ML20028F505
| ML20028F505 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/24/1983 |
| From: | GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028F497 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8302010402 | |
| Download: ML20028F505 (70) | |
Text
_ _ _ _, _
ATTACHENT A Proposed TMI-2 Appendix B ETS THEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PRCPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 G302010402 830124 G535y PDR ADOCK 05000320 P
- - - - ~ =
~~~~~'^ ~ ~~'~'~-_,___.,....~,.._,..----
3.0 Environmental 2nitorinq 3.1 Nonradiological Monitoring A.
Initiation and Duration of Monitoring Programs The aquatic environmental monitoring progran;; described in this Section shall commence as specified under each program and continue until modified or termin9ted as provided for in Subsection 5.7.1 of the ETS.
The environmental monitoring requirements stjall become effective as of April 1, 1983. Modifications of the ETS or programs may be proposed at any time with appropriate justification in accordance with 10 CFR 50:90.
B.
Delays in Sample Collection If offsite sample collection cannot be undertaken on the scheduled date (plus or minus the number of days allowed by the appropriate sampling frequency definitions) due to adverse weather conditions or for other justifiable reasons, the factual basis shall be recorded and collections shall commence on the first practical date following the scheduled date.
I i
THREE MILE ISLAND - URIT 2 3-1 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
3.1.1 Abiotic 3.1.1.a Aquatic 3.1.1.a.(1) Thermal Characteristics of Cooling Water Discharge Environmental 2nitoring Requirement Deleted Action Deleted TIREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
-.7.
.n.
=.
Bases Deleted TFfEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3 3-4 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
3.1.1.a.(2) pli Environment'al Monitorirc Reauirement Deleted Action Deleted Bases Deleted THEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3 3-6 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
3.1.1.a.(3) Biocide Environmental Monitorire Reauirement Deleted Action Deleted i
Bases Deleted i
i TifEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3 3-8 PROPOSED DiANGE NO. 38 0535y l
l t - - _
3.1.1.a.(4)
Water Quality Analysis Environmental Monitoring Requirement Information on the physical and chemical characteristics of the Susquehanna River at the times and sampling locations of the Aquatic Biotic Monitoring Program of ETS Subsection 3.1.2.a. shall bc collected in the vicinity of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station.
The following physical and chemical characteristics of the Susquehanna River shall be measured at the times and sampling locations of the Benthic Macroinvertebrates survey of these ETS Subsection 3.1.2.a(1)(a).
Temperature pH Dissolved Oxygen Total Dissolved Solids The following physical and chemical characteristics of the Susquehanna River shall be measured at the times and sampling locations of the General Ecological Survey of these ETS Subsection 3.1.2.a(1): temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen.
All samples shall be collected and all analyses shall be performed in accordance with the procedures prepared by the licensee in accordance with Section 5.5.
The collection of samples shall coincide to the extent practicable with biological sampling at the same location. This monitoring program shall commence April 1,1983.
I T W E MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-9 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
Action The results of the monitoring conducted under this program shall be summarized, analyzed, interpreted, and reported in accordance with Subsection 5.6.1.
The licensee shall indicate for each parameter the date of sampling, sampling location, concentration measured, depth of sample, and method of analysis used.
Bases Examination of the water quality, at the times and locations used for the aquatic ulalogical investigations will yield data required for the evaluation of trends ard unusual occurrences that may be suggested by the biological observations.
l TIREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-10 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
3.1.1.a.(5) Chemical Release Inventory Environmental Monitorirc Teauirement Delete Action Delete Bases Delete l
l l
r l
THEE MILE ISLAPO - UNIT 2 3-11 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y l
3.1.2 Biotic 3.1.2.a Aquatic 3.1. 2.a. (1)
General Ecoloaical Survey 3.1.2.a. (1) (a) Benthic Macroinvertebrates Environmental Monitoring Requirement The benthic macroinvertebrates shall be sampled to detect and assess the signifit.ance of changes in species composition, distribution, and abundance as related to three Mile Island Nuclear Station (TMINS). This program shall use a baseline and consolidation of the data relating to macroinvertebrates gathered by the Licensee's consultants through December 30, 1982.
All samples shall be collected and all analyses shall be performed in accordance with the Procedures prepared by the licensee as per Section 5.5.
This monitoring program shall commence April 1,1983.
Action Description of the program, results, and interpretative analyses of environmental impacts shall be reported per the routine report schedule of Subsection 5.6.1.
Results reported shall contain information encompassing but not be limited to: sample date; station number; depth of the sample in meters; gear type used; substrate type (expressed in general terms); sample size (a real size campled in m2); species or taxon; the estimated or actual number of each taxon in the sample; the relative abundance of each taxon.
Bases Because benthic organisms are sedentary and cannot " avoid" adverse conditions, they are useful indicators of water quality and environmental change.
The environmental assessment made in the FES-OL of 1972 (Section V.C.2) and the Supplement to the FES-OL of 1976 (Section 5.5.2.3) determined that impacts to the benthos of Lake Frederic area (York Haven Reservoir) of the Susquehanna River may result from the operation of Three Mile Island Nuclear Station. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board determined in its Initial Decision, dated December 20,197',, (page 80 ff.) that the program to monitor the benthic macroinvertebrates should continue for at least three years following the onset of Unit 2 operation. This requirement has been completed without TmEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-12 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
evidence of sig11ficant, adverse impacts to the benthos from the operation of TMI-1, the combined operations of TMI-l and TMI-2, the accident at TMI-2, or the post accident shutdown modes of TMI-1 and TMI-2.
e r
{
l THEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-13 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
~
~
i 3.1.2.a.(1)(b) Ichthyoplankton Environmental Monitoring Requirement The ichthyoplankton shall be samled to detect and assess the significance of changes in species composition, relative abundance, density, and seasonal and spatial distribution as related to TMINS. All samles shall be collected and all analyses shall be performed in accordance with the Procedures prepared by the licensee as per Section 5.5.
j This monitoring program shall commence on April 1,1983. Approval for modification or termination of the monitoring requirement may be obtained from the NRC in accordance with Subsection 5.7,1.
Action Description of the program, results, and interpretative analysis of environmental impacts shall be reported as per the routine report schedule of Subsection 5.6.1.
Results reported shall contain information encompassing but not limited to:
sampling date; station number; depth of the sample in meters; species or taxon; life stage of the specimens; and No/100 m3 (the estimated number of organisms per 100 cubic meters of water filtered or pumped).
4 Bases The environmental assessments made in the FES-OL of 1972 (Section V.C.2) and i
the Supplement of the 1976 (Section 5.5.2.2) determineo that impacts to the ichthyoplankton of Lake Frederic may result from the operation of Three Mile Island Nuclear Station. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board determined in its Initial Decision. dated December 20,1977, (Page 80 ff.) that the program to monitor the possible impacts to fish should continue for at least three years following the onset of Unit 2 operation. Combined far-field and entrainment studies have been conducted during the operation of TMI-1, the operation of TMI-1 and TMI-2, the accident at TMI-2, and the post accident i
shutdown period of TMI-l and TMI-2. All studies have indicated that no significant, adverse impacts resulted from the activities at the TMINS.
THREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3 3-15 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
_a 3.1.2.a.(1)(c) Fish Environmental Monitoring Reauirement The ichthyofauna shall be sampled to detect and assess the significance of dianges in species composition, relative abundance, and seasonal and spatial distribution, as related to TMINS.
All samples shall be collected and all analyses shall be performed in accordance with the Procedures prepared by the licensee per Section 5.5.
Data will be collected by methods appropriate for statistical analysis in the form of catch-per-unit-effort. Additionally, creel surveys shall be continued.
This monitoring program shall commence on April 1,1983. Approval for modification or termination of this monitoring requirement may be obtained -
from NRC in accordance with Subsection 5.7.1.
Action 1
Description of the program, results, and interpretative analyses of environmental impacts shall be reported per the routine report schedule of Subsection 5.6.1.
Results reported shall contain information encompassing but not limited to:
sampling date; station number; depth of the sample in meters; sampling gear type used; duration of sampling (minutes); species or taxon; actual or estimated number of each taxon collected in the sample; length frequencies (number 5mm intervals); and mean weight (grams) for all specimens in each length interval. If a significant deviation from preoperational conditions is discovered, the reasons for the deviation shall be determined.
Bases The environmental assessments made in the FES-OL of 1972 (Section V.C.2) and the supplement to the FES-OL of 1976 (Section 5.2.2.1) determined that impacts to the fish populations of Lake Frederic may result from the operation of Three Mile Island Nuclear Station because of impingement of tsdult and juvenile fishes and the entrainment of fish eggs and larvae. The Atomic Safety ard Licensing Board determined in its Initial Decision, dated December 20, 1977, (page 80 ff.) that the program to monitor the possible impacts to fish should continue for at least three years following the onset of TMI-2 operation.
