ML20079M912
| ML20079M912 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1983 |
| From: | ALABAMA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-1437 AR, NUDOCS 9111110001 | |
| Download: ML20079M912 (244) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ . . . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . I lI
- j. - 1 e
g b l iI - I l
- JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT 1 I
COOLING WATER INTAKE STUDY !g 316(b) DEMONSTRATION 1
-s (Two-Unit Operation) !
l. i
- I 4- i 1981 - 1983 l
!I LI4 0 I l n 9111110001 831231
'lW PDR NUREO 1437 C PDR
~ .. .- - _ . .- .. . . . . . . _ _ _ _ - _
I . [I ALABAMA POWER COMPANY I JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT COOLING WATER INTAKE STUDY 316(b) DEMON 3TRATION .I I TABLE OF CONTENTS S_E,' (ION PAGE 1 Water Quality Studies 4 2 Plankton Studies 11 3 Larval Fish Studies 62 5 Impingement Studies 72 I I I g I I I I I I
I l BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS l' I
- 1. The concentrations of a majority of the water quality parameters I associated with ;: nogical studies varied seasonally; however, no differences tha', would have biological significance were detected between I upstream control and downstream discharge sites.
- 2. Variations in phytoplankton and zooplankton densities occurred over the course of the study; however, there were no qualitative or quantitative l
changes in plankton communities of the adjacent Chattahoochee River that were attributable to the operation of the Farley Nuclear Plant intake.
- 3. Larval fish studies in the vicinity of the plant failed to indicate any-significant effects of plant intake operation on larval fish in the
{ Chattahoochee River.
- 4. Impingement studies at the Farley Nuclear Plant intake indicated low impingement rates were occurring relative to game and comercial species.
Impingement rates for other species were also considered insignificant relative to any effect on fish populations existing in the Chattahoochee River. ,I
- 5. The results of biological studies of the Chattahoochee River near Farley riuclear Plant failed to indicate any significant changes in biological I communities which could be associated with intake operation.
I ,I I
.1 ~ .
I
I STUDY AREA 5 The section of tne Chattahoochee River (CR) included in this study ex+. ended from kiver Mile 45.2 (CRM 45.2) downstream to River Mile 41.0 (CRM 41,0) (Fig. 1). The Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant is located on the banks of the Chattahocchee River between CRM 43 and 44. Sample station 1, located at CRM 45, is 1.5 miles below Andrews Lock and Dam and a;mroximately one mile aDove the Farley Plant. Sample station 2 is located in the river water intake canal at CRM 43.8, Station 3 extended from the discharge structure to 1/2 mile downstream (CRM 43.0-43.5), and Station 4 is located l in tne Smith's Bend section of the river (CRM 41.0-41.5).
~
Plankton and water samples were collected from depths of 0.3,1, 2, 4 - and B meters (when river depth allowed), and larval fish samples were collected from depths of 1.5, 3.0 and 4.5 meters (when river depth allowed). This section of the Chat.-hoochee River is subject to a large degree of sand sedimentation so that watr- depth was seldom more than 4-6 meters on most g dates. IE ll I E I I I i -
l __ -I I CRM 46.5 Andrews I.ock & Dam I CRM 46 I / N I Station 1 . CRM 45 - I I ' f* CRf144 l Station 2 (CRM 43.8) - PLANT !!1TAKE Station 3 (CRM 43.5) - PLAfiT DISCHARGE CRM 43 (1) Sampling station upstream from intake canal. (2) Sampling station in intak.e canal. (3) Sampling station below plant discharge. i (4) Sampling station downstream from I 1 CRM 42 discharge structure. l, E 9 ! 1 I Station 4 CRM 41 I I a
'I Figure L Schematic diagram of Chattahoochee River near the Joseph M.
Farley Nuclear Plant showing sample stations. CRM--Chatta-
. hoochee River Miles.
I WATER STUDIES I Sampling Procedures Samples were collected about the middle of each month beginning in August, 1981 and continuing through January, 1983 for a total of eighteen sampling dates. Water quality variables measured at each site and depth included temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO). These measurements were made I- using a YS1 Model 51A oxygen meter. Secchi disc visibility was also measured at each station. Water samples for chlorophyll analyses were collected with a submersible pump and hose and stored in Nalgene plastic containers. All water samples were held in ice" chests for transport back to laboratory facilities
- I located at Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama. For the analyses of chlorophyll a_, b and c_, a 100 ml aliquot of water from each depth was filtered onto a 0.45 y pore size, Millipore filter pad, macerated in a tissue grinder and the pigments extracted in 90% acetene. Chlorophyll concentrations were estimated using the Trichromatic Method (APHA et el. 1980).
I Water samples for plankton analyses were also collected with a submersible pump and hose apparatus. For phytoplankton analysis, a 500 ml water sample was collected at each depth and placed in a one liter flat-bottomed Nalgene jar containing 18 ml of merthiolate preserving solution. Zooplankton samples were collected at each depth by pumping 80 liters of water through a I standard Wisconsin style (80 u mesh) plankton net. Zooplankters were washed from the net bucket into 100 ml Nalgene plastic containers and preserved in Si fomalin. Plankton samples were counted and identified using Sedgwick-Raf ter counting chambers following the procedures recommended by Weber (1973). I 4
I I. Plankton data reported by station and depth include standing crops for phytoplankton and zooplankton. By station, data included chlorophyll concentrations, dominant plankters and for zooplankton communities, species diversity (3) and equitability (e) values. , I I I I I I I I - I I
- I I
I I
.s.
g
)
I RESULTS AND DISCL'SSION Water Variables Secchi Disc Readings Light transmission through the water was measured by Secchi disc . readings at each station. Visibility as measured by the Secchi disc provides an estimate of turbidity. When the turbidity in the river is not due primarily to suspended sediment, Secchi disc readings correlate well with phy-toplankton density. Summaries of the Secchi disc visibility data are provided in Table 1. The limited visibility of waters near the Farley Nuclear Plant result from two primary sources: 1) the high degree of turbulence in the river as a result of hydroelectric power generation through Walter F. George Dam and the regeneration of this turbulence as the water passes through Andrews Dam;
- 2) the waters relea>ed from both dams contain higher standing crops of phytoplankton (which will reduce visibility giving lower Secchi disc readings) than would normally be encountered in a river transporting as much sediment as the Chattahoochee.
There is no evidence from visibility data provided by the Secchi disc readings that the intake or discharge from the Farley Nuclear Plant caused any change in the sediment or phytoplankton load of the waters in this reach of the Chattahoochee River. Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen (D0) Temperature and DO content in the water column at each station are shown in Tables 2 and 3. Additionally, temperature profiles of the water column at each station are provided on Figures 3-20 and 22-36 of plankton standing crops. Thes3 data show the seasonal variability expected for water temperatur<s, but no indication of significant variations between stations I l l LI J Table 1. Mean Secchi disc readings in the Chattohoochee River at each station sampled from August 1981 to January 1983. ! l I- Station River Date 2 3 - 4 means i 1 cm Aug-81 100 105 100 100 101.3 l Sept 70 71 70 71 70.5 Oct 125 125 125 135 127.5 Nov 120 125 115 100 115.0 Dec 85 85 85 85 85.0 I- Jan-82 60 60 60 60 60.0 Feb 30 30 30 30 30.0 Mar 58 56 58 60 58.0 Apr 75 70 70 70 71.3 May 68 67 69 66 67.5 l 78 79 78.5 Jun 78 79 Jul 78 80 80 75 78.3 Aug 100 100 95 85 95.0 Sept 68 67 80 71.3 I 70 Oct 130 130 128 128 129.0 Nov 68 75 78 82 75.8 Dec 77 76 75 75 75.8 Jan-83 50 52 53 53 5?.0 I I 80.1 80.8 79.8 79.7 80.1 I I I I l
I Table 2. Mean temperatures of waters in the Chattahoochee-River at each station sampled from August 1981 to January 1983. l Station Date River 1 2 3 4 means I. oc l Aug-81 Sept 29.87 27.00 29,30 27.07 30.00 27.00 30.00 26.68 29.82 26.92
~
I Oct Nov 22.43 18.00 22.47 18.70 22.67 18.70 22.43 17.50 22.50 18.17 Dec 10.75 11.50 12.50 12.30 11.77 Jan-82 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 Feb 13.00 12.88 12.88 12.78 12.88 Mar 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 Apr 17.63 17.63 17.88 17.90 17.76 l May Jun 22.00 27.00 22.50 28.00 22.25 28.00 22.88 28.00 22.41 27.77 Jul 28.45 28.50 28.25 28.00 28.30 Aug 31.25 30.50 30.75 31.00 30.88 Sept I , Oct 29.10 24.80 29.10 24.80 29.10 25.00 29.25 25.25 29.14 24.96 Nov 20.00 20.50 21.00 21.00 20.63 Dec 17.50 17.50 17.50 17.50 17.50 Jan-83 10.50 11.00 11.13 11.00 10.91 I I 20.79 20.94 21.09 21.03 20.96 E I I I - I I I I Table 3. Mean dissolved oxygen concentrations in waters of the Chatta-hoochee River at each station sampled from August 1981 to January 1983. Station Date River 1 2 3 4 means mg/l l Au9-81 Sept 7.40 6.63 8.70 7.87 8.08 8.20 8.25 7.18 8.11 7.39 l Oct fiov 9.53 10.30 10.00 10.30 9.93 10.30 9.58 10.35 9.84 10.32 I Dec Jan-82 11.65 12.80 11.67 12.80 12.00 12.80 12.00 12.80 11.84 12.80 Feb 11.20 11.20 11.20 11.08 11.16 Mar 12.40 13.00 13.00 13.00 12.86 Apr 10.00 10.10 10.00 10.80 10.26 May 9.90 10.50 10.65 9.88 10.21 Jun 8.00 8.53 8.27 8.80 8.43 l Jul Aug 6.80 8.00 8.00 7.90 8.00 8.00 8.00 7.80 7.70 7.93 Sept 8.35 8.35 8.35 8.50 8.39 Oct 8.40 8.50 8.00 7.95 8.21 flov 9.95 9.90 9.60 9.75 9.80 I Dec 9.26 9.20 9.20 9.20 9.22 Jan-83 11.50 11.40 11.33 11.50 11.43 Y 9.58 9.88 9.85 9.80 9.77 I I . I I
I or depths on a given sampling date. There was no evidence from the study that indicated any change in temperature or 00 concentration associated with the intake or discharge from the Farley Nuclear Plant. I Sumary of Water Variables The watershed upstream from the stretch of the Chattahoochee River studied provides an excess sediment load (primarily sand) to the water. Deposition and erosion of the sandy river bottom in the region of the Farley Nuclear Plant is a continuous process that resulted in decreasing water depths following channel dredging operations. Because of the close proximity l of the nuclear plant to Andrews Dam and Walter F. George Dam, this reach of the river is essentially like a modified tailrace below a major river - impoundment. Water temperature and dissolved oxygen content measured on each sampling trip indicated that within this stretch of the river these water quality variables were favorable for the support of aquatic life. The waters discharged by the Farley Nuclear Plant were at no time observed to appreciably alter temperature or dissolved oxygen values. Secchi disc visibility of the water at each station on all dates sampled also indicated no unfavorable conditions for the support of aquatic l ccmmuni ties. 1 I I I I Plankton studies Phytoplankton Mean phytoplankton abundance by group (algal division) and chlorophyli a concentrations for the 18 month study are shown in Figure 2. The vertical I - distribution of phytoplankton in the water column, temperature profiles and mean chlorophyll a, b and c concentrations for each station and date are shown in Figures 3 through 20. Data on numerical dominance by phytoplankton group (algal division) and species appear in Tables 4 and 5, respectively. Mean chlorophyll a, values ranged from a low of 2.6 mg/m3in September of 1982 to a high of 12.1 mg/1 3 in October of 1981 (Fig. 2). Winter and spring phytoplankton communities were dominated by diatoms (Chrysophyta) mostly, except for one date when green algae (Chlorophyta) were dominant (Fig. 2 and Table 4). The diatoms were mostly various unidentified pennate and centric diatoms (Table 5). The summer and I fall samples were dominated by various green and blue-green (Cyanophyta) algae. During the warm months of July, August and September 1982, olue-green blooms dominate phytoplankton (Fig. 2). The phytoplankton standing crops in this reach of the Chattahoochee River are higher than similar riverine habitats around Alabama. This is attributable to the influence a' pools formed by Walter F. I George Lock and Dam and Columbia Lock and Dam, both located upstream from the Farley Nuclear Plant. The vertical distribution of phytoplankters in the water column was relatively uni form. Between stations the phytoplankton distribution patterns, densities and chlorophyll concentrations were remarkedly similar on any given date (Figs. 3-20). I I
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M' M i5 -
"a
}lo
*I js -
N. A 9 m p J F M A H J J A 5 ss N D J S T - {EN[E"Eit$
-.---oka.opyta C
n 4 - C O e j -
?
ii y
/ \.
fm p- ---e / \
,k 2 g / / '[ '
A s / \ / \
\
\g \
/
-,\ . ~ / ,' N . \
Nj/ , N fxj ' x4 k N s . e As % /
/
o~4 - _ m --- ------ --- ----- --- A 5 0 N D J f M A N J J A 5 0 4 D J 1981 1982 1983 Figure 2. tiean nunter of phytoplankters and chlorophyll a values from the four stations on
~
each date. Sampling extended from August 1981 througli January 1983.
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M STATION Depth j 2 3 (m) oC ,C ,C *C 0 - 3 03 29.3 ............. 30.0 30.0
. : ~. **;****
..::f :.-
1- 300- 9/./.s# *i. ** *
- i.'*.-2 29.3- :}.*:* .*,;/
- * *: :. . .30.0- *
- i ::*i
. . .f. . ....: .
.:::. i,i ..'sf* f.*:;;::i.$.. ::l:.i::.};ii',Ip 30.0-
. . .**l
, 'f. :.,.
2- 293.. l..!!!.* ! . .
... s..r. . ....
- g. .
- 29. 3 s:#..ifi*:. et 30.0 - ...
.:. .: .. .. .. 't;;.*."*;;}.y.f.f.,:3- 30.0- ;.gg,i,::j;. ,
. i
,; .. 293_ .}.}:.:..:.i:':.
- 30. 0 . ... .**iii:.*4 30.0 :.Y;.*I **:.*.*..
. ~3 s
es ......%..
.*. SU
..:.:. :::1.:/ . .. . .org/ml
. g-30.0 70 -
.m xm
- n. E _
oN
- 1. O o E r -
U 10-a a
^
Fig. 3. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of priytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 12 August 1981.
m M M M M M M M M M M M M m- M -m ' M STATI0fl Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C *C "C "C 0- 2IO :.:.r . 27.2 27.0 ....,.
. ::g :.
27.0 .... . ., .
- y :
....... -.: :.s .
1- 21D-f.:.*:.'.::::':* 27.0- .?$ ....'. .l.:l: 27.0 - N. S :*.' .s. :,.
. .: 26.8 ?!.!.*!
.....:. . % . g. . .*
27.0 J-.:# **1 2n27.0-
- f. 27.0 -:*."f.:.7.:.
26.6 -: :::.:::..1.'. 1
. .*:. .
- a
- . .:s.:
. ...... : ...1:::
'.:,.1"-:: ::.:. .
4- 2 20 27.0 I:'*tl 26.3 ::#1**te-3 10 e org/ml
- 8- m u
70 -
~
x .-- cm c1 E - oN L. CD oe r u 10 - a a a a l F1 R I I Fig. 4 Tenperature profile, vertical distribution of rhytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 17 September 1981.
m m m m m m m m m m m m e e m STATION Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) "C "C "C "C 0-22.5,g,. ;g ; 22.5 23.2 22. 5
...}. ,;;.,
7....
,,g,s,;
.: ,..{.,g.g7.,,. . ,;,Qf,,,,f ,
'e..W:::.
- 7g,22.5 I....::
1- 2.5 .:-: ...
.. . 22.5- r.".,. *:.. .J. 22.5 - #::*:.. .. .... . : ~./.-; ~ i. ~:
- e.:;. ::::.:.s ..... :::::::.. J..':...
.:::. :. .r.
- .. :::.:. 7 ..
.. . - :. ...r.:;.::::1.::: .:.
2 .*. 22.5 :::::.:::.
. ,\.it:
- .:.y..::. :
7z 3 ... 22.3 22.s . _*::::::.: . . :.. . -, i .::*.:::
- y... :-::..:.
4- 22.2 * .':::::::
~~~7-10 8_ org/mi ~
m m 70-e
.c m ae -
ON 5- CD oe
.c -
U a 2 - a a 10- - Fig. 5. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 13 Or*ober 1981.
5!) m M M M M M M M M g g g g g g STATI0ft Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C *C *C *C ( 0- 1RS ... .., , .., 18. 7 ..,.. . s. ,. , 1 8. 7 . ,. ..,.. ,. 17. 6 . , , ,i.. . l . . ... :::. . . . . - .....Y.:.
.n. .. . . . ..
- s..:a. A.
1- IR0-!9..!!!."6./ Y. 18.7 - * #!:: *. 18.7- i.';:!.:.:is. 17.6- ? c... .- I:y ?? i.Q.F.::
- .1 i7I Y
.::.. ...:::.. . . . . : . :.f.:.
'.i ::.::
.t i.r,:..-
.. .J'.'..
2- 17.5 5' !8. 79N'. ::: 18. 7 #25'.:**:'(: 17.4 - I[:"I.E.".,'5. '.3: ;
- ....... c.:
..- .s.....
- 17. 4 "."#.**:;$i'.'O 4.
10 org/mi 8- s m 70-
- j. _
rm as oN 1O OE r o a a a a 10- - b C b c b c s E Fig. 6. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and :hicrophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 12 flovember 1981
. i
l g g g - g g g e e m mM M M M W- M M' E STATI0ft Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C "C *C *C 0 -11.0 .:g
, 12.0q:j, qf 13. 0 .g...g 13.0 -. .:.:q ,
- .... -:.. .: ~:::.
1- 11.0- :j((i,- 11.S- ij'.: 12.5- .f,.:. 12.5 - ,:ff,g, 2- 1a5- ii::.: 11. 0 * *:' - 12. 0 ~ ~ *: 12 0 - !!.::::
. ..'.i:.-
- . . s::.::
... - . i
. /::-
4- 10.5 12.0 - :p,".h. .
= ,: ...
- .:j.:
- .... 3
.:.; . 10
, .: ,.f. org/m1 12.0 Wi! H
- 8_
u l . I 70 - zm aE - ON L. CD OE
~~ .
x u a 10 -- a a - a c
- lb lb c [11 c_ l l lb .
fig. 7 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /.ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 12 Qecraeber 1981.
M M l l y h p or _ M i l o _ 3 0/ E m " h - 1 g c r d O n a
)
l
- m
/
M c- s m
- s i
. 9 .: . ::. ..;.. ..
. :::. ..- .. bl n a
M 4 ..."i:
.y.: 5: 1:.=.
- f. f ::: :::::. .:.:: .-
l 9
.: .:.:::..O..l.u i .;: :- f..:
r
.... .. i;. s
...l: . a o
( l C0 0 0 0 0 s
" r .
e2 M 9 9 9 9 9 t8 k9 n1 a l y pr M oa t u yn d :- e :
- .J '
b- ha pJ M 3 . ;.
. 5 .a: :.. . -
f- :- -
,1_ f6 o2
- a I_. nn C0 0 0 0 i oo 9 9 9 9 t n uo M l t
0 I bi it T ra A - ts 's. T c-m S bn i dg li n
= al cp s....:.- . .. if g :. ::.."
.. - i m 2 : .
..':*.:.:: a- t a M_ - - -
rs e vh C0 0 0 0 c
* ,a 9 9 9 9 ee M l it f a o
rs C- a pn o M ei l b n. ua rt t r at a~ l 1
..i: '
rn ee M C0 0 0 0 pc mn eo
" 0 9 9 9 9 7 0 Tc 1
1 M h t) 0 1 2 4 8 ,m6NCu-L pm
>c.COLo c.o 8 e(
D g i M F M i
~
M M M M' M M M M M M 9 M M M M M ;-M - M STATI0ff Depth (m) C; C 2 C 3 C 4 0_110 r. 13.0 . 13.0 13.0
- t. -
1- 13.0-J- 13.0-e 13.0-.".- 13.0_. , 2- 110--. 13.0- : 13.0- . 13.0 - 1 4 -. 110. 12. 5 _ .' 12.5 - 12.5.. 3 10
' org/ml g_ 12.4 -
e 70 - 7 -. DE S" ~ h h" p _ v a
, b _
E l b
\ -
E l l
- b. -
E
. l ,h -
E
=
Fig. 9. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 18 February 1982.
M W Wm W W M M W- M M M M M M MM M W STATION 2 3 4 Depth 1
*C *C *C *C (m) 0 - 16& :. . 16. 0 - 16. 0 ...:... ,
- 16. 0_ . ..
1- 16 & f.f , . 16.0- :ii.. .i i 16. 0-. e .* 16.0- :?.- 2- 16A::;! 16.0- t/fi 16. 0_.::*: 16.0. ::' ,
- :-l ::: l
. .-:.i
- 4. .*.:. l 4- 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 -I?
1
- 3
- 10
- org/mi 8_ 16.0 -:- s y
a 70 - rn ae oN L. 01
,o Ev r
o a 10 - a- - a. h c = - b I- k, c_ l l l l b__ Fig. 10. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each samriing station on 15 March 1982.
STATION Depth 2 3 4 1 (m) *C *C *C "C 0- 18.0 .. 18. 0 .,. 19.0 .. 18. 5 - . . 1- 17.5-- 17.5 - *i 17.5 _/ 13.0 _ .J: 2 -- 17.5- 17.5_ 't 17.5 -. . 18.0_ 9
.' }
4 -. 17.5- 17.5 # 17.5 ! 17.5-;. l
- I 10 3
org/ml ro 8- 17.5 - H , e 70-i x-Em as . o% L. CD oe
.c -
U a ^ a 10 -- 3 - C C c b - _b - b- . Fig. 11. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /mi) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 14 April 1982. L. _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - . . , . _ . . - . .
M M m M M M m M M m m M M M M M W "M W STATION Depth 2 3 1 4 (m) *C 'C *C *C 0 - 22.0 22. 5 - .~.m 22. 5 .. :. 23.5 ...- v.
. .:n 1- 221L !!:.. . 22.5_ 22.5 - i/.' 23.5-:1:':
. :i?:' :::: :::.
2- 22.0 .:.* ~O 22.5 - !.'.:l.:.~-);.
} 22.0 - -: 'j: 22.5- 2'./.!.:.
;e..
- :: =:.
..:. :: .f.t./. .:
4- 22.0- ^: ' 22.5 * ':: 22.0 2:' 22.0- *::::
?.*:i
- .... 10 3
- .- or9/ml e:e::
m 8- 22.0 H m 70 - e rn ae _ ON u en oE
<--v _
O a a a_ _a - 10 - - ~~ b b c b c h. c
- c Fig. 12. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (orgamisms/ml) and chlorcphyll concentrations at each sampling station on 13 May 1932.
~ U L_J L_ >
STAT 10tl Depth 2 3 4 1
*C *C "C *C (m) 0- 27.5 28.5 ,.s. 28. 0 ... .., 29.0 .....
.:.'l:.i
> :l
.i.i.:
1- 27.0 - 28.5- //,.f.j 28.0 -si: 29.0- i ?;* '
.*0.f.i ,
*:*:,n.
4.::.. 2 7.0 - l.?.4 28.0 ::\ 27.0 2 76.5 .i:::i::1 3*:~:Y' 27.0-4- 3 10
' org/mi
~ *d 8-70-a a a
- a 10 C - -
b c c b - b l I l .i i fig. 13. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyli concentrations at each sampling station on 19 June 1982.
g g a _ m. m ma mm m M M M M M M M '~ M E STATION Depth i 2 3 4 o, 5g ' oC ,C oC 0 ,J,19
'90 ' 95 ' 28.5
.g.:: .... 28.0
- . :: s :.::..
a ,04s.c:.e .: ca o- ,:;:.:.::.:& :. 1- 2a9- -:j!p!!: fit.(:.: 29.0 :::.:.:::.
, ,,8,29s.g,,y,,,.
, ,9,, 28.5--::<.: , y;
- . .i ::.:::::: .:.::: :- . y: ... : .
. j, .:.::.
.:..jj,,),7;:::,i..,
2- zuo- l.;.;il::..:.:: ?.;;;l 28.0- 28 0-
.: . 28'* * "
..::.. i.(..li.t.
. .. .::Y&*'i*
.'ii:
. .: . :.v.. .: . . .
- ?:.:::;}:$.:.i.;.:*
. :0::
- 5. );.;;..::::.;;:*d:*.;.:*.*
.E. .* . :*i h.:. :. . . ..;- ;;;i;:;:*.
- .*:.V:
.?.
* ; 8 ' 336 *": .'-
- 9.042 ;:.;*
28 0 *:*:* *:* ;*:*:*: **** *Y::;-:'. 4- zao 28.0 *> 28.0 '> 3 10 org/ml ro Zs 8- H 70-rco ct E - 0N L CD O E r o a a a - a 10 - b c b,C b c b c
-! I i ! --
Fi g.14. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station 15 July 1982.
W W. W W W M M h mm M 'm M M M M M-M W STATION Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C 10,507 C *C "C 0 31.5 30.5 ..... . ..s. ....:/.. 31. 0 - . :.... ....
. . . ..-e.. 31.0 - e.:-: .. . .: .:::.:
.:: : : . . . . . . )... ..: ..
.. ~
1- 31.5- 1.~;;'i..i.i . 7. .: .3 30. 5- .i!, .l.# .~p:.i,'. 31.0 - -:.::'
~.i}.l;:(.;. 31.0 - : :~:::".,'!f..,:.j ' .
2- 31.0-30.5-
'*:'*;:::::*: . . :. 31 0 - ;C.
. .:.:.:.: .i.. .
7..M . .:-::h.::
'.. :.::. .'.'.:. :. X. .::':.*:.:.:.: 30.5-
.............:. ..........\
. :'. . . :.,0. 5
. 9,364.. .. 31.0 4- 31.0 - * .. .> - - .. . .
30.5 .. 3
. 10 m rg/ml m 3 s 70-cm ae .
o%
- t. cn oE .
.c o
a a a c d 10- ~ b b C [ b _b .
-1 l .
F i g.15. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 18 August 1982.
STATIONS 3 4 Depth 1 2 "C *C *C (m) *C 0 - 292- 2 9. 2 2 9 . 2_ . . . . . . . , . . . 29.5 ......... 1- 292 1. 29.2-
- 3....
29.2 . 4. . . *::: * *. :. :.:*: 29.5- *:.*
...M........... , ..... ~.....
. ...~...:.. . .....29.0- . . . . . ..
- i'.*.1:. . .29.0-2- 29.0 .... .': '
.: '. 2*i.i. * ! .::::. ,:. O. .:
.. 29.0- 6. .*.* :~;s..
. ...... . . . .i. i..,:.:i.d.
- 2.:.*** . ... \
*.::s.. :::::
.:' u.*: .
':.:\.*.:::: .. . . . .: . . . . .
.:*.'. ..*..**. .':'.. :.. ... .29.
.***:. .;..'.'. '.. W- ...
.Wll.'
h2 9.. 0.. ..... 29.0- ~;.*N. 4- 29.0 :.. .
. . . . ........i
.*.e ** *
..., \
.. .. :.... ..... ... .. .:.. ..............~. . .. . .. ... ... ..
ns 3
. .. ..:..: . . .... . oi ,. ,1 ~
B-29.0 *. . . . . . . . ~: .. .
* * * ~ * * * - - * ~ ~ ~ -
cn B 70-e rm nE ow u en E
.O.
c - u d 10- - l _b_ _c a b a a_. Fi g.16. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml)"and chlorophyli concentrations at each sampling station on 16 September 1982.
- t. _ _
M M. M M M M M M m m mM M W W W W -W W STATION bepR 1 2 3 4
'C *C *C *C (mi 0 24.& :.::::.: .. :.: 24.8 25. 0 ?5. i - ...:. :
- \.::.: ..:.. ....::. .:: : ..s
..... ..n.: ....
*.y:::~;.i~.:.:: ..: n:..-*:::::*.
1 - 248- . .;&:- 24.8- :.9. > 25.0- *:::: ?.:.~.*:;:.. 25.5- -:::.2.i::.::*.'; ; 1 c:::: p:.i . . '~ zq ..::::
- 24.g_
25.o. .::.y:.y.:- 25.0- :.. :..5:::::.. 7- ::: ::-:::.
..: . . - . . +
..*':*;'::~
25.0 O. ... .,. . - . 25.0 -: 'i':?... 4- 24.8 -. 10 m org/ml 8- H 70 - e l rn ne ox -
- s. cn oE r -
o 10 _ a a a i-. b C
. i 5c .
11-b Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll Fi g. 17. concentrations at each sarapling station on 14 0ctober 1982. ,
M M 1 l y h p o M r o i l m4 h 0/ . g5 c 1 r M c i d a n
)
.:.:7 C- 1 M : .:. . .
1- i m
;:..s~ . ....: ..:....
. /
*-Y-
.. b- s
- ... i ..:.......~ . cs 4
- .. .1.
a-i n a M - -
. . ?_ . . . . . . . . #
g r C0 0 0 o
- 0 (
1 1 1 i s . 2 2 M 2 2 t9 r2 e8 _ k1 _ n ar M :: ..8.. 1-
. l e>
pt oc 3 l:... ..' ...
.. l' -
b-t e yv h oi
; . pf e :..
1: - 7; ..- ...
.: .I
.:. I U a-I f1
- - - - o1 f C0 0 3 0 nn mT oo f
- 0 1 1 1 1 i I
2 2 2 2 t n A uo T bi S , i t ra M . . . . !: .: cr i tt ss
- ...(..
s .d . . -- .. ..- . b-dg n
.. y. : Q...... ~
- .. : . : . . . . ~ -
2 . : . f l i
- @ . .. . .: .:;. al
.i cp
. :. . :::.:....... ..-.:. . .. .. c..f.:........- a-
.: .~ i m M -
1 - t a rs C5 5 5 5 e
- vh c
0 0 0 0 ,a 2 2 2 2 ee M l it f a o c- rs pn f M : .:.. . Y.
.........f . . . .
. :. "I ei o
1 :...:
. - b- rt ua t r
......:...~....
- ..1- ..:.... . .. ._. ::. - . :.....e
.. - at
.- a- rn
- 'I M -
?.. . .
- - ~
ee p c. C -
- 0 0 D
L
- f. 0
_ _ ~ _ mr eo 0 0 0 7 0 Tc 2 2 .O L 2 W h t) pm 0 1 2 4 8
,,ENCe-r . .
8 e( >rGO1o ro 1 D . g W i F W
. mco.
m l
g MM M M STATION Depth 2 3 4
*C 1
*C "C 'C (m) 17.5 0 - 175 17.5 17.5 ..
.:...s.
.::.1,
.?
1- l1.5- :-::n 17.5- :-i:: IT.5 - ::L.:.:: ' 17.5 - :h:: 2- 115- =:. 17.5- : .'-::) . 17.5 - .-:..... 17.5 - :::.:.:.. .
~
- '22.2 : 17.5- ,7f.:.
17.5-]?ii{. 17.5 :- 4- 17.5-
..:.i . . .
. . . .~ .
- .:.= ,
..- .- .: s 10
.~--.:.:. orgimi
~ .
- 17. 5 -)
17.5 ~ 115 =
-e -
- 8 17. 5 -
70 - rm ae oN _
- k. (P OE r -
u E c a a 10 - d a b F=, c b
!b I - Ib i I I :
I . Fig.19. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 14 December 1982.
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M *M M STATI0ft Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C *C 'C *C 0 - 10.5 . . . . 11.0- 1 1. 5 .... . o 11.0 .... g
. ..j .- ...,
..l
. . .1 1 10.5 - . ' . .;- 11. 0-, .G..;.; 11.0---:,..Z 11.0 --?;J,e:1
....a
; :. f . ..-. , . :. . :..
.:::: - t:: ..4., ::;
2- 10.5 - #;.. 11.0- ~... . 11.0- ;;:- 11.0 - -t..
- .y: 1.:;
.-. . .: 3
. ... 10
, ::.: ;. : : .- or3/mi u, 4 10.5 . - - 11. 0. 2.'. 11.0 _ :- l 11.0 . ??? !.'- ~
o 70 - tm ae ON L. r3 oG r u
)
10 a a y a m a b l-l_ c_ m q b ny_ Fig. 20. Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytopiankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 13 January 1983. .
