Hickey, Jr., Fishery Biologist, USNRC, Washington, D.C. 1 page p

" Report of Wild Animals Killed," Davis-Besse Channel, Carroll Town: hip, Ottawa County, Ohio, September 25, 1974.

14.

Letter dated August 6, 1976 from Paul C. Woner, Pollution Specialist, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Columbus; M:

C. R. Hickey, Jr.,

USNRC, Washington, D.C.

1 page.

15.

Reutter, J. fi. April 1978.

Fish Population Studies from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station During 1977.

Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a.3 Fisheries Population Studies.

CLEAR Technical Report No. 87.

Prepared for Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

20 p.

16.

Barnes, M. D., and J. M. Reutter.

February 1979.

Fish Population Studies from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station During 1978.

Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a.3 Fisheries j

Population Studies.

CLEAR Technical Report No. 105.

Prepared for Toledo

[

Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

30 p.

17.

Reutter, J. M. September 1978.

Ichthyoplankton Studies from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station During 1977.

Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a.4 Ichthyoplankton. CLEAR Technical Report No. 88.

Prepared for Toledo Edison Company, Toledo, Ohio.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

8 p.

34

.[

k

=

18. Heniken, P. R. September 1977. Distribution and Abundance of Larval Fish in Western Lake Erie.

CLEAR Technical Report No. 69.

Prepared for U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory -

Duluth, large Lakes Research Station, Grosse Ile, Michigan.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

95 p.

19.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commision.

November 1977.

Draft Environmental Statement Related to Construction of Erie Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Ohio Edison Company, et. al.

Docket Nos. 50-580 and 50-581.

NUREG-0337.

USNRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C.

20.

Reutter, J.

M., C. E. Herdendorf, and G. W. Sturm.

June 1978.

Impingement and Entrainment Studies at the Bay Shore Power Station, Toledo Edison Company.

316(b) Program, Task II.

CLEAR Technical Report No. 78b.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

160 p.

21.

Reutter, J.

M., C. E. Herdendorf, and G. W. Sturm. June 1978.

Impingement and Entrainment Studies at the Acme F wer Station, Toledo Edison Company.

316(b) Program, Task II.

CLEAFj fechnical Report No. 78a.

The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

161 p.

22. Benda, R. S. and W. C. Houtcooper.

1976.

Impingement Studies at 16 Electric-Generating Plants in Michigan, pp. 291-315.

I_n:

L. D. Jensen (ed).

Third National Workshop on Entrainment and Impingement, Section 316(b)-Research and Compliance.

Ecological Analysis, Inc.,

Melville, N.Y.

425 p.

23. Ohio Department of Natural Resources. January 1979.

Status of Ohio's Lake Erie Fisheries.

Sandusky, Ohio.

19 p.

24. Ohio Department of Natural Resources.

1979.

Commercial Fish Landings Lake Erie - 1978.

Sandusky, Ohio.

14 p.

25. Murarka, I. P. and D'. J. Bodeau. October 1977.

Sampling Designs and Methods for Estimating Fish-Impingement losses at Cooling Water Intakes.

ANL/ES-60.

Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois.

277 p.

26.

El-Shamy, F. M. 1979.

Impingement Sampling Frequency, A Multiple Population Approach.

Environmental Science & Technology.

13(3):

315-320.

27. Goodyear, C. P. July 1978.

Entrainment Impact Estimates Using the Equivalent Adult Approach.

FWS/0BS-78/65.

Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.

14 p.

28. Horst, T. J. 1975.

The Assessment of Impact due to Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton.

pp. 107-118.

In:

S. B. Saila (ed).

Fisheries and Energy Producton: A Symposium. Texington Books, D.C. Health and Company, Lexington, Massachusetts.

300 p.

35

t

29. Adams, S. M., H. A. Mclain, D. S. Vaughan, G. F. Cada, K. D. Kumar, and S. G. Hildebrand. June 1979. Analysis of the Prairie Island Nuclear Ganarating Station - Intake Related Studies.

Prepared for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge Tennessee. 27 p.

30.

State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.

September 1978.

Guidelines for the Submittal of Demonstrations Pursuant to Sections 316(a) and 316(b) of the Clean Water Act and Chapter 3745-1 of the Ohio Administrative Code.

Division of Industrial Wastewater, Columbus, Ohio.

55 p.

31. Nelson, D. D. and R. A. Cole. October 1975.

The Distribution and Abundance of Larval Fishes Along the Western Shore of Lake Erie at Monroe, Michigan.

Technical Report No. 32.4 Institute of Water Research, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

66 p.

32.

Patterson, R. L.

June 1977.

Production, Mortality, and Condensor Cooling Water Entrainment of Larval Perch in Michigan - Ohio Waters of the Western Basin of Lake Erie in 1975.

School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

51 p.

33.

Reutter, J. M. and C. E. Herdendorf.

July 1977.

Response of Fish and Invertebrates to the Heated O'scharge from the Davis-Besse Reactor, Ohio.

Project F-41-R-8, Study No. I.

The Ohio State University, Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio.

230 p.

34.

Hazleton Environmental Sciences Corp. March 1979.

Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak Harbor, Ohio.

Annual Report Summary and Interpretation January - December 1978.

Report to Toledo Edison Company, Project No. 5501-07786.

Northbrock, Illinois.

38 p.

35.

Patterson, R. L.

Undated.

Ichthyoplankton losses in Western Lake Erie in 1975-1977.

School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

10 p.

36

U b

m

~

Appendix I 8

316(b) Determination ty the State of Ohio Environmental Prc.ection Agency for Davis-Besse Nuclear Pc.ver Station, Unit 1 37

~

's l

(c. Q $

k-

/,,, s

(.,pG C

,/

Janua ry 16, 1980

\\

Re: NPDES Permit ! B211*AD Mr. Levell E. Roe Vice President Facilities Development Toledo Edison Company Edison Plaza 300 Madison Avenue.

~

Toledo, Ohio 43652

Dear Mr. Roe:

Members of my staff have reviewed the document entitled " Impingement and Entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Pcwer Station Unit 1, 316 (b)

Demonstration ". The staff has determined that the cooling water intake at Davis-Besse represents best available tecnnology for the minimization of inpingement and entrainment of fish as required under Section 316 (b) of i

l the Federal Clean Water Act. The use of closed-cycle cooling in conjunction with an off-shore intake should prevent 'the occurrence of significant impact to the important sport and commercial fishery in the Western Basin of Lake Erie. Folicwing established procedure, the NPDES permit will be mocified'to indicate the 316 (b) decision.

If you have any questions or comments please contact Joe Reidy (614) 466-2390.

i l

Very truly.7 ours.

12 EF&

Robert E. Phelps, P.E.

Chief, Division of Industrial Wastew;,ter l

REP:ph cc:

J. Reidy G. Milburn, USEPA-Region V C. Hickey, USNRC /

l li f

James A. Rhodes Gcverner State of Ohio Enviroamental Protection Agericy James F. McAvoy. D recter seu ic 9. 361 E. 3 read St.. Columbus. Chio 43215 -(614) 465-856