4 L
l TmEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-16 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
Studies of adult and juvenile fish mlations have been conducted during the operation of TMI-1, the operation of TMI-1 and TMI-2, the accident of TMI-2, and the post accident shutdown period of TMI-1 and TMI-2. All studies have indicated that no sig11ficant adverse impacts resulted from activities at the THINS.
i THREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2
!L17 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
.l 3.1.2. a. (2) Impingement of Organisms Environmental Monitorina Reauirement Delete r
J e
Action Delete l
Bases Delete i
TIREE MILE ISLAlO - UNIT 2 3 3-19 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
~.
I 3.1.2.a.(3) Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton Environmental Monitorina Reauirement Delete k
Action
/
i Delete l
l l
Bases Delete i
4 4
THEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-20 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y 1
i 3.1.2.b Terrestrial 3.1. 2.b(1) Aerial Remote Sensing Environmental Monitorina Reauirement Deleted 1
l 2
i TIM E MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 gy PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y f
v,..--.
.n.
,, -.- ~, ~
r -- - - - -
9 Bases Deleted O
TFEEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 3-22 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
4.0 Special Studies and Requirements 4.1 Residual Chlorine Study Proaram Requirement Deleted RI l
Action IMleted i
l l
THEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 4-1 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
Bases Deleted TmEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 4-2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
4.2 Thermal Plume Mapping Requicement Deleted A
Action Deleted Bases Deleted
(
TFREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 4-3 PROPOSED CHANGE 10. 38 0535y
l 4.3 Hydraulic Effects Requirement Deleted Action Deleted l
Bases Deleted i
l i
T H E MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 4-4 PROPOSED CHkGE M). 38 0535y
- - =
A.4 Erosion Control Insperdon, Rege 7nts Deh d
Action Deleted Bases Deleted I
l' l
l l
THEE MILE ISLAW - UNIT 2 4-5 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y l
l
4.5 Herbicide Applications Requirements Deleted l
Action Deleted Bases Deleted l
THEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 4-6 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y t
4.6 Exceptional Occurrences 4.6.1 Unusual or Important Envfronmental Events Requirements The licensee shall be alert to the occurrence of unusual or important events.
Unusual or important events are those that cause or could cause potentially simificant environmental impact casually related with station operation. The following are examples: excessive bird impaction events on cooling tower structures or meteorological towers (defined by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in its Initial Cecision, dated December 20, 1977, (page 80 ff.) as more than 100 in any one day); on-site plant or animal disease outbreaks; unusual mortality of any species protected by the Endangered Species Act of 1973; fish kills near or downstream of tk site.
This specihl requirement shall commence with the date of issuance of the operating license for TMI-2 and continue until approval or modification or termination is obtained from the NRC in accordance with Subsection 5.7.1.
Action Should an unusual or important event occur, the licensee shall make a prompt report to the NRC in accordance with the provisions of Subsections 5.6.2.a and 5.6.2.c.
Bases Prompt reporting to the NRC of unusual or isnportant events as described above is necessary for responsible and orderly regulation of the nation's system of nuclear power reactors. Pronpt knowledge and action may serve to alleviate l
the mamitude of the environmental impact or to place it into a perspective broader than that available to the licensee. The information thus provioed may be useful or necessary to others concerned with the same environmental l
resources. NRC also has an obligatien to be responsive to inquiries from the public and news media concerning potentially significant environmental events at nuclear power stations.
4.6.2 Exceeding Limits of other Relevant Permits Requirements The license shall notify the NRC of occurrences of exceeding the limits specified in relevant permits and certificates issued by other Federal, State ard local agencies which are reportable to the agtney which issued the permit. This requirement shall apply only to topics of NEPA concern within the NRC area of responsibility as identified in these Environmental Technical Specifications.
1
{
1 TmEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 4-7 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 l
0535y
This requirement shall commence with the date of issuance of the operating license for TMI-2 and continue until approval for modification or termination is obtained from the NRC in accordance with Subsection 5.7.1.
Action The licensee shall make a report to the NRC in accordance with the provisions of Subsections 5.6.2.b. and 5.6.2.c. in the event of a reportable occurrence of exceeding a limit specified in a relevant permit or certificate issued by another Federal, State or local agency.
Bases NRC is required under NEPA to maintain an awareness of environmental impacts casually related with the construction and operation of facilities licensed under its authority. Further, some of the ETS requirements are couched in terms of compliance with relevant permits (such as the NPDES) issued by other licensing authorities. The reports of exceeding limits of relevant permits also alert the Staff to environmental problems that might require mitigative action.
THEE MILE ISLAPO - UNIT 2 4-8 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
TAELE OF CONTENT ~
Pgle 1
j 1.0 INTRODiETION 1
2.0 PRCLRAM DESCRIPTION 2
2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates 3
2.2 Water Quality Analysis 3
2.3 Ichthyoplankton 5
2.4 Fish 8
2.5 Creel Survey Table 1.
GPUN Proposed Aquatic Monitoring Program of the Susquehanna River in the vicinity of TMINS.
Table 2.
NLJmber of sampling periods conducted oy IA near TMINS during January, February, March, and December from 1974-i?81.
Figure 1.
Location of Macroinvertebrate Sanpling Stations Figure 2.
Location of Ichthyoplankton Sampling Stations Figure 3.
Location of Electrofishing Zones Figure 4.
Location of Potential Seine Stations Figure 5.
Location of Creel Survey Areas Comparison by month of anglers, fish caught, fish kept, hour s Figure 6.
fished, catch / effort, and harvest / effort, March through November 1981.
Monthly distribution of the number of anglers interviewed by IA in Figure 7.
the York Haven Reservoir from 1978 through 1981.
Monthly distribution of fir.h kept by anglers interviewed by IA in Figure 8.
the York Haven Reservoir from 1978 through 1981.
Yearly comparison of number of anglers interviewed by IA in the Figure 9.
York Haven Reservoir from 1978 through 1981.
Appendix
ATTACHENT G Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Proposed Aquatic mnitoring Program 1.0 INTRODLETION The aquatic monitoring program described herein is based on two facts:
1.
For the past 9 years, GPU Nuclear (GPUN) has performed an extensive aquatic monitoring program of the Susquehanna River in the vicinity of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (TMINS).
2.
These studies have demonstrated that the operation of TMI-1 and TMI-2, as well as the Accident at TMI-2, have not adversely impacted the aquatic resources of the area.
The existing program is an inventory / assessment program with emphasis towards inventory. Based Lpon the results of 9 years of extensive sampling, GPUN concludes that the inventory objective Sss been satisfied and that this portion of tne program is complete. Thus, the aquatic program now should be redefined with the objective of providing assessment of impacts associated with the operation of TMINS. This redefinition will consist primarily of the removal of those aspects of the existing program that were desiyied to provide an inventory of aquatic resources; i.e., mnecessary control stations and, for purposes of assessment, redundant sampling programs.
2.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The major components of the progran,are described in the following subsections. Each subsection identifies sample frequency, the r.unber of stations to be sampled, the number of samples per station, and a brief justification for the proposed sampling regime. N ch of this information l
1s also summarized in Table 1.
All sampling stations proposed by GPUN are existing stations and thus, have an extensive data-base. Other key criteria used by GFUN to select sampling stations are:
1.
Stations should provide information useful for assessment.
2.
Stations from control and indicator areas should be similar so that impacts will be discernable, and 3.
Stations should be selected relative to the potential area of impact from TMINS.
TfREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHAPCE NO. 38 0535y
2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates 2.1.1 Sample Frequency - Monthly, April through November 2.1.2 Number of Striions - 3 (1 control, 2 indicator) 2.1.3 Samples / Stations - 4 replicate, Ponar Grabs 2.1.4 Procedure With the exceptions noted below, GPUNC will perform the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Program in accordance with ECP 1450, Revision 2.
2.1.5 Bases From the review of Benthic Macroinvertebrate data collected by Ichthyological Associates, Inc. (IA) since 1974, GPUN selected 3 stations (1 control, 2 indicator) in the vicinity of the TMINS Main Discharge (DSN 001).
These stations, illustrated on Figure 1, were selected l
based upon their position relative to DSN 001 and their degree of similarity. Results of a study releasing fluorescent dye from DSN 001 during low, medium, and high river flows confirms the appropriateness of the positioning of the two indicator stations. The zone of influence
- rom the TMINS Main Discharge to the York Haven Dam ranged from approximately 15 to 190 meters from the west bank of TMI during river flows from 64,000 cfs down to 4,100 cfs. Higher river flows would compress the zone closer to the bank. Additionally, Stations lA2 (control), 11A1, and 981 have Percent Similarity Values greater than 80% on species composition. Hence, changes in the composition of benthos between stations should be readily discernable.
Sample frequency was selected to monitor the benthos during the " biologically active" period of the year.
Historical data indicate peak densities of benthos from May through August. Typically, macroinvertebrates exhibit growth at 100C leading to reproduction about 1 month later.
In the vicinity of TMINS, the Susquehanna River warms to about 100C in early April. Therefore, to ensure monito:ing during this active time, the sampling period was selected as April through November.