, d
)
Table 4 Dominance ranking of phytcolankton groups by station and date. G The most abundant group was assigned a value of (1), I Station Date - l 1 2 3 4 12 Avg 1961 Diatom I 2 3 3 2 Green 1 1 1 1 Blue-green 3 2 2 3 Other 4 4 4 4 17 Sept Diatom 3 3 2 3 Green 1 1 1 1 Blue-green 2 2 3 2 Other 4 4 4 4 13 Oct Diatom 3 3 3 3 Green I 1 1 1 l' Blue-green 2 2 2 2 Other 4 4 4 4 12 tiov Diatom i I Green Blue-green 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 Other 4 4 4 4 17 Dec Diatom 1 1 1 1 Green 2 2 2 2 Blue-green 3 I 3 3 3
'Other 4 4 4 4 26 Jan 1982 Diatom 1 1 1 1 Gr.en I
2 2 2 2 Blue-green 3 3 3 3 Other 4 4 4 4 i I 18 Feb Diatom Green Blue-green 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 4 Other 3 3 3 3 15 Mar Diatom 2 1 2 2 Green 1 2 1 1 Blue-green I 4 4 3 4 Other 3 3 4 3 14 Apr Diatom i 1 1 1 Green 2 2 2 2 I Blue-green 3 3 4 3 Other 4 4 3 4 I I
. I e A 8 Table 4. Continued. Station l 1 2 3 4 13 May Diatom 1 1 1 1 Green 5 Blue-green 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 Other 4 4 4 4 14 Jun Diatom 1 1 1 2 Green 2 2 2 1 Blue-green 3 3 3 3 I 15 Jul Other Diat0:a 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 Green 2 I 2 2 2 Blue-green 1 1 1 1 Other 4 4 4 4 18 Aug Diatom I 3 3 3 3 Green 2 1 2 2 Blue-green 1 2 i 1 Other 4 4 4 4 16 Sept Diatom 3 3 3 3 Green 1 2 2 2 Blue-green 2 1 1 1 I 14 Oct Other Diatom 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 Green I 1 1 1 1 Blue-green 2 2 2 2 Other 4 4 4 4 I 11 Nov Diatom Green Blue-green 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 Other 4 4 4 4 I 14 Dec Diatom Green 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Blue-green I 3 3 3 3 Other 4 4 4 4 13 Jan 1983 Diatom 1 1 1 1 Green 2 2 2 2 I Blue-green 3 3 3 3 Other 4 4 4 4 l I l (
M M' M E E E W W M M M M M M M M M .M M 1 3 Table 5. Dominance ranking of phytoplankters by station and date. Most abundant organism was assigned a value of one (1). 1981 19G7 Sept e IF Ortoner I3 noveeer 42 Onew IT Je==4ry 2. Orgaatse Awarst 12 4 2 4 I 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 3 2 3 4 3 2 3 4 Stattoa i 2 3 1 3 OtRF50PWY14
& lestra sp.
A "* lata 6 6 6 7 6 5 a 4 5 5 9 3 I I 3 I I I I 3 2 10 6 6 4 3 4 4 H. 2.'a*iTa F a R JTsTess 5 6 4 5 9 e t 3 6 6 8 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 Cy TsiiTTe so. syaedra sp. Aslici nelle sp. ATor i6id-C (fryjTyese. hrysococtus sp. Onid. penaate diatoms i 3 I 2 2 2 I 5 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 I 8 Otar4c y sp. Tii.41TeiTe sp.
- 6 EeylisiTe sp.
w w otDe0PtfYT4 M istrodesas sp. 6 5 8 6 5 1 7 5 4 6 K- Ten iTuteT 5 4 4 5 4 5 3 K. Til(alii 6 5 7 8 8 E adaao M eae 6 4 6 9 8 8 8 9 5( M s8ers sp. 5 EfiliTi-5 etMis 5 10 9 1 4 7 10 1 6
- 5. eTe=Taetes 6 6 5 5 9 4 6 5 to 5 acomeT. F 6
- 5. ermatus 6 6 5 5 6 5 7 5 2 8 3 2 6 6 5 s T F 5 5 5.STJGi' 6 6 F s
5.Jenifietstas 6 4 5 s i e a 8 2
- 5. ErsiTiiss i~ i s F
[.
. U N N.e sis
- 5. pas 6
4 4 5 5 gii3r6(ewd* 5 4 3 2 4 5 5 3 ( 3 6 3 1 1 1 3 7
- 5. opsiTiEiTi- 6 Closter1.= sp. 6 6 5 s a to CElifilli sp.
FeJTiitr--= sp . 6 e i s F MTsi- schenetect 6 5 gt r~..~ F l F ~diiEl i.Ts c Ittinasarwe Keiisaut 6 U~
- iTv=~se. 3 5 6 7 10 F I __* W 55 sp.
6 3 3 5 9* 6 5 9 T. tri m S*1eaestrue so. t III8 des sp. 3 3 4 3 4 3 5 5 3 4 7 4 8 4 7 4 5 7
M M t - J ~ L -]
)
Table 5. Continued. 1932 1981 Septe.6er IF october 13 me eer t t>ne.ner J cp y, 0<9anism Awpr.t 12 4 2 3 4 5 7 3 4 i y 3 s statton 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 3 09.0aOPWTT4 ((opt.) 6 6 4 6 6 4 7 6 trw igants sp.
- f. 9 arete fos wiTwe sp. 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 6 5 7 7 5 8 6 ,
Kip @ yt6w sp. 5 6 1 tirtimerliTTe sp. 6 5 e to 7 51E_lf Te Aa~erime sp. 6
- 5. p.Ti w 11 C 5 7 8 Celea7 T.Te sp.
8 6 flaiter g is sp. GJdiina spT [.~~eTiji.s 7 7 5 i
#elcret6a Gs sp. F F i
5 8 [.iii M ^ii. 6 6 6 PTeiri6tsaeise sp. 6 7 6 HsiesiMp. 5 5 e tinifpeid flagellates Elenatettwls sp. II55I[Ui f E3 sp. 5xystis sp. 6 6 5 le ' Teiriitiwu sp. Fwiiieienthum 6 ArtiwWsAn sp. tiie14. 9ecen uxtel4 (T AWJPpts t A F 6 5 7 8 le th e sappe49 e sp. 6 8 7 Giillietoria sp. 6 8 6 T @ tlistee 6 5 1 4 8 5 9 7 6 f t:yo+tixtes, sp. 10 Apmaaotwta,sp. 7 8 A**t M 8 Sp- _ : F I C :.'*- 4 5 i , , , , I , I , , 4 4 6 3 , 5 ,,.11,. le.. h,a2 6 s M p. 5 4 2 3 3 3 4 8 2 1 3 2 5 4 8 7 5 4 t g. a so. 6 7 8 6 7 6 macrotrstis sp. 4 3 OTHE e5 v ert4 son o sp. B. atttelirerm 8 8 F Mes ~sp. 4 6 5 6 7 30 1 9 F F 5 Tre~hflamaaes sp. 5 4 5 s a to i (sj ua sp. i 6 6 5 5 4 5 4 5 Crwed8?t == sp. t qm seclis sp. tmed. dirofle9ellates
m m m - t IR r - (___> Table 5. Continued. _ tu? Jwe 14 Jelp 15 merth 15 Aseti 14 Ny 53 febreacy is De p.t se 4 1 7 3 e 3 4 3 7 3 4 3 2 3 4 i 3 4 3 7 Stetton 1 2 3 I (Hetser vi. 1 3 8 3 3 4 6 twiestre sp. 1 1 9 I i e 2 4 2 3 7 i i R~ji~eaetets ? 3 7 7 7 s R .eiiC 5 e 6 6 6 7 7 7 e s M ETiTeM 5 7 5 5 6 5 5 TytisifTTs sp. 5 6 Sy~ m~eF eM 6 7 asTFFT m lie sp-K~ TWir 6 6 7 Cy Q Vf ~se. 1 7 3 4 5 3 Ewysm ates sp. 1 2 2 2 7 5 3 6 3 1 1 1 i E C @ iTe dieta.s t t 5 P+geyca sp. 5 5 TeteTlene sp. Tii &. TTiite sp.
- CNt08CPut!A 6 s a 5 e saa e5eredesan,s s3 3 2 8 5 3 3 5 3 2 5 2-7 4 2 3 K7s WsTJs' 3 5
3 6 6 7 s 8 5 8 rte %TT 7 7 7 I .'TaiiTew [!asiTfi I hE*MS*wk SF- 6 6
} eystrts s 6 6 7 8 8 5, swei 8 8
- 5. 15W'1981n 7 7 9 8 8 1 eeln 5 5 7 8 7 4
} . g rme.tv1 7 6 6 3 3 7 7 1 tuvse 6 6 7
} eed icvietrl
} k<es111g*11_1 5 6 7
- 3. #1M1 1 SE.111t*1!1 3 2 5 5 6 7 3 5 5 2 e 7 4 a 6 7 e e 8
5 geefrigeeq 7 7 s 6 6 5 estUt*113 t 6 U nit <2 c sp. 4 3 6 7 e (*InrHe 58- 7 8 fttjest y sp. 5 f 8vF!f! 7 6 7 SN*'. *U1111.1Lhlt'l kweoe*-t e sp . 8 I555*5E2 f 1911 MIL *111 8 8 S U*alty e.e*1tg_hti 7 6 7 9 7 7 Loefest_rc ss. 7 lii?**t!!ts Sa-I. 1'JI"*"M 9 4 5
$*?***1ty p sa. 4 5 5 3 5 6 7 6 2 7 1 i 2 6 8 7 3 e 7 If I a f===41. sp
m m m m a m m m a m W W W W W W M em M 4 4 Table 5. Continued. Orgaelse retreary is Marten 15 Apell le flay 13 Jua* 84 July 85 Statten 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 3 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 8 2 3 4 Os(MIOPMTTA (coat.) Crwcly ale sp. 7 8 F S 9 CQJrh fe w ri== sp. 7 en 6 5 5 a 6 , 7th ogtIwe sp. slethaerielTa sp. F F 6 7 6 e e McT--* - T sp. F e a 7 (C .~ 1 Le Cel Tiia ii. 6 5 e 6 6 e
- s sp-D &iisi! sp fodneIna-
@ I CETeg~sns Alciiissise sp.
Tiakiramsp. 6 1 FTewidtaeetes sp. 5teurestrwe sp.
~
, 6 8 8 twise. grece Flagellate-i
" flatatethese sp.
- Fla.lis N ie sp.
s h}itE sp. 6 7 6 # Tetrostns= sp. E leferaienthw9 - 3rthredeTesss sis.' UinICip17eie~tortele CTcrarttYT4 M r8sertedts sp. Osillistoria sp. 4
- 9. a*pstTistaa F 4 3 5 6 6 4 8 7 3 3 9 (hetecccews sp. 5 3 4 6 6 F F 9 6 8 aaothets sp. 5 I
Ap*iFaina~sp. An 8 6 7
~
gim p erie sp. disid. F S 5 5 7 7 5 Islament. Sg~truisaa tasa 2 I I I
! Ehapl31pis sp. 6 3 2 2 2 i tapaa s ]p. I s a M6crecyst9s sp.
Oilt 25 perset=two sp. 3 5 1 6 5 7 5 F FTailivlIferwe baisse. 4 TFE*43= ==as sp. 6 4 2 4 4 3 7 4 4 e 5 i e 5 feilana so. 9 4 l GreadLelve sp. I t*;w tacljs sp. . F wed. de= Tlapitates 1
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M e- M M Table 5. Continued. 19R2 1983 August 18 Septe= hee 16 Octobee it teoveveer il Decesse,14 Jeavery 13
- Orvpenism Stetten i 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 8 2 3 4 8 2 3 4 3 2 3 4 CHRT50Petf14 w iestre sp.
! essiete F $ F F 4 5 6 6 4 5 4 3 4 2 4 2 2 2 2 9 6 4 ?
h. a 7.siTF.s-4 F 6 % N lislosi 9 7 6 7 7 F to F e 6 3 5 3 6 3 3 6 [ftis14TTise. a F 5F # Fi ii-Asi&FTsaette sp. E vm[ Cy g e3m sp. O'I55 "I'5 '9-Ed. pennefe dieteurs 2 2 4 T 8 2 3 $ 3 2 4 2 3 2 2 5 4 1 3 1 2 I I I I Decebryca sp. Tit 4TTeeTe sp. Tii~slTiiTosp.
, w l N C4 Cacewf74 i Ar4 3strodes=ss sp.
A. cr-avoistus 8 8 7 6 8 10 3 6 4 5 3 4 3 3 2 4 5 4 7 6 2 3
- 4 3 F F F 4 5 7 E. TiTcates 9 F K no.w.shTe.w 4 a 6 6 e F F Tre EeT sa. F Feaenians sp.
T~TfiiFTi~ 6 5 7 9 F F
- 5. ed642 ens 6 8 a 16 7 7 T. Ensiiiles 8 40 7 F 8 5 6 7 6 7 5 T. ea isTi ~s 6 T. armetes 8 9 8 4 7 8 F $ F 9 6 6 %
- 5. 6Tjsje- 8 F 6 6 T G atsi tetes 9 e 6 4 2 5 6 6 8 9 5 7 6 6 T. Sie~silic&iti 7s 3 6 4 3 T. ~ifiedi 3 5 2 5 6 5 3 2 6 2 I 2 1 8 2 3 2 2 3 1 6 7 F F 6 s T.opTTe.iTi- 7 6 Desterive se, F 7 7 7 CIiT6;iTT sp.
Fe7Tiifrw= sp. 10 F F 6 7 6 F F F. d pTir 9 s TrN*rerystts scbreateri F khoctTi sp. 8 F F 5 8 7 6 Fend 576ee swwwe F ^ ees6ew W si; i 3<tfieit a b liwht8 F F
- Chifesfr d sp. 9 9 7 to F F F Teir~eened sp. 4 7 10 6 6 F S* 6 $ 8 F F 6 6 9 F i Iidb 5,te=estnam so.
4 (iIki'N'AM sp. 6 3 4 5 $ 4 4 6 ~F 6 5 5 3 5 l F 3 % $ 7 6 3 a
m 1
. ~ ~ ~
M M @ T .fr . E L ~ o
~n 1
. . ~ ~
I % 1, e + * . . l
~ *~ ~ .~
._ . ~ _ ~
. ~ ~~ ~. ~
\ =
~ a * . . ~
_ ~ . . . . .. . I .
. * .~ . . ., .
a e .. . . . m. . I - k-6
~ . . . ~ . ~ .~ . ~.
- e ~. +-e
. . ~ . ~ ~ . .- ~
m a * . ~ ~.
~ . . . -
. . .. .~~
g . ~ ~ .. . .
. .- .. .~
- . . . . . -. e.
} ~ . - .. . .~ . ~. . . . ~
. ~. . . . ... ... .
-o ai g E : : .
I
~
Le 3 . .
- .t . .
5 2 i : 2.5.4. u o J 42 3 sw 44 ..
* .g 2 ..-
sas. nc -- -s --8 . tim:,_4 :4
.. a e e -
e - 335 4-am:!.. d:: F:.:2':;. a 5, - m.g t -! t~ i:2 e 3r;:r:er,rkh,4_i
. t: -
m E ::: : in 4 e :i 5;: '$ o
- py :::;d:
. L' 1.
5 :: 5-2 J ::L':g%...$5:8: ml 5 M'- itp---Hm Su g y 5 :x;; Qi tr6 +L sith a:;::p -5 $, i .II x x-s.:*he,,s,i b3 i E a 5 eu. osac ' taa:t@cLa bs.clorsx:Lig c 3 I 5
I The most abundant and frequently encountered diatoms were Melosira granulata, M. varians, M. distans. Cyclotella spp. and various unidentified pennate diatoms (Table 5). Dominant green algae included Chlamydomonas sp., I severa*. species of Scencdesmus and Ankistrodesmus convolutu h Blue-green algae were dominated by Spirulina laxa, Radhidiopsis sp., Oscillatoria angustissima, Lyngbya sp. and Gomphosphaeria sp. (Table 5). Seasonal shif ts in dominance were observed but no biologically significant differences between stations were detected on any given date. I Results of this study failed to demonstrate any measurable quali-tative or quantitative effects of the operation of the Farley 'Juclear Plant on phytoplankton comunities in this reach of the Chattahoochee River. , I I I I I I I , I I I
- 39
l Zooplankton ( Zooplankton densities (by group) for the 18-month study appear in Figure 21. The vertical distribution of zooplankters in the water column and tenperature profile for each station and date appear in Figures 22 through 36. The three numerically dominant taxa in each zooplankton group for each station and date appear in Table 6. Mean density, numbers of taxa, diversity IB) and equitability (e) for zooplankton collections on each date appear in Table 7. Rotifers dominated zooplankten communities on all dates with cladoceran and copepod density usually much lower (Fig. 21). Zooplankton density ranged from a low of 51 organisms / liter during October 1982 to a high of 560 organisms / liter the following month (November). The data in Figure 21 show that rotifer density exhibited much greater fluctuation during the 18-month study than the other two groups. Based on results of plankton studies conducted in comparable streams in Alabama, zooplankton standing crops in this reach of the Chattahoochee River were considerably higher than expected. This again was apparently due to the influence of the pools above Walter F. George and Columbia Lock and Dam upstream from the study area. The vertical distribution of zooplankters at each station reflects the tendency of these organisms to migrate up and down in the water column (Figs. 22-36). A comparison of the data in these figures generally shows that rotifers were more uniformly distributed in the water column than copepods and cladocerans. Both copepods and cladocerans have a greater tendency to migrate vertically than do rotifers, often occurring in greater numbers well below the surface of the water. Patterns of distribution varied considerably betwen dates but variations between staticns on any given date were minimal. The most abundant and frequently occurring zooplankters in each major group were:
I , rotifers--Keratella cochlearis, Polyarthra spp., Synchaeta spp, and k Brachionus,spp.; copepods--imature copepods and Cyclops spp.; cladocerans--Bosmina longirostris, Bosminopsis deitersi, Diaphanosoma 500. and Ceriodaphnia lacustris (Table 6). Diversity (6) and equitability (e) indices were strikingly similar I at all stations on any given date (Table 7). The variations in 8 and e between dates were apparently due to seasonal changes in environmental conditions. Diversity of a hypothetical community consisting of 100 organisms evenly divided among ten taxa would be a 8 = 3.32 and an e = 1.43, whereas a comunity of 100 organisms with 90 in one taxon and 10 in the other would have a 8 = 0.47 and an e = 0.75. Based on the results of this study, there appears to be no evidence l that the operation of the Farley Nuclear Plant has had measurabit adverse effects on zooplankton comunities in this reach of the Chattahoochee River. I I I !I 1 I l
'I I
I
M M e m m m m m m m m m m e M M M M M 400 -
'l 0 Rotifers
~" impress .
350 -
- Cl**W era 23ry ._
~
t 5
, n ton -
C tw - 100 - 1 A M A I
/\
\
N, / m_ ss_ s /
/'\y' /\
/a y 'v
/ \
A s O a 0 J I M A n J J A % o a D J
- 1931 1982 1983 Figure 21 Incan numlier of zooplankters collected ftom the four stations on each date. Sampling extended from August 1931 through January 1983.
i I STAT!0ll I Depth (m) 'C 1
'C 2
'C 3
'C 4 i i
30.0< I 3a.% 30.0y O< 1- 300 29.37 29.3 30.0< 30.0-2< 2D 2 9. 3 - 30.0- 30.0< I i 2 v 4- 2D 30.0-30.0 - g a: 50 org/l 8< 30.0 - I O- - < .. 1 ., < . 2J < .- . . : . , 4 4 . < Y t; l 10 org/l
~
B. - O. I 1 . . . . 2< - - i
- N < ..
IL I e b 8 4 <j <
'\
\ J.:
7 'i '.4 I U
.] 10 org/l I
I g. .- 1 J ,_., l Fig. 22. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 12 August IP81. I g .u.
I l I STAT 10!i > Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) 'C 'C 'C 'C , g 0 270 < 27.2' 27.0 - 27.0' l 3 j 1< 270< 2<220< 27.0< 27.0<' 27.0< 27.0< 26.8' 26.6< - 50 org/l a - I f0 g 1 y y < 10
&2 . . <- <
org/l l - E I. g 0- - r 7 <g ,. 1- 3 n/ 10 o < - =
<\ '
./ org/l I .2
<- 1 u 2 ne sor I 0, 22 5 22.5 23. 2, . -
22.5. 2 1< 22 5 22.5 22.5l 22.5
$ 2 22.5 22.5 22.3 3~ 22.5- c g , 50 er org/l I
i 22.2 4J s 0- g <N i I 4 E 1-2<
< < T d
10 0 org/l 4-
- l y) 2 s2
\' s .- .
I
/ 10 C -
org/l 4 < * - Fig. 23. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters g (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 17 September 1981 , E 1 (upper) and 13 October 1981 (lower).
- 44
( I I , l I l I : I ! STATION Depth 1 2 3 4 I (m) 0 < 185<
'C 'C 18.7 3 ,, 18.7<-
C 'C 17.6-lg g 1- 1 &O< 18.7- 18.7< 17.6-3 2- 18.7< '\ 17,' 3 17.5- . 3. 7 < - 50 B ' e
'.,y org/1 :
a 17,4 <- ' w
, g 4-0- < <
I l .g a 1-2<
-\
E 10 l 0 4 org/1 m lC 03
- < ~ -
]
a gij. ' , s 2- - . q l 2 10 G ! org/l I ~ . 4 Fig. 24. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters g (organisms /l) at each sampl'ng station on 12 November 1981 I g I I , __.m.,#--.- #~. . . ,. . - _ ...-..,_._.,--_,.mmm., .__m.___. m ._.mm..,mm,,_.m._ _ ,,-,#.,re-,-....,,y.% ow.,..y.,.,,-..
a ! 1 l STATION i ' j Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) 'C 343
'C 100 'C aC l O < 11.0 - -12.0 13,0 < 3.0 :y-1< 11.0<
~
11 5- .
~
12.5 < J 12.5 ]* l 2- 10.5' 11.0 < 10.0 71 2.0 ' 4 J 2 -
. , 0;.!
$ 4- <
3g,n. l l !3 t ie I 50
- E org/l i5 8' 12.0- - i i
1, I 0-i l l'[
~
l I ' ! I I \ IN ] ' I , 3 g4 J' ,
- j. u 10
- org/l i 8 ,
!I L.
<1 0)
I - - . .
\
2, .
) . .1 ;
b k 4- *+ . I 5 l 10 I 8. .a
'9/I n
Fig. 25. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /l) at each sampling station on 17 December 1931. I _ . . _ , _ . . _ _ _ , . . . _ . . . . . . . _ - . _ _ _ , _ . . _ . _ . _ , _ _ _ . . - . , _ _ - . _ . _ . . . . . ~ _ . . - . . - - _ - _ . . _ . _ . _ . . _
i I STAY 10N Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C 562 C 323 'C 'C 0<9.0 -9.0 9.0 9.0 < .
- 339 379 2- .0 - 9. g, 9.O ,
307
':- 4- 9.0 -
9.0 ' ' 9.0 9.0-t C I " 50 l l 8 9.0< M I l g. 127.0 , 73.0 Y - 2} , 4 . . 71.0 , E O . l B. . I 10 org/l m I 0 , . l 1- 3 j 2< -
)
l g 8 g 4- - - , . 4 I .2 v
.]
}
10
.1 org/l I
8 . il m I Fig. 26. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 26 January 1982. I 47 g I
_ . . . ._ . _ - _ _ . . . . _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ --____-_~._. _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ - _ - _ - - - ._ i STATION I Depth (m) 0 13.0
'C 1
13.0,.
'C 2
13.0
'C 3
13.0<
'C 4
1 13.0- 13.05 13.0 - 13.0 2 13D- 13.0 13.0< - 13.0 I m . . b
.t 4 13.0 12.5- "
12.5< 12.5-i " 50 org/l 1 l 8 12.4' ~ l f 0)
,. . . . 1 - ~
m 2 J f 3 ' I g 4-v g 10 g org/l
' ~
8' 0- r 1 . 2
'A .
e4 . < I b lE 10 org/l l g. Fig. 27. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 18 February 1982. I l l
-~ , ,- ,-.vu
+,n- - - . . _ . + , - , , , . , . , . - - - . - - - - _
. . - - - . . . .---,---r., .--,--,---..n,--, . - - - , , , ,
5 d STAT 10f4 H Depth 1 2 3 4 L (m) 'C 'C 'C 'C 0 LEO- 16.0 3 16.0 e 16.0 < - 1- l EO- 16.0< 16.0 - 16.0 - 2< 160< l 16.0- 16.0 - ~< 16.0 - m - 4< 160< 16.0 - 16.0 - 16.0 - I T a 50 org/l I 8. 16.0 - w i I , 2* ( :
- ~
I 3a 8 E
- a. . . .
10 org/l
' H 8-0- 4 1< ) 3 -
2- - ( - - 2 i o g4a 1 . . 0 10 org/l M g< < Fig. 23. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /1) at eacn samplinn station on 15 Maren 1902.
l I STAT 10f4 Depth 1 2 3 4
= 'C 'C (m) *C 611 *C 0 <1&O 1 &O < .
. - - 19.0 ' -
18.5- , 1- 17.5 < 17.5 < ' 17.5 < 18. 0 <
. 493 2< 17.5- 17.5 17.5- 18.0-o E 4< 17.5 -17.5 17.5 - 17. 5 '
e s 50 org/l 8- 17 . 5< ~ o 0- 1
). .
2-I 4 h 4J - - -
- 4. ,
I a 10 l 8- - org/l
~
l 0 103.2 130.9 100.F 10 7 6 , 2
, $*,, 61.8 98.0 119.2 ,
i g ti 5 10 org/l 8 . - Fig. 29. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters I (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 14 April 1982. I
i STATION Depth 1 2 3 4 i (m) 'C 'C 'C 'C
! 22S- 22.5. ..' '2.5. 23.5.
O I I"
~
1< 22S 22.5. . . ' , ' ' 22.5. I 23.5,
- 2- 22&
22.5 il" . - 22.0- ' l 22.5-j g ,., l $4 22D 22.0 J 22.0< , y
. a i
l 50
'g ,
org/l ig 8- 22.0 - -
% i i
l 0- - - < < j 1- - < < < 2- - - - < li m i ) 1-w 4
/ * <
i Et u i i 10 lgp org/l
, 8 . m
~ ' '
l18 1 'X T ,g 1 . . . . 2J - .i , , . <
/
ij 2 i 8 a 4 - .
/ .
. .c 10 org/l lg H
;E 8- -
Fig. 30. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 13 May 1982, ia !E {
l N STAT 10f4 2 3 4 Depth 1
'C 'C 'C 'C (m) 29.0<
0 2251 28.5 - 28.0<- 2 1- 22Ch 28.5- 28.0< 29.0< . 2 2- 2E9 27.0< 28.0< 27.0< 50 g - org/l 4- 27.0- - 0< g .;; I - - - ' < g h2- < - ' - 10 y org/l 4- -
- g ; :: :x : : n 8 2- N < '
o k la
] org/l
- 4< '
I 0<2E93- 29.0< 28.5 < 28.0 < 28.0- 7 1 g 1 2E9, 29.0 28.5 I I. 3 2-280-'1 28.0< 28.0- 28.0-50 g org/l 4 280.. 28.0< 28.0 < 28.0- - L 0- 'I
'/
-}
3 y 1 g2 . <
")' 10
( ) org/l 4, . < < l g 0-1- f 2- - 10 g org/l
" ~
.< .I 4 .
Fig. 31. Temperature profile and vertical oistribution of zooplankters I (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 14 June 1982 (upper) and 15 July 1982 (lower).
.. . - . - _ _ - - . . _ - - . - . . = _ - _ _ _. --
I I l t ! I fl STATION I Depth (m) 0 . 3 15
'C 1
j
'C 30.5 2
31.0
'C 3
'C
- 31. 0 < .
4
.7
{ l-t 2-315-31.0 I 30.5-30.5- ,
<1 31.0-30.5
.i 31.0-31.0-a i 50 org/l I S 4 310
/
1 30.5- 31.0 -
~
O. . l 1 {2-10 l a 4 . . g org/l
~
l ,, 0
).
89 . . l I
- 10 C
- 1
. org/l
\ - \ ~
4- - - Fig. 32. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankter:, (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 18 August 1932. h I ^ E I 53
1 j STATION Depth 1 2 3 4 i (m) 'C 'C 'C 'C 0 < 29. 2 < .
- 29. 2 < .
29.2 - g 9.So l 1< 29.2 2- 29.2-29.2 - 29.2 - 29.2 29.0 - s 29.5-29.0< 2
$ 4- 29.0 f l 29.0 < 29.0 < -
29.0+ U I " 50 org/l l 8- 29.0J w 91.8 ' 118.7
- 71.2 Vit . 2 ' "b ,
67.5 70.5 115.5 I 2,
/
j :< j : 'l ::) .,. / l t . 3 l . 10 p org/l i 8- - ~ Q l' ,} , " 2
. n .
ets
. .j ,,
4< - Y ' < - 2 - u .. 10 org/1 8 . . .o w Fig. 33. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 16 September 1982. STATIO!1 i Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) 'C 'C 'C 'C 0 24.8, 24.8< 3 24.8<: 24.8 21< 24.8-' 24.8" 24,8-
$2 24.8 24.
24.S 8<N.1 24.8- 24.8-
~ 50 y org/l 4 243 24.8<l
- .f O'
, }\ }
2 ,- - 9 g2 - - - ' 30 / j org/l 4, l_' k l ' '
,0- s i b l< <
J- ' l f2 10
} .y org/l
~
( 4 . -l
~
I 438 568 50 l 9 l 322 21 0-5 .
' 21 0 ~
631 750 540-2 i20.0 --- 20.5 :21.0J40 21.0 0 47I 21.0 21.0 44 - 20.5 ' l ' 10 04 j 5
, ( / org/l
() I y 2- - -
- <J; i .
y l g . ~
)
z / , 83.8 151.9 10 0- --
. ) 78.5 l 73.8 ~ '
; . org/l 118.0 -
I b I101.3 130.0 201.0_. l .g 2 - m U 102.5 168.8 87.5 67.5 4' Fig. 34. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 14 October 1982 (upper) and 11 flovemoer 1982 (lower). i - - - - - _ _ _ - - _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - ___ _ ______ _________ . _ _ _
I I b STATION Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C 'C 'C 'C 0 17.5.' . 17.5 " :v : 17.5- 17.5 ,..u. ,I- ' I- 1. 5- 17.5- .
- .5: : 125- -
- 17.5 - ~.
'17.5- . . ' ' ' ' ' , ' , ' . 17.5 "-l'.,
2- 115 .
- 7. 5 - *
.:l '., .; ,.
.. , . :i g ,
, t 4- 17.5- 17.5- .. 17.5 - 17.5 "I.
- g y . J 3 '
50
'.. p-org/l I
E 8-17.5- 17.5 '" 17.5 : ' 17.5 E- s 'I ! 0
- q. 90.0
- l- -
l 2- - - - . .i h4 , - . v- . . 10 org/l i 8- --
'\ . . . ~
I 61.2
- 75.0 81.2 0- -
96.2 60.0 93.8 l 3 , 62.5 70.9
-64.0 2-
/
2 ' ' 5 4, 63.8 , , , l 5 - 10 org/l ib
.I 8- . A -
65 1 Fig. 35. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /l) at each sampling station on 14 December 1982. I .
E I I I I STATION Depth 1 2 3 4 (m) *C 'C 'C C 0 .105- 11.0 y 11.0 - 11.0* 2 1- lah 11.0- 11.0-- 11.0- j , 2- 105- 11.0 - 11.0 -
$" 11.0 - i 50 g org/l f 11.0 - -
4 105 i 11.0 '3 11.0 0- , 1
.g 1
] . - -
f2-10 g org/l 4 . - I , 0- - - - 1' E, 1 - - - M* 2- - - 10 org/l 4 . .. . l - Fig. 36. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters I (organisms /1) at each sampling station on 13 January 1983. I C I
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M W W W Table 6. Dominance ranking of zooplankters by station and date. Most abundant organism was assigned a value of one (1). lel tw2 Organism August 12 Septendier 12 tscioter 13 neweser 12 Messer 17 J a,f <$ Station i 2 3 4 3 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 a I 2 J e i I J 4 Rollf(RA Honostyle sp. ferafilii sp. I l 1 1 E R eeres 1 1 1 I i l i I E. i&iiliaT 2 3 Eradion=5 sp. 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 CiifiFrii sp. Foly~aithis sp. 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 Yri( E a sp. 3 2 1 2 l 5 s ta sp. 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 f@&&$listdes o sp. 2 2 FellicTtiWiestoniensis RiierGii~ip. Fie - 16csome forsosum KijTik.nosp. Con 6EEilii sp. I I I i 1 . I I 3 Floesoma sp. I 3 2 3 3 3 Pl ai F iii patulus futu iETs sp. a liiime sp. Ieratella carlinae
$ is7p ai Wnopus sp.
tilf6Ecca e DRTd. rotifer CDM p7JA lamstore 2 2 2 2 I I I 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 I I 1 1 1 1 l I C*(lors sp. I I I I 2 2 2 I I I I I I I I 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Nsplissp. 3 3 3 WerpafilceId copepod 3 ctADXIRA Bossina longtrostris 1 1 1 1 2 I I 2 2 I I 2 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I [eriods W ia sp. Fol y dtum amazonicum 3 II. etteerve f.apf.4Ti'ip7 2 2 L. D. parvulap61T poOaYibti Fiei35irda 6Tsiitata iiiilia alcrure ilyoc3 g spinifer Alona sp. 5!EileMaivs sp. anosoma sp. 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 DIap+Jiii.iTi feiss pulchella GosaA eg g eelieriT~ 2 1 2 2 1 1 2- 2 4 2 II tus sp. Si eseits 4tn fiis iiETa li<=gtstres 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 Alena coHiis f6idi sp.
I ; j, - ~ m ~ ~ - ,
, le!, - ~ m -~ ~ -
;2!