Additionally, a monthly sampling frequency is sufficient to monitor potential changes in the benthos.
Ancilliary functioro of this monitoring will be to supplement the existing GPUN Asiatic Clam Surveillance as well as to obtain river sediment samples for analysis in the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REW ).
THREE MILE ISLAt0 - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
During the October 26, 1982 meeting, the NRC requested additional statistical justification for CPUN's proposed reduction in sample period and frequency. This information is provided in Table 2 and the Appendix.
As previously stated, a sample period of April through November was chosen to monitor the benthos during the
- biologically active' period of the year. Additionally, sampling during the winter frequently is impossible due to climatic limitations. As illustrated in Table 2, the data-base for henthos from 1974 through 1981 is only 26.6% for the months of December through March.
Sample frequency was reduced from biweekly to monthly.
The foremost reason for this reduction is the complete adequacy of a monthly sampling regime for purposes of assessments. Commonly, a quarterly sampling of benthos is considered adequate to detect and assess impacts.
Consequently, monthly sampling is more than adequate.
This is demonstrrted statistically in the Appendix.
Accordingly, montisly sampling, as compared to biweekly, provides a similar degree of analytical ability and
}
usefulnr.ss for cnaparison to the existing data-base.
1 2.2 Water Quality Analysis 2.2.1 Sample Frequency - Monthly, April through November 2.2.2 Number of Stations - 3 (1 control, 2 indicator) 2.2.3 Samples / Station - 1 2.2.4 Procedure With the exceptions noted below, GPUN will perform the Water Quality Analysis Program in accordance with ECP 1449, Revision 2.
i 2.2.5 Bases l
Water quality will be measured at the same frequency and stations as sampled in the Benthic Macroinvertebrates Program (Figure 1). Parameters to be measured include i
temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and total dissolved solids.
2.3 Far-Field Ichthyoplankton (IP) 2.3.1 Sample Frequency - Weekly, April through August 2.3.2 Number of Stations - 4 2.3.3 Samples / Station - 2 (Replicate surface tows) i THREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
2.3.4 Procedure With the exceptions noted below, GPUN will perforri a Far-Field Ichthyoplankton Program in accordance with ECP 1451, Revision 2.
2.3.5 Bases IA has conducted a far-field sampling program for l
ichthyoplankton since 1976. During 1976 and 1977, only night samples were collected. Both day and night samples were collected from 1978 through 1981. Through the review of these data, several items of importance to the development of an effective monitoring program have been identified:
(1) Night densities comprise over 80% of the total densities sampled in York Haven Pond.
(2) Night densities can successfully predict day densities in York Haven Pond.
(3) The stations along TMI are the most similar in species composition among all stations sampled for IP.
(4) Of the existing stations, only Stations 3 and 4 (Figure 2) are indicator stations as confirmed by the previously described dye study.
(5) Upstream stations (Station 1 and 2, Figure 2) can successfully predict densities of IP at the discharge station (Station 3). This has been demonstrated by a model developed by IA.
Based on the above, GPUN contends that 4 of the er.! sting stations are adequate to detect and assess potential impacts of the discharge from TMINS. Stations 1 and 2 are the control stations and Stations 3 and 4 are indicator stations. These stations will be sampled during the night, weekly April through August. This will provide data during the summer spawning and growing seasons as consistent with the existing data-base.
GPUN believes the above IP Program is fully adecuate for the purpose of assessment. However, at the meeting on Octcher 26, the NRC requested GPUN to suggest additional sampling stations to provide a pond-wide coverage. If the NRC wishes pond-wide coverage, GPUN recommends stations 5 through 8 as illustrated on Figure 2.
Rowever, GPUN does not recommend that these additional stations be included in the TMI-2, Encrironmental Technical Specifications for the following reasons:
THREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
StClons 5 throtagh 8 will not provide data useful to the detection on assessment of potential impacts of the discharge from TNINS.
Ristorical data fall to identify positive correlations between the number of ichthyoplankton and adult fish in York Raven Pond.
Without this positive correlation, it is impossible to predict adult fish populations or assess impacts of natural plsnomena on the fisheries through extrapolatic* of IP data.
The model developed by IA is capable of predicting IP densities dow;; stream of the TNINS main discharge using the two stations immediately upstream. The add:ltion of other control stations is neither required nor appropriate for use in the model and l
thereby for use in impact assessment related to TNINS.
i 2.4 Fish (Electrofishina) 2.4.1 Sample Frequency - Monthly, April through November Semimonthly, August through September i
2.4.2 Number of Stations - 6 zones 2.4.3 Samples / Station - 1 2.4.4 Procedure l
With the exceptions noted below, GPUN will perform a Fish Monitoring Program (Electrofishing) in accordance with ECP 1452, Revision 2.
2.4.5 Bases Fish Monitoring Programs have been conducted by IA in the i
vicinity of TMINS since 1974. Various studies and types' of sampling gear employed to collect and monitor fish have included electrofishing, seine, trapnetting, and l
tudies on fish movement, population estimates, and food habits. As a result of these studies, a substantial data-base exists on the fishery resources of the Susquehanna River in the vicinity of TMINS. This-knowledge has identified zones comon to specific species as well as changes in the fishery unrelated to the operation of TMINS. Consequently, GPUN believes there is technical justification for reducing the present assessment / inventory regime to a monitoring regime based on the Electrofishing Program.
TIREE MILE ISLAPO - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 i
l 0535y
Food habit study requirements were deleted after the 1978 sampling season. Population Estimates and Movement studies have been conducted since 1974. Based on this historical data, movements of fishes appear random for most species. Habitat preferences, temperature preferences, and spawning migration appear to be the main factors influencing movements of fishes in York Haven Pond. At no time were movements of fishes related to the discharge of THINS. The summer and fall population estimate program also identifies seasonal shifts which are again presumably due to temperature preferences.
Therefore, based on these findings, food habits, population estimates, and movement studies are considered complete and will not be continued by GPUN.
i Currently, fish are sampled by seine, trapnet, and electrofishing. For the purposes of assessment, these efforts are largely redundant. GPUN contends that a single, well-coordinated program is sufficient when based I
upon the vast amounts of historical data available for I
comparison. Of all the programs currently performed, electrofishing provides the best overall assessment of the fish populations in the reservoir. It is an efficient, quantitative, and productive means of sampling a diverse segment of the fishery.
GPUN selected 6 zones (stations) to be sampled monthly, April through November, and semi-monthly, August and September (Figure 3). Station 2 is a control station and Stations 3 and 4 are indicator stations to monitor DSN 001. Additionally, 3 other stations were selected to maintain current information on the overall fishery of York Haven Pond. This additional samplitig effort is deemed appropriate in recognition of the general importance of fish to the public and the anticipated need to monitor the success of the American Shad restoration in the Susquehanna River.
Ancilliary functions of this program will be to obtain fish samples for radiological analysis of the REW and provide fishery data as required for the relicensing of the York Haven Generating Station.
During the October 26, 1982 meeting, the NRC requested additional statistical justification for CPUN's proposed reduction in sample period and frequency for electrofishing. Furthermore, GPUN was to provide additional information on fish collection by seine. This information is provided in Table 2, the Appendix, and the following discussion.
THREE MILE ISLAf0 - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
GPUN statistically analysed electrofishing data for 1981 to test the validity of data comparison for reduced sample frequency versus the full-scope program (Appendix). Diversity indices and values for i
catch / minute from the full-scope program were similar (P
= 0.05) to the same parameters in a randomly selected half-scope program. Accordingly, the ability to detect, assess, and enumerate data on the local fishery is not compromised by the proposed reduction in sample frequency. Additionally, GPUN summarized historical data to assess the significance of data loss from a reduced sample period of April through November. As illustrated in Table 2, the data-base for electrofishing from 1974 through 1981 is only 18.8% for the months of December through March; primarily owing to climatic limitations.
Accordingly, data loss is minimal.
SEINE I
At the request of the NRC, GPUN determined stations in York Raven Pond that could be sampled for fish by seine.
Based on the review of 1981 seine data for species composition, diversity and biomass, 5 existing stations were selected to provide a pond-wide coverage of York Raven Reservoir (Figure 4).
If necessary, these stations will be sampled monthly, April through November. As with other aquatic programs, winter sampling has been severely curtailed by climatic limitations. Frca 1974 through 1981, the data-base for seine is only 31% for the months of December through March (Table 2).
However, GPUN's position remains that a seine program is unnecessary and provides no information useful to the detection and assessment of potential impacts related to l
TNINS. This position is based upon the followings o
Physical Constraints - The shorelines in York Raven Pond are irregular, sporadically ladden with debris, and variable in depth. Rence seining effort is neither consistent between stations or with time.
o Non-quantitative - Because of the number of variables affecting seining effort, seining is the least quantifiable method of fish collection.
Although this is of minor importance in an -inventory program, it is a major deficiency for purposes of assessment. Data which cannot be quantified are of little value to the assessment or even the detection of potential impacts.
l THREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGd NO. 38 0531,y
o Destructive - The existing seine program destroys nearly 100,000 fish per year. For the continuing purpose of inventory, this sacrifice, even if reduced through procedural changes, cannot be justified on a technical basis in recognition of 9 years of base-line data.
o Redundant - The seine program, while somewitat more selective towards juvenile and smaller fish, remains largely redundant to electrofishing in a program developed for assessment. Although to varying degrees of success, all families of fish collected by seine also are collected by electrofishing.
With recognition of the extensive data-base, the most noteworthy contribution afforded by the present seine program is the collection of current information on fish diseases and parasitism in the fishery of York Raven Pond. GPUN proposes to continue the collection of this information while still advocating the deletion of the seine program. This will be accomplished through the electrofishing program by a cursory visual inspection of captured fish and the return of some portion of these fish to the laboratory for a more detailed evaluation.
2.5 Creel Survey 2.5.1 Sample Frequency - One weekday and one weekend day per month, April through October l
2.5.2 Number of Stations - 4 (Figure 5) l 2.S.3 Samples / Station - 3 (0900-1300, 1301-1700, 1701-2100 Hours) c 2.5.4 Procedures l
l With the exception noted below, GPUN will perform the Creel Survey Program in accordance with ECP 1476, Revision 3.
2.5.5 Bases Survey data collected by IA since 1974 adequately demonstrate angling pressure and success within York Haven Reservoir. NUREG 0596 and NUREG 0754 document behavior responses of fisherman as a result of the TMI-2 accident. Additional creel surveys, at the present scope, are not needed for assessnent purposes.
l l
THREE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
GPUN proposes a creel survey program based on the fact that historical data indicate that fishing pressure near THINS peaks sharply in May and declines substantially in October. Monthly surveys from April through October will sample a representative cross section of anglers during these peak months.
During the meeting on October 26, 1982, the NRC requested additional statistical justification for the proposed reduction in sample period and frequency. This information is provided in Table 2, the Appendix, and the following discussion.
GPUN proposed a sampling period for Creel Survey of April through October. A significant decline in both fishing pressure and success occurs from November through March, due, in part, to decrease in air temperature, water temperature, and day length. Darkness, high river flows, and ice conditions also reduce the number of completed survey periods during the same period. Figure 6 identifies the April through November peaks for six parameters sampled dur!ng the 1981 Creel Survey Program.
Figures 7 and 8 demonstrate the monthly distribution of the number of anglers and the number of fish kept for the combined data of 1978 through 1981. It is evident that minimal information will be lost by not sampling November through March.
GPUN divided the 1981 Creel Survey data into two subsets to test the adequacy of a reduced sampling frequency.
Figure 9 graphically demonstrates the close relationship between the two " half-scope" data sets. The Appendix statistically demonstrates the same close relationship.
Accordingly, sampling one weekday and one weekend day, as opposed to two of each, provides a similar degree of analytical ability and usefulness for comparison to the existing data-base.
4 TmEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
Table 1 GPUN Proposed Aquatic Monitoring Program For The Susquehanna River In The Vicinity of TMINS Program Sampling FreQcency Stations Samples / Station Benthic Macroinvertebrates Monthly, April-November 3
4 Water Quality Monthly, April-November 3
1 Ichthyoplankton Weekly, April-August 4
2 Electrofishing Monthly, April-November Semimonthly, August and September 6 zones 1
Creel Survey Monthly, April-October 4
3 TINEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
Table 2 i
Number of sampling periods conducted by IA near TMINS during January, February, March, and December from 1974-1981.
l YEAR l
Totals PROGRAM i 1974 l 1975 l 1976 l 1977 l 1978 l 1979 l 1980 l 1981 1 x
1 I
I l
l I
I I
I Total # l 0 1 0
1 0 1 3
l 3 1 4 I 4
I 3 l 17 BENTH0S l
l l
l l
l l
l l
x l
0 1 0
1 0 1 37.5 1 37.5 1 50.0 1 50.0 1 37.5 1 26.6 I
l l
I l
l I
l 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Total # l 0 1 0
1 0 1 2
l 2 l 4 l 4 1 3 l 15 WATER QUALITY l
l l
l l
l l
l l
x O I o
1 0 l 25.0 1 25.0 l 50.0 1 50.0 l 37.5 1 23.4
,I I
I I
I I
I l
l I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Total # 1 0 1 2 l 2 l 2* I 2 1 2* I 5
l-3 1 20 SEINE I
I l
l l
l l
l l
x l
0 1 25.0 1 25.0 1 25.0 l 25.0 1 50.0 l 62.5 1 37.5 1 31.3 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
~
l I
I I
I I
I I
I Total # 1 0 1 0 1 0 l 1
1 2 1 3 1 3 1 3 l 12 ELECTROFISHING l
l l
l I
I I
l l
x l
0 1 0 1 0 l 12.5 1 25.0 l 37.5 l 37.5 1 37.5 l 18.8 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
- Only partial sample collection l
THREE MILE ISLANO - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y i
l l
Tall ll!!1 ISIAl{D L
151 AID 1
ST. JO)DG IS1AltD SAllD BEACE ISLAllD
[
f h@
^
.(
i
)
SitELIIT
)
IsrA>m ruins FISHIIC cRz a
.f i
C
'e' f
l
'/
TitRIE xn.E I IU CO?il.11ACO Stations BASBoitE 1 = IA2 U
IIA N 2 = 11A1 3 = 951
/,
Y ~ ~
nLAR
. r C.
) 1NIAXE g DISC 11ARCE
@ DISCHARCE IMPACT AREA 500 m
_J b.
Tigure I CPUN Proposed Aquatic Monitoring *rogram for the Susquehanna River In The Vicinity Of TMINS.
Locat ion of IScroinvertebrate Sampling Stations.
TWEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 PROPOED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
-_y
.___._v-.
,r
HILL ISLAND j
fL ISLAND ST. JOHNS a
ISIAND SAHD BEACE ISIAND i
/'t
\\
/
I f
b'>>
SRELI.ET 3
ISLAND TMIHS PISHIlC CuEx 7
/
p ay Stations g
1 = 16Al 5=
4A1 E
I 2 = 13A2 6 = 1431 g
CONIV. ACO i
h',e,
3 = llAl 7 = 12A1 CREEx 4 = 951 8 = 10B1 BASRORE
/<
==
ISuND HAVEN i DAN s.
I
\\nm BRIDGE
) INIAXE g DISCHARGE
@ DISCHARGE IMPACT AREA
- @ CPUN PROPOSED SAMPLING STATIONS
[
Figure 2 CPUM Proposed Aquatic Honitoring Program for the Susquehanna River In The vicinity of 1NINS.
Loestion of Ichthyoplankton Push Net Stations TmEE MILE ISLAND - UNIT 2 FROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
l
}
1 rm.
IStAND MILL ISLAND i
ST. JOEG SISLAND SAND BEACE
\\
l hI i
[
@)
SHELLEY ISIAND THINS FISHING 0
CREEK g
/'
Stations h
l
/.,-
THREE 1=
4A1 MILE l
2 = 13Al M1AND ggg i
3 = 1,A3 CREEK 0
4=
985 BORE
'T ISIAND 5 = 1073 BA N I DAM 6 = 1181
\\-
BRIDGE
) INTAKE E DISCHARGE Q DISCRARGE IMPACT AREA b._
500 m GPLN Proposed Aquatic Monitoring Program for the Susquehanna River Figure 3 In The vicinity of IMINS.
location of Electroffshing Zones TifEE MILE ISLMO - UNIT 2 PROPO3ED CHMCE NO. 38 0535y
,,,e
,,p-e.,,, -,,
1 l'A1.L lilI L 3 SIAllD N
17.l AllD l
II Fl ST. JOllis TSI.AllD SAllD fil*ACII
\\
751AllD
[\\L I
2 4
l
/
Snxi.1.>.y p
IS tAITD Mills 2
FJSilllG y
CRY.V.R 4,
i
\\
i,.,
l t/, '
\\
Stations I"
J=
4A2 l'
I
,I 2 = 16Al I, \\ v, nee
' - ' ^'
it TI.E e.
d = 13B5 h
O.*
CO 3 = 10B5 y
BASilORE ISIAND
- /
YOE IIAVEli I
/
DAM
'e t '24 kWJ BRIDGE
) INrAKe
$ DISC 11,,rtCE @ DISCHARCE IMPACT AREA e-... 3
....................f Figure 4 DtINS Location of Potential Seine Stations TEREE MILE ISLka - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
NISLAND TALL HILL JSIAlm
/(
I a
ST. J0lt ISLAllD SAND BFACE
- pg
\\
l J
SiiELLEY
/
ISLAND DiI FISilI!C f
General Reservoir hst hm B
.7 West Dam York Haven Generating Station THREE
/,
win l
ISIAID l
C01:LVAGO CREEK N
BASHOR.E lt N
m
\\FI-m BRIDGE D INIAKE Q DISCRARGE LI b __
500 si Figure 5 GPUN Proposed Aquatic Monitoring Program for the Susquehanna River In The Vicinity of 1 MINS.