. i 4 ~ - m . - ~ ~
.e M N .= N N .= m I
i . ~ ., -~ ~ M - ~ m ~m t 5
. ~ ~ - m - m ~
- m ~ -~ ~ e i
. - ~ m -~ - ~
M M N
** an e. m N 2 ~ um -~ - .
~ m ~- -
?
I
, - ~ m ~-m ~
- m - m N N-M - ~
a :
~ ~ ~ m ~-
} - ~
, - - m ~ ~ - ~ m I , - ~ m ~m e m - m ~ I
-~m - e ~
j ~ - ~ m -~m -
- u m ~~m
. - ~ m . - - ~
y m ~ m ~ - ~ E 3 a' ~ ~ m ~- - ~
~
- ,,. m u
- e.
\.
-5 1 .
o : : I . . I E : 2 % :- 8 l e
. 1
- 3 1
. s
-2 . . 2.:p y 4 2 2 : .: . sm E . . 4 *-
w -2 2- t .Mt TJ 2 & Lj
*d "'*
v d ::: d :!. 2 4 2 d [x: I a 22.34 : 4. .i! 2 3 ,*!'*:e.!'y..; I - p p1. :' 3
. 4 42 sp,t ,z .
- L-w= qsa_
t rie['s,L. a 2 m . I.:e ' pl* . - -t
*- ~t d <.T,.jltgIp 51XGI=i.: .gi::,=Xi- .,.-:.ir22g,gh.xse m.: t *!$ : " D# j"'*
a 5 3'* ' *," C :2 QGIST.:rs=: l: o a 5 ;.u:m;u .,3 1 itl . . !: .T;. 0*: lla%:9; 5:.m j: i% mes-6 -L
. t. -
l.::xlg!gi.p!tlym g =.w"Eicim.umM ti-0*-,-. .. -- m u ~ u.e -- LgLi o e - www o< . w ~ .=wlMtit lS.G
.u :- g .I. .*hz ,215-t .-,
e e 2 v :
+
I I I
M M M W m M M M M M M M M M M M M-m M Table 6 Continued. 1982 1982 Organism August 18 Septester 16 Octet.cr le tsuve eer Il Detender 14 January 13 Station 1 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 8 2 3 8 ROTIFfRA fionostvla sp. nii)ilta sp. 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 I I I iC~'iifElearis 2 2 L ikifice5a ~ Braihlonus sp. Castrepus sp. Polyaithis sp. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 '3 filthocerca sp. I 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SyEilJiis sp. 2 2 2 2 (oE6isif Ides sp. 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 Ulllisilla ~ostantensis b henarthra sp. Pseudoploesome formsve Asi.1Athe. asp. {on iEllsi sp. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 Ploestma sp. I~ s (genesp. terstella carlinae ch Eclinishopus sp. O tsilsificca
. Unid. ratifer CDFfI'00A invia ture 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 8 1 1 I. 1 I I tydopssp. 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Llaptosus sp. 3 3 3 id~rpiiiifold copepod (tADOCfRA sossina longtrostris 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 8 I a sp.
leFi3di R533: @5 Fame:ontcue H. giL5erum 9apEnTa sp. 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 5 pariule
- 5. geleT ~
ThydoT5s sphaericus Iepis3&ra~1Tidei Pic a sI3a U 3eitata Ti,lii~~eic~rera 3 3 3 IT R rfpfviipintfer Alona sp. EieRephalus sp. Dai~a Unoi6Ei sp. 3 (er:635{hnTepulchella BJi~oinopsli deTieTsi- 2 2 2 2 1 1 I I 2 3 3 2 Tirecrypisi sp. 54agT.BMJris a,lagi Gii62TjhiTa lacusfrts 3 3 3 3 3 2 't 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 Alinitoiliia 19olha sp.
Table 7. Mean nunber of zooplankters, number of taxa, diversity and equitability of zooplankton communities by date and station. Station 3 4 Date 1 2 d e Org/l Taxa d e Org/l Taxa 2f e Or9/1 Taxa 2i e Org/l Taxa
.73 34.7 12 3.01 1.00 31.4 13 2.98 .85 50.1 13 3.07 .92 64.8 11 2.51 ,
Au9-81 3.51 .89 137.1 23 3.50 .70 138.5 19 3.26 .37 1 Sept 176.0 19 3.39 .79 127.3 18
.88 20 3.49 .80 216.6 19 3.58 .89 198.2 17 3.40 Oct 264.7 17 3.41 .88 196.5 .63 2.73 .64 103.5 14 2.32 .50 108.2 16 2.87 Nov 108.6 11 2.43 .64 144.6 14
.36 S7 1.99 .36 292.4 11 1.73 .36 168.0 14 1.91 Dec 259.7 14 1.70 .14 332.8 14 2.24 .46 282.3 15 2.08 40 283.0 11 2.18 .55 213.6 13 Jan-82 285.9 12 2.11 .50 81.8 1.96 .45
.40 94.0 10 1.78 .40 83.9 12 1.82 .42 11 Feb 84.5 10 1.56 91.4 13 2.26 .46
.64 115.1 16 1.99 .31 89.6 14 2.26 .43 tur 82.7 11 2.39 .43 369.5 I4 1.88 .36 1.97 .45 429.2 13 2.04 .38 382.4 14 2.13 Apr 485.3 11 1.57 .29 222.9 14 1.93 .36 May 204.3 9 1.65 .44 208.6 10 1.57 .40 215.8 14 2.70 .53 137.5 17 2.97 .65 144.1 15 2.93 .73 Jun 112.1 17 3.16 .76 143.7 17
.64 27.7 10 2.75 .90 30.5 8 2.09 .63 24.3 11 2.99 1.09 Jul 31.9 14 2.75 95.4 2.98 1.00 3.08 .80 132.1 15 2.98 .73 101.1 13 2.55 .62 12 Aug 105.2 15 2.42 .58 86.4 13 2.79 .69 2.79 .67 106.1 13 2.39 .54 147.4 12 Sept 148.5 15 37.0 15 2.54 .53 40.6 14 2.74 .64 Oct 33.7 13 2.62 .62 42.5 14 2.35 .50 2.88 .77 583.2 14 2.91' .79 392.0 13 2.86 .77 Nov 562.6 14 2.87 .71 611.0 13 2.72 .53 210.8 15 2.86 .67 239.6 14 2.70 .64 Dec 257.9 15 2.86 .67 265.9 17 2.47 .89 21.5 9 2.50 .89 39.0 11 2.35 .64 Jan-83 28.6 10 2.55 .80 32.4 9
I Larval Fish Fishes in the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant can be classified generally as warm-water species which will spawn anywhere the habitat is suitable. Studies to determine the densities and types of larvae in the vicinity of the plant were conducted every two weeks during the period March through June,1982. Larval fish collected during the study were obtained from four sample areas in the vicinity of the plant. Sample stations included: (1) an upstream station located approximately 0.9 miles above the plant intake; (2) an intake canal sample station; (3) a discharge sample station; and (4) a downstream station located approximately two miles below the plant discharge. Samples were collected at depths of 1.5, 3.0 and 4.5 meters. (Sampling at the 4.5 meter depth was dependent upon sufficient water depth). Samples were obtained by towing a plankton net with attached flowmeter and represent larvae obtained from approximately 100 cubic meters of water. Larval fish densities were computed for each sample area and sample date during the study period. Table 8 provides the number of cubic meters sampled, total larvae per cubic meter, and the taxonomic identification of larvae for each sample area and depth. Table B shows that the Clupeidae (herring family), which includes the shad, represented the dominant taxonomic group in all sample areas during the study. The groups less represented during the study were the Castostomidae, Centrarchidae and Cyprinidae. A total of 184 larvae were collected during the 1982 study period. The number and percent of the total represented by each of the previously mentioned groups is as follows: Clupeidae, 175/95.1%; Catastomidae, 2/1.1".; Centrarchidae, 4/2.2%; Cyprinidae 1/0.5%; and Unidentified, 2/1.1*.. An attempt to describe the distribution of larvae in each of the four sample areas, based on taxonomic differences, could only be conjectural based on the numbers and percentages listed above.
W W W W W M M M M M M M W W W W W W W TABLE 8 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT j i Number of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water 1 at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1982 Cubic Meters Total Fish Depth (H) Sampled Per Cubic Meters Family Number Station Date 1.5 116.4 0 - Upstream 3/3/82 0 -
~
3/3/82 3.0 128.1 - 4.5 118.5 0 - 3/3/82 1.5 44.0 0 - Intake 3/3/82 102.3 0 - Discharge 3/3/82 1 -. 5 0 - 3/3/82 3.0 104.4 - 4.5 108.7 0 - 3/3/82 4 1.5 103.5 0 - Downstream 3/3/82 0 - 3/3/82 3.0 107.1 - 4.5 113.0 0 - w 3/3/82 1.5 123.2 0 - Upstream 3/16/82 0 - 3/16/82 3.0 119.7 1.5 39.4 0 - Intake 3/26/82 1.5 II6.1 0 - Discharge 3/16/82 0 - 3/16/82 3.0 117.1 1.5 109.8 0 - Downstream 3/16/82 0 - 3/16/82 3.0 111.4 0.01B Clupeidae 2 3/31/82 1.5 113.3 Upstream 0 -- 3/31/82 3.0 110.4 Intake 3/31/82 - [ ' 1.5 107.4 O f Discharge 3/31/82 - 3.0 105.7 0 - 3/31/82
M M M W M M M M M W W W W W W W M M m' TABLE 8 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT Number of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1982 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (M) Sampled Per Cubic Meters Family Number Downstream 3/31/82 1.5 102.6 0 - 3/31/82 3.0 109.4 0 - - Upstream 4/13/82 1.5 63.4 0.158 Clupeidae 10 4/13/82 3.0 83.1 0.024 Clupeidae 0.012 Unidentified 6 1 intake 4/13/82 1.5 0.0 5 0 - - 4/13/82 3.0 7.6 0.262 Clupeidae 2
% Discharge 4/13/82 1.5 80.3 0.075 Clupeidae 6
, 4/13/82 3.0 94.9 0.105 Clupeldae 10 Downstream 4/13/82. 1.5 89.4 0.123 Clupeidae 11 4/13/82 3.0 95.4 0.105 Clupeidae 10 Upstream 4/27/82 1.5 101.1 0.069 Clupeidae 7 4/27/82 3.0 100.791 0.010 Centrarchidae 1 0.040 Clupeidae 4 4/27/82 4.5 118.7 0.110 Clupeidae 13 Intake 4/27/82 1.5 46.0 5 0 - -
4/27/82 3.0 0.0 0 - - Discharge 4/27/82 1.5 100.5 0.07 Clupeidae 7 4/27/82 3.0 97.5 0.103 Clupeidae 10 4/27/82 4.5 102.9 0.058 Clupeidae 7 Downstream 4/27/82 1.5 100.5 , 0.020 Centrarchidae 2 0.060 Clupeidae 6 4/27/82 3.0 98.87 0.010 Clupeidae l 0.010 Unidentified 6 1 4/27/82 4.5 102.992 0 - - -
~~ -
TABLE 8 FARLEY HUCLEAP. PLANT Number of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1982 . Cubic Meters Total Ftsh Sampled Per Cubic Meters Family Nur#>cr Station Date Depth (M) Clupef<tae 5 1.5 90.2 0.055 l Upstream 5/10/82 0.020 Clupeidae 2' 3.0 100.7 5/10/82 Clupeidae 5 11.3 0.444 Intake 5/10/82 1.5 0 - 5/10/82 3.0 5.5 Clupeidae 2 85.0 0.024 Discharge 5/10/82 1.5 . 0.043 Clupeidae 4 5/10/82 3.0 92.2 Clupeidae 3 1.5 104.8 0.029 l Downstream 5/10/82 0.010 Centrarchidae 1 Clupeidae 3 l , 3.0 101.2 0.028 m 5/10/82 m 127.1 0 - 1 Upstream 5/20/82 1.5 l 2 1 123.2 0.016 Clupeldae Intake 5/20/82 1.5 0.008 Cyprinidae 1 Clupeidae 5 133.7 0.037 Discharge 5/20/83 1.5 0.016 Clupeidae 2 1.5 122.6 Downstream 5/20/82 106.6 0 - Upstream 6/2/82 1.5 0.048 Clupeidae 6 3.0 126.1 6/2/82 0.008 CatastomMae 1 6.2 0 - Intake 6/2/82 1.5 Clupeldae 5 1.5 105.3 0.048 l Discharge 6/2/82 0.024 Clupeidae 3 t 3.0 126.4 - 6/2/82 Clupeidae 2 1.5 105.5 0.019 Downstream 6/2/82 0.025 Clepeidae 3 6/2/82 3.0 120.5 ,
M M M M M M M M M -M .M Y M M M M M M MM TABLE 8 FARLEY HUCLEAR PLANT Number of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1982 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (M) Sampled Per Cubic Meters Family Number 1.5 132.6 0.030 Clup'eidae 4 Upstream 6/14/82 1.5 67.5 0.015 Clupeidae i Intane 6/14/82 1.5 102.3 0.0 0 Clupeidae 4 Discharge 6/14/82 1.5 129.7 0.008 Clupeidae 1 Downstream 6/14/82 1.5 116.7 0.009 Clupeidae 1 Upstream 6/28/82 1.5 70.5 0.014 Catostomidae 1 g Intake 6/28/82 1.5 101.5 0.010 Clupeidae 1 Discharge 6/28/82 1.5 126.3 0 - - Downstream 6/28/82
- 1. Upstream Sample Area...............CRM 44.7-45.2
- 2. I ntake Sampl e Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CRM 43.8
- 3. Discharge Sample Area..............CRM 43.0-43.5
- 4. Downstream Sampl e Area. . . . . . . . . . . . .DRM 41.0-41.5
- 5. Flows were too low to give a reliable meter reading.
- 6. Specimens unidentifiable either due to demage or early stage of development.
-w
I I, The low densities of non-Clupeids is probably due to lack of suitable spawning habitat in the vicinity of the plant. The extremely unstable sand and gravel bottom of the Chattahoochee River in the vicinity of the plant and the 0.6 to 0.9 meter per second velocities resulting from a narrow river ^ channel and operation of Andrews Dam (located approximately 0.5 miles above the upstream sample station) make this portion of the river under study psor spawning habitat, especially for those species which build nests or require semi-lentic spawning conditions. The average number of larvae collected from each sample area, ., during each sample period, is presented in Table 9. Temperature and dissolved oxygen data collected during each of the larval fish sample periods are presented in Table 10. . . Larval fish studies conducted in the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant during 1982 indicated poor spawning success for fishes other than the Clupeidae, Unstable bottom conditions resulting from high , river velocities and associated operation of Andrews Lock and Dam are expected to be the primary contributing factors for icw larval densities. Data collected during the study did not indicate that any differences among the three areas could be attributed to plant operation, but were closely tied to variations in natural environmental conditions in that portion of the river under study. The results of the 1982 larval fish study, which was designed to evaluate the effects of two unit operation at the Farley Nuclear Plant, failed to indicate any significant effects of plant operation on larval fish in the Chattahoochee River. E I I TABLE 9 Average Number of Larvae at Each Sample Station for Each Sample Period on the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1982 AVERAGE NUMBER OF LARVAE PER CUBIC METER 1 2 3 4 SAMPLE DATE UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE 00WNSTREAM 3 ' ~, / 8 2 0 0 0 0 3/16/82 0 0 0 0 3/31/82 0.018 0 0 0 4/13/82 0.186 0.262 0.180 0.228 4/27/82 0.179 0 0.241 0.100 5/10/82 0.075 0.444 0.067 0.067 5/20/82 0 0.024 0.037 0.016 6/2/82 0.056 0 0.072 0.044 6/14/82 0.030 0.015 0.040 0.008 6/28/82 0.009 0.014 0.010 0 I I 1. Upstream Sampl e Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CRM 44.7-45.2
- 2. I ntak e Sampl e Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CRM 43.8 5 3. Di scharge Sampl e Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CRM 43.0-43.5
- 4. Downstream Sampl e Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CRM 41.0-41.5 I
I I I I
M M M W :m M M M em mmm M M M M -e m TABLE 10 Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Data for Larval Fish Sample Periods on the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1982 Temperature (C)/ Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) Date Time Location 0 ft. 5 ft. 10 ft 15 ft
^
3/3/82 1220 Upstream 12.2/11.00 12.3/11,00 12.3/11.20 12.3/11.20 3/3/82 1530 Intake -12.3/10.80 12.3/10.80 12.3/10.P9 - 3/3/82 1330 Discharge 12.3/10.80 12.3/10.80 12.3/10.80 12.5/10.6 3/3/82 1500 Downstreaa 12.3/10.80 12.4/10.80 12.4/10.80 12.4/10.80 3/16/82 1230 Upstream 16.0/9.70 16.0/9.70 16.0/9.70 3/16/82 1440 Intake 15.6/9.50 15.6/9.50 15.6/9.60 i 3/16/82 1400 Discharge 15.7/10.00 15.8/10.00 15.8/9.90 i c; 3/16/82 1450 Downstream 16.2/9.50 16.2/9.50 16.2/9.50 3/31/82 1330 Upstream 16.2/9.70 16.2/9.70 16.2/9.65 16.2/9.60 3/31/82 1630 Intake 16.7/9.60 16.9/9.70 - - 4 3/31/82 1410 Discharge 16.2/9.60 16.2/9.60 16.2/9.60 - 3/31/82 1445 Downstream 16.4/9.80 16.4/9.90 16.4/9.90 - 4/13/82 1300 Upstream 17.1/9.90 17.1/9.90 17.1/9.90 17.1/9.90 4/13/82 - Intake - - - - 4/13/82 1440 Discharge 17.2/9.90 17.3/10.00 17.1/9.90 17.3/9.80 4/13/82 1400 Ocwnstream 17.1/10.00 17.1/10.00 17.1/10.00 17.1/10.00 4 4/27/82 1325 Upstream 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 4/27/82 - Intake - - - - 4/27/82 1530 Discharge 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 4/27/82 1600 Downstream 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 19.2/9.40 5/10/82 1300 Upstream 20.3/9.90 20.3/9.90 20.3/9.70 5/10/82 1410 Intake 20.4/10.1 20.4/10.0 20.4/10.1 5/10/82 1345 Discharge 20.3/10.20 ,20.3/10.30 20.3/10.20 5/10/82 1500 Downstream 20.2/10.20 20.2/10.20 20.4/10.10 4 1
M M M M M M M M M M*M M M M M M M M M TABLE 10 Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Data for Larval Fish Sample Periods on the Chattahoochee River near Faricy Huclear Plant 1982 Temperature (C)/ Dissolved Oxyjen (ppm) 5 ft. 10 ft 15 ft Date Time Location 0 ft. Upstream - 22.3/8.50 22.3/8.50 22.3/8.40 22.3/8.40 5/20/82 1340 1530 Intake 22.3/8.30 22.4/8.35 22.4/8.40 - 5/20/82 22.3/8.90 22.3/8.90 5/20/82 1540 Discharge 22.3/8.70 22.3/8.70 ; Downstream 22.5/8.20 22.5/8.20 22.5/7.80 22.5/8.30 5/20.82 1520 1230 Upstream 22.5/7.15 22.5/7.15 22.5/7.10 6/2/82 6/2/82 TEMPERATURE /0XYGEN METER STOPPED WORKING 1225 Upstream 27.3/7.55 26.8/7.55 26.7/7.40 -
. 6/14/82 27.2/7.10 -
27.3/7.10 6/14/82 1440 Intake
~1 Discharge 28.8/7.25 27.4/7.05 27.1/7.00 26.9/6.95 6/14/82 1325 27.4/7.10 1425 Downstream 29.9/8.40 28.2/8.15 27.5/7.40 6/14/82 1235 Upstream 29.4/7.85 26.1/6.70 26.2/6.65 6/28/82 -
6/28/82 - Intake - } 1600 Discharge 28.9/7.20 26.9/6.50 26.2/6.20 6/28/82 27.0/6.70 26.6/6.20 l 6/28/82 1555 Downstream 29.2/7.70 j e s
- . _ . . . - .s -
; :ta::*t s : sa : s 2: pp se !* i,t' E9 I y 4 4 4 4 4 6 $ 4 .*
ps rppgsppg ppg": _gli eieiieiie d sg i 4 i
- g--
e 4'eassind::s quermres ; spppagegrppg"g 5 .,* -,.,. : 5 H ~ f:s i ieei6 iiee : *. - rs ss Egb;g's'e'w's'e*F's't's 'F r 'S*fatat*t'E9 'f=8 _I ; e ssei e i 3 i e e n i e i s d .: *s\i
. *I.*i F '8
=
! dl g5 :ppppg:pppg 55 5-44siaeiei xg-- a5 i
4 e5'- spppyggpppi ggI EE E!"fi i deit i sai< e * = i ;
- l:;*isidiseisrerer's's's's'r*r 't : an ' rat's*t's's's't's 's ' * *. SE ':
e e i i niit id st i = ' I tr: : s'sar's's't's't an r x as's's s-s's'r's's 28 28 28 iLi eiieiiiie d i e i i s' i .' d i ii et d' *
- gj.,' *;'i. 488t*S't'$'i'F80 3 *2 ** 'f**'E'S=$'I'5's's at '8 I3*
ieii4 4 i i i i i i4 4 ii44 0 ] I i js 's't'f % *:'s's's*f *: 2: :s. 's's'E'E*PE**'I'5 'S U l *T f.f ieu iiiiii et dl4 e eiie iiii i E
- E -I.
2': 't's'i's's*5's F'F 'I a: 'a: 's'F'E*F';*f*f'E*S: *; a, ** I ik iieiaiiii l 3, i i e iieeieiie i * *
- tba 'seg et' sus'f'3't'5 ' *8 'F' *E 's*E'f*F'7'F'F'!'t *T ~3 N 4 i.h asiieiiee d i 4; ieiiiiiei i
- 1 '
I r*: 's'ses'tet*S'E'I'S 't ii l i i ieie4i i EF bgjg'e'e'i'F't'S'F'F't iii4i i4 eg i 4 i i a n,
't'F*r't ;'s*;*t's i i i e i i ; i d' I es*g';'g.gegegeger .;
s
'l*:
- 2 *2 .
"i;
,.y i
s i i iiieiieie i s, s I 3 '
- l'c oif 'Fi'5'eiiiiei ig S 'F 'T *;'S 'S *:
e d
*F 'f't'F'5"#'F'F'F't as : :: ' :
e ieiiieiia
- i; e
*: 'p
- F *s
- F* F*f ' F't
- F ' 's . "2'"! I 'f*E'F't 3't*1'F'tf*3 ei.....l4 .
js?,f ' F ~ 'I t ' R - I 5 i ed
- iii4 s 4 i i l e i i e i i i e i; 4 i s 8'
- il' gf.s:t:i aF't'F'T'f*f'F't'T taietiesi at e
i e "F 3'3'f*4'F'*'F'S desissit i a
*:i 't 10 a
cE : : -s s i
,: g.;i s's'r'r's :: ' s: : : .r's's's :'F a'r's se ex x:
p esidenisd j i e eiissest i i ii q\.. :: m g: 9 ma.g al e .c..e .c r. .e .c .e .t . . e.cerc.e.s."
. .i. i. 4.-l a. n. .n I *
*** s'e
~
- s :'s't's' er's ff i e4 4 ieiii E
's4 e
d es i
*:4 *:i er i
't-s'n's's.c*tq's eiiiiiiie
-s ' at i e i a s F 'E'S'i'F'I'i's h;y"e'iiiieiii '3 C'F *P"I' P'S 's's at :: It 2:
I
.g eaiiiiiae d i a i K's -: t's*;'E*t'F's's at 3 ; *t's're s ts* f *S's's 's 's := '
gli eiaeeieii e i i iii4ae4i4
!t 4 e i a sj: *: ; ;*:'s't's*s 's 22 22 K! 'f *:'s" ":' E r'P s *f *3 'I ::
f.y aiiaiia4 4 4 4 i ieai4 iiei e i 4 e
- 5': iieiiiiie gg a s't 're s's 's's 's 's s 4
4 e s'sas's r r'e=s s s *s 's *: i id i e4 4 i e 4 4 e i I i.li, i
*r. .s" . '.F. pt' a
es's :
, q. :-
. ..<'.s r. .c s,. q.
- r. :'s== a .s. ;
. 5.:
ap s r's*F :'se r-es c :s.:: eses'sres: a-es's 2: a s ca g.s iieedaeie i e .e ieeaaiiii a a i i E. m': s's r r s's--'s's :: :: 's :'s :meds s s es :s fif ieiiiiiii it i i i i i ici i e i i r f i e i:f sr m.; 'a' e d'e's'r* 's's 's *re a 't sesst::'s ::: x: x: -
; ei4 ead e i e i e isg i i i a !sg i e f:g
;;; s.*F's s'er p**- s s. :- ag *eo ;-:n s i p s n *: * *s. p-a.a ***=' - ' * 'd - - *== -
- I .
a 3- _, = .e . ; 2
- - n c -
a n I
, a Eam a- c e e ! = s .= c . .
sts!g e a - r
-d y ;. ::.:ssds: -
a
- w cv 2 : s-*
n a -s v 5: s I. *
=
psat. m . s S . e .:, y v., u
- m: ,;=1 r ; a
- = a i =r.y :ne;s =t:
v n. ,, . . a . ..: 3 I :g. g:. :g - g . I a a e E - to c :s s 5-l
.h ! x :. 3 3 e
- 71. -
= a.aa .
i E 53 a s v E V i
I 1r91ngement Studies Impingement monitoring at Farley Nuclear Plant began on February 18, 1982 and extended through January 17, 1983. Fish and other aquatic organisms impinged on intake screens were collected for one continuous 24-hour period every two weeks during the study. Organisms impinged during the 24-hour sample periods were obtained by passing the d effluent from the screen wash system through a collection basket. Fish l collected during the study were identified and individually counted, weighed and measured. The weights of fish were obtained as previously noted, with tne exception of small shad (Dorosoma spp), which were weighed in aggregate in order to increase the occuracy of weight determinations for this species. Impingement data were collected on 26 sample periods during the 12-month study. Impingement data collected during the study are presented in Table 11, which includes the number and weight of each species collected during each of the 24-hour sample periods. Impingement monitoring at Farley Nuclear Plant resulted in the collection of 14,103 aquatic organisms (see totals in Table 11). The clam Corbicula fluminea and the Clupidae hncluding gizzard and threadfin shad) were the most numerous of the orgarisms collected. The Corbicula and shad accounted for 6.49% and 91.50%, respectively, of the total organisms collected during the study. Thus, these two groups, collectively, represented 97.99% of all organisms collected , during the 12-month study. Aquatic organisms collected during the impingement study were l divided into three general categories which included game species, comercial species, and other species. Organisms collected during the impingement I studies, and classified as previously described, are presented in Table 12. The total number and weight of each species collected are presented, as well as the estimated daily and annual impingement rates for each species identified. The estimateo annual impingement rates for game, comercial,
~ - .
I other fish species, and Corbicula (see Table 12) were detennined to be 723; 2383; 166,756 and 12,565, respectively. The estimated annual impingement rate e of 166,756, as shown for the classification of other fish species, includes ! an impingement esticate of 166,212 for the Clupeidae. Thus, the estimated annual impingement rate for all non-Clupeid spe:tes of fish is 3,650. The estimated annual weight of fish impinged on intake screens as determined to l be 50.27 pounds (22.80 kg.) for game species, 156.06 pounds (70.79 kg.) for commercial species, 1390.66 pounds (630.80 kg.) for other fish species, and 33.22 pounds (15.07 kg.) for Corbicula. The Clupeidae account for 1353.65 pounds (614.02 kg.), thus the estimated annual impingement rate for non-Clupeid species of fish is 243.34 pounds (110.38 kg.). The estimated annual weight for all organisms impinged on intake screens was determined to be 1630.21 pounds - (739.46 mg.). The distribution of fishes and shellfish over the 26 sample periods is presented in Figure 37. Most of the fish collected during the impingement study occurred during the late winter and early sprin5 The impingement of fish during this period has been seen at other power plants throughout the State and is thought to be related to increased movement of fishes associated with feeding and spawning behavior. Impingement rat.es for C_orbicula were relatively constant throughout the study with the exception of the period late June to early July, during which significantly larger nun.bers were observed. Table 13 and Figure 38 present the minimum and maximum rates of water withdrawal which could have occurred through the in',ake system during each of the impingement sample periods. Average flow rates for each 24-hour period could not be obtained since available information on pump operation was limited to the number of pumps running in continuous mode and the number of pumps set in the automatic mode. Thus, tne data in Table 13 shows flows known to cccur (minimum flows) and flows which could have occurred (maximum I I< I W 6 m c s w
,a
=
p' g e
-Ck.ev.scwei-e w
Cc=AL C?> .3e. . s. ,f. (.k. m o p t c a. e.
+
c
=
ceCfCe-MC m
-C,,,Nm
- b. . f* = N. D. N. a. v.
c
- N.
eo
.- k. N.
P. W N r, N. C
- t c
; e - -
.I E i t. ege aa *-
- r O C E. E.-- e w .c.s.C.g g t. e.
a . C.* c.... s w w .C w i - . . . . . S.
. . m e 2. *. 3. E. . .
c- CCCCCCCCo n C rt C C CCU~NCCCC w C C w I
- r*
~
,T U'
p g
. e . . . . . . .
TC#TM*ww
*TMO-w==
e N N k m m t wA*N"IaCh
-w
= h* e Nh Cr**
== -
N C n ( e a 1 > e a,v C. w g . 4 e
=
4T =
%. N. N y
=
I. r
- 5 n
i n
- e c .-mcm.N* ~ m
- m w
9 a a w..N... w . A. ys.A .d.c,. N > *
* *CCCCOCGC N
a '*
~. c. w. c. C. o. N. e c.- E.
. . . . r.
c, CCohWCCGC- o v
& w
- P P
.. ...... .. e g
,e N. m- ,e , !
2 0 lC0000000= M. f. N. s.C. M. b. r.C.@b.C.tk.b. I'
- h. E ,.- ~ ~ _. c. . C. w.h.C. b.
w i b. y e 6 e Mw u m a o C=CC 04CQ Ir - - 9
*w N r E tt o b$tww w ! % .u l r% es v N 4 T.m-= n = ecwca e 'o o e-t
%=$ rt wrt < tvv w *
- 9 i
w Oe at g h. c. C. C. C. C. C. C. C. - e C.C. C. N. N.C.G.=. C. e. I- C. e e=t* C C C C C.3 O C C C = = e ee-. *T w b. CCC=JEC3C3
- 4 o wCa4 @
i o C g b C. - Y = w C ha &
& C' y Afb t
Sb M M 67
*F N.e. w.W. *.*.T.N. e.
w
. N. N. @ ..w =. &. *. @. r. m. e.
w Ca tw=T C4 {m=CNramN' s O C wCO CMCP w e w *
- s C t. 4 r p* -g .*c.--m%< o' - - r ce*+N e
'. I N 4= a={'
wt b *9 W 8
. 4(
r i e = w @' o
=
{ w-in e wa JN = C N
=
=
N
= n.
c
/
EVr a5 =M v n
-- set w. @
W q % w Y J t* I swC . N = tai CP Ce=vmfw
- r e ~CN*eOOe= N r e N J =r b?T A q HF N w w 4 Q te to cm
. tug O. C. w. C. eD eCeCeC-N s e. N. O. c. C. F. w. c. C. /.i C. =.
< 6=w CAI e= =#6 E CCCCCCC@ m N N C=CNCCCCC mW e N N
w
& > =- =
m u N b b =C6 => k i m Lee w e ees at I
- b ~ = p ~s g
- rwri Ef4C4w'
> wa 4
ea bu aa Oh cm H" R
=memn=w.-
m
~
e ke
=
e e
=
- -a - cmN -b r e e .r ~ cg N
o N
+
0-e 0 m e
=
w
=
m M I b && 7 W F b *
% w 4 O O we p W d' H
WP PV m3 w 15 av G - = vl ~QW && *J n Lp w mp l1 4 @wr 7 a my s ==u (um4C.- *O zJD_gg rg$ I ui g f*) T F
- ~ 6' i s.
. i
}Q s e' .gw . d, r*. ' =
a
=
b4200
<>u Pge
.> A l . C LW '
LM r
- s
. u =,=, =er .A ,O w
*a .y . .
- e. -
w vamee Q
-w Q b.
=
l ** M*h 4
.i ----- -w n c a z -s1 m e. O" .
I 4 wh7 Qi P Pm F 23r W ~3 e o {E E l i - y:kl
.- A
.r W h a 2 w
y JE t.- E w .b. . e 2 www- .J 1 w& k'pa iw u e - QwE. ' E. -
=& e -
P a EDS !! f .4 L C w w w m f I O O W 4.c
- w
'A & A V u !e w $. 6 w I w CW W W 1 m w = a em -
O w a .e. ' O :. e g*
- gi
- u.
- 4 A4 . .C P E') . = y i,
'u b
*[um == 1
+
3
~
W ( e.) a < %m 12 s V
. u.s r
E i In
=
& p w. a(T P 46 .tC 96 Pd@" C i k l W IW ? g e 3p1
.I tt i r
M
- y
-r=v 4 ..