Creel Survey TIREE MILE ISLAPO - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHAPCE NO. 38 0535y
asi. ns sse ase riu causuf leM im Slee 900
- ae0 -
300 -
rism marr 400 300 300 aca acra.s aasmo ne see no C&Km/tfreRT S) 3.e -
IJ s.e -
e.s IWtygst/tfreaf @)
s.ts e.se e.u 848 AFE IEET Nel JWL AuC Sb GCT Der Figure 6 c ap e s.
61 an ain et.e4.e. es.m..~.shi, ts.h 6.re.
.. ::.m.a.. 6.h/ert.<. a n.e...i/erseen, i
m...m in =ss S
- .. seas.
TmEE MILE ISLAPO - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHAICE NO. 38 0535y
R TOTAL ANCI.ERS PER MONTH 1978-1981 1750-1500-1250-E 1000-750-500-250-i l
l Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Honth Figure 7 Monthly distribution of the number of anglers interviewed by IA in the York Haven Reservoir from 1978 through 1981.
TFfEE MILE ISLAf0 - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHAPCE NO. 38 0535y I
4000s.
3#
TOTAL FISH CAUCHT PER MONTH 1978-1981
+ = 10 or less 3000-2500 -
FISH 2000 -
1500 -
1000<
- 500, s
r I
s JAN FEB HAR APR HAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC HONTH Figure 8 Honthly distribution uf fish kept by anglers interviewed by IA in the York Haven Reservoir from 1978 through 1981.
TmEE MILE ISLAIO - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
CREEL SURVE! CWPARISON A = Jkmber of anglers on first veekday and first weekend day B = heder of anglers on second veekday and second veekend day 600 -
B L
A
$00 -
c r
A.$
~
ia P
400 -
B s
D
.bo 300 -
A 200 -
I t
100 -
1978 1979 1980 1981
! EAR Figure 9 Yearly comparison of number of anglers interviewed by IA in the York Haven Reservoir from 1978 through 1981.
l THEE MILE ISLAf0 - UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 38 0535y
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Proposed Aquatic Monitoring Program APENDIX l
1 I
t Appendix Ecction Page I.
Introduction A-l'
~
II.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate A-2 III.
Fish A-7 IV.
Creel Survey A-17 Attachment
I.
INTRODUCTION The Appendix contains statistical analyses of data collected by IA for the TMINS Aquatic Monitoring Program. Analyses were performed using a computer statistical package (SAS) developed by SAS Institute, Inc..from Cary, N.C.
Statistical significance, as used in the text of this proposal, is based on results of Wilcoxon tests (Z statistics). The Wilcoxon test is the non-parametric equivalent to the t test and is appropriate for comparison of two samples with unknown distributions. T tests were performed and compared to the Wilcoxon test for electrofishing data and creel survey data. Results from the two tests readily agree with each other in all data analyses. For this proposal, GPUN chose not to make assumptions on data distribution and based statistical significance on results of the Wilcoxon test. Results of the one-way ANOVA and the Kruskal-Fallis tests are included for information only. Both of these tests apply more to the analyses of more than two sample means and, therefore, are not used in j
the interpretation of these data.
The 95% confidence criteria was used in all analyses contained in this proposal. SAS outputs list levels or probabilities where the statistic becomes significant. Since GPUN chose the 95% confidence criteria (P =
0.05), any value listed by SAS greater than or equal to 0.05 leads to acceptance of the null hypothesis (Ho). In all analyses, the null hypothesis states that the two data sets are equal (H : p1 = p2).
p Rejection of the null hypothesis (probabilities less than 0.05) concludes that the two data sets are not statistically equal at the P = 0.05 level. The following examples should clarify the SAS outputs contained in this appendix.
a)
Prob > lZl = 0.80 Accept Ho: ul = p2 (Data sets are equal) b)
Prob > lZl = 0.05 Limit of acceptance of H * #1
- u2 o
(Data sets are equal) c)
Prob > lZl = 0.03 Reject H : p1 = p2 p
(Data sets are not equal at P = 0.05 level) l P = 0.05
/
\\
w' t
\\
l c,m
.05/2
.0s/2
^
812
.8/2 A-1
II. Benthic Macroinvertebrates To test the adequacy of monthly versus semimonthly sampling, GFLN randomly divided the collection periods from Station TM-AQI-1181 (discharge station) into two subsets, each with data from one sampling period per month. Separate analyses were run on the number of organisms ccllected during 1981, 1980, and 1978 (Tables A-2, A-2, and A-3 respectively). Biomass data were analyzed for 1981 only (Table A-4).
For all analyses, only the months April through November were used. All other months provided inconsistent data which de not lend to proper analyses.
Results of the Wilcoxon two-sanle tests lead to the acceptance of the null hypothesis for all data comparisons. For the yearly comparisons on, total numbers of organisms, the probabilities of exceeding the lZl were 0.9581 for 1981, 0.9581 for 1980, and 0.7132 for 1978. The probability of exceeding the lZl for the biomass comparison was 0.0831. All the above Z statistics fall within the 95% confidence criteria leading to acceptance of the null hypothesis in each case. Accordingly, the data subsets for each comparison are considered equal at the P = 0.05 level.
GPUN consulted other nuclear utilities through NOMIS (Nuclear Operations and Maintenance Information Service) to obtain sampling frequencies and durations of other benthic sampling programs. The replies are contafned in Attachment I of this Appendix. As anticipated, the benthos sampling frequency proposed by GPUN exceeds the sample frequency of every utility responding to NUMIS. In addition, with nine (9) years of historical records, the duration of GPUN's benthic program also greatly exceeds those required of other nuclear utilities.
i l
A-2
Table A-l.
Proposed scope analysis on the number of benthic macroinvertebrates collected by IA during 1981
~
TEST OF REDUCED SCODE ON NUMBERS 4
YEAR =91 e
ANALYSIS COR VARIABLE.NUM CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONG MS VITHIN MS 107420 1034423 1
9 1222.52 2
8 956.S3 F VALUE PROB >F 0.10 0.7520 T
VILCOXON SCORES ! RANA SUMS 1 SU~ 0 EXPECTED STD DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCORES UNDER H0 UNDER H0 SCORE 8
59.03 88.00 9.52 8.63 2
8 57.22 88.00 9.52 8.38 V!LCOXON 2-SAMoLE TEST INORMAL APPROXIMATION)
VITH CON ~INu!Tv CORREC'!CN 0.
.51 S=
S9 23 Z= 0.C525 DROB >I21=0.9581
- -TEST A?oonx. S:0,s: ;;ANCE=0.9588
.sRUSKAL-VALLIS ~ES~
(CHI-SUUARE APPROXIMATION)
~
CHISO:
2.2' OF=
PROS > CHISO=0.9164 l
l
Table A-2 P mposed scope analysis on the number of benthic macroinvertebrates collected by 1A during 1980 I
TEST OF REDUCED SCCDE ON NUMBERS YEAR =80 ANALYSIS FOR VARIABLE NUM CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONG HS VITHIN MS 236196 1017150 1
8 1543.20 2
8 178S.00 F VALUE PROB >F 0.23 0.6373 a
VILCOXON SCORES (RANK SUMS)
S U.~.
0 EXPECTED STD DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCORES UNDER H3 UNDER HO SCORE 1
9 57.02 G8.00 9.52 8.38 2
B 59.00 69.00 9.52 8.63 VILCOXON 2-SAMPLE TEST INORMAL APPROXIMATION 1 lVITF CONTINUITY CORREC'!ON OF.51 S=
57.20 Z=-2.0525 ORC 9 >lZi=0.9581
/
T-TES~ Ao0ROX. S!GNIF.*CANCE=0.959R KRUSNAL-VALLIS TEST (CHI-SOUARE APPROXIMATION)
CHISO=
0.C:
C=
PROB > CHISO=0.9164
~
b
Table A-3 Proposed scope analysis on the number of benthic macroinvertebrates collected by IA during 1978 TEST CF REDUCED SCCPE ON NUMBERS YEAR =78 ANALYSIS FOR VARIABLE NUM CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONG MS VITHIN MS 2G3882 1734204 1
8 2001.63 2
8 2258.38 F VALUE PRO 8>F 0.15 0.7025
{
VILCOXON SCORES (RANK SUNS)
SUM OF EXPECTED STD DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCCRES UNDER H3 UNDER HB SCORE s
S 84.02 68.23 9.52 8.00 2
8 72.33 68.23
-9.52 9.00 VILCOXON 2-SAMP_E EST (NORMAL APPROXIMATION)
(VITH CON INUITv CORRECTICN OF.51 S=
B4.30 Z=-2.3676 RROS >lZi=0.7!32 T-TEST APPROX. SIGNIFICANCE =2.7183 KRUSsAL-VALL!S TES- ! CHI-SOUARE APPROXIMATION)
CHISC=
0.19 DF=
1 PROB > CHISO=0.8744
a Table A-4 Proposed scope analysis on the biomass of benthic macroinvertebrates collected by IA during 1981 TEST OF REDUCED SCOPE ON BIOMASS ANALYSIS FOR VARIABLE VEICHT CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONC MS VITHIN MS 3443437 838170 S
1928.71 2
8 980.89 F VALUE PROB >F 4.11 0.0622 WILCOXON SCORES (RANK SUNSI SUM OF EXPECTEO STO DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCORES UNOER HZ UNDER H0 SCORE 9
85.23 68.C3 9.52 10.83 2
8 51.32 68.00 9.52
'6.38 VILCOXON 2-SAMPLE TEST (NORMAL APPROXIMATION 1 (VITH CONTINUITv CORRECTION OC
.5)
S=
85.30 Z=
- .7328 PRGB >lZI=0.0831 T-TEST APPROX. SIGNIFICANCE =0.12?S ARUSAAL-VALLIS TEST (CHI-SOUARE APPROXIMATION 1 CHISO=
3.19 OF=
1 PROB > CHISO=0.0742 READY
l III. Electrofishing GPUN tested the adequacy of monthly versus semimonthly sampling on the 1981 Electrofishing data collected by IA. The data were organized into two data sets; one containing data collected at the six proposed stations at the full-scope and one containing thta at the proposed half-scope -
(same stations). Table A-5 and A-6 are yearly totals by station and month, respectively, k sed on the half-scope sampling regime.