~v4P% Tw ejW a 4 1 va
.ev f Q Ce
.cna-avvw
=
na
== -= 9 w wk t f
p a j b -w a r; u * -wat exew{e m, t . . wer
- u i .i, rrJ_e i e : .a
~- vam3 3 e t a a. ee:-A 1. pie I C .'..W e39.= lI w
- iJ 8* Oi .8 =0
- t ew O U *d W G .
I 8 s.e f e_
.DJ ::e ab ue a ' _s= ., f e -- 1 = 4C L
<
- 4 4 =- w s. in sw tw m O M a; .'
- w t E i .C t ,; I-i 4. I sua
. i O- p2. b EQo4 sa i O O 40 L,a e 40 t
~ 74 - * '
~
man man man man == mas em' ~ 'uns an erT uma sus em sus' mas sus em:_see w FIRGURE 37 THOUSANDS FISH AND SHELLFISH COLLECTED DURING EACH 24-HOUR SAMPLE PERIOD 10 .- FISH
.....SHELL FISH 8 _
h, U N B E R 6 - C 1 0
- L L
4 - E C T - E D 2 - 0 7 , , g' ',- 2 4 6 3 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 SAMPLE PERIODS
I TABLE 13 ( Minimum and Maximum Intake Flows j During Twenty-Four Hour Impin9ement Studies at Farley Nuclear Plant 1982 Date Study Began Sample Period 3 Minimum Flow (m / min) Maximum Flow (T / min) ! 2/18/82- 1 0 342 3/3/82 2 0 266 l- 3/16/82 3/31/82 3 4 228 228 266 380 4/14/82 5 266 304 4/27/82 6 190 304 5/10/82 I 5/20/82 8 7 228 190 26-6 342 6/2/82 9 266 266 i 6/15/82 10 266 380 6/29/82 11 380 380 7/12/82 12 152 342 7/26/82 I? 152 342 8/10/82 ic 152 380 t 8/24/82 15 380 380 9/8/82 16 190 380 9/15/82 17 114 342 9/29/82 18 152 152 10/11/82 19 152 190 10/27/82 20 76 228 11/9/82 21 114 190 11/22/82 22 152 228 12/8/82 23 152 228 12/21/82 24 228 266 1/4/83 25 152 266 1/17/83 26 152 152 I I M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M FIGURE 30
, MAXIMUM RATES OF RIVER UATER UITHDRAUAL DURING EACH 24-HOUR SAMPLE PERIOD 400 -
C U B 350 _ I f i lT 300 _ j E R
, S 250 _
g E R 200 _ , N 1 I N 150 _ E 100 , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 4 6 ~8 '10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 SAMPLE PERIODS
- - a
I flows), based on the number of pumps set on automatic. The rate of water withdrawal did not appear to be relatee to impingement rates for fish, with the peak impingement rates occurring during a period of relatively low intake flow rates. The peak impingement rates for Corbicula did occur during a period of high flow rates. However, taking into consideration the relatively low rate of impingement for Corbicula during other periods that had equally high rates of flow, this peak was assumed to be coincidental. The results of impingement studies at the Farley Nuclear Plant indicate that the removal of fish and other aquatic organisms from the Chattahoochee River is sufficiently low that no significant harm to aquatic communities is expected to occur. Impingement rates for game species were determined to be extremely low. The estimated daily impingement rate f,or game species of 2.17 is less than 5?. of the daily creel limit per fishermen for sunfish, as set by the Alabama Department of Conservation & Natural Resources. The impingement rate for commercial species was also considered to be low, with an estimated daily rate of 7.16 fish. Biological studies conducted near Farley Nuclear Plant prior to and during the first year of operation of Unit #1 indicated that threadfin shad, gizzard shad, and Corbicula represent the majority of aquatic organisms living in the vicinity of the plant. Thus, impingement rates for shad and Corbicula, while appearing relatively high in comparison to impingement rates for other groups, are not considered sufficiently high to cause any detrimental effects to populations of these species. I I I 1
I I literature Cited l American Public Health Association. 1980. Standard Methods for the 8 Examination of Water and Wastewater. 15th Edition, American Public Health Association, New York. 1134 pp. g Weber, C. I., ed. 1973. Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for { Measuring the Quality of Surface Waters and Effluents. V. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C. I I I lI I I
- I I
I I I I I I
I . I I I I ,, JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT Environmental Non-Radiological Monitoring of Aquatic Comunities In The Chattahoochee Piver . I 1975 - 1978 g .. g . I I I I I I I e
l ALABAMA POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT I Environmental Non-Radiological Monitoring of Aquatic Comunities in the Chattahoochee River I TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Pages 1 Macroinvertebrate Studies 1 2 Water Quality Studies 18 3 Plankton Studies 51 4 Larval fish Studies 115 . S Adult Fish Studie', 135 6 Impingement Studies 152 I I . I I I I I I I > mum au snu r au - suas
l I BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS
- 1. An analysis of macroinvertebrate populations, using density, diversity and equitability values, did not indicate any significant differences l in populations of these organisms which could be contributed to the operation of Farley Nuclear Plant.
- 2. The concentrations of a majority of the water quality parameters associated with biological studies varied seasonally; however, no differences that would have biological significance were detected between upstream control and downstream discharge sites.
- 3. Variations in phytoplankton and zooplankton densities occurred over the course of the study; however, there were no qualitative or quantitative changes in plankton communities of the adjacent Chattahooctiee I River that were attributable to the operation of the Farley Nuclear Plant.
- 4. Larval fish studies in the vicinity of the plant failed to indicate any noticeable changes in larval fish densities or spawning periods during tne four-year study.
- 5. Studies of adult fish populations, using n lative abundance and condition values, did not indicate any major changes in fish populations had occurred as a result of the operation of Farley Nuclear Plant.
- 6. Impingement studies at the Farley Nuclear Plant intake indicated low l impingement rates were on.urring relative to game and commercial species.
Impingement rates for other species were also considered insignificant relative to any effect a fish populations existing in the Chattahoochee River.
- 7. The results of the four-year biological study of the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Flant failed to indicate any significant changes in biological communities which could be associated with plant operation.
i l 1
W. / I Results and Discussions Introduct y Mennoring of aquatic connunities in the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant was begun in 1975 in accordance with conditions of tne NRC FES-OL for the Farley Nuclear Plant. The program, as described below, provided for the Jampling of aquatic comunities in the Chattahoochee River and the comparison of data collected curing pre-operational monitoring with data collected during operational nonitorit.g. The comparison of data collected during pre-operational monitoring with date collected during operational nonitoring provided the basis for evaluating the impact of the operation of Farley Nuclear Plant on the aquatic environment. The change , from pre-operational to operational monitoring is based on the December 1, 1977 com creialization of Unit 1. Macroinvertebrate Studies An aquatic macroinvertebrate sampling program was initiated on the Chattshoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant in June,1975. Macroinvertebrate populations were assessed using Hester-Dendy multiple-plate samplers (Weber 1973)l . Samples were taken quarterly frnm both the east and west banks of the river at these sample stations. Macroinvertebrate sample areas included: (1) an upstream sample area lecated approximately 1.2 miles above the plant discharge, (2) a discharge sample area, and (3) a downstreem sample area located approximately two miles below the plant discharge. Macroinvertebrate studies were conducted over a period of forty-two months and included fifteen sample periods. Studies were begun in June,1975 and terminated in November,1978. Macroinvertebrate studies conducted during tht, previously mentioneC period provided information ralative to the types 1 Weber, Cernelius I, 1973. BioloA.g4-7g0prd Fi U.S. E.P.A., Cincinnati. E.P. Laboratory Methods.
4 and densities of organisms present in er-h of the three sample breas. Tabins 1 through 4 list the macroinvertebrate taxa identified from each s sampic area during each sample period, as well as the numbcr of organisms collected per square meter of sr.mpler. Data presented in the previously , referenced tables does not indicate any noticeable differences in dominant taxa among the three sample areas during the study. Macroinvertebrate population densities (number /m2) changed considerably from season to season and year to year in all sampla areas, as determined from multiple-plate samples. Table 5 is a summary of macroinvertebrate densities for each sample area during each of the sample periods, it is obvious from the data presented in the pre',iously referenced l table that macroinvertebrate densities in all sample areas were lower in the spring and winter sample period 2 than in the sumer and fall sample periods during each of the study years. Peak macroinvertebrate densities occurred in all sample areas during the fall sample period of each year. Figure 1 is a graphical presentation of average macroinvertebrate densities in each l sc.mple area during each sample period. While information presented in Figure 1 does not indicate equa', densities in each samnle area during the study, it does indicate that fluctuations in population densities followed the same trend during each sample year. Yearly average population densities are shown for each sample area and year in Figure 2. A statistical evaluation of macroinvertebrate densities was conducted to determine if any differences existed between sample areas during each sample year. The results of 3 " student's t" test did not indicate any significant differences in macroinvertebrate densities among the three sample area, when computed for each sample year, using an 80% confidence limit. A comparison of sample areas, using data from all sample years. L -
m m m M M M M M M m m M 1 M M W M E_m M Table 1 Macroinvertebrates identifled from Multiple-Plate Samples at Farley Muclear Plant 1975 Menber of Organisms Fer Squate Meter of Saneler 6/18/75 - 7/17f75 8/3/75 - 10/2/75 11/18/75 - 12/16/75 l II 22 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 i 4 W5 W E W E W E V E W E W E W E W Macrotnvertebrates E E Crustaces 3.2 Cladxera Diptera Chironceus 5 16.1 67.1 107.6 18.3 312.2 113.0 21 2.1 269.1 118.4 147.5
* (ricotopus a 21.5 139.9 16.1 3.2 10.8 3.2 5.4 w FBredilu:n $ 5.4
, Procladius r-3.2 3.2 Psectrocladius Unidentified h 5.4 5.4 7.5 10.8 10.8 3.2 Pentaneurini 6 10.8 37.7 32.3 10.8 37.7 21.5 18.3 Ephemeroptera g
- o Cacnis M 5.4 Stenoneca N 5.4 Gastropoda 3.2 Larva .
16.1 her toda 21.5 5.4 5.4 Oligochaeta 10.E Pelecypoda Ptsidium 5.4 3.2 5.4 7.5 Trichoptera e flydropsyche 21.5 75.3 32.3 75.3 16.1 3.2 5.4 7.5 _Polycentropus 21.5 32.3 54.5 129.2 10.8 96.9 75.3 21.5 59.2 177.6 132.4 3.2 tm dentified 5.4 Average fio. of Organises Per Square 7.5 Meter of Sannier M/A 75.2 89.4 193.0 164.7 150.7 500.7 301.3 287.4 4E2.9 339.0 318.6 26.9 10.8 17 1 3.2 21.5 2 3 5 2 9 5 6 7 5 7 2 2 4 1 2 1
, Total _ Genera N/A 4
- 1. LTstream Sa=ple Area....... .Cm 55.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sarple Area.......C M 43.0 - 43.5
.. e i
ummu w ===ne _u u Table 2
.berelevertehrstes Ierett;ted fram 9hIttple-Flate Samples at feeley nuclear Plant 1976 Essener of , .lsas Fw Steere Meter of Sameter 8/F/76 - 9/21/76 11/9/76 - 12/8/76 2/3/76 - 3/2/16 6/2/76 - 8/29/76 1 2 3 y 7 y 2
2 / y 7 3 13 I W W E W t W f W W W E N f W f E w(relevertebrates (4 w$ t W t ' W E E eele.erate 5.4 3.2 10 3 Hydra 3.2 48.4 7.5 64.6 oleertera 3.2 3.2 latzerte 3.2 21.3 etal tpllidae m resta(ea " Gassmares 3.2 ** 6 3.2 Aaselpase c le.s 4 topepeda E 3.2 g 3.2 3.2 Ostratoda ,. imideatifled 5 - a rtere g 41abeseyie 3.2 _4 g 5.4 32.1 5.4 Brtita ?* 48.4 139.1 57.1 21.9 43.i 75.3 80.7 I474.7 390.11253.1 f 646.i l227.1 380.r g lie.1 219.' 64.6 tste ist.6 thfrenomes 21.5 43.8 64.6 0 31.7 = G 5.4 g 3J u toeletanypes 3.; 3J 38.3 5.4 29.1 10 3 " tricetores ' Glyptetenderes 50.8 T.li 3J F2.I 21.' 21.1 Memerodruseta 14.0 3.2 221. 22.f 3J 2' .5 64.6 131.9 52.9 10.8 % .4 16.1 polypedilens 3J 3.2 18. 3.2 T.1 '#.8 Psectociedfes 1.5 28.5 5.4 T.9 5 tenot b $ renrumps 96.1 11.E 32.3 5.4 24 J 32.3 lanwterses f r khettadies 5.4 3.2 temhlronounts F.' 5.4 5.4 32.3 5.1 39J 5.4 t>tdentified 14.0 5.4 3.1 3.2 10.5 T.S . IG.8 n aborinae 32.3 26.1 10.2 50 6 F.5 57.1 57.3 82.9 21.5 Otronominae larvaa 14.0 14.s 14.9 21.5 18.3 3.2 2.5 7.5 10 ) 7.5 21.5 3J 75.3 37.7 78.6 rentaarertal 3.2 Slaulledee pheaetectera 15.5 1.2 F5. 32.3 130.9 23.5 3.2 F.5 86.1 24.8 ?O .t 46 . ' 21.5 19.8 10.9 taents IG) l b.enythis 'F .5 F.* 14.0 3.2 3.2 5.4 53.E 7.5 26.9 30 3 16.1 Ste m 5.4 3.2 h ata 3.2 35.5
- Ar9 ta 3.2 F.5 sacerm ordulle 3.2 Gigochaeta
'eletypoda 3_2 3.2 te.9 to.! 18.1 5.4 10.8 Pistdlus 27.7 e6. ==e.a ro.. 104.4 2nr.e en9.e 131.9 trichapters
*ydren ytme 3.2 5.4 3.2 aois 796. tam.nol5.t 215.3 96.9 1536.1 64.4 14.8 39.4 10.9 67.8 96.9 64.6 _ _ _ .
F8IZgestnews M 5.4 g 78,6 10.035L50J F. era,e w. or k9ani .ms Per Sgeere r8.4'210.9 %'9.15485.4~645.:;'s )4.; 5:19 ,I m/4 251.7 s wp.9 $l3.s 415 4 le p 70.9 850.8 114.0 afn 53.9 129.2 M fill 43.???39 6l218.1 629.7 4rter of_Saepler fotal Genere 1 9 7 m/A 4 5 11 13 15 IL _lL _6_ 3] _IL 1_lG _ , _& _ .ElA .JL Js_ s r r I. tt:rstream Sample Ares... ... .tm 44.1 - 45.2
- 2. E16 thorpe Sample Area. ... . .Cm 43.0 - a1.5
- 3. 09mestream Sasq=le Ares... ..tM 41.0 - 43.5
- 4. The letter I denotes test bort sample
____ s in letter W draatn We t bme wt=
4 m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 4 i Table 3
%cretowrtebrates Ideettfled free 94mit tple-Plate Samples et. f arley feuclear Plant 1977 w or e ,a.s Per w m w e.c et sameiec 2ftf!! - 1/3/11 6flif11 - 1f18171 tl22f?? - 117 117 M M rn tso ms yI I I
1 2 1 1 7 1 2 2 I t' v5 t u t w t u E w t u a w t a E w e w t v t
- wre savert+e tes Celeoptera cytts<tdee 5.4 (rvstaes C8P'Peda 32.3 43,1 5.4 790.F trjt .3 ts trecede F.5 3.2 F.5 E
".a Diptera Brllia y *k 3.2 CLIRinw ws 34.0 19.5 39.s 10.8 5.4 5.4 516.7 550.4 805.2 g 344 .5 g F422.0!O15.11779.1I273.4 462.51094.1,1SF A f Eg7.3 5.4 es.1 129.2 32 3. tu 64.6 21.5 Uheter s. gg.g Felypectime FiettMipjes T.5 5.4 1.. . g g 5 ri,., 129.2 .r..
- c.
" ~
5 teamliTrace=='s 3.2 M *d5 5 0 5" 39.9 3.2 3.2 TrifgMR8vs_ 32 *
- 10.8 g 32.3 32.3 e.2 lenoditeswors U U 3.2 s
g -- . -7 g-- g = in Nta Adult g g 10.P 84.0 21.5 14.0 3.; N ta tarve 21.5 37.7 53.E o 32.3 " 10.8 3.2 7.5 orthecte416mae 3.2 Pentencorfel 5.4 59.2 32.3 32.3 118.4 161.5- 147.5 226.r1 96.1 118.4 240.0 14.0 to a fphemeroptera teettst e 3.2 CeMTs~- 3.2 IS e 3.2 3.2 bis;Fhis 3.2 IiftopTA$e 3.2
$ temee*Ee ~ 3.2 3.2 3.2
[aree 3.2 instropeda ter,a 5.4 feewipters 6% ridae 18.P
%=atoda 3.2 IO E 3.2 umat Ar39e 5.4 31 Tetriymmeria 19 8 l:1ipodeeta 10.8 3.2 relecypode [
gjggggg I.5 3.I I - *, 46.1 F.5 24.8 43.8 [ fe,, F t rideptere , M 14.0 21.5 32.3 26.9 26.9 10.2 59.2 54 1.4 ZE3 13.9 207.E 107.6 32. 1 10 1 57.1 153.* 12 herh(evpos r$T, 608.2 236.9 269.1 118.4 193.8 222.2 600.G 241.6 151.5 4:2.3 3.2 14.0 19 P wta % g 12.8 3.2 14.9 3.2 _ Everage he. of
#9entses per Square vter of Sast ler 33.7 32.3 78.5 17.1 37.7 54.0 1211 r4216.e;'70s . , a/A 633.6 it/A 1048.1 ;476 3 063.1 71 3.1 yyg,11sgy,p ig3.1 g 775 e pg g r49 6 F4).2 otal h e 4 2 4 2 3 7 5 5 7 R/4 4 g e/ A 9 12_ J _ _ g_ _ L E L _12_ 2 ?? IL
$_ Ji_
- f. Ups tream 5 ample An-o.. .. .. .t 3es 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discherge lample Ares......last 43.e . 43.5 3 kwesstreae Samste Aree..... .tkig 41.0 - 41.5
- 4. We letter _t C;~Ha RDt Cd d
Ii I .
*k$
#C*
E 2
- W, %%
2* W Q$ f 1 l
? ? Me., ~
- R * ~, i g w g e g n y m -gl w m
y \
? D ? ? * ??
. =
3 "$ E E $ "E %: W * * . . R. " I t
~
U. S
~
O "" K . 22 @ o "1
% e ~ . . u 3 - k b b f *
.* ~ . $ , n. .. 5 m e:
I 3- - aa : -- a a -
==l w!ai g
. -- . - . . ~ -
- y
* - 1 E
- 40 SMLtts RITt!!vtD = =
3 e s' LH
*
- E I
3: i 9 M : 9 ~. ?
.f A .t. g sj = m g g m g e g e
- u
- 7 -
h e R " ". R u a
- s t -l r.
~
a B' E' s-
- 3 I ,
~I a
t E I
~
"l d.
MN h 9
~. 9 !
- C C I I. P,
. .! 3ye f N *- *
,I 9 N " " .
- N *. [* w 3, 7 ,
- = g- - ~ c ~ ~gg -- .
" l' c -
a
* :I E J.; *
- 9 "" "
- J .
I e a" na i e = g e a p g . H " * * . *. *
* . . . m f N g" % e 2 E2 22 22 * *
- 2 l k
- en a N .
I l j n, g
~
U" 2 w e 3 m N n . N
. " 22..
-m NS Y
"2 3 E
2 h l l ".'en h f 'l I W -8 8'8 m 40 SWLIP.5 RITRlWLD
- I R d
w "e
~
53 5 ~
". 93%
223 9 2 9 C
~
. 7 N*n CO3 I t E
u w NO 1WLERS dtTR!!vtD 3R C 9999 9
;RC "
9 9 9 9 g E .,,
~oa:*
4.;;
*** g g k
~ - . . _ "m . LEE I
,= . - ,
~
-i
,l sisendid is - -
d { s. = i. i ;.i]al
~
9 9 *. : :.*k , *lw 2 2 E
- E 5.El ,-- tt e .2-L Ei;
~g~l{=
- s -5 -
}t je 9 f , aea
; ., :- - T L1,hp-x- 2.f -,
-3 ss. it' :r I .
=we p- -Ly:! ta:.-
j :giEd!Ey5Esjj]i$j@+n- *
.u q.
3d4{:;j I5::'i3l;}5}::t 15 3
- 5-
_B:.
*w,
- g ZEMg.h- !
tt x e t h.- i :: jg;]23 !! tt a a
- ~~
1 $3 z: : x
- kt q;EE au.b 1
! . 6- l
I I ( Table 5 I Average Macroinvertebrate Densities Determined from Multiple Plate Samplers Collected from the Chattahoochee River near farley Nuclear Plant 19/5 - 1978 Organisms Per Square Meter Sample Period Upstreaml Discharge 2 Downstream 3 June - July, 197E 75.2 136.2 157.7 Sept. - Oct., 1975 I Nov. - Dec. ,1975 Average 1975 401 .0 18.9 165.0 375.2 10.2 173.9 328.8 14.5 167.0 I Feb. - March,1976 June, 1976 110.9 114.0 2019.0 91.6 479.1 1605.0 I , Aug. - Sept., 1976 Nov. - Dec., 1976 Average 1976 1869.6 251.7 959.3 4075.3 522.0 1682.6 1671.7 304.6 636.8 . I Feb. - March, 1977 35.5 58.1 45.9 June - July, 1977 1213.7 2708.2 613.6 I Aug. - Sept. 1J77 Nov. - Dec., 1977 Average 1977 2272.5 183.1 926.2 2822.3 392.9 1495.4 1291.2 756.4 676.8 Feb. - March, 1978 236.9 387.5 419.8 May - June, 1978 643.2 363.5 407.4 I Aug. - Sept., 1978 Oct. - Nov., 1978 Tyerage 1978 1268.4 108.6 564.3 1254.2 426.9 608.0 1471.1 291.2 647.4 - Average all years 686.3 1044.4 556.3 I I 1. 2. 3. Upstream Sample Area........CRM 44.7 - 45.2 Discharge Sample Area. . . . . . .CPJi 43.0 - 43.5 Downstream Sample Area......CRM 41.0 - 41.5 I
- I .,.
I
~
- " ' .-----a, _ 23 , j I
I . A' +
<./, -
y h4...N. - 1
- 9. ,'
s t* I 4
.,a
.P..
A
/ *
/ .
$ ,6 g
* ,:**..- \ -
> g
, s,
{ w g r s
'N, -
t, g % " e. p Q
. . . . . . . . .\ . . .
- H g
I s,
- 8 g g .. -
g g
${ -
y Q
... e W ...,...
v
~~~ .
O Cf. s-s k
<C i
w I 8 E ~ Y. lt I e I l g 4 A I I I I i ! I . ..... . . ... ..... I. ' . 8 J
I I, I hkkkkkkh\\\\\M I , _, - g w . I Y s E$ l g m
$8SANNh\%\N h :
m m. 3 I ~ p mi
- I ie b 88S h5 % \\ % \NN s __
E E -
~I*
a I
- W I s -
s= ssss I _E I ,, , , , , , . I ...... ... ...... .. ..
I indice.ted that the discharge sample area had significantly (80% C.L.) higher population densities than the upstream and downstream sample areas. I Macroinvertebrate diversity and equitability values (ibid., g Weber, 1973) were calculated from data collected during each of the sample periods. Diversity and equitability values, computed for each sample area, are presented in Tables 6 through 9. The diversity and equitability values computed from multiple-plate data indicate similar macroinvertebrate populations in each of the three se>nple areas. Average diversity values for the upstream, discharge and downstream sample areas during the four-year j study were 1.91,1.88 and 1.91, respectively. Figure 3 is a graphical presentation of population diversity values computed for each sample period during the study. While diversities were not the same in eacn of the three areas, fluctuations within each sample area followed the same general trend during the study. A comparison of diversities using a " student's "t" test indicated significant differences among the three areas within sample years. Diversity values computed for the downstream sample area were found to be i significantly greater (90% C.L.) than values computed for the upstream area during 1977. Significant differences detected during the 1978 sample year included: (1) diversities in the discharge area greater than diversities I in the downstream area (95% C.L.) and (2) diversities in the upstream area greater than diversities in the downstream area (90% C.L.). No other l significant differences (90% C.L.) were detected among the threc sample areas during each of the sample years. An analysis of diversity values using data from all sample years failed to indicate any significant difference among the three areas, even at the 60% confidence level. Equitability values computed from data collected at each sample area are presented in Tables 6 through 9. Macroinvertebrate equitability values varied ennsiderably from sea 3cn to season in each of the three sample areas. However, fluctuation in each sample area (as depicted in Figure 4 ) l
.in .
W W W M M M M M M M M M M W W W W M Table 6 Macroinvertebrate Diversity and Eco sitability Values Calculated fmm Multiple-Plate Data Obtained from the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1975 Number of Location Sample Period Taxa Organisms Collected Diversity (d) Equitability (e) Upstreaml June - July 4 14 1.99 1.25 Discharge 2 June - July 3 42 1.09 1.00 Downstream 3 June - July 6 60 1.62 0.67 Upstream Sept. - Oct. 7 146 1.83 0.71 Discharge Sept. - Oct. 7 162 1.51 0.57 Downstream Sept. - Oct. 7 149 1.57 0.57 Upstream Nov. - Dec. 3 7 1.15 1.00 Discharge Nov. - Dec. 4 5 1.92 1.25 Downstream Nov. - Dec. 3 6 1.50 1.00
- 1. Ups tream Sampl e Area . . . . . . . .CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Di scharge Sample Area. . . . . . .CRM 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Downs tream Sampl e Are a . . . . . .CRM 41.0 - 41.5
Table 7 Macroinvertebrate Diversity and Equitability Values Calculated from Multiple-Plate Data Obtained from the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1976 Number of Location Sample Period Taxa Organisms Collected D!versity (d) Equitability (e) Upstream I Feb. - March 8 42 2.50 1.00 Discharge2 Feb. - March 7 32 1.84 0.71 Downstream 3 Feb. - March 5 32 1.50 0.80 Upstream June 13 487 1.45 0.23 C Discharge June 15 848 1.09 0.20
, Downstream June 10 175 2.50 0.80 Upstream Aug. - Sept. 14 1043 1.60 0.29 Discharge Aug. - Sept. 12 2272 1.54 0.33 Downstream Aug. - Sept. 12 932 1.74 0.33 Upstream flov. - Dec. 9 70 1.81 0.56 Discha rge flov. - Dec. 14 193 1.96 0.36 Downstream Nov. - Dec. 10 152 2.03 0.50
- 1. Ups tream Sampl e Area . . . . . . . .CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area.......CRM 43.0 - 43.5 .
- 3. Downstrea:: Sample Area . . . . . .CRM 41.0 - 41.5 i
W W M MM M M M M M E M M M M M M , M M Table 8 Macroinvertebrate Diversity and Equitability Values Calculated from Multiple-Plate Data Obtained from the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1977 Number of tocation Sample Period Taxa Organisms Collected Diversity (dl Equitability (e) Upstream I feb. - March 4 14 1.73 1.00 Distharge2 Feb. - March 4 29 t.36 0.75 Doo- trez.:n 3 Feb. - March 7 17 2.42 1.00 )
- Upstream June - July 5 440 1.32 0.60 C Discharge June - July 6 740 1.28 0.50
. D ,nstream June - July 3 54 1.38 i 00 Upstream Aug. - Sept. 10 677 1.25 0.30 Discharge Aug. - Sept. 10 1560 1.56 0.40 Downstrean Aug. - Sept. 7 507 f.44 0 t3 Ups tream Nov. - Dec. 6 17 3..E5 0.83 Discharge Nov. - Dec. 15 221 2.57 0.60 Lownstream Nov. - Dec. 14 420 L21 0.42
?. Ups tream Sample Anea . . . . . . .CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Di s cha rge Sampl e Area . . . . . .CRM 43.0 - 43.5 .
- 3. Downs tream Sample Area. . . . .CRM 41.0 - 41.5
m W M M M M M M e m m W W W W M MM M Table 9 Macroinvertebrate Diversity and Equitability Values Calculated from Ptsltiple-Plate Data Obtained from the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1978 I Number of Location Sample Period Taxa Organisms Collected Diversity (d) Equitability (e) Ups tream l Feb. - March 10 40 2.72 0.90 2 Feb. - March 2.58 0.89 - Discharge 9 105 Downstream 3 Feb. - March 8 34 2.37 0.88 T: Upstream May - June 12 279 2.84 U.83
, Discharge May - June 16 171 3.14 0.75 Downstream May - June 12 124 2.84 0.83 Upstream Aug. - Sept. 8 704 1.80 0.63 Discharge Aug. - Sept. 7 695 1.63 0.57 Downstream Aug. - Sept. 7 4 09 1.50 0.57 Upstream Oct. - Nov. 13 63 2.79 0.77 Discharge Oct. - Nov. 15 238 2.96 0.73 Downstream Oct. - Nov. 13 134 2.51 0.62
- 1. Ups tream Sample Arez. . . . . . .CRM 44.7 - 45.2 ,
- 2. Di scha rge Sample Area. . . . . .CRM 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Downstream Sample Area.....CRM 41.0 - 41.5
m - a - - , m__a., ai, am.a.
- _a_. A.- __0 _.
I I . E ..... .~.. *g* e I S
. ::,5% .
R E *
, s
'.,s l3
, , 4 N. g - -
, : . 4 3 g / -
- s. :
e s* y . . . .? ~.. . ,.'. s~ ' ' E a - g g '.' 4 o I N *s**.**\l N*W t g *
- o my -
g E WE g e- ' A E g " gi . s,v...
- c. .
4 w
*J A
E.- Wm o e N*. *
'. t I m o g t ' . . * *' .\ '. '
s w O a*. ' . ,,.*',,
~
R
%*%. 4 E y % .. W., , '
e M *
%, ~
' R m l 4 5 E .
W . n j l * '
' k 4 ~
t l l l. '. 4 5 , i ' ' 3 4 E . e : : ,
"'"8 d * *
- O 3 m"3 waaw >> & 4 ed We ee LI 15 -
r; u - v FIGURE 4 EQUITABILITY OF MACROINUERTERRATE POPULATIONS e isn-isn s s.s e u scomm t 3I90ewet a _ _ _ _ _ N* s.ps . T . n .
\
E . .. s. . . .
* \'..
. */ \
p u . .,. - -
. . 5.- \
. f,p ',
n ., .
, -g \ .. /
r e.n ./ . . //
'. \. /
m ,
* ,/ '.
. t
/ \ ./ .
s *. .. g ..
/ ./ -
.)*rs '
j ,1 j t
' '.].
\
. 1
,1l '.,
\.
i e.s _ . g .
~.
E . . / : \ p s '. \
- l ., .' ---
v '. /
\ __ -
. e
' ~
" e.as _
a i L U E I I I I I. I l l l i l I I p-77 se-n 3-7s s-Ts e-n s-w t-w so-w se-n 2-7s e-w s-n ts-7s 2-n 7-77 SAMPLE PERIODS
.._..ma-. , _ . .
followed the sarre g2neral trend during the four-year study. Equitability values computed for each of the three sample areas were compared using the
" student's t" test to detennine if any tignificant differences existed within sample years. The results of the previously mentioned test indicated only one significant difference an,ong the three sample areas.
Equitability values computed for the upstream sample area were found to be significantly greater (i,0% C.L.) than values computed for the discharge area daring the 1978 sample year. An analysis of equitability values using data from all sample periods indicated significantly greater (95% C.L.) values occurred in the upstream area as compared to the discharge area. Conclusions The collection of aquatic _ macroinvertebrates from three sample stations on the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant indicated considerable fluctuations in population parameters throughout the four-year rtudy. Differences in macroinvertebrate density, diversity and equitability values betveen the three stations, during the four s. ample years, were few and sporatic i.' occurrence. Differences between the three areas, based on quarterly values obtained from all sample years, indicated significantly higher densities (80% C.L.) in the dischcrge area as compared to the upstream and downstream sample areas. The upstream sample area had significantly higher (95% C.L.) equitability values than the discharge sample area when values for all sample periods were compared. It is concluded that differentes in density, diversity and equitability values associated with macroinvertebrate populations in the three sample areas do not indicate any change in community structure between the three sample areas during the four-year study. However, the data collected does indicate a seasanal fluctuation in comunity structure that is shared by all sample areas. i 1 _Sampitg and Analytical Procedures for Water Quality Studies. Location of satupling stations, and depthe sampled, on the Chattahoochee Liver at the Farley Nuclear Plant site are given below (see Figure 5 ). Ltention Depth sampled, In* *
- 1. Above intahn area, CRht 44.7-45.2 0,1,2 and 4
- 1. Within totake canal, CRht 43. 8 0,1,2 and 4
- 2. Discharge plume, CRht 43.0-43.5 0,1,2 nnd 4
- 3. Lower reach recovery tone, CRht 41.0-41.5 0.1.2 and 4
'Sarnple collected approximately 50 feet in front of intake screen. ,
**1nitially it was planned to routinely collect samples from 8 m depth. Ilowever.
from the beginnin3 of sampling it was evident that this area of the Chattahoochee River was subject to sand seditnentation so great that only a 4 - 6 m water depth exicted throughout the area for the entire study period. Water samples were collected on the following dates: Location Date s * ,
- 1. Above intake area, CRht 44.7-45.2. b-2-75, 8-14-75,11-25-75, 2-25-76, 4-22-76, 8-25-76, 11-10-76, 2-10-77, 4-20-77, 7-6-77, 6-4-77, 9-8-77, 10-4-77, 11-1-77, 12-1-77, 1-4-78, 2-15-78, 3-6-78, 3-30-78, 5-15-78. 5-30-78, 6-29-78, 8-1-78, 8-30-78, 9-28-78, 10-31-78, 12-5-78.
I. Within intake canal, CRLt 43. B. 11-10-76, 2-10-77, 4-20-77 7-6-77, 8-4-77, 9-B-77, 10-4-77, 11-1-77, 12- 1-77, 1-4-7 8, 2- 15-78, 3-6-78, 3-30-78, 6-15-78, 6-30-78, 6-29-78, 8-1-78, 8-30-78, 0-28-78, 10-31-78, 12-6-78.
- 2. Discharge plume, CRh! 43.0-43.5. 5-2-75, 8-14-75, 11-25-75, 2-25-76, 4-22-76, 8-25-76, 11-10-76, 2-10-77. 4-20-77, 7-6-77, 8-4-77, 9-8-77, 10-4-77, 11-1-77, 12-1-77, 1-4-78, 2-15-78, 3-0-78, 3-30-78 5-15-7 8, b -J0-78. 6-29-7 8, 8-1-78, 8-30-7 8, 9-2 8-78. 10-31-78, 12-5-7 9.
- 18
I Andrews Lock L Dam l'igure 5
. CRM 40 Schematic Diagram of Chattahoochee River Near the Joseph M. Tarley Nuclear Plant
. with Indicated Locations of Water-Plankton Sampling Stations 1 . CitM 45 I
,i I f.CRM44 CRM 43. 8 w i PIANT INTAK1:
CRM 43. 5 - PIANT DISCllARGE CRM - Chattahoochee 111ver Miles
- CRM 40 I (1) Sampling station upstream from intake canal.
(!) S ampling station in intake canal. I' (2) S ampling station below plant discharge. (3) Sampling station dowtatreem from discharge . , C RM 42 structure. I I l CRM 41. 3
'I u I
I I I
. g
I . Location Date s
- lI
- 3. Lower reach of recovery zone, CRM 41.0-41.5. 5-2-75, 8-14-75, 11-25-75, 2-25-76. 4-22-76, 8-25-76, 11-10-76, 2-10-77, 4-20-77,
.l 7-6-77, 8-4-77, 9-8-77, 10-4-77, 11-1-77, 12-1-77, 1-4-78, 2-15-78, 3-6-78, 3-30-78, 5-15-78, 6-30-78, 6-29-78, 8-1-78, 6-30-78, 9-28-78, 10-31-78, 12-5-78.
- An attempt was made during the last 18 months of sampling to collect the sam-pies during the week in which the first of each month occurred, llowever, on some occasions high river waters caused a few days delay in collecting samples.
I All water samples for chemical analyses were collected by a submersible l pump and bose armagement and stored in Nalgene plastic containerr., placed in ice chests and returned to the laboratory as rapidly as possible for analysis. - ,I
- I lI I
- I lI il
!I lI fI' l I Analytical methods employed for water quality determinations are summa-P rized below: Parametor hiethod llet I Temperature Thermistor 1 (p-280) pli Glass electrode 1 (p-230) Turbid!.ty Turbid; meter 1 (p-295) I Light penetration Submersible photocoll Secchi disc i i Conductance Wheatstone bridge 1 (p-275) Dissolved oxygen Electrode 1 (p- 50) Free carbon dioxide Electrometrio titration 2 (p- 92) . Alkalinity Eleotrometric titration 2 (p- 52) Chlorides Speitt0c 100 electrode N as am2nonia Spectile ton electt ode 1 (p-105) I N as nitrites Colorimetric 1 (p-215) N as nitrates - Cadm;am reduction 1 (p-201) P, orthophosphate Coloritnotric 1 (p-249) I Total bydrolyr.able P bulfuric acid digestion 1 (p-249) hietals Atomic absorption 1 (p- 78) Total organic carbon Carbon analyzer 1 I 1. National Environtnental llesearch Cot.ter. 1974. hiethods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. U.S. Environmental Prottetton Agency. l Washington, D. C. 298 p.
- 2. Ameriena Pubtl. alth Association. 1971. Standard .*.tethods for the I Examination of Water and Wastewater. 13th ed. Amer. Pub. Ilealth Assoc.
New York. 874 pp. I
l I l I Light Tranemission in Waters I Light transmission into water at all sampling stations on all sampling dates was measured by secchi disc readings and on occasima by determination of the point of 99 percent extinction of surfact light intensity. Summaries of I the secchi disc visibility data are given in Table 10 . l It is evident from these data that visibility into the water showed slight variations from station to station on a given sampling date, but variations in I the visibility into the water between sampling dates was much mc,re pronounced. l The limited visibliity into waters in this reach of the river was partially the result of the high degree of turbulence in river waters as a result of genera 4 I tion releases by Walter F. George Dam and the regercration of this turbulence as thesa released waters passed through Andrews Dam. Plus the fact that nor-mal water depths were relatively shallow throughout the sample area (ranging I from 4 to 6 int.ters on a majority of sampling dates). It is also noted that the waters released by the Walter F. George Dam contained more phytoplankton (which will reduce visibility into water) than would normally be encountered in a Southeastern river. Further evidence that turbidity of the Chattahoochee 111ver waters within this reach of the river varied only slightly betwen stations on a given sampling day, but varied significantly between sampling dates was provided by measure-ments of Jackson Turbidity Units (JTU'c) and suspended solids in the laboratory. These measurement data are summarized in Tables 11 & 12 , respectively, and are in general agreement with the Secchi disc visibility information. t
s L Table 10 r L Secchi dise visiblitty Into waters of the Chattahoochee River between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978. r L Station Date 1 2 3 1 i em 5-2-75 34.0 34.0 34.0 -- 34.0 6-14 63.0 65.0 73.0 -- 67.0 11-25 93.0 101.0 93.0 -- 97.0 2-25-76 77.0 -- - -- 77.0 4-22 51.0 49.0 49.0 -- 49.7 8-25 84.0 88.0 90.0 -- 87.3 109.0 l 11-10 2-10-77 109.0 67.0 109.0 90.0 109.0 75.0 80.0 78.0 4-20 -- -- -- -- -- 7-6 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 8-4 86.0 86.0 86.0 85.0 85.5 9-8 75.0 95.0 95.0 85.0 87.5' I 10-4 11-1 100.0 106.0 95.0 106.O _ 95.0 106.0 85.0 107.0 93.7 106.2 12-1 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 1-4-78 110.0 105.0 100.0 100,0 103.7 1 50.0 53.0 51.0 51.5 2-15 52.0 g 3-3 45.0 4E. 0 48.0 46.0 46.7 3 3-30 57.0 60.0 62.0 62.0 60.2 5-15 55.0 50.0 70.0 55.0 53.3 5-30 65.0 70,0 70.0 65.0 67.5 1 6-29 92.0 90.0 90.0 85.0 89.2 8-1 80.0 80.0 75.0 70.0 75.O 8-30 92.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 I 9-28 10-31 115.0 100.0 115.0 95.0 130.0 95.0 110.0 95.0 117.5 96.2 12-5 93.0 90.0 90.0 87.0 90.O i 79.1 77.6 78.3 79.7 79.6 I (
. 23 .
.I l '
Table 11 hiean turbidities (JTU's) of waters from the 'Chattahoochee Illwr between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978. I Date 1 2 Station JTU's 3 I i 5-2-75 40.0 41.6 39.4 --
- 40. D 8-14 13.4 12.8 12.7 -- 13.0 11-25 10.6 11.2 10.3 -- 10.7 2-25-76 12.8 12.6 it. 5 --
12.6 4-22 28.5 27.5 27.6 -- 27.9 8-25 12.8 12.3 10.3 -- 11.7 11-10 8. 7 8.1 7. 3 7. 6 8. 0 2-10-77 15.0 14.3 13.7 14.3 14.3 4-20 23.3 22.1 22.1 21.1 22.2 7-6 6. 4 7. 5 6, 8 5.1 6. 5 8-4 9. 8 9. 7 9. 5 11.2 10.0 9-8 17.3 10.5 10.5 10.7 12.3
- 10-4 11.5 10.5 12.3 9.1 10.9 11-1 12.3 10.0 8. 3 7. 6 9, 6 12-1 22.3 20.0 18.1 19.7 20.0 1-4-78 7. 3 8. 5 7. 5 8.0 7. 8 2-15 42.5 39.3 42.0 41.8 41.4 3-6 32.8 32.3 34.5 32.8 33.1 I 3-30 5-15 19.8 27.7 17.9 27.8 17.1 28.3 17.1 28.0 18.0 27.9 5-30 25.3 24.8 20.8 23.7 25.2 I 6-29 d-1
- 12. 8 13.4
- 9. 0 13.1 9.0 14.0 10.7 12.5 10.3 13.3 8-30 10.2 10.4 7.1 6.7 8. 7 I 9-28 10-31 4.4
- 8. 2
- 4. 8 10.2
- 5. 9
- 5. 4 4.6 5.7
- 5. 0
- 7. 5
- 12-5 8. 4 6. 8 0. 8 9. 0 8. 3 1
R 16.7 16,6 15.9 15.6 16,2 Coef. of variation 9. 6 Depth O 16.5 15.7 15.9 14.9 15.8 lI 1 2 16,9 16.8 16.I 16.2 16.0 16.1 14.9 15.4 10.I 16.2 16.4 18.6 16.2 20.8 17.3 I 4 ! 6-8 -- 14.0 12.2 1.4 10.0 l l' . I .u.
I Table 12 Menn suspended matter concentrations in waters from the Chattahcochee River between mile 41. 0 sw$ 44. 7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978 Station I- Date 1 2 3 I i mg/l I 5-2-75 8-14 11-25 10.50 14.25 14.02 10.58 15.05 13.99
- 12. 66
- 15. 12 13.95 11.25 13.99 13.92 I 2-25-76 4-22 13.78 13.97 12.93 13.56 9-25 17.09 16,92 13.85 -- 15.80 11-10 12.75 12.82 12.99 13,15 12.70 2-10-77 16.84 17.13 17.04 14.01 16.20 4-20 19.69 18.74 17.69 18.35 18.62 7-6 11.11 13.88 11. 69 7.18 11.21 8-4 10.75 10.65 12.73 11.35 11.38 9-8 19.13 18.27 17.39 21.18 19.29 +
10-4 15.13 17.92 23.32 17.39 18.51 11-1 20.77 17.64 15.88 18.16 18.16 12-1 37.48 35.84 39.46 27.76 35.63 1-4-78 8.99 31.58 18.13 -13.07 17.94 2- 15 14.12 15.98 15.80 17.19 15.79 3-6 25.11 25.56 27.35 28.07 26.75 3-30 21.07 22.26 19.87 24.55 22.16 6-15 26.88 26.55 28.02 25.21 26.78 5-30 22.03 24.78 28.86 30.52 26.29 6-29 15.13 f2.71 13.01 12.42 13.38 8-1 27.54 30.97 28.81 34.21 30.22 6-30 8.51 12.63 11.93 10.85 10.99 9-28 8.12 9.45 11.53 7. 9 B 9.35 10-31 9.13 20.82 11.89 9.98 13.16 12-5 10.18 8.56 11.42 10.84 10.25 I 5 16.81 18,84 18.05 18.55 18.00 Coef. of variation 28.5 Depth, m 15.73 16.52 16.99 18.24 16.77 I O 1 16.61 16.66 19.21 18.44 17.69 2 17.41 10,47 17.96 17.80 18.18 17.51 23.02 18.04 21.88 19.61 I 4 l 6-8 -- 20.18 28.20 13.10 19,65 I l 25 - I E _ _ . .
I There was no evidence from either the Secchi dise visibility data, the JTU, or suspended solids data that the discharp from the Farley Nuclear Plaul caused any chang in the sediment or phytoplankton loading of river waters in this reach of the Chattahoochee 111ver. I I I . I I I lI 1 I I l 1 l l
I I Total Organic Carbon Concentrations Analyses for total organic carbon (TOC) determinations were made on a majority of the samples of water collected from the C'anttahoochee River at tim Farley Nuclear Plant site. A summary of the dates and stations sampled, as well as mean TOC concentration in the water is presented in Table 13. A sum-mary of the mean particulate carbon content of these same water samples is given in Table 14 , and a summary of the mean total carbon content of these I water samples is given in Table 15. . From these data summaries it is evident that TOC, particulate C, and total C concentrations in these river waters varied within very limited ranges - I between r'stions on a given sampling date, but wider variations existed between different sampling dates. No real evidence exists in these data accumulated between May,1975 and I December,1978 that indler.ted real differences in concentrations of these C forms associated with stations on a given arJaple date. Thus, there is no evi-dence of any change in C concentration in the Chattahoochee River that can be attributed to the discharge from the Farley Nuclear Plant. Information on the ash-free (organic matter) content in these water samples is given In Table 16 . I I l' l -u. 7
I Thle 13 Mean total organic carbon concentrations in waters from the Chattahoochee River between mile 41.0 and 44.7 for various dates from 1975 through 1978. I Date 1 2 Statlon 3 I i
.9MI 5-2-70 4.90 7.03 6.02 -- 5.98
- 8- 14 4.87 4.79 5.07 --
4.91 11-25 4.27 4.11 4.94 -- 4.44 I 2-25-76 4-22 7.01 8.71
& 48 8.03 5.74 7.61 6.86 8.12 8-25 - -- - -- -
I 11-10 2-10-77 7.47 7.98 7.54 8.23 6.73 8.46
- 9. 64 10.21 7.43 8.74 4-20 6.80 6.34 6.40 6.57 6.53 I 7-6 8-4 6.51 6.62 6.15 6.96 6.57 ,
g 9-8 6.60 6.55 6.89 6.47 6.64 y 10-4 -- -- - -- - 11-1 7.20 6.78 6.60 6. 44 6.77 12-1 6.71 6.95 6.30 6.55 6.63 I 1-4-78 2-15 5.86 6.35 5.65 6.35 5.41 6.54 5.48 7.01 5.60 6.56
'j 3-6 6.70 J.05 6.17 6.36 6.32 5 3-30 7.27 7.21 6.99 7.14 7.15 5-15 -- - -- -- -
5-30 7.95 8.88 7.16 6.77 7.22 I 6-20 8-1 7.47 8.61 9.20 8.07 9.28 8.16 9.28 8.11 8.78 8.26 I 8-30 7.18 6.35 6.05 6.52 9-28 7.30 6.79 7.46 7.16 7.21 10-31 7.34 7.51 7.23 6.86 7.26 12-5 6.63 6.73 6.76 6. 67 6.70 x 6.85 6.80 6.72 7. 19 6.86 Coef. of variation 11.0 Depth, m i O 2 1 6.83 7.12 6.78 6.78 6.89 6.74 6.71 6.92 6.55 7.47 6.93
- 7. 12 6.90 6.97 6.78 4 6.69 6.80 6.69 7.32 6.78 8 6-8 -- -- -- -- --
I'
Table 14 Mean enrbon content of particulate matter collected from water samples frora the Chattahoochee River between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 I throuch 1978. Station , a Date 1 2 3 I x
' me/1 5-2-75 .849 .793 .769 -- .800 8-14 1.766 1.907 2.247 -- 1.957 l . 11-25 2.495 2.050 1.752 -- 2.099 2-25-76 1.019 1.238 .907 --
1.055 8-25 2.180 1.965 1.675 -- 1.940 11-10 1.435 1.282 1.338 1.760 1. 3 83 2-10-77 1. 5 12 1.885 1.897 1.812 1.769 4-20 1.585 1.238 1.298 1.218 . 1.284 i 7-6 1.570 1.435 1.320 1. :17 1.397 8-4 1. 5 14 1.570 1.670 1.904 1.645 9-8 1.838 1.709 1.388 1.683 1.650 sa 10-4 1.463 1.570 1.853 1.560 1. 6 15 *
, 11-1 1.510 1.463 1.378 1.387 1.437 12-1 1.655 1.167 1.315 1.303 1.346 1-4-78 1.120 1.338 1.185 1.243 1.211 l 2-15 1.128 1.210 1.235 1.168 1. It,4 3-6 1.248 1.140 1.145 1.388 1.230 3-30 1.593 1.543 1.385 1.570 1.522 5-15 1.823 1.867 1.604 1.537 1. 7 12 5-30 1.613 1.557 1.711 1.619 1.625 6-29 1.594 1.416 1.092 1.277 1.349 8-1 1.599 1.544 1.637 1. 633 1.603 8-30 1.507 1.149 1. 1 04 1. 10 1 1.223 9-28 1 '34 1.064 1. 2 65 1.104 1.150 10-31 .51 1.733 1.1S5 1.242 1.328 R 1. .4 1.483 1.409 1 426 1.461
$ Coef. of variation 18.8 Depth, m 1 0 1.605 1.441 1.381 1.348 1.452 1 1.415 1. 3 85 1.370 1.409 1.394 2 1.469 1.484 1.<40 1.482 1.469 4 1,557 1.641 1. +.7 1,517 1.542 6-B -- -- - -- --
I
Table 15 Mean total carbon concentrations in waters from the Chattahriochee Ittver be-i tween mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978. Station , Date 1 2 3 I x mg/l 5-2-75 6.512 8.637 7.565 -- 7.572 8-14 7.184 7.080 7.345 - 7.201 11-25 6.508 6.368 7. 155 -- 6.676 1 2-25-76 8.800 8.275 8.350 -- 8.475 11.066 8-25 11. '.'25 10.900 10.575 - 12-10 10.100 10.100 9.300 12.100 10.007 I 2-10-77 4-20 9.825 8.825 10.075 8.300 10.333 8.375 12.050 8.475 10.587 8.494 i 8-4 9-8 11-1 9.180 9.150 9.975 9.433 9.025 9.325 8.850 9.325 8.950 9.633 8.900 9.000 9.233 9.113 9.333 12-1 8.750 9.050 8.300 8.600 8.680' w 1-4-78 8.000 7.625 7.375 7.375 7.594 ? 2 - 15 7.850 7.750 7.950 8.350 7.975 8 3-6 8.350 7.625 7.700 7.875 7.888 3-30 8.000 8.725 8.550 8.725 8.725 h' 5-30 10.800 9.325 9,450 9,200 9.727 6-29 10.025 11,500 11.550 11.600 11,140
> [A 8-1 11.360 10,575 10.725 10.550 10.835 8-30 10.29.5 9.250 8.850 --
9.41' I s 9-28 12-5
-31 10.075 9,200 8.200 9,500 9.325 8.200 10,250 8.900 8.250 9.900 8.633 8.133 9, 14 9.040 8.200 2
C x 9.114 8.952 8.852 9.223 9.017 i Depth. m 0 9.282 Coef, of variation S. 4 8.930 8.861 9.544 9. 12 6 9.316 9.050 9.020 8.969 9.098 fs 7 8.874 8.700 9.212 8.919 2 8.958 4 8.894 8.955 8.820 9.100 8.907 6-8 -- -- -- - -- t E' I Table 16 liean organte matter (ash-free residue) concentrations in waters from the Chattahoochee River between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1977 throuch 1978. Station Date 1 2 3 I x mg/l _ 7-6-77 5.19 5.12 4.83 4.88 5.01 8-4 4.93 4.71 5.16 6.71 5.30 9-8 4.95 3.90 3.76 4. 11 4.18 10-4 4.03 4.44 5.06 4.10 4.43 11-1 4.53 4.42 4.03 4.43 4.35 1 12-1 4.74 4.23 4.32 4.25 4.39 1-4-78 3.64 4.33 3.82 4, 15 3.98 I 2-15 3-6 3-30 4.13 4.65 4.83 5.37 4.43 4.59 5.43 4.E9 4.49
- 4. 83 4.88 4.75 4.91 4,64 4,66 -
5-15 4.83 5.59 4.97 5.34 5.20 5-30 5.64 8.15 6.36 5.95 6.56 6-29 4.52 3.81 3.88 3.56 3.96 8-1 5.21 4.77 5.36 5. 14 5.12 6-30 3.62 3.37 3.24 3.37 3.40 9-28 3.07 3.12 2.96 3.11 3.06 I 10-31 12-5 2.83 2.68 4.95 2.46 3.21 2.85 2.92 '
- 2. 85 3.51 2.71 ic 4.44 4.67 4.44 4.52' 4.52 Coef. of variation 21. 7 Depth, m 0 4.38 4.16 4.37 4.30 4.31 1 4.49 4. 3 f. 4.43 4.45 4.44 2 4.48 4.49 4.28 4.70 4.49 1 4 4.42 5.74 4.66 4.91 4.90 6-8 -- -- -- -- --
1 I I I' g -n-
hiacro- and Micronutrients in Source and Receiving Bodies of Water. ( The concentration of ortho and ortho + particulate phosphorus and total nitrogen (including ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate forms)in samples of water collected on each sampling date are given in Tables 17 ,18, and 19 . It is noted that for a majority of the sampling period the total nitrogen concentration was adequate to excessive while the ortho phosphorus concentration appeared to l be limiting for maintaining anything greater than a moderate population of phyto-plankton. The 24-hour flows of ortho and ortho + particulate phosphorus for each sampling date are given in Table 20 Dat- on ammonia N and nitrate N concentrations at this site z.re given in Tables 21 and 22 - The micrountrients (including calcium, magnesium, potassium, iron, and
. manganese) concentratiocs in the filtered waters frem the Chattahoochee River and in the removed suspended matter on varicus sampling dates are given in Table 23 The presence of moderate concentrations of calcium and iron (in-cluding those quantities found in suspended matter) in these waters was probably responsible for the reduced quantities of phosphorus generally present. All elements included in the macronutrient list were present in sufficient quantities at all stations and sampling dates to support a greater population of phytoplankton than was found to exist.
Concentrations of some heavy metals (including zinc, chromium, cadmium, copper, lead, and nickel) in water samples from the Chattahoochee River at Far-ley Nuclear Plant are given in Table 24 None of these elements were present in sufficient concentrations to exert any detrimental effects upon the biological l l community.
1 Table 17 Mean concentrattans of ortho P in waters from the Chattahoochee River between I mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978 Station , Date 1 2 3 I x mg/l I 5-2-75 8-14
.023
.010
.030
.011
.026
.010
.026
.010 11-25 .034 .036 . 04 5 --
.039 2-25-76 .064 .065 .060 -- .063 4-22 .028 .029 .048 --
.035
.063 I 8-25 .003 .086 .045 --
11-10 .065 .106 .074 .052 .077 2-10-77 .103 .104 .100 .128 .109
.088 .047 .074 I 4-20 7-6 8-4
.094
.119
.082
.068
.095
.072
.143
.096
.148
.093
. 12 5
.086 ,
9-8 .048 .047 .070 . 096 .052 l .065 .076 .056 .065 .066 0 10-4 11-1 .082 .095 .079 .162 .101 I 12-1 1-4-78 2-15
.036
.034
.029
.069
.032
.028
.045
.031
.025
.055 036
.030
.051
.033
.028 3-6 .018 .036 . 006 .032 .028 3-30 .010 .009 .016 .013 .012 5-15 .027 .020 .025 .019 .023 I 5-30 6-29 8-1
.022
.020
.286
.019
.023
.226
.022
.021
.237 030
.030
.255
.023
.023
.253 I ...
8-30 9-28 10-31
.028
.022
.011
.020
.022
.010
.073
.025
.012 025
.028
.011
.037
.023
.011 12-5 .010 .019 .034 .010 .019
- i .055 055 .056 .065 .057 Coef. of variation 45.7 Depth, m 0 .058 .053 .067 .062 .060 1 .060 .057 .054 .061 .058 2 059 .051 .049 .071 .057 4 .046 .056 .055 .075 .054 6-8 -- .015 .020 .023 .021 I
I ; Table 18 Mean concentrations of ortho + particulate phospborus in waters from the Chatta-hoochee River between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978. Station I Date 1 2 3 mg/l I R 5-2-75 .023 .030 .026 --
.026 8-14 .036 .039 .038 --
.037 11-23 .034 .036 .045 -- .038 2-25-76 .077 .085 .063 -- .074 4-22 .041 .045 .063 --
.050 8-25 .278 .275 .264 -- .272 11-10 .259 .497 .269 .254 329 2-10-77 .304 .301 .317 .341 .316 4 20 .203 .189 .233 .231 .215 7-6 302 .325 .373 .378 .342 8-4 .310 .284 .303 .323 .306 9-8 .164 .207 .164 .192 .181 -
10-4 .195 .187 .169 .154 .177 11-1 .239 .262 .228 .327 .260 12-1 .258 .260 .238 .235 .249 1-4-78 .134 .154 .141 .139 . 142 1 2-15 .251 .248 .241 .252 .248 3-6 .088 .196 .190 .214 .172 3-30 .180 ,194 .216 .142 .182 5-15 .404 .420 .393 .406 .406 5-30 .509 .645 .491 .450 .528 I ' 6-29 8-1
.088
.435
.091
.359
.104
.392
.087
.421
. 09 3
.403 8-30 .168 .153 .198 .166 .172 I 9-28 10-31
.146
.159
.142
.313
. 156
.130
.155
. 198
. 15 0
. 17 3 12-5 .010 .019 .034 .009 .019 i .197 .218 . 199 .245 .211 Coef of variation 26.3 Depth, m
.180 .237 . 211 .243 .215 I O 1
2
.203
.200
.211
.213
.204
.198
.235
.249
.212
.213 4 .202 .213 .198 .238 .207
.080 .253 .163 5 6-8 -- .044 I
I Table 19 Mean total N concentrations in waters from the Chattahoochee River between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978 I Date 1 2 Station 3 med I i 5-2-75 .836 .899 . 815 -- 849 8-14 .859 .792 .753 --
.801 11-25 .605 .574 .583 .587 I
2-25-76 .597 .570 .447 --
.531 4-22 1.128 1.106 1.210 --
1.148 8-25 .579 .704 .217 -- .478 8 11-10 .682 .600 .733 .471 .643 2-10-77 .916 .987 1.000 1.037 . 9 64 4-20 1.255 1.209 1.215 1.108 1.197 I 7-6 8-4
.601 1.204
.560 1.187
.557 1.166
.504 1.184
.558 1.186 9-8 1.164 1.180
- I 10-4 11-1 1.251 1.266 1.002 1.207
.903 1.154 1.179
.994
- 1. 140 1.255
.984 1.225
.969 1.449 I 12-1 1-4-78 2-15 1.562 1.065 1.421 1.302 1.111 1.452 1.436
.992 1.470 1.206 1.471 1.437 1.093 1.453 3-6 I 3-30 5-15 1.414 1.622
.557 1.522 1.648
.507 1.880 1.662
.519 1.594
- 1. 646
.487 1.603 1.644
. 5 17 I 5-30 6-29 8-1
.551
.300
.070
.519
.415
.081
.571
.388
.091
.575
.374
.075
.553
.393
.079 I 8-30 9-28 10-31
.258
.243
.082
.305
.246
.069
.300
.242
.057
.328
.225
. 14 1
.296
.240
.083 12 -5 .573 .651 643 .670 .631 i .820 .815 .799 .879 .823 Coef, of variation 11.9 Depth, m 0 .798 .821 .844 .891 .835 1 .835 .838 .834 .847 .838 2 .872 .825 .797 .866 .839 l 4 .838 .839 .841 1.176 .867 l 5 6-8 --
.644 .333 .264 .329 l
lI I Table 20
+
t Pounds per day per square mile of drainage area of ortho P and total P trans-ported by the Chattaboochee river past the Farley Nuclear Plant for each s_ampling date. Date Flow x ortho P ortho P R total P total P cfs conc. flow cone, flow I mg/l 2 lbs/m / day mg/l Ibe /m2/ day 5-2-75 13,000 .026 .219 .026 .219 I 8-14 11-25 13,125 13.416
.010
.039
.085
.340
.037
.039
.317 340 2-25-76 15,980 .063 .656 .074 772 I 4-22 15,342 .035 .352 .050 .500 8-25 7,423 .063 .304 .272 1.314 10,438 .077 .525 .329 2.242 I 11- 10 2-10-77 4-20 8,898 18,654
. 103
.074
.631
.901
.316
.215 1.831 2.616
- 5,311 .125 .434 .342 1.185 I 7-6 8-4 9-8 7,679 6,301
.086
.052
.430
.214
.306
.181 1.529
.746 5,875 .066 .253 .177 .679 I 10-4 11-1 12-1 16,211 11,232
.101
.051 1.068
.375
.260
.249 2.747 1.824 31,678 .033 .681 .142 2.929 I 1-4-78 2-15 3-6 18,375 23,271
.028
.028
.337
. 427
.248
.172 2.974 2.607 13,006 .182 1.544 I 3-30 5-15 5-30 18.379 6,850
. 0 12
.023
.023
.101
.275
. 131
.406
.528 4.866 3.015 6,086 .091 .093 .370 I 6-29 8-1 8-30 13,852 7,679 023
.253
.037 2.285
.185
.403
.172 3.640
.859 I 9-28 10-31 12-5 5,979 4,527 5,311
.023
.011
. 0 19
.089
.033
.065
.150
.173
.019
.584
.511
.065 I
I E i- ,
l Table 21 s hiean ammonta N concentrations in waters from Chattahoochee River betwee,n, mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978. Station Date 1 2 3 I i mg/l N 5-2-75 .680 .705 .645 -- .077 8-14 .119 .086 .073 -- .093 11-25 .157 .132 .136 -- .142 2-25-76 .031 .018 0 -- .015 4-22 .659 .649 .757 --
.688 8-25 .526 .646 .223 -- .487 11-10 .436 .351 .485 .210 .393 2-10-77 .521 .621 .623 .660 .605 4-20 .776 .745 .726 .624 .718 7-6 .509 .445 .415 .392 .443 8-4 1.002 .987 .979 .972 987 9-8 1.076 1.035 1.036 1.006 1.041 -
30-4 1.055 .985 .939 1.020 .998 11-1 .848 .755 833 .833 .816 12-1 1.054 .766 .910 .928 .919 1-4-78 .563 .563 471 .679 .569 2-15 1.218 1.251 1.254 1.252 1.243 3-6 1.023 1.140 1.484 1.212 1.215 3-30 1.343 1.356 1.361 1.364 1.356 5 15 .140 .102 103 .080 .106 5-30 .042 .014 040 .059 .037 6-29 .101 .101 .109 .075 098 8-1 032 .030 .032 028 .030 8-30 . 128 .152 .149 .163 .147 9-26 .178 ,166 .160 ,148 .164 10-31 .045 .058 034 .093 .055 12-5 .226 .276 .248 .271 .253
~
.536 .525 .529 .614 .545 Coef. of variation 16.5 i Depth m 0 .499 .516 .535 .615 .535 1 .538 .533 .544 569 .544 2 .566 .524 .503 .583 .542 4 544 .529 .534 .842 .561 6 -- .037 .067 0 .030
_-8 n
Table 22 Menn nitrate N concentrations in waters from the Chattahgochee River between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978.
- =
Station , Date 1 2 3 I x mg/l N 5-2-75 .144 .181 .157 -- 160 6-14 .734 .725 . 688 -- .717 11-25 .444 .439 .445 --
.443 2-25-76 .555 .541 .549 -- .548 4-22 .464 452 ,449 -- 454 8-25 .050 055 .087 -- .064 11-10 .240 .240 .242 .254 .242 2-10-77 .386 .358 .367 .369 .370 4-20 .469 .455 .450 .479 .471 7-6 .085 . 119 .136 .106 .109 8-4 .194 .192 ,178 .203 .191 9-8 .173 . 12 7 .114 .133 .137 .