(Refer to pages 590 and 591 of the 1981 Annual Report for comparison to the corresponding full-scope Tables). Data were included by randomly selecting one sampling period per month. Diversity indices were calculated using the machine formula
- of the Shannon-Weaver Diversity Incax to maintain continuity with like values contained in the 1981 Annual Report. Figure A-1 is a comparison of percent similarity values on species composit' ion for the proposed scope ar.d the existing scopc..
Percent similarity values for the reduc;d scope were calculated using the same eqtntion contained in the 1981 Annual Report. GPUN statistically compared diversity indices and catch / minute values for the full-scope program versus the half-scope program. Comparisons were made by month and by station.
l Results of the Wilcoxon two-sample test for all data comparisons imply that there is no statistical difference (P=0.05) between the two data sets. That is, data organized into a half-scope program does not differ statistically from data collected at the present scope. By month (Table A-7), the probabilities of exceeding the lZI were 0.2332 comparing diversities (Table A-8) and 0.7911 when comparing catch / minute (Table A-9).
By station (Table A-10), the probabilities of exceeding the lZl were 0.3785 for diversities (Table A-ll) and 0.2298 for catch minute (Table A-12). All calculated Z statistics fall within the 95% confidence criteria. The null hypotheses are accepted for ell comparisons and the data sets are considered equal at the P=0.05 level.
l l
l l
I h(N1og10N - I ni ogloni)
H' =
l H' = Information per individual C = 3.321928 (converts base 10 logarithms to base 2)
N = Total number of individuals n1 = Total number of individuals in the ith species s = The number of species in the sample for a station A-7
o Q
b j*
- e. v Le e nt..
- S9MMea d eed
- g emm em g e m e n d m. e m O
mM m
a
==
mmed e
e um e
d e m
4M emM M
e.M.m. m
- +
M 9
nmMe
- m. e. e.
- e. m.
M. e d. m. e. c. g O.
- e. n.
- e. d.
- e. 3 g e
w g
g g3 g
m Om em OOO Om edMMem m
e m
e m
e h e g
e e m m e. e e d O
mM 4
ggemse g 3=== 3me emend mM m
m e M. w em e
M e
e E
=
MMm O
O.
gg e. m. m. e. e m. e. g
- m. e.
- O. M. e. m. e. n. e.
m a
ao o g g.
a w
g Moom OM O
mm memMemow m
MMm 0
h e e
4 em ggemme fe e OM cMM $memememnd e m. e O #
O
- e. m. d mm eme w
Om e
e m
M Z
R MMM H
- M.
- e. m. e. g m. m.
e.
=
w g 3 gg m. 3
- e. m. e I
e a
0 g g eg m
M. OO e
Mm MON O
m em e
me e
e U
g g ggqg seM > g g g gem gemd Omm ge m m e n= O m e
e e
- e. m. e 4
m
= m m
em E
-Mm=
M e.
- e. m.
- e. O. m. e g e.
Og e. m. e e. m. g e.
g. 4 e
O MO DO
=
O WO MMm mo g g
a w
a M
=
m e
M m e O
=
3 W ggem gem 3 e gM GMm geOeese g e m e m. e O 4
- e. n..e e
e e
mOme mem 4
M e
e p
3 eMM e.
- m. e. e M. m. g M.
M.
M. e.
- e. m. e. a
- m. e.
a go c
g e
e e 4
m e
O O
ac me M
O me emm Om e
a m
M m
e h e nO4 O
O m 36 4 SmM 3 M g=
S em smem 0 e e m e O d e. O. w. w.
4 M
em e
e WM e
mM e
e e
m 1
MMM k
- e. m.
M. e. M.
M.
=.
m O.
- e. d. g m. e.
c e
g 9 3
=
w e
e gg g
g o g 4"
O M
DeMOO O
me Owe O
e
=
m M
M e
h eM eseemeem m em t ee emmO s eM e
e e m e. M. ee t l
4 en e
n e
- e. n. m e
s M
e o
e m
4 e
W y
g WMM e
h m O M. *. * * *.* I
- * + 4 7 m e
e..e...m wem M
e a
O M
e+O e u c e.m e n
m I
=
mOe e
e se e =
l0
- e 4 A
e..
N
.e e p
u 6 e 3eO e e e e*.. e e.
e.
= e.rt 8 m * *.
- e e art e e 0 eeee
^U
- m. e. e 4
e e
m m M M
d e e
m M
J em 4
e m
1 F
eMM b
d M. m. e. m. O. m. m.
M.e.
e.
- e. 9 M
e e
M OOM O e u ss De e
m O.
0 -
g e
e 9
4 m
e e 30 - 0 e
e
==
m wee M
.#. s'* *= r. e.a.
U t 6 *. e e *.
e e.t e 3 0 e.rt e
- o. a m m.. e 4. M e8 4
= g a.
.=
e e
se e M e
=
,p a
c mM.
e.
a d m.
- m. M M.
e.
m.
9 - e.
te. e. c. e*
O a n
d 6
=
0 e = 0 se e
me m
De M&M O = O e
- A 4 MO O
e 3
4 h
e n
Olw = e M b e ed
- .e e.
U p M
$ +e d g e m m e* M cM ead eMeM e B M S w
oea 4
e e
=
a me m
o O
e M m e.
e.
p R
o.
e.
e W
- e. 3
- e. m.
O.
G. M. e. m.
- D. e. M. =.
e.
6 e
e.
Ig g
e g
g m g g e
. mm OM e
=
e w
ed Oed m
M nom 4
e e
m b e e e d.e u m, m
e2 e
4 e m ge n e one e 4 e e seememm em e. 4
- e. m. -
mm m-M es mM
=
e e
e mn n
m o
y p
WMM 9
M. m.
- m. e. m.
- m. M.
g m
e
- n. e. e.
M.
M m.
l t - t e
e g
g e g
3 - 6 m
e m
M OmM e
O ed MMm m On a
w e
e m
M m M
e e
m h e m e ea CP e e d m M e e.e e m. O.. e.
4 3 w $emomde e
- e. em e m es
- e. e ea 4
o e
.=
e es m m e. -
A e
e n
e w
a y
4 we e
ee. g 4 M. m. m. m*e. M. e.
- m. e. e.
- d. e.
13 O. 4 d
m 3 9 e e
e
=
bO M
ec
=
meOnh am mom W
e*
E e
O M
M m
o S
b e A
g em et em 3 g-M e e e 3 seMe d eDe eW M h et eW eM m h
p
. O. e. e d
mM end m
e-e e
e m
e h
y 3
Mem b
f.,
o e e S
H a e 2
e e
c g
y a e
C e W u.
g D ewt 3
=
e m
- e 8
m, es e e 4 m
m e 8 e W F
- O e
- o m e t ow N
h y em =
C K e e e& & W W W h== I S
m 2 we eM e
b e6 g m m 9 e yp
- e W D & C t ob m W e em 9 m e gg & A b e e e m E e
m og S eb e A g m g f Q
C h & weX w 3 g g e g e e 3 em 3 P e mA mem wh m
g e
e eS eg
- w g p g aw t O w W e e W
& hm m
w e9 wm m e a w e m o e e e em eew w e
M m e
- s.. ~e a =. e,. a = w~.m.
l e e s.. B mm % e e
e.
a tmA ed D e aA e
- b. 1,. t e
i
.m mw m
e.m -
.. e e
... -. = a e f ee gwm-
- =
e.
m 15.3 e m ee Lm =
- m mma = e.e m ww e c.