10-4 .204 .216 .236 .228 .220 11-1 .145 .139 .154 .144 . 14 6 12-1 .502 530 .524 .5 17 .518 1-4-78 .494 541 .514 .519 .517 2-15 . 19 6 .194 .211 .212 .203 3-6 .383 374 .390 .372 .380 3-30 .275 .287 .296 .278 .284 5- 15 .406 .395 .406 .397 .401 5-30 .506 .504 .529 . 5 14 .513 6-29 .288 .308 .277 .296 .292 8-1 .035 .048 .056 .045 .045 8-30 .128 .152 .149 .163 .147 9-28 .059 .074 .076 .070 .070 10-31 003 0 .002 0 .001 12-5 .341 .369 .289 . 3 94 .372 It .292 .299 .299 .277 .293 Coef. of variation 7.1 Depth, m 0 .292 .299 .304 .268 .292 1 .291 .298 .303 . 2 68 .192 2 .300 .296 .288 .276 .291 4 .287 .303 .301 .327 .300 6-8 -- -- --
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M mM y Table 23 Concentrations of macro- and micro-elements in Chattahoochee River waters and its suspended matter between mile 41.0 and 44.7 on given dates from 1975 to 1978. Date Sta. Ca Mg K Fe Mn II2 0 SM 1I2 0 SM II2 0 SM II2 0 SM II2 0 SM mg/l 8-14-75 1 1.83 .042 2.GG .078 .81 . 010 . 022 .263 .026 .020 2 1.87 .049 2.82 .082 .8G .013 0 .358 .021 .025 3 1.78 .042 2.42 .081 1.18 .021 .036 .297 0 .019 it 1.83 .044 2. G3 .080 .95 .015 .019 .306 .01G 021 11-25-75 1 2.24 021 3.04 .028 .73 .020 0 .303 .007 .049 '$ 2 2.00 .009 3.06 .034 .69 .030 0 .313 .015 .058 3 2.19 .014 2.91 .039 .92 .008 . 030 .308 . 006 .051 R 2.14 .015 3.00 .034 .85 019 .010 .308 .009 .053 4-20-77 1 2.77 .024 2.05 .123 1.17 .059 .345 . 67 1 .015 .081 2 2.72 .020 1.98 . 100 1.17 .059 .461 .622 0 .073 3 2.G5 .02G 1.91 .100 1.23 .0G8 .4G0 .596 . 014 .074 I 2.81 .030 1. 8G .094 1.27 .056 .274 .713 .007 .074 2 2.74 .025 1.95 .104 1.21 .061 .385 650 .009 .075 8-4-77 1 3.80 .073 3.51 .057 2.71 .012 .007 1.500 079 .244 2 3.79 .059 3.51 .0GG 2.26 .012 .048 1.353 0 .260 3 4.24 .061 3.23 .063 2.10 .014 .048 2.125 0 .298 I 4.21 .087 3.43 .198 2.14 .100 .009 1. G30 0 1.300 i 4.01 .070 3.42 .095 2.30 .035 .028 1.652 .020 .525
m M M 4 8 0 6 9 0 8 1 8 6 e l e S 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 i i m N M n e 02 8 7 5 4 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 1 e I . . t w e M b r 5 4 e 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t t M 0 0 0 0 a S . . b M d m P 5 5 6 7 2 e 02 0 0 7 0 7 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d n I I e M p s 8 u 7 s 9 2 1 1 1 6 3 2 1 s o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t i M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M d n t 5 d S . . . . a 7 9 C 1 02 6 6 9 5 s 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e m 1 M t a o r 1 l w f / g . r s e e m 5 8 6 1 7 3 1 3 0 v i 0 0 0 1 0 M 4 2 i l I d a M S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g r e e n l b e i l C 4 1 4 5 8 1 4 6 h p 6 a c 02 7 1 1 7 8 3 4 M T o o m a I I 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 ha s t n a e t M h iv 2 8 2 5 7 0 0 0 1 8 C g 5 6 6 4 0 3 3 0 6 2 n n M 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 i o S . . . . . . . . . s 7 n , t 2 M n . e 44 02 0 9 0 3 9 8 3 5 6 1 5 0 u i 1 1 4 1 m d I 2 3 4 1 3 0 0 G 0 0 l e n 1 . . . . . . . . e a M l t a 0 . 3 1 3 5 1 1 6 7 1 6 e 14 3 3 1 0 2 3 2 1 3 2 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m . . . y S . . . . . M v u a C 0 1 2 6 7 1 3 9 6 2 e 0 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 h 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 f I . . . . . . o I M s n . o a i i t 1 2 3 I i 1 2 3 I t S a r M t n e 7 7 c 7
- 7 n e 3 -
o t 2 4 C a - - M D 4 8 M M '
$i
5 lI '( Other Water Quality Parameters I Temperature and dissolved oxygen (D.O.) content in the water column on given sampling dates are shown in Tables 25 & 26 . These data indicate that while water temperatures varied seasonally, there was no evidence of significant I variations between stations and depths on a given sampling date. No evidence war gathered in this study that indicated any change in temperature or D.O. concen-tration a rociated with the discharge from the Farley Faclear Plant. I Data on other water qualf ty parameters, including pH, specific conductanm, free carbon dioxide, total alkalinity, sulfates, and chlorides are summarized in Tables 27 through 32. Variations in concentrations of each of these para-I meters from each station on each sampling date are negligile. Variations be-tween sampling dates are more evident, but are insignificant so far as indicating any drastic change in the aquatic habitat that might be associated with the Farley Nuclear Plant's discharge water. I I I. I I I
'l l
Table ?S l A L M2an temperatures of waters in the Chattahoochee hiver between mile 41.0 and 44. 7 on various_ dates f n 1975,1976,1977, and 1978, a g Station y Date 1 2 3 I i DC 5-2-75 21.0 21.0 21.0
-- 21.0 8-14 26.0 27.0 27.5 -- 26.7 11-2G 15.5 15.5 15.2 -- 15.4 2-25-76 15. 0 15.0 15.0 -- 15.0 4-22 20.5 20.5 20.5 -- 20.5 8-25 27.7 27.8 28.3 -- 28.0 11-10 16.0 16.0 16.0 15,5 15.9 2-10-77 7. 0 6. 3 6. 9 7.0 6. 7 4-20 20.1 20.2 20.2 20.1 20.1 7-6 28.0 28.8 28.8 28.0 28.4 8-4 27.5 28.0 28.0 28.0 27.8 9-8 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 -
10-4 25.3 25.5 25,8 24,9 25.4 11-1 20.2 20.7 20.7 20.3 20.5 12-1 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 1-4-78 8. 8 E. 2 9. 0 8. 8 9. 0 2- 15 8. 5 8. 5 9. 0 8. 5 8. 6 3-6 10.5 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.1 3-30 17. 0 16.6 16,1 17.0 16.6 5-15 21.8 22.0 22.2 22.0 22.0 5-30 24.3 25.3 25.1 25.0 24.9 6-29 28.8 29.2 29.3 28.6 29.0 8-1 28.7 28.7 29.6 28.7 28.6 8-30 29.0 29.0 29.0 28.8 28.9 9-28 27.0 27.0 27.1 27.5 27.1 10-31 20.7 21.0 21.5 21.5 21.1 12-5 17.5 17.6 17.1 16.5 17.2 i 20.8 20.7 20.9 20.1 20.7 Cocf. of variation 1. 6 Depth, m 0 21.2 20.9 21.0 20.9 21.0 1 20.7 20.8 20.9 20.8 20.8 2 20.5 20.7 21.3 20.5 20.7 4 20.7 20.2 20.7 14.2 20.1 6-8 -- -- -- -- -- e a2 -
I Table 26
Mean dissolved oxygen concentrations in waters of the Chattahoochee between mile 41.0 and 44.7 cn various sampling dates from 1975 through 1978.
Station Date 1 2 3 I R mg/l I' 5-2-75 8-14 11-25 8.00 6.80 9.60 8.10 5.75 9.50 8.17
- 0. 90 9.77 8.09 6.51 9.62 2-25-76 9.10 9.10 9.10 -- 9.10 5 4-22 9.05 8.90 9.00 -- 8.98 8-25 7.72 7.80 7.80 -- 7.77 11-10 9.40 9.70 9.80 9.80 9.66 I 2-10-77 13.80 14.60 13.20 13.80 13.89 4-20 8. 90 8.90 8.40 10,52 9.18
' I 7-6 8-4 9-8 7.85 7.44 7.30 7.43 7.47 7.20 7.47 7.62 6.80 7.90 7.30 7.30 7.64 7.46 7.14 - 10-4 8.83 7.55 7.32 8.03 7.92
- I- 11-1 9.00 9.02 9.15 9.03 9.05 12-1 9.60 9.80 9. 90 9.70 9.75 I 1-4-78 2-15 3-6 12,50 13.00 11.20 12.15 33.30 12.30 12.47 11,90 11.40 12,45 13.00 11.20 12,39 12.80 11.52 3-30 10.00 10.65 11,55 10.20 10,60 5-15 8.90 8.80 9.00 8.80 8.87 5-30 9.47 9.32 8.90 9.80 9.34 6-99 7.70 7.80 8.50 8,13 8.03 8-1 5.80 6.52 6. 15 5.92 6.08 8 6.02 6.50 6.95 7.20 6.63 9-28 7.50 8.00 7.00 7.40 7.44 10-31 9.05 8.92 9.00 9.20 9.03 12-5 10,75 10,86 10.02 10,93 10.60 'I i 8.98 9.12 8.97 9.58 9. 12 Coef of variation 4, 6 0 8.93 9.14 9.07 9.45 9,13 1 9.08 9.14 9.05 9.36 9. 15 2 9.01 9.10 8.33 9.37 9.06 4 8.90 9.09 8,92 11.07 9.14 6-S -- -- -- - --
I I
~
I( Table 27 Mean pH of waters from the Chattahoochee River between mile 41. 0 and 44. 7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978.
- Station Date 1 2 3 I ic 5-2-75 6,82 6.96 6.95 -- 6.91 8-14 7.13 7.15 7.18 -- 7,16 11-25 7.02 7.11 7.16 -- 7.10 2-25-76 6.96 7.13 7.22 --
7.10 4-22 6.44 6.60 6.65 -- 6. 5 C 8-25 8.31 8.38 8.40 -- 8.37 11-10 7.81 7.86 7.90 7.92 7.88 2-10-77 7.54 7.66 7.65 7. 33 7.59 4-20 6.33 6.83 6.48 6.54 6.43
- I 7-6 8-4 6.83 6.71 6.92 6.90 6.95 6.9'5.
7.03 7.01 6.53 6.87 9-8 6.78 6.97 7.02 7.03 6.94 10-4 6.73 6.93 6.95 7.04 6.88 11-1 7.03 7.12 7.15 7.21 7.12 12-1 6.53 6.56 6.65 6.63 6.58 l 1-4-78 7.04 7.11 7,10 7,10 7.09 2 15 6.58 6.60 6.65 6.67 6.62 3-6 6.64 6.71 6.75 6.74 6.70 3-30 7.20 7.19 -* 7.13 7. 17 7.17 5-15 7.26 7.24 7.25 7.27 7.26 5-30 7.07 7.06 7.08 7.08 7.08
- 6-29 6.96 6.99 7.05 7.07 7.01 8-1 7.06 7.14 7.12 7.16 7.10 8-30 7.18 7,23 7.32 7,25 7.24
- 9-28 7.52 7.53 7.45 7.54 7.51 10-31 7.16 7.17 7.20 7.21 7.18 12-5 7,24 7.37 -- 7.42 7.37 I Tc 7.03 7.11 7.15 7.10 7.09 I
Coef. of variation 0. 85 0 6.98 7.10 7,13 7.07 7.07 1 7.04 7.11 7.15 7.09 7,10 2 7.06 7.12 7,12 7. 15 7,11 1 4 7.06 7,11 7.14 6.99 7.10 6-8 7.20 7.64 7.85 7.69 i g -o-
E Table 28 Mean spectSe conductance of wa'ters from the Chattabocchee River between mile
- 41. 0 and 44. 7 on various dates from 1975 throuch 1978.
Statbn , Dau . 1 2 3 I x umhos 5-2-75 38,5 40.8 40.7 -- 40.0 8-14 51.8 50.0 53.6 -- 51.8 6 11-25 47.2 45.8 40.6 -- 46.6 2-25-76 48.6 45.8 50,0 -- 48.1 f 35.6 4-22 36.3 34.8 31. 7 -- 8-25 66.7 62.5 50.0 -- 59.0 11-10 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 2-10-77 44.4 44.4 46 4 44.4 44.4 4-20 33.3 40.0 34.1 33.3 35.2 7-6 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 8-4 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 9-8 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 - 10-4 50,0 50.0 50.0 50,0 50.0 11-1 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 12-1 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 1-4-78 5 C.1 57.1 60.5 62.9 59.1 2-15 32.1 37.1 40.2 36.1 36.4 3-6 39.1 38.7 39.9 39.5 39.3 3-30 52.9 50.0 48.4 50.9 50.5 5-15 60.0 50.0 57.9 59.5 50.0 5-30 69.6 66.6 63.4 65.7 66.3 6-29 49.3 51.3 51.8 53.8 51.4 8-1 43.1 46.9 47.6 48.4 46.3 8-30 79.1 77.7 75.7 75.2 77.0 9-28 72.8 72.5 72.2 70.4 72.0 I 10-31 63.0 G3.5 65.2 65.3 64.2 12-5 58.6 S1. 4 62.0 63.9 61.3 5 51.7 51.2 51.5 52.6 51.7 Coef. of variatio2 5.03 Depth O 52.1 51.5 51.1 53.3 51.9
.I 1 2
51.4 51.9 51.9 51.6 51.9 51.7 53.6 53.6 52.1 52.1 4 51.4 49.9 51.8 45.4 50.6 50.0 48.1 50.0 49.3 5 6-8 --
- 4s -
E
i f I Table 29 hican free carbon dioxide concentrations in waters from the Chattahoochee River between mile 41. 0 and 44.7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978. Station Date 1 2 3 I i mg/l _ I 5-2-75 1.05 .80 .83 .89 8-14 1.01 .88 81 -- .90 11-25 1.10 .99 .95 -- 1.01 2-25-76 .85 .69 .55 -- .70 5 4-22 1.82 1.71 1.49 -- 1.67 8-25 0 0 0 -- 0 I 11-10 2-10-77 4-20
.33
.28 1.82
.22
.19 1.90
.11
. .?.2 1.60
.11
.22 1.43
.21
.23 1.68 7-6 1,51 1.35 1.40 1.93 1.41 8 8-4 1.47 1.25 1,38 1.17 1.34 9-8 1.21 .94 .80 .70 92 .
I 10-4 11-1 12-1 1.29
.99 1,51
.83
.80 1.60 1.24
.66 1,51 84
. 77 1.36 -
1.06
.81 1.50 I 1-4-78 2-15 3-6
.91
.96 1.10
.72 1.02 1.18 1.02 1.02 66 .66
. 83
.91
.74
.96 1.05 3-30 .50 .52 .58 .44 .51 I 5-15 .51 .58 .63 .59 .58 5-30 1.21 88 .72 1.14 .98 6-29 1.05 .96 1.02 .99 1.00 8-1 1.17 91 1.02 . 83 .99 8-30 1.21 1.07 .77 . 95 1.00 9-28 .52 .59 63 .62 .59 10-31 1.18 1.16 .72 1.03 1.02 12-5 .83 .59 .55 .51 .63 I $ 1.02 .90 .85 .85 .91 Coef. of variation 16. 9 0 .97 .82 .70 . 94 .84 1 .98 .86 .70 . 72 .83 2 .83 .82 .84 .59 .80 4 .89 .79 .73 . 83 .81 6-8 -- 77 . 62 . 11 .39 i ,
1 I Table 30 t Mean total alkal!nity, as ppm CACO,. of waters from the Chattaboochee River between mile 41.0 and 44. 7 on vaNous dates from 1975 through 1976. St*ti " E Date 1 2 3 I i 3 mg/l as CACO 3 6-2-75 11.06 11.63 11.00 -- 11.23 8-14 17.00 17.00 17.25 -- 17.08 16,19 16,56 16,55 -- 16,44 11-25 13.00 13.44 13.56 -- 13,33 2-25-76 4-22 10,88 11.50 1 1. 63 -- 11.33 8-25 25.13 23.94 24.80 -- 24.58 11-10 21.15 20,81 21.13 20.63 20.97 2-10-77 14.75 14.94 15.08 14.87 14.90 4-20 12.75 12.06 12.88 12.63 12.58 7-6 20.31 22.38 23.19 21.75 21.92 8-4 18.00 19.00 19.38 19.67 19.20 9-8 18.56 18.56 18.50 18.67 18.57 ' 10-4 18.06 17.44 17,81 17.67 17.75 11-1 20.88 19.44 18.13 19.58 19.50 12-1 13.63 13.88 13.25 14.00 13.67 1-4-78 15.81 14.87 14.87 14.31 14.97 5 2-15 10.31 9.37 9.43 9.31 9.61 3-6 11.25 10.50 10.50 10.56 10.70 I 3-30 5-15 12.50 15.25 11.43 14.88 11.69 15.19 12.19 15.25 11.95
- 15. 13 5-30 21.06 18.38 17.44 17.67 18.70 I C -29 8-1 18.94 20.30 17.00 18.81 16.62 19.00 17.08 18.50 17.43 19.24 8-30 22.69 21.75 21.63 21,75 21.97 9-28 21.25 21.81 21.42 21. 64 I 2 1. 94 12.81 12.56 12.31 12.50 12.55 10-31 12-5 11,25 10.92 11.19 11.00 11.11 i 16.60 16.06 16.14 15.79 16,19 Coef. of variation 5, 7 Depth, m O 17.92 16.09 16.22 16.09 I 1 16.09 16.11 15.94 15.95 2 16.10 15,94 16,23 16.24 4 16.27 16.09 16.18 13.14 5 6-8 -- -- -- --
I Table 31 Mean sulfate ton concentrations in waters from the Chattahoochee River between mile 41.0 and 44. 7 on various dates from 1975 through 1978 Station , Da2 1 2 3 I x mg/l 4-20-77 2.00 1.50 2.00 2.00 1.88 I 7-6 8-4 9-8
.75
.60 2.65 1.25
.33 2.25 1.00
.50 2.50
.33
.33 3.20
.87
.47 2.61 10-4 2.75 4.00 3.50 2.67 3.27 1 11-1 2.25 2.25 1.25 1.00 1,73
< 12-1 2.75 4.25 3.25 3. 00 3.33 1-4-78 2.00 1.25 2.25 2.25 1.94 5 2 -15 2.50 2.76 2.75 2.00 2.50 3-6 2.13 .88 1.50 1.38 1.47 . I 3-30 5-15 5-30 2.00 1.00 4.00 1.50 2.75 4.50 4.75 2.75 2.00 5.25 1.67 2.50 3.38 2,14 3.30 I 6-29 8-1 8-30
.13 5.00
.75
.13 7.25
.75 1.88 7.50 1.25 1.33 6.38 2.67
.83 6.91 1.27 I 9-28 10-31 12-5 2.00 3.50 2.75 1.17 2.25 2.33 1.13 3.25 1.50 1.17 3.00 2.67 1,39 3.00 2.29 x 2.22 2.32 2.45 2.57 2.38 I Depth, m 0 2.69 Cocf. of variation 51,3 2.45 2.18 2.55 2.47 I 1 2
4 1.68 2.16 2.33 2.34 2.26
- 2. 2'.
2.53 2.37 2.71 2.82 2.24 2.83 2.34 2.26 2.47 6-8 -- -- - -- -- I I I'
I Table 32 Mean ebloride ion concentrations in waters from the Chattaboochee River be-tween milo 41. 0 and 44. 7 on vartaus dates from 1975 through 1978. Station I Date 1 2 3 1 i mg/l 5-2-75 -- -- -- -- 8-14 16.6 16.2 19.8 - 17.5 11-25 5. 4 5. 8 6. 8 -- 6. 0 2-25-76 30.6 U2. 2 35.0 -- 32.C 4-22 21.1 21.7 21.5 - 21.4 8-25 44.4 46.2 44.4 -- 45.0 11-10 63.0 59.5 65.7 67.5 63.1 2 77 32.0 35.1 42.6 47.9 40.2 440 79.9 78.0 79.8 70.1 76.9 7-6 20.0 21.0 23.8 24.4 22.1 8-4 29.0 31.0 36.7 40.2 33.7 9-8 27.9 30.3 34.8 36.5 32.1 10-4 36.4 41.6 43.9 49.1 42.3 11-1 43,8 44.8 44.4 45.5 44,6 12-1 21.5 22.4 20.8 22.3 21.7 1-4 ';8 39.9 50,1 54.1 58.6 50,7 2 -15 14.6 19.3 21.3 22.0 19.3 3-6 17.0 27.6 30.6 34.3 27.4 3-30 43.8 46.9 49.2 51.8 47.9 5-15 26.2 29.4 33.3 36.3 31.3 5-30 54.2 58,4 61.5 66.1 59.6 I 6-29 8-1
- 7. 6
- 6. 0
- 7. 8
- 6. 0
- 7. 0
- 5. 9 7.0
- 5. 9
- 7. 4
- 5. 9 8-30 6. 5 6. S 6. 4 6.7 6. 5 I 9-28 10-31 15.3 11.1 15.0 11.0 14.8 10.1 17.5 10.2 15.5 10.6 12-5 -- -- - -- --
i 28.2 30.7 32.5 35.6 31.4 Coef. of variation 10.7 Depth, m 25.9 30.0 31.6 34.2 30.1 I O 1 2 28.3 29.7 30.4 30.9 32.6 32.0 34.2 36.6 31.2 32.1 29.2 32.3 33.6 40.3 32.4 I 6-8 4
I
,( Summary Discussion I Sampling of the Chatteoochee River in the environ of the Parley Nuclear Plant was an exercise in sampling a modified tailra?.e below a major river im-poundment. Due to the terreFtrial makeup of the upstream watershed there was an excessive sitt load (primarily sand) transported into the sampling arel. Con-sequently, the deposition onto and shifting of the sand bottom in this stretch of the river was a continuous process that resulted in decreasing water depths fol-lowing the yearly navigation channel dredging operation.
Water temperature and dissolved oxyeen concent.st on dsterminations, made on each sampling trip, indicated that within this stretch o. the river these ' water quality parameters were always favorable for the support d aquatic life. The waters discharged by the Farley Nuclear Plant at no time were observed to alter these favorable temperature and D.O conditions. Other water quality parameters, such as pH, free CO 2, speciuc conductance, etc. were also invorable for the support of aquatic life throughout the course of this study. There was no evidence that the waters discharged by the Farley Nuclear
.I Plant altered any of the water quality parameters that were under observation.
I I I I I
I II l s Sampling and Analytical Procedures for Plankton Studies I Location of phyto- and zooplankton sampling stations and depths and sam-pling dates were the same as those described for water quality analyses (page 18 ). Plankton samples were taken between 1200 and 1400 hr on most sampling dates. A submersible pump and hose apparat.us was used to collect water at the various sample depths. Forty liter) of roter were passed through a standard Wisconsin style (80 micron mesh) plankton net and all zooplankters ware washed from the net bucket into a 100 ml Nalgene container and preserved in a 5% for-malin solution. For phytoplankton analyses, a 500 ml water sample was tr. ken at each depth snd transferred to a 1-1 flat-bottomed Nalgene jar containing 18 ' ml of a merthiolate preserving solution. Samples were transported to labora-tory facilities located at Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, and analyzed as outlined in Table 33. Starting in 1976, chlorophyll concentrations were men-sured in waters collected at each station and depth on all sampling dates except 22 April and 25 August 1976. Phytoplankters from a 200 ml aliquot of reservoir water were collected on 0.45m pore size Millipore filters, macerated in a tissue grinder, and the pigments extracted in 90% acetone. The chlorophyll content was estimated using the Trichromatic Method (Table 33 ). I I I I l
} I l Table 33 Analytical procedures ornployed to measure certain chemical and biological pa-rameters related to this study. ( Medium Parameter Method Re f. I Water Total organic carbon Carboa analyzer 3 Plankton Phytoplankton enumeration Counting chamber 2 Zooplankton enumeration Counting chamber 2 Chloropbell determination Trichromatic 3 8 Suspeaded matter Dry weight Gravimetric 4 Total carbon Carbon analyzer 4 Total phosphorus Colorimetric 1 Ca Fe Atomic absorption 1
. Mg Mn .
14 s Cu K Zn I References
- 1. National Environmental Research Center. 1974. Methods for chemical analyses I of water and wastes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agoney, Washington, D. C.
298 p.
- 2. Weber, C. L , ed. 1973. Biological field and laboratory methods for measur-ing the quality of surface waters and efnuents. U.S. Emironmental Protec-tion Ageng. Washington, D. C.
- 3. American Public Health Association. 1971. Standard methods for the exami-nation of water and wastewater. 13th ed. Amer. Pub. Health Assoc. New I. York. 874 p.
- 4. Lawrence, J. M. 1971. Dynamics of chemical and physical characteristics g of water, bottom muds, and aquatic life in a large impoundment on a river.
3 Final Report on OWRR Project Auburn University Agri. Exp. Station.183 p. I I
Phytoplankton L ~ Variations in phytoplankton numbers and chlorophyll concentrations were pronounced at indicated in Figures 6 and 7 . Winter and spring phytoplank-ton communities were dominated by centric diatoms and summer and fall com-munities by various green and blue-green algae. Mean chlorophyll a concentra-3 tions ranged from a low of 2.3 mg/m3 15 February 1978 to a high of 45,9 mg/m 10 February 1977. Mean phytoplankton densities ranged from a low of 241 organ-1sms/ml 15 Febnlary 1978 to a high of 37,638 organisms /ml 25 February 1976. High turbidities caused by suspended inorganic particles depressed phytoplank-ton standing crops in May 1975 (40.3 JTU's), February 1976 (41.4 .1TU's), and
- March '.978 (33.1 JTU's) (Table 1I and Figures 6 and 7 ). Phytoplankton standing crops in this reach of the Chattahoochee River are abnormally high when compared to data from other plankton community studies conducted in similar habitats. This is attributable to the influence of the two upstrcam impoendments l
(Walter F. George Lake and Columbia Lock and Dam) on the r+ndy area. Vertical distribution of phytoplarkters in the water column, temperature profiles and mean chlorophyll a_, b ar 3 c_ concentrations at each sampling site I are illustrated in Figures 8 throut;h 34. Phytoplankters were uniformly dispersed through the water column and the distributton patterns, organism den-sities and chlorophyll concentrations at the various stations were simliar on any given sampling date. 4
M- m W 'm m m m m m m m M -m m W 'm m m m-45 , at
- n p 8 30 -
E 'ee B 15 .. o 8,303 9,676 3G,G34 15,926 4000 ' p D D D
, s - -
O chrysophyta O Chlorophyta G Cyn%hyta E othe
. m-.
$ k. * .. E
= q
'd g 2000- ,
_ y
- 5. '
O -
~
- _ ~
4 - ( j , f
~
?
? - l -
a , p . o J R 1 400 - i , li n 1_ , d W : k, :,1 _
- _ L May Aug Nov Ith Apr Aug Nov Feb Apr Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1975 1976 1977 Figure 6 . Mean number of phytoplankters and chlorophyll concentrations encountered at all sampling stations on all sampling dates from 1975-77
I I, t I 45 - I aI Q"E 30 .. D ' l 0 15 - I I S,722 I 4000 -
~
D' D chrysophyta O Chlorophyta E c anoph'rta r E E other a M
~
I r"
- i 3a 2000 s
I I O fc u h a E o
"3 k .l?
I i 9 _ h p .
. 8
) :) h
-2 5 hf '
400
, [.N : q , f 4 ,
3 - p g ,. s y v - ( b N m )_ ._ I _ N 1 -
$ i -
Lam Jan Feb . Mar Mar May May Jul Aug Aug Sep Oct Dec 1978 i I Figure 7 . Mean number of phytoplankters and chlorophyll concentrations encountered at all sampling stations on all sampling dates in 1978. I
. ss .
g
M M M M M M M M M M 'm m W W m m CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 93.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 m oC C oC 0 21.0 21.0 .. 21.0-
)
1 21.0 21.0 21.0 i f 21.0 2 21.0 21.0 ' e t 3 10 4pl.0 l 21.0 . 21.0, 4 Fig. 8 Temperature profile and vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) at each sampling station on 2 May 1975. t i
l!I ! i 1ll
~
1 n h m 0 g
/ c a
1 r e o t a
)
m l
/m s
- . m s
m A 4 8
- 2 3
1 t n a 5 A I 8 M3* 2
, g 2 3 r
8 9 2 1 0 1 I (o m 4 0 I i sr 1 '0 0 C. i e 4 E 7 7 k 8 2 2 2 2 n a m ,1 f l p t o
~
y
, = . '
hp O O 2 2 ~
'os m 5 3
O 8 I r- 0, 3 .
~
i t n o 4 m
- J. - , t 0 Il' i r
0 m 3 4 7 2 0 7 2 0 7 2 7 2 t s i . d5 7 M l a9 R c1 C . i t M t r s ev u g u dAn a4 1 c 8 i n f f o ropino 1 3 4 t ea rt t us ag f rn e p 'p I mm ea 2 , Ts 5 . , ' 4 -
- 1-7 .
4 0 0 0 4 6 9 6 6 6 2 2 0 p g h 1 2 4 i ( F p e L llI ill i!lll l Ill <\l(l jl} l}l lll\ 1l1f
m m m M M M M M M M M - M M M M M l CHM a Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 40.0-41.5
' 'm "C
- OC t 0.15.5 15.5-. _ , 15.3 ., --
l
~=T ;,
h~ r { bi!
;- , :li . .
- 1. 15.5 15.5 - 15.2 '; e
] 3, gc-
. .ec v .
v. ! co 15.5 !. 15.2
- 2 15.5 ' ' ,
I -
- 1 + -c -
i
- !i'i
) 4
- ' - c: ' . _ , 10 15.5 22 15J org/In1 1 4 15.5 .. ;
( i_ ] Fig. 10 Tempersbre profile and wrtical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) at each j sampling station on 25 Nosember 1975.
~
~ _ - - - - . , - - - , _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ . - - _ _ - - _ . . - - - - - - . - - - _ _ . - - _ _ - _ _
~
m m a a g g g g M M M M M m 1 1 CRM 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 15 h 15.h. , . , - E 15 h . :
,. 2
~.
15.0 .. 15.0 l l
- 1. 15.Of i[
[~ __ i :1. , 1 s 15.0 15.0
- 2. 15.0 !
~
3
- 10 g 15.0i -
"#.Eb"I 15.0 -
e
- 4. 15.(
70
~
m cE dD _e a E e a C l D a b b b 10 - oI.m m - bh -
- m-e-I .
Fig. Il Temperature profl!e, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /mi) and chlorophy!I concentrations at each sampilng station on 25 February 1976.
M M M M M M M M M M M M W W CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 o oC 20.3 20.5., _ k20b y
/l 1 20.fi 205 d_' g 20.5 F
', - ,t 20.5 2- 20.5 - 20.5 :
,~
i
',i 10 org/ml
. 4 2 0 . 51 { 20 5 - 20.5: i -
70
~P e-
.g E
.c U
10 $-. E a a b " b E
- };IA _ _ _ _ E_] ^ ' 'l - -' '
Fig. 12 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentration at cach sampling station on 22 April 1976 4
m m M M Wm mM wm m m im me m> m m M r-CIIM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 {7 12.6 L 0C 3g S
- 14'04l
- k 13*290-*
28.0 12,345_ gg,c, 13,209_
- 1. 27.7 __. l_7,110 _
cn 21,507 10,165 28.5 11, 01 [ 2- 27.8. 275 - 103 9,848_ 28,0 9,783 org/mi 4 28.O u 10,147 27.5 Fig. 13 Temperature profile and vertical distributton of phytcplankters (organisms /mi) at each sampilng sta!!on on 25 August 1976. e
M M M M MM M M MM MM M M *M MM m MM
- CRM 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth 44.7-45.2 o c-m C ,
c 16.0 ,..g g .._. 0,16.0 .. ,, 16.0r ., ;1
- ;;F.y sJ ;7. . ...
n; itG 1- 16.0
] 16.0 a.. . c 1 S.S
- .! .C : 1 . . .
~: .
-: . - (, -
u -
- s '
16.0' , A .6.0 . 2, 16.0 _
.:.l/fsl ' ,,
}9 3
, .-.s-
.w org/ml eu 16D; 4
4 16.0 ; 16.0 i - -
- l 1
i 70, Oc
*E
#s a.
o te o&
~.a O
a c
"~
10 c f
] ! I ,
Fig.14 Temperature proflie, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /mt) and chlorophylt concentrations at each sampilng station on 10 November 1976.
E E E E M MM M M .M MM M g g g CRM 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth 44.7-45.2 32.444 6. 18,659_ gf 31.24L 4 17h 24,303 7h 27,196 6.4 31,203 6.9 29,194_ 1 7.n 27,106 , 7, o 6.9 29*844 2- 7.0 -. 7.0 6.2 ._ 103 cn
" 26,806 27,965 27,594 org/mi 26,196 6.2 6.9 -
a 4 - 7.0 - 7.0 -- 70 bg a b *- o $ c c d __ 5 h c _b_ ,_ - IO. g Fig. 15 Temperature profile, vertical distritxition of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each samp1tng station on 10 February 1977.
E 4 E M MM M M M M M W M Mm emme - CRM 43.8 43D-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth 44.7-45.2 20 5
,071 -
20.5 I'30 -
- 20. U' -
20 - 0# - 2 14,727 , 20.0 16,577 20.0 16,541 _ 20.0 21,313 _ 20D 1 I' I'0 20.0 ' O *0.0 M* * - 2 20.0 20.0 =
- 10 m
#' 18,532 18,224 18,453 - 14,184 org/ml 20.0 20h 20.0 -
. 4 :'0.0 70
>rs E B
j,2 h oS c b a E- E .-E- y c 10 h
,h-.
_h Fig. 16 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 20 April 1977.
U U M 'M NM MM Mg g g CRM 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth 44.7-45.2 o 0 C 29. . ;:- ;-
$ 28.h , ., . .g 28.0 ,. , y,7;..
29.h , , . . w.
-: :n.. ..e, w n.. ... .
=',-;
J.:... . f.i.'?2;[: q l;;; . ...
..:.'ic::::&:. .. v... . . . . s 1 29.0
~
.- 28.0 ' ' " ' ' '
'~
29.0 . : !... ..: B: - 29.0? ' ' - J
- - . ,d ;3. :.-? : .. -;*;--
. - .,: m.. .e: . . ^
~
29.0 0 f 29.0
~
~
2 28.C ,
- 28.0 . , . - .
- , ; q.