D e & e aeqe pp ee e r q e. =
s el p m o.e e e = =. a s*e m
e ee e e a aue e
es a 4oeauWh O.e a ** > u E m e u & e e A-8
,e.,*
.. e..
~~
..a.,a..~.,..O..9.,
-.~.e.
e...e.
t O-O se
~
e n
ee 4>*
O...
~.a.-~.-..~.
.,.~..,-~.
Or.
m.
O.
O
,e.
.. -,o.,e.
~,em e
O
~
.m
~
n.e em.
as;==*~~'-
. S.
~*
3
.... - i -.O sas e * *
. e.
9'% **
ee 1
se G
er O
aa-aaasa-9
=
O. a
. O.
M 3
9 en s
9 a
wg pe en 3 $ Se es ce 84 M l== e* sm 9 O W4 4 Wt
- e9 O ed St Pt e '"* O em *=
e es fue M PS e4 M
- = e9 ** Po up e re O em W
g
. g=
as om e
e e 0% e6 0*
ta ee
%9 e e eh8 c e et e==
e em g't me sie em 4==
9 O
em. 9 9 =f f4== O ** 9 **== M S e* O bso F4 e== Sm O e* ef so 49 f9 9
Sh W fe et e e
@e eS we 9
4#
P=
0 8"t 8 0 es e=== =d - 0 fo 4M S O ** ** mm 79 ** O e v4== e s e en is e
sF9 em M up am ge e re up O se es gb S
9e e
e 9
fe M foo 9
to 4.
ama e O =a O O Wt - s=
e op p een e
1N O
am e=
5 4 9 P4 9 79 P= -
$~
0 9 St O re -
O =# s't a=
- = ee - s' O.
s't e
se OW 9
8e 09 e
D am== e'e,em e e e t
W es 0 ee a e ce re s't am W4 as em g ee e es ce e me O re en 3 e, ge f
d*=
me ce fe F* e gf esp
==p.
se m
ce 04 mme o
e k.I me 6
as e
e =* 3 e c== e= art 0 e e 4
-e e art M e e=e ** =#
g - O e e.e a O
.am O - e. as.
O ar em om a=
e art ce ee
- ~
c t
e O-* 0-O.
ee e e a ** s c ** e ===== 8 ed=
- e'* um e 8 e=-
e e a a em g
~
O-*=.=a.
e.
=* 8
- m am
@e es O
M
.mo De eO ce ea e e e ce, ce 4 e-
.e e. -een e - - e e,, es a r3 e,,
M of 84e e *8=
- 9 a=*
e e y
O se 9e s'*
a gm P4e 4
OO..,o..~...~,..
S e.-......--~......
,s.
O, n
e 4
- a
=e 9e ee-5"O o
sa
.e
- n. (. J y,
J ** gm.#
e.e
- S
- -to e 9 0 a=
0 $ es
- e *e Pe 0 $ g e sm
- 9 44 9 ** 5 5 4 e 8 59
- =
P't
- e. Q uma S*
p Fe s=e 4
es C*==
g
== $*
P
- =
- 4 0 e O F*
e ** ** wt - = = = * *. f.
Ja *en g 3.,a.
O WD 5 W9 0 9 @ Pe 9 e4 5 e
re **
e e
d e*
g A
J c"tme es S
e....,,.........., -,,,, -.,,,,=* -.
W We d
ee **
h
- 9 7"
Po eoe 5
A e
k MM y
4 4
O
,e
.. ~,
,e.-
... -......,,,,,~~~
m.-, e-ee,e e s s a-se e
em ;==
a.et.
m
- 6 C.) $*
em e
me j
aus
@Oe Pe g
to tus e-
..e,-
, ~... -
OO O
ee
. ~ -.
e.
.,......O 4
9e Oe.e e es gp Pe== mae e
q
,fe Se W
C y
r'*
p e em.e te.#
e p.
vt,e== e*
. e em.e em em e 0 e e e9 ce e
=a
- 0 M e se e et es et es es g gm.
86 aus as eJ
. 88 em 9 OHO g.
O es Pe ese e4m e O ** e se e d.* ** 3 ee en 8'*
O 4 9 S =* 9 0 e9 d 9 Po e.= 0 m ** e-se
- e. gj e.
g ens 9 e y
e-
- * * -e g
em O
es 9
t O 9 2
i 6 6 O
O V ON # $
8 8 C
W y9 6 9
- J 9 s9 9 me a e 31 e m b D es C #
g 4 e 4= a
== - s e
es e a e.e 4
h a =.= &
w 3 e as 4 D 9
b er w w **
pg K e 68 e& C 9 9 m se me 9 e me T S
s f
- e 3 gum e AX & &
- l1p D ame g
- E D es e =* e.
- 5...e
,9
, e..5
- e... e,r a,s
- .4. 4a S,h w
up e49 W
W e 9 (
m,
.e,
e,.
e.
. e
-e g a e
e 3 e.
e-e-
g, e
op m
- E C== e er ) e enW# JD b
- er 4
- e D 9 D in= - 9 E ap se C em S as
'e wtA S 6,0 9 *W
- m. es -
6
$E
%d 88 I O O e*
- ** m*9** e m w W e t 3 op m
- e. ee==.. & 4%
g b W
er se >,
es es up b
(
e'J es es 3 f4 Os GB A
p g e
g g a W as 6
- I i S % d 3 O % b I **
a e a. 3 / s$ **
h or
[-
O e.
E F'S wt
%D ** F. %s %) em O
- ** > 44 3. en a y e. We o em A-9 O
e
I Figure A-1 COMPARISON OF PERCENT SIMILARITY FOR SPECIES COMPOSITION AT Tile PROPOSED ELECTROFISHING ZONES 1981 Italf Scope PSc Full Scope PSc 4A1 13Al 10A3 9B5 10n3 4A1 l '4 A1 10A3 985 1083 1
4A1 l
4A1 13Al 56.3 13Al 66.9 10A3 63.7 82.4 10A3 63.8 83.3 985 66.2 65.9 75.0 9BS 62.7 71.3 78.0 10B3 64.7 59.3 64.1 69.1 10B3 63.4 62.0 67.5 68.9 11B1 70.3 40.2 49.9 65.0 58.1 llB1 71.2 44.2 53.6-66.0 59.7
Table A-7 1.isting of 1981 Electrofishing data 1y month used in the analvsis of the proposed scope I
ELECTROFISHING LISTING OF DATA 8Y MONTH i
OSS MONTH T_NUM R_NUM T_DIV R_DIV NUM DIV 1
MAR 1.97 1
12 2.84 3.00 0 85
-0.16 2
APR 2.88 2.20 3.12 2.89 0.68 0.23 3
MAY 2..: 1 3.26 3.00 3.23
-0.85
-0.23 4
JUNE 1.33 1.04 3.02 2.59 0.29 0.43 5
JULY 1.45 1.23 2.96 2.93 0.22 0.03 6
AUG 1.68 1.90 2.86 2.86
-0.22 0.00 7
SEPT 2.69 3.07 3.19 2.94
-0.38 0.25 8
OCT 4.77 6.07 3.05 2.95
-1.30 0.10
>1 9
NOV 1.00 0.30 3.09 3.02 0.70 0.07 PAIRED T TEST ON CATCH / MINUTE VARIABLE T
PR>lTI NUM
-0.00 0.9965 PAIRED T TEST ON DIVERSITY l
VARIABLE T
PR>lTI-i DIV 1.17 0.2759
Table A-8 Proposed scope analysis by month on 1981 Electrofishing diversities ANALYSIS FOR VARIABLE CIV CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE MIORAN65 VERE USEO FOR TIES ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVE'.