- s: . , = . . ... -
3 10 m, u
- org/ml 28.5 e 4 28.0. . 'cl 28.5 <
70-k
#n
- o. E ON s tac o- c 6
a a a a _.= c e 10 b b _.b_ JS q Fig. 17 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of p'hytoplankters (organisms /m1} and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 6 July 1977. .
M M M M M M M M MM M M' M MM MM M M cnu Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.G-41.5 O O m OC C OC C 0 27.5 2 8.0 . . - 28.0- 71 28.0 -; 7
;f
~
~
\ - -
- 1. 27.5 28.0 28.0 --
28.0
- 2. 27.5 28.0 [ 'l 28.0 28.0 3
10
. 4 27.0 28.0: 28.0
#b"I 70, 1
- co
~f5.
6 o % u te 6 6 E E 10._A b c b c b c b c _- , i -. % Fig. 18 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /mt) ed chloroph f11 concentrations at each sampling station on 4 August 1977.
M M MM M M M M MM M YM N M M MSI'M cnu ik pth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41,5 m "C *C "C "C 0 29.0 29.0 , 29.0 g. 29.0
- 1. 29.0 29.9 29.0 29.0 k
2 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0
'l I
3
. 'n 10 "I "I
. 4.29.0 l i 29.0 l 29.0 l 70
= I in B W
- s. te
.E E
.a 0
10 E b b b b c c
, va c -
, - Ic Fig. 19 Temperature profile, vertical dis *J1bution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) arxl chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 8 September 1977.
CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 h,25 3 . 3- 25 26. . j . I 25.3 25.0 25.5 - 26.0 .
- r. -: . .
2 25.3 24.6 25.5 -f' 25.8
! i .
10 3 k
~
4.25.3 i 25.5 25.5 rgml 70
. Nc o.
O N s N ** 2a O a a a - a 10 7 F~~ h c b c b c , b c 1 rm M . r_, , i r i 4 Fig. 20 Temperature proflie, vertical d:stributio6 of phytcplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrailons at each sampling station on 4 October 1977. d
M MI H M M M M M M M M M M M M M' M M M CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-413 m OC OC OC OC
- 0. 21.0. . ,, 21.0 21.0. _
21.0 ;,, ,. : i :;t ;; ; .:: 9':g.
- %. .; ; r.
9 g-: - .- . .;;; 1 20.0' : 20.0 .._; 21.0 g -t 21.0 tiq-rU .
. . . .., ,.- { -- .
i; .- .. _ - 2 20.0 20.0 < 7; 20.5 : ,. 20.5
.:s
,s
.~
=
+ .
..;s. ,
103
.e o
- 4.20.0 l 20.5 I 20.5- l "#k" 70
.Nes ga th 28 O
a a a _a_ . 10-_ b c b c- b c b c _g _ _3 g , Fig. 21 Temperature prottle, vertical distribt.tton of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlororhyll concentrations at each sampling station on 1 November 1977.
M M M M M M. M M M M & M & Y M M M r*& Y CRM i Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 l m OC OC OC OC 15.8 15.8 ez 15.8 -- ,
- O 15.g - .
- f :-
l
- 1. 15.! 15.S .
15.8 . 15.8 -g
- 2. 15.t 15.8 15.8 15.8 .
t' 10 3
'J
' org/mI 15.8 15.Br 1 -
- 4 .15.t 70-
. Nc
- as l hD 2
O 8 , a a ,
- 10. n_ . a, _
~'
b c 'b c_ b_
.g _b, t
~
r- 9 hE l ~l ~~ T l Fig. 22 Temperature proflie, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /mi) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampI!ng station on 1 December 1977.
_. . _ . _ _ . . m _. __ . = _ _ . _ --._ _ . . E E E O E E E E E E E E E E E E E -E W CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 m oC OC CC oc . 04 9.5 .. c 1, 9.5 - _
. ~,:
-[ 10.0 - --
9.C _
~ -.
1 9.0 l'q 9.0 . 95 9.0 - i .. m. -
- 2. 8.5 TF' 8.5 9.0 _
;, 9.0 -
4 u.3 . -
; .+
10 3 y ,
* 'WI
~ '
42 8.2 - 8.5 \ .~ 8.5 ~ l 9.0 70,
)
#c. 6 ,
. Eh l
.e n
a U
"- ,_N_ -
E - 1 10' c e L b M, .- . k i ~l Fig. 23 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankiers (organisms /nt) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 4 January 1978. t .
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M E M MM M CHM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 m O *C *C 4 0 8y; 8.5, 8.5 9.Q ! !2 i 1- 8.5 8.5 8.5 ; 9.0 ! i i
- 2. 8.d 8.5 8.5 { 9.0 i
1 [l1 a s v I
~ l I 103 ll ,
4 8.5 8.5 l 8.5 9.0 [ orgml 70 3 ! O 1 bo. a Oh a 0 10 e e a b a b c a b a b 1 i . . . r, ! I c , - J_J l F1g. 24 Temperature proflie, vertical distribution'of ph,toptsnkters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concent-ations at each sampling station on 15 Febmary 1973.
W E,M M M E W W M M M M M M E M MM E 1 CRM Depth 4 4.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 m "C OC OC OC' 0 10.5 8.5 SD 8.5[ I . 1. 10.5 8.5 8.5 9.0 I 2 j 10.5 8.5 . 8.5 9.0 l ' i I .
. 'I 103 4 10.5 8.5 8.51 9.0 70-
=
.c
&4
- s. ec
, .2 E
.a 10 D C 81-- b:1_I ca b -
c r- 1 b r7 rm ~1 e, 17g. 25 Ternperatun prorIIe. vertical diedribution or phytcylankters (organisms /mi) and chloro-phyll concentrations at each sampling station on 6 March 1978. I
W E E M M E M M M E E E E E E M E 'E E cut Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 m OC OC OC CC
' O ,17.0 17.0 -
- 1 16.8 - t 16.5 m '=_n s
' r -. -
1 17.( 17.0 16.6 - 16.2 - ] , i g
- 2. 17.( '
17D . 16.5 , 15.9
* ! 3 10 u l 4 17.0 17.0 IG.5 f 15.t .
f orgmi
. e f
70 i J l' 4 I g 4 18 ON h te
.3 6
^
.a o a a a
.- a - -
C b C 10 b _k b A
~
b b r_ j _ _i _ _ _ _ . i__._ { l ._
- Fig. 26 Temperature pronte, vertical distribution nF phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chloro-l phyll concentrations at each sampling station on 30 March 1378.
J
m m m x 7- rw- - CRM 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-415 Depth 44.7-45.2 OC OC OC m CC i 22.t 3f22.0: 0< 21.8 .! 22.0
< 4,
;/
_/ I - . .
-y
. m. .
'.:- .l/
?
1 21.8 22.0 . I 22.&
.: p- .
22.2 l
)- '
.- l .. ..
~
?}
~~ '
[ 22.0 .i 22.0
~
22.2 ,- 2 21.8 ,
~
- ,- , .k 3g3 w . , , , ,
org/mI i ,0 m. 4 21.8, - i 70-I
=
N E8 2b 56 O a a c a - 10- a
~
, _ I ~-I_ _I -
-r
~
7 _ _ _ . r-Fig. 27 Temperature profile.veritcal distribution of phytoplankters (arganisms/ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 15 May 1978. a
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M -m W l CRM 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth 44.7-45.2 OC O C *C m oC 25.5 :
- 25. 25.7 .
0 24.5 _g
- t - .
1 3 l _- 25.5 25.0 1 245 25.0 ' :{ l
\ ). -'
i
--' ) 25.0{ :. 25.0 i 2 24.3j ,
25.0 - t n
, i I T ..
i t i ! 3
' 10 b.0 25.0' Y."
j 4 24.0 ,i l 70- i
= .
' Ei
$h 2U fi i i ~
- 10. n a b a a_
j O S
~ 11_ _.1. r 1 1 1 F1g. 28 Temperature profile, vertical distritnf.lon of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampilng station on 30 May 1978. !
i
E E.W M M M M M M M M M M M M M M6 M CItM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43D-43.5 41.0-41.5 O O m OC C W: C r 0 30.0 29.0 29.5 -
"'a rs.%
?.
1:Li 7Al[(
- 1. 29.0 28.5 29.3 L
, 6-? I '; 2 .28.3 29.0- d.th l 4 i l
- 1 3 10 y
[ 4 !28.4 29.0 i "k"I 70 , i i ) i I
- .c co ,
1
@B uN o te l 26 U
- 10. a e a a F7 r , E b c ~b c c i
~~ ~l l _. _ 1 5-r'7 L_ L b r_ a L_lbT ~1 I
l t 1 Fig. 29 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (erganisms/ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 29 June 1978. I i i I i
. n-
'M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 'M M C11M Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5
^
O O "C oC m C C 29.0' 0 29.0 - 29.0. 29.C _
. ' ^:.:zi ,
I. 28.7 28.8 28.8 .- ? , - 283 .
- ([::h
-._...g
' ~
' *'Y
# ^ '
2- 28.5 . 28.7 -. 28.5 285 ' 103
~ . }
y
"' org/ml
. 4 .28.3 . '!
-- 28.5 l 28.5 28.2: -
70 N i8 l 8b 58 O a a
- 10. a -
- n. -
b b b b Fig. 30 Temperature profile, vertical distrI6utton of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampilog station on 1 August 1978.
CIIM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 O m OC C "C OC 0 30.0 28.8 29. .9.0 -
-l
- }
1 29.5 28.8 29.1 . 29D 2 28.5 28.8 \ 29.0 29.0 -
- ~
10 4h8.0 3 29.0 29.0- #N"I 70
'E E 8h SE O
10 a c_ a a_ a, hl l l [b c l lb c l lh c Fig. 31 Temperature profile, vertical distribution of phytoplankters (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 30 August 1978.
m a mM W M M e a e m W W W W W W -m e CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 O O m OC OC C C 0 27.0 27.5 s-. 27.0- -
! 27J ,
.. 5: i
- } ;
. a
~
1- 27.5 27.5 27.0 . ., 27.3. - J
~
- ] ...
I 2 27.0 < 27.5 - 27.0 - - i 27.0 - 1 I
- ,i x . .-) , .
1
- 10 3
- 4. 26.5 i 27.0 .
70< 1 i ? l i i l ]
- l! a8 3
2
.]
u h a ! I a 10- - : t b b b 1 > - b i i I Fig. 32 Temperature proflie, vertical distribution'of phytoplankiers (organisms /ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station ca 28 September 1978. i I
W D JL1 L-- ~I CIIM 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth 44.7-45.2 ~ OC OC m oc CC 21.0 21.5 - .
- 0. 21.C ,
21.5 .! ., 21.5 21.0 . 21.5 -
}
1 20.E -
. .g . --
L\ :/
* - :1. 21.5 2 20.5 - 21.5 - ~d 21.0 f
I
~ - 3
~
j
- 10
- Org/mi l 21.0 21.5 l'- - l 4 C0.5 1 70 eS o g n
Eh 7 '
.s n
a 0 10 _b Fig. 33 Temperature profile, vertical efistritmtion of phytoplankters (orgar.tsms/ml) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 31 October 1978.
- y. m m , rw -r ,
CRM 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 Depth
*C *C m bc *C_
0 17.5,. 16.5 g ,., 18.0 r. ,ga 17.0I ,.t t4 ::Q :
' ff ADq) 16.5 y; 17.8 -1 17.0 '
1 17.5 . ,z-
; 't' q ,
16.5 - -d 17.2 17.2
- 2. 17.5 3
. 10 g ,
- org/mi 4 ' i 5; '
** ~
70 1
.a
&E u to 3 fi a
.a a a --
U . _ _
- _.i a 10 b b, --
b Fig. 34 Temperature profile, vertical distributton of piytopiankiers (organisms /mt) and chlorophyll concentrations at each sampling station on 5 December 1978.
I Data on numerical dominacce by phytoplankton group (algal Division) ap-pear in Table 34. Diatomp were the dominant organisms on 18 of the 27 sam-pilng datos followed by the green and blue-green algal groups with 5 and 4 dates respectively. Greens and blue-greens were dominant only during the warmer months (Figures 6 and 7). A numerical dominance ranking of the plankton algse encountered by sam-pling station and date appears in Table 35 . The most abundant and frequently encountered diatoms were Melostra granulata, M. varians, pyclatella spp. and various unidentified pennate diatoms. Dominant green algae included Scenedes-mus quadrienuda, Ankistrodesmus convolutus, and Cosmarium spp. Blue-green dominant phytoplankters were Raphidiopsis curvata. Oscillatoria angustisrtmn.
~
- Anabaena sp. and Lyngbra op., Seasonal sh1fts in dominance were observed but there appear to be no biologically significant differences between stations on any given sampling date.
Results of this study have failed to demonstrato any measurable qualitative or quanttative effects of the operation of the Farley Nuclear Plant on puytoplank-ton communities in the Mjacent Chattahoochee River. lI lI !I 'I l l
l l Table 34 l' himtoance ranking of phytoplankton groups by sampling site and date. The most abundant group was assigned a value of one (1). I Date CRM 44.7-45,2 Station rtver mile CRM
- 43. I CRM 43.0-43.8 CRM
- 41. 0-4 L 5 2 May 1978 Dittom 1 - 1 1 Green 2 - 2 2 Blue-green 3 - 3 3 Nr - - - -
14 Aug. Dlatom 2 - 2 2 Creso 1 - 1 1 I Blu&-gtse n 3 3 - 3 Other - - - - 25 Nov. Dlatorn 2 - 2 I Creen 1 - 1 1 Blue-green I Other 3 3 3 I 25 Feb.1978 DLatom 1 - 1 1 Onon 2 - 2 2 Bl=4 stven 3 + 3 3 Othe* - - - - 22 Apr. Dtatorn 1 - 1 1 Green 2 - 2 2 Blue-green 3 - 3 3 Nr - - - - 25 Aug. Diatom 3 - 3 3 Green 2 - 2 2 I 10 Nov. Blue-green Other Diatorn 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I Orson Blue-green Other i 3 2 a 2 3 2 3 I to Feb.1977 Dtatorn Green Blue-g2ven Other 1 3 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 2
*0 Apr. Dtatom 1 1 1 1 Grwen 2 2 2 2 Blue-green - - - -
Other - - - - 6 Jul. Dtatom 1 1 2 2 Orten 2 2 1 1 I Blue-green Nr 3 3 3 3
I - Table 34, continued Station river mile CRM CRM CEE CRM Date 44. T-45, 2 43.3 43.0-43.S 41.0-41.S 4 Aug.1977 Distom 3 2 3 3 Orson 1 1 1 1 Blue-gnen 2 3 2 2 I. Other - - - - 8 Sep. Diatom 1 2 1 2 I Oneu Bloe-green Other 3 2 3 1 3 2 3 1 I 4 Oct. M tain Green Blue-green Other 3 1 2 2 3 1 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 Nov. Dtates 1 1 1 2 Green 2 2 2 1 . Blue-green 3 3 3 3 , Other - - - - 1 Dec. Dtatorn 1 1 1 1 Green 2 2 2 2 I 4 Jan.1978 Blue-gnen Ober mtom 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 I Green Blue-green other 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 I 15 Feb. Diatom Green Blue-green Other 1 2 3 3 2 3 1 2 1 3 2 1 3 6 Mar. Diatorn 1 1 1 1 Green 2 2 2 : Blue-green 3 3 - 3 Other - - 3 - 30 Mar. Dtatom 1 1 1 1 Green 2 2 2 2 I Blue-green 3 Other 3 3 - 3 13 May htom i 1 1 1 I Green Blue-green Other 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 30 May Dtatom 1 1 1 1 Green 2 2 2 2 Blue-green 3 3 3 3
? Other - - - -
.I I ,
Table 34, continued i Station rtwer mile CRM CRht C R'; CRbt Date 44.74 L e 43.8 43. 0. ; ) (L S.41. 5 29 June 1978 DLatom 1 1 1 1
- 3 Creen 2 2 2 3 4g Blue-gnen 3 3 3 1 Other . - . .
'g 1Aug. Wtom 2 2 2 2 'g ? Green
- Bloe-gnen 3
1 3 1 3 1 3 1 , Other - - . . 30 Aug. 1Astom 3 3 3 3 i Orson 2 2 2 2 Blue-gner. 1 1 1 1
- Othse - - . .
t 28 Sep. Diatom 3 3 2 3
- Orson 2 2 3 2 l
Blue-gnen 1 1 1 1 1, Other . . . . 31 Oct. Dtatom 2 2 2 3 jg Gwen 1 1 1 1
$2 ;
- E I Other 5"'" '
3
=
=
- 3 $ Dec. Dtatom 1 1 1 1
- g Green Blue-green 2
2 2 3 2 l Other 3 3 . 3 I I I I g . I I. I Table 35 __ Dominance rankinc of phytopinnkters encountered by sampling station and datee The most nbundant organterm was assigned n value of one (1)e I gase to.*ee 4 . O 6 e 4 ( 7 4 [ 3 CastenfWTTa 0 9 0 L WhtRhrt # P Atan19 4 5 5 l 4 8 4 4 3 3 6 I I e i t t f W I 6 6 f24;staJg knemap e B g g g a f 9 g g L323 # B B i 8 e 0 0 0 It#ET.W!EJG h rugJea es. 9
!!223n3g ek 3
** powe e eue w te t 4 9 8 I
WEMB LER.Jtl 8 % 8 4.4tu ** y es. 4 tetosoeurta e i Jmt!!21U.ad om I 4 4 4 9 8 8 8 8 8 e e 0 I 8 5 ii- sutuadtt 0 8 '
.. b.ma e e ' ' ' e t e e I
i Eft.31/l* j 8* $ to e i Issman e i 428.338 3 e e 4 9 is $ se 3 e e r tLatas t L2AL e W e e e e
' $umsd i t $9A Elt I
4 4 3 a $ 8 3 3 e 4 e e e t
> Dad'.undt 8 e 0 9 0 0 64
).Wtecam **.
LF1JA en G g 9 3 e i
.112CL38 as
,'. $1T.A 14 4 BAttsulW ISMMED 19 9 4 4
$3RR.'re B.:D3 I
knee.ma hanxas e e (Ast".an
'r'CDR.E 3 emo
,EAnd is
'nimme enseas en y e pg;g e t i menom ,
e , , , e I e tuern.e,em wwr ,w lact.mm ax :r,* em
} #L21:48 4 e 1t*1tandas *
,,42:380%
SaaNG
..seda&
- I g
.t#88tDG am g gg 4A538:.0.a w ye e nee.iww em O I
[M.RIE. eel 4 8*
- waras
- 6 9 I.S'Dattll5 I"24tn5 4,tLRtits2tLE tt8%3L fJB I
toe. gewee amassee (Ta unveYta I M N# 14 unseers enmuuttaa e e i e a a s e e e e a e is A W2tutAt *
,e t I
&amaran es. t i p n.ama es- e a wgtestatt.E..t
- t em e,asa C912MSE11 #- e 0 BeinaLAlif 11L. lit i 3 8
$ nam 4.aSJ #
k m a masus Ltut.o m MS$ ** wtus es f5DRS3E e e
,' taamitana
,' Atha
- 4 I
.IthttJagatt m. e e e se
, as.gsn e.
M SWHe# I < I I . ,-
l. L Table 35 , continued.
,e
,,r-,.,,., .
.1 i.
. . g.% . i , i i
cusroovwww
=
. =.=.>- i e e i . . . .. . . . . . .
I g=== ' 8 8 8 8
,,,,,,m . . . . . . . = . . .
6fttCI!Itus
- Daent * ,
IND4 se *ene e to g sg n . e 8 8 8 9 8 9 e e I EIELJEh5 %IER3g e MJ 6 3 f% CEbom084ITT4 4eE21FTf"tEl
- 8 8 8 8 8 ' ' ' 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
- 4. saanAas 8 I
6 htannus "
.p R4Wr"F2R est tet& **
,p 4 8
mmIndahlt
- 8 8 8 8 ' 8 smaan ,
- t DA*
8 ' I
- Rtted.M
;== , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i i i i i i am
.;Lassue m A i .
- ===t= = "
8
- I s b.e. nenina mAnteir.ma
- e e 8 8
.EAd!GS
- 1, r.ame"
.ggggg a S B B l 8 8 8 8 8 8
;,DSLRit
- I k SIREJBL a 4 4 4 e f 9 9 e e e la a s h.m uma a
- kritaneetsa
- e e b moeuas t Tannmes *
.ABCE
- I r SJlmEL
.manIL
- J3D.Ergit
- wm.
6 m a win.e. er= o e e e i e a e 8 9 mistmasam '
- tem p=e esmuus
.I CTAEFETI4 3g13333g3 m W emansdastaa 4 8 9 '
DEm:stesnt
- I eggsagga m #
errat.an e. ggg es, 8 8 W 4 8 9 4 1 1 4 tem am Mg&Cl3 ab. 9 40 e o 8miaAmmau m mm i e i 8 1 4 e t t I dERn tErdM I m m. . I O 4 i . 4 I 8 4 4 mawrsue s 8 8 (PNatas ftC&ETS
- fastame tSear
- 25 W 1.nsr* mmeses.m han.s t=6 eennegedne I
I I - 88 -
I Is I se e, Ta.bl.e 35. con. ti.n.ued. IF*t I e,,,.-~ ga,
, % 3 g
I B 1 4 8 i . 5 I
. i t 1
L"T* . > ' * * * ' I :
- a bE : ; : g g g
=m ..
- u. -.AR
- natm.au
- g em, . m ,, , .
e I La.m.m.
- PteoPgY1A 4 9 4 4
. # 4 0 0 I I O O I
$ star'ESE I EJLAAlks4 **
ALthu
&?ntammP tl TAM kbin
, emaient 8
8 8 8 ta st f.a# I 4 4 4
- 0 8 8
,g 3 1 1 4 4 4 MLas
- bbni d #
tilwtuhm
- f IkLLL Wis2J# 215Et,tk g tanM1.3 htne e I
8 8 p1DR
, JtattOR
- SAE1All
]ELEtt #
,w' E.arta .
, e e e e a a 4a SAEAkL I
watae o e
- e a net.ut:4a
- W-stJ.a8 y st. sauna eo isl$LSMAg om p*u s tL Ret ee.
I latWidL *b l ' ADS
- LD.LitrJis.lLME mnerum ew
'Le4 pas, Amanione t e I O bacEA e toe. pose seesens I CYalelsfBf74 Insticamaa e 6thi .at. f* A et.
g,,. g I h so. akauastemenLa en tene sweee. Ihamp.ansia ep
>' $Ok$
m op.
.m LAWC#
s , 4 8 8 e 9 MAILaCLILL ** I- ofu a n. fRLARs3 en-f, = = mis pay se 3 9 I t at+ thew ( sk ? t 1 Lat.tJ.
- I t e4 *smaesmewes I
I ___.m I - o9 -
I I\ Table 35, continued. I .... I t.m e.. amwrn m n. Ehnga f
. I i
I 1 I i I l 1 6 h I a I 3 I i i i g 7 LJhL.es. .I .I . . I i m.- 2ci noba.t. sus. n 6- - .e
. i.
t= I u.a.n . . . . cuumorena
"$A,fE19t#414
+ . . . . . . . ,
s.ss m,== . I
..i.nsme -- ss .
w
.L *hELH2f
,n= .
i
- tage .= .
. mem
...m.c m . . . . . . . . . . . .
I mm-
. Jt. mad
- M._wu'em:
m tuse una ba wm e== I 3r.ap
- 1
._ A 6 W151M.
r e m.e-I f amMiam S. $ 4 g 4
$MIARLMal.
- er.Lnts
- WI.use.shsE e ha wom,ananen ma r en ew.
' L'.M ,
I
.tanna em,
,.elv mR m N'OM f
!le" ntaattna
- 9=* areas Aaessee . . s * . 3 i e .
Ogganeamerna en
$gunge-w s,-=a===s i.
I Mkg.3.ggl. Em 4. cumecena Mt . . . 1 Lam.tWR$181b mum = i i g; . hm a m M M M# . . . Onsa saamm. NM4 - 1 i % i l 1 9 6 .
> was Ltars. =
I b e ra . k taszna
- 9 NEns hnaama ek F- nam har.m m s s 9 e I
th JL R % bens owAegnihne I I I I
Zooninnkton I Zooplankton densities varied seasonally as illustrated in Figure 35. With the exception of the January 1978 sample, zooplankton standing crops were lowest in winter months and highest in spring and fall months. High rotifer den-I sity in the January 1978 sample was unusual for this time of year and was appa-rently attributable to lov.Jr than normal water flows and low turbidity (Table ll). Based on results of plankton studies conducted in comparable streams in Ala-I bama and c?her adjoining states, zooplankton standing crops in this reach of the Chattahoochee River were considerably higher than would be expected. The great abundance of the cladoceran, Bosmina longirostris, in April 1977 and Maf 1978 is very unusual under rtwrine conditions. This is apparently due to the influence of the two upstream impoundments (Walter F. George Lake and Colum-bla Lock and Dam) on the study area. The abundance and vertical distribution of zooplankters in the water column at each station on each sampling date are illustrated in Figures 36 through 49. Patterns of distribution varied considerably between sampling dates but varia-tions betwen stations on any given date were minimal. Dominant zooplankters encountered during the course of this study are pre-sented in Table 36. The most abundant and frequently occurring organisms were: Kerstel'.'. cochlearts, Triebocerca spp. , Brachionus spp. Polvartbra spp. , Boamina longirostris, Cvelops spp. , Bosminopsis detterst, Ceriodaphnia spp. and Pseudosida bidentata. The seasonal appearance of the rotifer xelticottia g I
. _ . - . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . - _ . ___ . . -_ . . . _ - . _ . . . . . _ . .~. ._
m '- m m
. m m m M. mm W M. m m 'm M M M M
! 323 l - l 200 0 Itottrera
'; O Copepoda
., E Cladocera
<m
@ 100 - 1
- s j, -
- y .
~
20 - - Is, ll .PF t. 1 [
)
ii 7 : . ' , - L. l J
~
-1 - _ 1 .
My Au N F Ap Au N F Ap J1 Au S ON r 'n , f , 7 D 1975 1976 1977 i Figure 35. Mean number of zooplankters encountered at all -. u -- epling date from 1975 to 1978.
I Ii Depth - in ' oC 44.7-45.2 43.8 CRM 43.0-43.5 O C 41.0-41.5 O C o r < 21.0' . 21.0-
~I f. 01 {1. 0
,1,01 < 21. 0 < 21. 0 <
& l y 2 T1.0 21.0' 21.0' . 'g I s.
4 21. ON.
- g.-
21.0 / 21.0 50 org/l 0- - *
?f 1' ,[
g 2-
@ . 10 4 . J *LE
0 ' n. S 1<
/ <
h 2 . 10
- 2a ,
O org/l 4 . .a - f 0,26, 27.O. 28.0 8 1-26. 0 -
- 27. 4 .
28.04
# 2 g6. 0 . 27.4 i 27.0 j $ 50 4 f.0. O.' 1 27.0- i 27.0-j ,
I g it 2-1
. 10 org/l I 4, 0
1- < ]i - v o 2, - Y-E 10
.I 4 \ [ orgA g Fig. 36. Temperature profile and vertical distributton of zooplankter (organ-isms /l) at each sampling station on 2 May 1975 (upper) and 14 August 3
1975 (lower). I l CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 I , m 0 15.5 C 15.5 C s O 15.3-C g 1. 15. 0- 15,5J _ 15.2-15,5- 15,2-
$ 2- 15.5L 50 I 4 15.5 . 15,5- 15.2-org/l 0, . . . .
{1
& 2
$ 10 org/l
- 0. . . .
2 1 . . . h2 3 10 o I org/l *
- 4. . -
0,15.0 q 15. O. 15.0., I $ 2 1 15.0!~ 2- 15.0-s 15. 0^ /
- 15. O' -
15.0-15.0- t I c: 4.15.0L 15.Of 15. 0 . J 50
#b I .g g 1-1 1 I
J
& 2-
$ 10 f org/l 4,
I , 0 . . ., y1 I j G
- 2. .
10 4 . --
-- org/l Fig. 37. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organ-isms /l) at each sampling station on 25 November 1975 (upper) and 25 February 1976 (lower).
CitM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5
@20 ;
, 20 k 20.
g 1 20.5 .. i 20.5 20.5-f 2- 20.5 20.5- l 20.5-50 'g $ org/l m 4 20.5
~
20.5 20.5- - I 0, , - I .. . g 10 p org/l 4 0< < 2 1
. \
h k<
- 92 m .
3 - 10 U org/i I 4 > 0 27.5 - 2 8.5 < r - 28.5 I
;~~
g 1<27.7- 28.0- 28.5-j 2-27 & 27.5- g 28.5-I y 4 28.0J 27.5- 2 8.0. 1 50 org/l 0- . 3 1. . t l o g 2-10 4 -1 01/I g 0- , < y ,, -
.i I o
]
8 1-2- 'I N.']\-
' U \ 10 4 \ .c.
#E!I a .
Fig. 38. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organ-I isms /1) at each sampling station on 22 April 1976 (upper) and 25 August 1976 (lower). I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _
CRM Depth 44,7-45,2 43,8 410-43.5 41.0-41.5 ,- m OC C OC > 0<16.0 , 16.0 , 16.0 <
" 16.0 *l g 1- 16.0 -
16.0 < j , =2 16.0 16.0 16.0-L $ 50
- 4.16.0 .
. 16.0 > \ 16.0 #M l
g . './ . g 2 < I j \ 3" \ 10 org/l
- 4. . .
0 - - < E 1
* \
8 1 m 2 10 4 U org/l ' I 07.0 7.0 - 6A . 6.9 2 1 .0 7.0 6.4. 6.9 hO ' 2.'7.0 4 7.0 - 6. 2-' - 6.9-m i , 50 6.9 - #E! 4 n.0 7.0 . 6.2 I 0, . n b -
'8 1 i
d \ g" . 2 - i
$ i 10
{ 4,
,{ org/l o-e 1' 1 1 1 -
$ q h2 A
]
$ i 4 l ,I j 03/I Fig. 39. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organ-1sms/l) at each sampling station on 10 November 1976 (upper) and 10 February 1977 (lower).
CRM
\
Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 0.5 20.Sh , 20 20.8 I g L20.0. 20.0. 20.0 20.0-d 2 20.0 06. 20.0 20.01 20.0 h ' 50 4-20.0J 20.00 20.0 1 20.0- U-0. l
+
~
(/ 1 i.. -
- g. ~ .
I .' g 10
.n
\ ,
org/l 0 :218 :196 :139 179 2 1 :190 :208 :135 :204 i
~ ! 2- :184 :165 ; 189 :163 3 '
i+ - 10 0 .._,' org/l 12 5 4 :160 :147 " ' ~ 0 .28.0, . , 28.0 29.0 29.0 , g' E 1 28.0 . 28.0- 29.0 ;, 29.0 m $
~
2 418.0. , 23.0. 29.0, 29.0. S 50 I 4 .28.0 l 28.5. 28.5-org/l 0-g , y a 1' '
)
10 4 j N 03.I / I ~ A j j e:1 2 l k'y 4 h - 3 U ' { 10 { 4 . ./ j org Fig. 40 Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organ-isms /l) at each sampling station on 20 April 1977 (upper) and 6 July I 1977 (lower).
. o,? .
CRM 3 Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 m CC O OC OC 037.5. 29.0 C 2 8.0. < 2 8.0. ...:.g .y q' ( g 137.5 28.0 28.0 28.0 J 28.0 r@ 28.0 ii'[N
~
237.5. 2 8.0. . . ~
$ lt:Ic. / 50 427.0. I 28.0 28.0 .
mj org:/l O. .. . ., - co 1-
. .} . }
g 2. . J . :. d ; 10 I 4. .i . :) . g 0. . . 3
.q m' E 1 ,
$ 2. -
I m 3 U 4, y , 10 org/l 0 9. 0- 29.0 m.3 29.0. ,, 29.0 g1 9. 0.' 29.0. ; 29.0. 29.0. ji 2.29.0. 29.0. 1 29.0. }; 29.0. 50 429.0.. 29.0. 29.0., ; or,3/1
- 0. ..
f1-
- p. 2
[i\ 2.A o o j.
., 10 rg/l 4j . s .
2 8 i l 1, L\ ' e j \ A f 23 J. 2 i f: ; -\ .l u lt .f 10 4, j.] i/ org/l Fig. 41. Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organ-isms /l) at each sampling station on 4 August 1977 (upper) and 8 Septem-ber 1977 (lower).
I CitM I' Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 JC m 0C OC OC 0.25.3 sq,. " 5. 3. 25.8 20.0. . . . . . , I. & 1 25.3 y
.w:* 25.0 *'l 25.5 20.0 ' 7 /,
#rc 25.3 [. - 24.0- 25.5 25.8 I
2 , g . o. . 50 4 25.3 . A 25.5 A 25.5 + a OIEll
- 0. ,
r'
< ,7 , . ,7 Of l
1 - E g, 2
')r . A '
};-l o V . '1 10 f lc:3 ,} l org/l 0
.gyg .g I a 1
- o. .
$py[gsX.U kl?
,1/
,, . .g}
/
I k C 4,
$4@/
,:r v lf hh) \
\ '
l 10' org/l 0.21.0 g 21.0- 21.0 t 21.0 2 1-20.0^ 20.0- A" 21.0-) 21.0
~
N
$ 2,20.0M 20.0 M ' 20.5 .