N MEAN AMONG MS VITHIN MS 0.0288 0.0207403 1
9 3.01 2
9 2.93 F VALUE PROB >F 1.39 0.2559 T
U VILCOXON SCORES (RANA SUNS)
Sur. OF EXPECTEO STO DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCORES UNDER HB UNDER H0 SCORE 9
99.50 85.52 11.32 11.06 2
9 71.50 85.50 11.32 7.94 VILCOXON 2-SAMPLE TEST (NORMAL APPROXIMATION)
!VITH CONTINUITv CORRECTION OF.51 S=
99.53 Z= 1 192:
PROB >lZi=0.2332' T-TEST APPROX. SIONIFICANCE=0.2498 sRUSAAL-VALLIS TES- (CHI-SOUARE APPROXIMATION 1 CHISO=
1.53 DF=
1 PROB > CHISO=0.2164 REAOY
Table A-9 Proposed scope analysis by month on 1981 Electrofishing catch / minute values 1
ANALYSIS COR VARIABLE NUM CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONG MS WITHIN MS 0.00375558 2.16988 1
9 2.27 2
9 2.24 F VALUE PRO 9>F 0.00 0.9673 Y
C VILCOXON SCORES IRANK SUNS)
SUM OF EXoECTED STD DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCO3ES UNCER HO UNDER H0 SCORE 9
89.02 95.5C 11.32 9.89 2
9 92.32 85.52 11.32 9.11 VILCOXDN 2-SAMDLE TEST INDRMAL APPROXIMATION)
- VI'F CCN~!NUITv CORRECTICN OF.51 S=
89.C0 Z= 2.2549 PRO 9 >lZi=0.7911 T-TES-AP3ROX. SION!F CANCE=2.7943 KRUSAAL-VALL:S EST ICHI-SOUARE APPROXIMATION)
CH:SO=
0.12 0F=
1 PROB > CHISO=0.7573 I
Table A-10 1.isting of 1981 Electrofishing data by station used in the analysis of the proposed scope ELECTROFiSHINC LISTING OF DATA BY STATION 09S STATION T_NUM R_NUM T_DIV R_DIV NUM DIV 1
4A1 2.04 2.70 2.75 2.85
-0.66
-0.10 2
13Al 2.59 2.77 3.13 2.98
-0.18 0.15 3
10A3 2 13 2. /. 0 3.12 3.00
-0.27 0.04 4
985 1.98 2.30 2.91 2.69
-0.32 0.22 5
1093 1.88 2.13 3.32 2.93
.-0.22 0.09 6
1181 2.04 1.35 2.83 2.60 0.B9 0.23 PAIRED T TEST ON CATCH / MINUTE VARIABLE T
PR>lTi NUM
-0.87 0.4240 PAIRED T TEST ON DIVERSITY VARIABLE T
PR>lTI DIV 2.07 0.0935 1
Table A-ll Proposed scope analysis by station on 1981 Electrofishing diversities ANALYSIS FOR VARIABLE DIV CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONG HS WITHIN HS 0.033075 0.028575 i
G 2.96 2
S 2.85 F VALUE PROB >F 1.16 0.3073 VILCOXON SCORES (RANN SUMS 1 Sun OF EXPECTED STD DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCORES UNDER HD UNDER H0 SCORE 1
6 45.03 39.03 8.24 7.50 2
6 33.00 39.00 8.24 5.50 WILCOXON 2-SAMPLE TEST INORMAL APPROXIMATION 1 (VITH CONTINUITv CORRECTION OF.51 S=
45.C3 Z= 3.8837 PROB >l21=0.3785.
T-TEST AP?ROX. SIGNIFICANCE =0.3973
%RUS.%AL-VALLIS TES' (CHI-SOUARE APPROXIMATION 1 CH:SO=
3.G2 CF=
1
?R09 > CHISO=0.3367 READ'r e
Table A-12 Proposed scope analysis by station on 1981 Electrofishing catch / minute values ANALYSIS FOR VARIABLE NUM CLASSIFIED BY VARIABLE SAMPLE MIORANAS VERE USED FOR TIES ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONG MS VITHIN MS 0.0768 0.16384 6
2.I1 2
6 2.27 F VALUE PROB >F 0.47 0.5091 h
VILCOXON SCORES (RANA SUMS)
MEAN SUN OF EXPECTEU STO DEV LEVEL N
SCORES UNDER HZ UNDER H0 SCORE' 6
3.02 39.00 8.24 5.17 2
6 47.22 39.23 S.24 7.83 V: LCOXON 2-SAMPLE ~ES~
INORMAL APPROXIMATION)
':-- CON INJ:~v CCRREC~:0N C:
.51 S=
3*
22 Z=
'.2210 oROS >lZi=0.2298
-TES-APPROX. SIGN!FICANCE=0.2550
%RUSAAL-VALL:S ~EST ICHI-SOUARE APPROX!MATION1 3
.64 OF=
1 PROB > CHISO=0.2002 CHISG=
i l
l
IV. Creel Survey GPUN analyzed 1981 Creel Survey data to determine the adequacy of monthly versus semimonthly sampling. Data were divided into two subsets, each with one weekday and one weekend day per month (Table A-13). Analyses were performed on the number of anglers interviewed and the nunber of fish kept. Only data collected from April through November were analyzed. All other months contained incomplete data which do nct lend to proper analyses.
Results of the Wilcoxon two-sample tests on 1981 data-leads to acceptance of the null hypotheses for both comparisons. Probabilities of exceecing the lZl were 0.9648 for the analysis on the number of anglers (Table A-14) and 1.000 for the analysis on the nunber of fish kept (Table A-15). Both Z statistics fall within the 95% confidence criteria thereby indicating that the data sets are equal at the P=0.05 level.
l l
l A-17
Table A-13 Monthly listing of 1981 Creel Survey data used in the analysis of the proposed scope.
CREEL SURVEY 1981 LISTING OF DATA BY MONTH 085 MONTH ANG_A ANG_8 KEPT_A KEPT_B 1
MAR 10 2
0 0
2 APR 42 35 7
31 3
MAY 96 60 41 37 4
JUNE 39 116 7
30
- 5 JULY 68 76 45 44 6
AUG 120 119 40 43 7
SEPT 76 119 89 134 8
OCT 73 43 91 48 h
9 NOV 23 1
11 0
PAIRED T TEST ON ANGLERS VARIABLE T
PR>iT:
ANG
-0.22 0.8313 I
PAIRED ~ TEST ON FISH KEPT VARIABLE T
PR>ITI AEPT
-0.45 0.6677 i
t.
Table A-14 Proposed scope analysis on tlw number of anglers interviewed in 'the York llaven Reservoir during 1981 ANALYSIS FCR VARIABLE ANG CLASSIFIE0 BY VARIABLE SAMPLE M10 RANKS WERE USED FOR TIES
.s ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE LEVEL N
NEAN AMONC MS WITH]N MS 32 1751.24 1
9 50 78 2
9 63.44 F VALUE PROB >F 0.02 Ot0942 y
5 WILCOXON SCCRES IRANN SUNS)
SUM OF EXPECTED STO DEV MEAN LEVEL N
SCORES UNDER HB UNDER H0 SCORE 1
9 85.50 85.50 11.32 9.50 2
9 85 50 85.50 11.32 9.50 WILCOXON 2-SAMPLE TEST INORMAL APPROXIMATION)
(VITH CON'INUITY CURRECTION OF.51 S=
85.50 Z: 0 0442 PROB >iZi=0.9848 T-TEST APPROX. SIGNIFICANCE =0.9853 ARUSKAL-VALLIS TEST ICHI-SCUARE APPROXIMATION)
CHISO=
0.00 0F=
I PROB > CHISO=1.3000
.oi s e a-u Proposed. scope analysis on the number of fish kept by an);1ers interviewed in the York Haven Reservoir durin:r.1981.
l ANALYSIS FOR VARIABLE AEPT CLASSIFIED BY VAR]ABLE SAMPLE MIDRAN'.5 LERE USED FOR TIES ANALYSIS OF VARikNCE LEVEL N
MEAN AMONG MS VITHIN MS 84.2222 1364.86 1
9 36.78 2
9 40 56 F VALUE PROB >F 0.05 0.8310 VILCOXON SCORES (RANK SUNSI SUN OF EXPECTED STD DEV NEAN 4
LEVEL N
SCORES UNDER HD UNDER H0 SCORE O
1 9
85 00 85.50 11.32 9.44 2
9 86.00 85.50 11.32 9.58 VILCOXON 2-SAMPLE TEST INORMAL APPROX! NATION 1 (VITH CONTINUjlY CORRECTION OF.51 S =.
85.00 Z= 010000 PROB >lZi=1.0000 T-TEST APPROX. SIGNIF]CANCE=1.0000 KRUSKAL-VALLIS TEST (CHI-SOUARE APPROXIMATION)
CHISO=
0.00 DF=
?
PROB > CHISO=0.9648 READY 4
5
ATTACtNENT I NOMIS Responses from other Nuclear Utilities Question:
A)
What sampling frequency is/was used for Benthic Macroinvertebrates during pre-operational and operational studies?
B)
How many years of operational studies were required by the NRC?
Plant Re.oxrises
- Pre-operational sample frequency was four times yearly.
The sampling is continuing because of Unit 2 licensing.
- Performed monitoring every sixty days during ice-free months. The monitoring was performed from 1977 to la80.
- Frequency is quarterly and one site required three years of operational studies and one site required none. The deletion of required operational studies resulted from the Appeals board decision on the TVA Yellow Creek plant. This resulted in offsite monitoring beir;J the responsibility of outside contrcators such as the EPA.
- (pre-op) took seasonal samples in Mey, 3;ne, and October during a one year study. They have comraitted to at least a one year operational study.
- Sample frt,quemy is twenty sampling points every two months curing the period April through December. These studies have been required between 1974 and 1978.
- (pre-op) will sample semi-annually in Spring and Fall as weather permits.
- Sample frequency was approximately quarterly and they did three to four years operational study. They note that there may be a differeme l
since they are a saltwater cooled plant.
- A quarterly sample is done.
- The frequency varies during the summer months and no samples wers :.sxen dur!ng the Winter. Two years of operational studies were required by the W C.
t I
l I
i
-