20.5 o i m F. i J
\ 50 4 20.01 20.5 J 20.5- \ Y I e
- 0. .
I
\
h o i l. 10 I 4 > si
; org/l
~
0 ./
/
e , , ,
;r : (
,o 2 .
( \ h 10 4; , .
, \s orgd Fig. 42 . Temperature profilo and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organ-Isms /1) at each sampling station on 4 October 1977 (upper) and 1 November 1977 (lower).
I
I CRM Depth 44.7-46.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5
, C OC OC OC 0.15 S 15. 8, ..
15.8 g 15.8 - .. 1 15.8' 15.8 15.8 ;, 15.8 - .p 2< 15.8 l 15.8 15.8E 15.8 / y 7 50
.I A: 4 ,- i org/l 4 15.8.1 15.81 15.8 - -
0- .m w 3x 1,
? I 'gk$)
Y gp
^ -
N 5, 2 - i 8,' o P' o t ,- 10 U
- 4. .h 7f f7 pg org/l 0, ,
,J - -
I g
- g. 2 1-n e '
10 . j, 7 I y 4 , J.l L org/l 0, :420 645 7
^
,1 .
- 363 ,
;(
.S 2- -
;441 --
-355 ,
h
,/ 50 1
4- -
- 530 +458 0 ,9.5, 9.5, 10.0, 9.03 es 1 9.0 9.0- 9.5 i 9.0-.'\
2< 8.5- 8.5- 9.0' 9.0' u 4 < 8.5 J ' '
- ~p~
8.5 /
/
8.54 '
/ 9.0"/
org/l 0 . s t g1 -
\ . ./
, 10 h \ #E/I 4J ., .k a
g Fig. 43 Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organ-5 tems/l) at each sampling station on 1 December 1977 (upper) and 4 January 1978 (lower). I I 100 -
I-CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0 41.5 m O C "C C "C 0, 8. 5, 8. 5 - 8. 5, 9. 0 , g 1< 8. 5 8. 5 - 8. 5 - 9. O < 2, 6. 5 8. 5 8. 5 9. 0 - 50 l 3 # 4 , 8. 5. 8. 5 . 8. 5. 9. 0. 0 - j1 < g2 c .
-l 10 U org/l
.:[ :]
4] - .l 0 -
,1 g1
{2 10. i I U 4 org/l O 10.5 10.0s 10 4 10. 0. . E 1- 10.5 10.0< 10.0< l 10.0-
$ 2< 10.5 10.0J 10.0< 10.0 '1 [ 50 org/l 4 10.5 10.0 10.0 10 4 J -
I 1
- c. 2-10 h -
0 ,, ' org/l i 4- 1 0, - 3 3 g 1< g 2- , 4 n , j 0 /l Fig. ' Temperature profile and vertical distributton of zooplankiers I (organisms /l) at each sampling station on 15 February 1978 (upper) and 6 March 1978 (lower). I
- 101 -
I CRM 44,7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-4 1.5
# O m C C C C O,17. 16.8- 16.5-I .
17.0< s ,
,1 u
- 17. 17.0, 16.6-16.2- ).
.2 2 17.0 17.0/ - 16.5-15.9- ..J ,
3 c: nr x Y ON
.- 50
;;; :334' ' org/l 4 17.0 17.0 16.5- 15.8 , -
0- 86
- , 7
'/
-s '
l
/ W
- 8. '
" 10 d
4
. . . , r
' ,[ ,
org/l 0- - -
- ~. ,
10 .
] ,
I U i . org/l O i
.t. ,J 4 . .
0 21.S- 22.0 q 22,07 22.2 g 1-21.S- 22.0- ) 22.0< 22.2
$ 2 "1.8 22.0J 22.0L 22.2 50
[ 4 321.8H 22.0 5 22.2 I W I .5 0 7 .
,y
/
10 d l org/l I 4 O< 116 -150 112
~1 86 2 1- , 89,, 137 76 90 2- 142 113 -- 61
$ 10 o
org/l
]L _
o 118 98 _n 119 - Fig. 45 Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplanktert B (organisms /l) at each sampling station on 30 March 1978 gupper) and 15 May 1978 (lower), I 102 -
CRht Depth, 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 OC mOC 0244, OC 25.0 25.7 OC 2 5.5 < g 1 24.5 25.0- 25.5- 25.0 <
$ 2-24.S 25.0 < 25.0 25.0
'd m 50 4 24.S 25.0 2 5.0 < "#M J
0 ,g - - p, - '
- 1. ,
}'$ 2 a .
o;w 6 . 10
.g . ,
,, .i . a Of_E./I 0, <
q l 2 8
,e 1
- o. . L 10 -
O org/l 1 4 - I 0,30.0- 29.0, 29.5 30.0 ,
,. ;;.y
& 1-29.0 .ll 2 8.5 < q. 29.3 29.5 i'
f 2-28.3 28.5 " 29.0 29.0-
-* $ 50 org/l 4 28.04 29.0 29.0- '
.k 6 / 10
./ :- org/l I 4-0, o I g$.
,5
$, f. /
l 10 I U 4 .w .]
\
.)
org/l I Fig. 46 Temperature profile and vertical distributton of zooplankters (organisms /l) at each sampling station on 30 hiny 1516 (upper) and 29 June 1978 (lower). I
- 103 -
CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 O O L OC OC C C
$29.Q ) .
29.0. . 29.0, 29.0 g 1.28.7. 28.8. 28.8. 28.8. E' 2 28.5 ' . , 28.7c 28.5 a 28.5 t 50 c:
- 4. 28,3.J 28.5. 28.2 #E^
- 0. ., . .
~.., .
e i.: . y , 1 .
- a. . :
g . .,.. . j 10
- 4. 50. / M
- 0. . . .
~
8 1 k ' 2. .\. I 10 " lP U org/l 4 0 .30.Qg 28.8- 29.2 29.0. , g 1.29.5q' 28.8. 29.1. 29.0. E ' 2 .28.5. 2 8.8 .' - 29.0 29.0
'e ,
50 c: U 4 28.0j 29.0 29.0 l 0 y. , . , i y
- g. 2 - ;j --
0 10 4 TEA 0 Ei 1 : 8
.g i 2 y 10 4 ,
org/l Fig. 47 Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /l) at each sampling station on 1 August 1978 (upper) and 30 August 1978 (lower).
- 104 -
l I-CRM Depth 44.7-45.2 43.8 43.0-43.5 41.0-41.5 OC C OC m C 0 27.0L .f 27.5- y 27.0, 27.3< n. a 27.5. 27.0. 27.3 1,27.5b I ~ 1 , . 5 2427.0) - 27.5- 27.0- 27.0< I f 50 4 26.5L 27.0< g a 1. c:-" ] 'w 7 Q2 l . bl ,
=
10
,A OER_/I 4 ,
- 0. .
.y , _.
w 1. ,
,8 2 ' '
y ~ 10 4 I
-Fig. 48 Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organisms /l) at each sampling station on 28 September 1978.
I I I I I I I
- 105 -
I CRM I L Depth m 44.7-45.2 OC 43.8 OC 43.0-435 OC 41.0-41.5 OC I a 0.21.0, 1<20.8- o-21.5, 21.5-21h. j 21.0< / 2 L5. 2L5 g D 2-20.5 21.5 21.0- - 21.5-
$ 50 4, 21. 0. kid.
0- , - j ,i f
\
1-j I g2 < d 10 0,E.5A
- 4. < .
0' ' ' I g-[ \
./
/
\
's 10' O / orgA
- 4. / .-.,
- 0<17.5 ,
10.5 18.0 174 , . . g 1, 17.5 - 16.5 - 17.8 17.0
-$'2 17.5 16.5- 17.2 17.2 <
I h / 50 4< 17.5 17.2. / 0 . . , . ... g* 2 <
$ 10 g 4
\u n x
3 e
,n ,, 1
.7
~/
')
.4,,.._ j f " A I Fig. 49 Temperature profile and vertical distribution of zooplankters (organismsA) at each sa.mpling station on 31 October 1978 (upper) and 5 December 1978 (lower).
I .,.
y y _y --- Table 36 Dominance ranking of zooplankters by station and date. host abundant organtsm in each major goup_was assigned a value of one (1). em sm Apris as g as eneseener . se 2eer s . Jgagal - . E s_ he ete . a e e a a a s s e e a s a a a e a swy.as o.m. e s summena s as sta*rla en ' - s s a a Mie*te es a a e s a 3 e a e a t s a a t E. ess huja 5 != ant ** e s s b.ern h,as
- a 3< Mesa s a s s s a e s e s.mt w s a s s s s s a a h!rarars s a s s ir!s-etroen a s a Jr"*** ten f!M.Maae
- t s a e a s
**Myane &*srt a e F*Tt9ff *> e s s t*2*T!s**sM tet_. - a e59attyg en 8 l
- EN trmn 1%.s*
P=Tae sant LW*ais en l.*.taf
- i I
smi e.sms., Mr?*Be !!! h*=* eW_****T=s *
' Ldhatitt l a c(Wa peau e s s e s e a e e e o ======= #===,n is a e s e e a s s e s e s e e e N s a s s s a s s s s : e O.sa.e.s 3 s . .g i
sp.. s e a a s s s n.o.du=ee e M e a e e ceaanima s e a e s e a e s a e e a e a s m.** n-esw wrie a e a e (=^
^
m- t .*>. e = E- s"S*e e s em p. s a a l P ein." ' l E P"' ( thesus maaert= s e e s laddra kindu8 FT*Westin istM Mdse arisrvis 32*S!IIfM EEssifff Abma e. P==*1%s so is=na -asa*ca swa es
- see. tsastenrass I I I I I
{fF_*'a8stehlA SED.Ms a I O e 9***J8tsPs3 sEiWi&l s grectmus .,. _WIls tissa 18stasMr>sma *. ilt*.esMa heria
&$es eesia J8?its 9
I I I
- j! . . . . .. . . .
ll . . . . . .. . . . . i
- g 4
3 . . . . .. . . . E i . . . . .. . .. i . . . . . ... .. . i I y E- . y . . . . < . 'O g . .. . .] ! 8 i l . p' i 1 ,q i.'t E.
. ? m 1 ::
i e i ibt'l f! If ifi i t t fij i t d l
"! I !j Ti I- i g y 3@a,ema h@t lium.m 4i ils! mlid..un!i i 4'!}pM',ht ag!lao 3 l1m.aW. D L%::.hm:.i E
1I
- 108 -
l E I .. .. . .. .. t,. I t. . . . . ... .
~
~ ~
i : : : . ::. : I S . . .. . g ~ ~ f: . . : ::~ : I . 3 . ... . g . . y .g g . .. . o 8 . s, ., ,, , ,, - l s d'
- qd43 ff Ik f)
$ 2hje } 6! E f!!N f$ #}"! l'jl$ 5f t i' tl Celli e tf !
l i illif!+6 pM!NO~[NINN0i"dilifI!dIIiNINdII
~
!" - 2 ~ IIbba!
d i I ll
- 103 -
I
Ww ----m w--- - - - - - , _ . - . _ . - , , - - , , , _ - - - _ I I. I I R g .
. Es . St . ..
I g . . . . .. . . . ..
} . .. .. .
I i . . .. . ... . .. I E I . . ... . . . 1 . . . . I . .. . as .. . es g . . d . . .
. $5 Sk 91b 43 GB $5
$5 . 95 9%
I , e. .. .. ... .
?
= . . ... .
7 g . I = s! si I $38gI t I I I II i ,j I I I I I I {f I i
@umlu hl%DM,$ a . m _A.a em ;p3 .NFeiMh,WH.J.h asm .
c I I - 110 5
I I I Table 36e continued im tusenter 6 I I (wt.eee Si L 2 8 I I I 8 I DOTif L M Mmunta es M f a al.a eD. L maminar a L amaruam I I I I $ $ I I L sazzhsis artW2Aa ep. I I GaAIska sp. f'gd1&lM e9 3 I I S I I I I Ju m em JLaL&atte et instdadte *
.I henie,magatusa m t nemmra op.
1211tJiusta.301 ME229 A&Maar.hu ep. 8 8 8 4 EaMEu st. 112112A
- I ,
UllatuntiLikt paunais m 149648 89-twd. rettist . t 3
- I Airme!!e striinas
&Af Lt4G4221 es.
121122t3R
- CortPODA 3
I I I I i I immaamre immepitt) I I I 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 E21129 an. l'lfftS39
- Raspeetsvoul espapnd CtJDoct M Ettisti lcDGIti!;$ I I L l & I i 4 I. Immcent
- 8.uwt2.33 ePtrogI33
& EL?.nal
- 3 8 8 3 16 **. 8 I A EILCS!i D miti flimcis itsstias twesen e f2222:si:ltitstatta Y.238# m ur1**
Chermo op.
-I $2JtMTTT%9 fi'@
alma ee. s:m a t+.we hat 15Lt Drtetnne L'me, sia&werse Cmm%*nts mWwlla I 2AfE2215,.!# rvem a $521I11 3 wom mne m a Liaaste+re e,. I. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1J.1120Ntt'AL9 (9Mo'tto 8131 12214 1 1htaP es. I I 111 - I I
I I' bestenfensis in cooler weather and the cladoceran Bosminopsis detterst in wwmer I weather was notable. Diversity (3) and equitability (e) indices were calculated for zooplankton communities at each station on each sampling date (Table 37 ) (Weber 1973). A hypothetical community consisting of 100 organisms evenly divided among 10 tan would have a 3 = 3.32 and an e = 1.43, wherets a community of 100 organisms with 90 in one taxon and 10 in the other wmld have a a = 0.47 and an e - 0. 7s. Variktion in Il and e was pronounced between sampling dates but these shifts were apparently due to seasonal changes in environmental conditions. On any given date organism density, number of taxa. 3 and e values were strikingly similar at all stations. Based on the results of this study there appears to be no evidence that the operation of the Farley Nuclear Plant beginning in June 1977 bas had detectable adverse effects on zoopinnkton communities in the adjacent Chattahoochee River. E I I I I I I .
- 112 -
l
'"ahle 37 Num*0er 'of tooplarkters, number of taxa. dtversity fih and equitability (e) of rooplankton communttles by sampling date and station, w,it., m uto. rt ors /i N ny a .
t Way'1978 1 D 148.8 10 3. 79 0.98 3 D 107.7 9 8. 83 L 00 I 14 Asg. '78 3 3 3 1 D D D D 1 43. 8 60.2
- 88. 0 87.4 11 12 13 12
- 2. 77 3.82 2.89
- 2. 2.3 0.88
- 0. te4 0.84 0.83 88 Hof. '73 1 D 24.3 3 0. 64 0.77 3 D 30.1 3 0. 34 9.43 I 3 D 14,8 3 0. 44 c.80 28 tob. 1978 1 D 83.9 8 L 02 0.42 D 47.0 3 7 1. 60 0.84 3 D 27.2 8 1.88 0.82 12 Apr. '70 1 D D0.8 8 1. 78 0.86
- 3 D *l . ? 6 1.87 0.02 3 D 11L9 8 1. 75 0.88 28 Ang. '76 1 D 122.1 0.88 8 8 D 168. 0 144,0 17 18
- 2. 78
- 2. 98 0.73 3 D 18 2.74 0.88 10 Nov. '78 1 D $ 8. 0 4 0. 97 0.88 '
,I, 1 2 D D 129.8 ' 184.1 la 18
- 1. 48
- 2. 02 0.27 0.30 3 D 120.0 18 2. 44 0.44 7 0 hb. ' ". I D 22.8 3 L 02 0.83 1 D 17. 8 4 1. 29 0.73
- 8 1 3
D D
- 23. 8 27.3 4 L 49 0.90 8 1. 38 0.88 to Apr. '77 I D 229.8 12 L 40 0.28 1 D $$8.8 to LG 0.38 5
3 D 197.8 13 1.81 6.38 3 D 188.8 9 0. 97 0.28 8 Julv '77 I D 29.I 18 3. 11 0.82 1 D 88.8 19 3. 42 0.81 I . 2 3 D D 79 7 18 3. 22 0.88 4's . 3 18 3.10 0.81 4 Aw. 'f7 ! D 91.1 10 2.91 1.08 8< 1 2 3 D D D
$3. 3 81.9 119,8 18 18 14
- 3. 18 3.21 3.C3 0.84 0.77 0.83 7.#.ep.'77 I D 42,2 14 3. 07 0.85 I 4 Oct. '77 1
2 3 I D D D D St. I 01,3
- 83. 1 If .3 21 18 to 17
- 3. 18 3.04
- 3. 44
- 3. 11 0,80
- 0. 8 'l 0.79 0.72 1 D 247.8 19 3.24 0.71 5 3 3
D D 182.0 13L 8 to 10 3.37
- 3. 88 0.88 0.91 1 Nov. ""f 1 D 98. 3 18 3, 17 0.88 I 1 Dec. '77 2
3 1 P D D D
$ 8.1 01.0 103.2 30,8 19 18 10 8
- 3. 89
- 3. 88 3.49 2.80 0.99 0.94 0.88 0,87 39.7 1 D 14 3. 39 LOS 1
2 D 8L4 11 2.98 1.01 3 0 88.0 11 2. 98 1.01
'I
~.
I .
l I Table 37, conttDued Org4 I SampLtag Dese Stattos 7tme No. Tama 3 e 4 Jkk 1970 t D 464.9 13 3. 14 0.97 1 D 319. 8 9 8. H L 18 I 418.0 1.93 D
- 4. 87 3 18 3 D 278.0 9 8. 71 1.02 it f4h. 'Tl I D 15. 6 8 1. 43 0.#3 1 D 10.I ? 1. 29 0.93 2 D 26.8 11 3. to 0.88 22.8 to 2. 60 0.f*
I 8 Mar. '11 3 I D D 14.0 ? 2. to 0. to 1 D 14.3 8 3. 49 0.00 I 30 Mar. 'Tt 3 3 1 D D D 0
- 9. 0
- 13. 4 136.0 114.8 14 18 7
4 3.80 1.23
- 3. 86 2.90 1.11 1.06 0.t4 0.14 I
$ D 194.8 14 3. 00 0.81 3 D 248.4 11 1. 89 0. 96 il May 'T4 I D 160.8 12 1. 00 0.13 1 D 117.4 12 1. 60 0,31 2 D 129. T 13 1. 64 0.32 D 1.83 0. !?
5 30 May 'T8 3.
! D 1 15. 8
- 9. 3 14 3 0.78 0.00 1 D 104 3 0.29 0.43 I
I D 22.3 4 0. f.3 0.30 3 D 15.8 9 L &3 0.40 19 June '?O I D 83.0 17 3. 02 0.40 1 D 77.8 17 3. 87 0.01 3 D 88.4 19 3.98 0.50 3 D 84.9 18 2. 88 0.48 5 1Aug.'T8 I D 18.4 I 1.14 1.18 1 D 28.8 12 3.03 0. 94 3 D 28.6 12 3.19 1.08 D 3. 29 ?.00 I1 30 Aug. '74 3 I 1 D D
- 31. T 43.4 38.7 14 to 18 2.38
- 3. 33 0.79 0.to
, 2 D 40.I 18 3. 22 0.I9 b D 43.3 le 3. 18 0.00 I 28 Sep. 't8 I 1
D D 142. 4 93.0 le Il
- 2. 40 3.93 0.45 1.08 3 D 173.8 12 3.81 0.73 3 D 204.4, 19 ". 78 0.81 5 31 Det. '78 !
1 D D 48.6 79.6 18 16
- 3. 84 3.30 1.06 0.00 2 D TL 8 19 3. 44 0.83 3 D 118.4 17 3. 10 0.72 8 f Dec. 'fl I 1
D D e9.8 101.1 12 9 1. 00 8.03 0.01 0.47 1 D 47.0 9 3.23 0.70 3 D 107.0 16 2. 18 0.39 I . I g .m. I
I I Larval Fish Fishes in the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant can be cit.ssified generally as warm-water species, which will spawn anywhere g the habitat is suitable. Studies to determine the densities and types of , l larvae in the vicinity of the plant were conducted annually from 1975 through 1978. Samples were collected every two weeks. during the period March through June, with the exception of 1975 when studies were started in April because of flood conditions. Larval fish collected during the four-year study were obtained from four sample areas in the vicinity of Farley Nuclear Plant. Sample stations included: (1) an upstream station located approximately 0.9 miles above the plant intake, (2) an intake canal sample station, (3) a discharge
~
sample station, and (4) a downstream station located approximately 2 miles below the plant discharge. Larval fish were collect 1d from the intake canal station only during 19~B, which was the first sample season following comercial operation of Farley Unit 1. Ssmies were collected at depths of g 1.5, 3.0 and 4.6 meters. Sampling at the 4.6 meter depth was infrequent due to insuffici ntt water depth. Each sample was obtained by towing a plankton not with attached flowmeter and represented larvae obtained from approximately 100 cubic meters of watcr. Larval fish densities were computed for each sample area and sample peri d during the four-year study. Tables 38 througn 41 provide the results of larval fish monitoring during each of the study years. The previously l referenced tables provide the number of cubic meters sampled, total larvae per cubic meter and the taxonomic identification of larvae for each sample area and depth, l l
- 115 -
m W m~W m W W m e m' W W W W m aR4 m'M 'M 1 Table 38 Nusd>er of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sasple Period 1975 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Sampled Per Cubic Meter Family Kaber Upstreaml 4/21/75 1.5 117.3 0.017 Clupeldae 2 4/21/75 3.0 144.2 0.007 Clupeldae 1 Discharge2 4/21/75 1.5 144.9 0 4/21/75 3.0 133.6 0.015 Clupeldae 2 Downstread 4/21/75 1.5 105.3 C.009 Clupefdae 1 g 4/21/75 3.0 125.1 0.016 Clupr.idae 2 Upstream 5/9/75 1.5 95.9 0.042 Clopeldae 4 Disdarge 5/9/75 1.5 114.3 0.017 Cyprinidae 1 Unidentified 1 Downstream 5/9/75 1.5 98.1 0.031 Clupeldae 3 5/9/75 3.0 116.7 0.009 Clupeldae 1 Upstream 5/19/75 1.5 104.5 0 5/19/75 3.0 106.9 0 Discharge 5/19/75 1.5 97.1 0.010 Clupeidae 1 5/19/75 3.0 100.1 0.020 Clupeidae 2 Dowr. stream 5/19/75 1.5 102.6 0.01C Unidentified 1 5/19/75 3.0 115.5 0.017 Clupeldae 1 Unidentified 1
M M, M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M ,M M Table 38 - cont'd Mtm6er of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Ead Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1975 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Saspied Per Cubic Meter Faelly Number Upstream 6/6/75 1.5 98.9 ' 0 6/6/75 3.0 105.9 O Discharge 6/6/75 1.5 81.1 0 6/6/75 3.0 93.2 0 ,
- Downstream 6/6/75 1.5 lb'8.7 0.009 Clupetdae 1 0
Upstream 6/19/75 1.5 120.9 0 6/19/75 3.0 113.5 0 Discharge 6/19/75 1.5 115.9 0 6/19/75 3.0 114.6 0.009 Clupeldae 1 Downstream 6/19/75 1.5 105.2 0 6/19/75 3.0 109.8 0.009 Clupctdre 1 Upstream 7/1/75 1.5 101.2 0 7/1/75 3.0 120.8 0 Discharge 7/1/75 1.5 103.6 0.010 Pomoxis 1 7/1/75 3.0- 105.1 0 Downstreaa 7/1/75 1.5 94.9 0 7/1/75 3.0 98.9 0
- 1. Ups tream Sample Area. . . . . . . .CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area.......CRM 43.0 - 43.5 -
- 3. Downstream Sample Area......CRM 41.0 - 41.5 -
MU FU T 1 Table 39 Nunber of Larval Fish Per Cubic Heter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1976 t Cubic Heters Total Fish Sampled Per Cubic Meter Family Nimmber l Station Date Depth-(m) . I 1.5 115.1 0 l Upstream 3/1/76 0 1 3/1/76 3.0 132.1 l 93.5 0 Discharge 2 3/1/76 1.5 0 3/1/76 3.0 106.6 3 1.5 106.3 0 Downstream 3/1/76 0 3/1/76 3.0 112.3 1 1.5 88.3 0 Upstream 3/24/76 0 3/24/76 3.0 110.8 1.5 100.0 0 Discharge 3/24/76 0 3/24/76 3.0 90.5 1.5 90.9 0 Downstream 3/24/76 0 3/24/76 3.0 115.2 1.5 110.9 0 Upstream 4/7/76 0 4/7/76 3.0 118.3 1.5 99.6 0 Discharge 4/7/76 0 4/7/76 3.0 98.9 1.5 95.3 0 Downstream 4/7/76 0 4/7/76 3.0 98.7
g'H q m e- \ J-l Table 39 - cont'd i Nuncer of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sagle Period 1976 Cubic Meters Total Fish Depth (m) Sagled Per Cubic Meter Family Ntaber Station Date 1.5 99.1 0 Upstream 4/22/76 0 4/22/76 3.0 109.9 1.5 93.7 0 Discharge 4/22/76 , 3.0 109.6 0 4/22/76 1.5 94.8 0
. Downstream 4/22/76 0 4/22/76 3.0 105.6 -
Clupeldae
.' 7 Upstream 5/17/76 1.5 97.2 0.093 Unidentified 2 3.0 102.6 0.049 Clupeidae 5 5/17/76 1.5 88.6 0.192 Clupeldae 17 Discharge 5/17/76 Clupeldae 5 5/17/76 3.0 93.3 0.096 Unidentified 4 .
1.5 94.4 0.032 Clupeidae 3 Downstream 5/17/76 ' Clupeldae 5 3.0 115.3 O.069 5/17/76 Unidentified 3 1.5 108.9 0 Upstream 6/1/76 0 6/1/76 3.0 116.5 1.5 99.4 0 Discharge 6/1/76 Clupeldae 2 6/1/76 3.c 103.8 0.019 1.5 85.6 0.023 Clupeldae 2 Downstream 6/1/76 O 6/1/76 3.0 87.7 ,
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M- M Table 39 - cont'd Number of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1976 Cubic Maters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Sampled Per Cubic Meter Faelly Number 1.5 Upstream 6/16/76 110.4 0 6/16/76 3.0 111.5 0 Discharge 6/16/76 1.5 93.8 0 6/16/76 3.0 94.7 0 t Downstress 6/16/76 1.5 100.9 0 6/16/76 3.0 S7.6 0.010 Clupeidae 1
- Upstream 6/29/76 1.5 100.6 0 6/29/76 3.0 105.9 0 Discharge 6/29/76 1.5 101.6 0 6/29/76 3.0 108.1 0 Downstream 6/29/76 1.5 111.1 0 6/29/76 3.0 108.1 0 Ups tream 7/12/76 1.5 116.6 0 7/12/76 3.0 118.4 0 Discharge 7/12/76 1.5 94.7 0 7/12/76 3.0 99.8 0 Downstream 7/12/76 1.5 101.0 0 7/12/76 3.0 105.0 0
- 1. Ups tream Sample Area . . . . . . . .CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area.......CRM 43.0 - 43.5 '
- 3. Downstream Sample Area. .....CRM 41.0 - 41.5
-g m mt rn F t J l
Table 40 NtEber of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Saaple Station and Depth for Each Sample Feriod 1977 Cubic Heters Total Fish Depth (m) Saapled Per Cubic Heter Family Number Station Date _ 1.5 99.9 0 Upstreaml 3/16/77 0 3/16/77 3.0 115.5 1.5 83.9 0 Discharge 2 3/16/77 0 3/16/77 3.0 135.6 3 1.5 99.6 0 Downstream 3/16/77 0 l 3/16/77 3.0 106.6 1.5 95.9 0 Upstream 3/29/77 0 3/29/77 3.0 101.3 1.5 90.6 0 Discharge 3/29/77 0 3/29/77 3.0 103.1 1.5 89.3 0 Downstream 3/29/77 0 3/29/77 3.0 89.9 1.5 93.1 0.032 Clupeidae 3 Upstream 4/12/77 0 4/12/77 3.0 103.8 1.5 95.0 0.053 Clupeldae 3 Discharge 4/12/77 Catostomidae 1 Unidentified 1 3.0 99.3 0.020 Clupeid3:- 2 4/12/77 , 1.5 97.5 0.010 Clupeidae 1 Dosenstream 4/12/77 0.010 Clupeidae 1 4/12/77 3.0 104.4
m EK m m e m e mi m W W W W WN Table 40 - cont'd Number of' Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1977 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Samled Per Cubic Meter Family thaber Upstream 4/25/77 1.5 90.2 0.078 Clupeldae 7 4/25/77 3.0 98.0 0.031 Clupeidae 3 Discharge 4/25/77 1.5 106.4 0.028 Clupeldae 3 4/25/77 3.0 105.5 0.076 Clupeidae 7 Unidentified 1
,1 Downstream 4/25/77 1.5 115.9 0.026 Clupeidae 3 4/25/77 3.0 120.3 0.050 Clupeidae 6 Ups trem 5/9/77 1.5 76.3 0.026 Clupeidae 2 5/9/77 3.0 82.G 0.121 Clupeidae 9 C)7rinidae i Discharge 5/9/77 1.5 72.4 0.014 Clupeidae 1 5/9/77 3.0 90.1 0.022 Catostomidae 2 Downstream 5/9/77 1.5 98.1 0.041 C1upeidae 4 5/9/77 3.0 105.3 0 Upstream 5/24/77 1.5 109.5 0.018 Clupeidae 2 5/24/77 3.0 116.1 0 Discharge 5/24/77 1.5 83.2 0.048 Clupeldae 4 5/24/77 3.0 106.6 0.009 Percidae 1 Downstream 5/24/77 1.5 69.5 0 5/24/77 3.0 74.2 0 I
Table 40 - cont'd Number of t_arval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station angth for Each Sample Period Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Sampled Per Cubic Meter Family Nunser Upstream 6/6/77 1.5 122.5 0 6/6/77 3.0 106.7 0.037 Clupeidae 3 Unidentified 1 Discharge 6/0/77 1.5 90.5 0.033 Clupeldae 2 Catostomidae 1 , 6/6/77 3.0
- 97.9 0.010 Clupeidae 1 y Downstream 6/6/77 1.5 89.6 0.033 Clupeldae 3
- 6/6/77 3.0 101.6 0.020 Clupeidae 1 Ictaluridae 1 Upstream 6/20/77 1.5 94.4 0.011 Clupeldae 1 6/20/77 3.0 91.1 0 Discharge 6/20/77 1.5 91.5 0 6/20/77 3.0 108.0 0.019 Clupeidae 1
, Cyprinidae 1 Downstream 6/20/77 1.5 93.9 0 6/20/77 3.0 102.7 0.010 Clupeidae 1
- 1. Upstream Sample Area........CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Di scha rge Sampl e Area . . . . . . .CRM 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Downstream Sample Area......CRM 41.0 - 41.5
m M- M M M M m m M MM m Table 41 Number of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1978 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Sa mled Per Cubic Meter Family Number Upstreaml 3/20/78 1.5 60.9 0 3/20/78 3.0 69.1 C-Discharge 2 3/20/78 1.5 66.3 0 3/20/78 3.0 71.4 0 Downstream3 3/20/78 1.5 71.0 0 3/20/78 3.0 67.0 0
,}
Intake 4 3/20/78 - Upstream 4/6/78 1.5 107.7 0 4/6/78 3.0 119.1 0.008 Clupeidae 1 Discharge 4/6/78 1.5 89.7 0 4/6/78 3.0 101.6 0 Downstream 4/6/78 1.5 88.4 0 4/6/78 3.0 96.8 0.010 Percidae 1 Intake 4/6/78 1.5 96.8 0 Upstream 4/19/78 1.5 118.1 0.017 Clupeldae 2 4/19/78 3.0 118.3 0.042 Clupeidse 5 Discharge 4/19/78 1.5 112.7 0.009 Percidae 1 4/19/78 3.0 120.1 0 Downstream 4/19/78 2.5 110.8 0.018 Clupeidae 2
^
4/19/78 .J . 0 108.5 0 Intake 4/19/78 1.5 88.6 0.011 Clupeidae 1 4/19/78 3.0 4.7 0.211 Clupeidae 1
w m m, _m n n n n C ' ' Table 41 - cont'd i Norrber of tarval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water I at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each Saaple Period 1978 Cubic Meters Total Fish Sampled Per Cubic Meter Qmily Nteder Station Date Depth (m) 1.5 119.9 0.050 Clupeidae 5 Upstream 5/2/78 0.041 Clupeidme 5 5/2/78 3.0 120.5 4.6 115.6 0.121 Clupeldae 14 5/2/78 1.5 104.1 0.067 Clupeidae 7 1 Dischar9e 5/2/78 0.111 Clupeldae 11 5/2/78 3.0 108.0 Catostomidae 1 118.1 0.051 Clupeldae 5 1 5/2/78 4.6 Catostomidae 1 ff,
- 0.102 Clupeldae 2 Downstream 5/2/78 1.5 98.0 2 3.0 112.4 0.027 Clupeldae 5/2/78 0.046 Clupeldae 5 5/2/78 4.6 108.3 1.5 74.0 0 Intake 5/2/78 0.172 Clupeldae 9 5/2/78 3.0 -
52.4 1.5 101.6 0.167 Clupeidae 17 Upstream 5/15/78 0.285 Clupeidae 32 5/15/78 3.0 115.9 Percichthyidae 1 4.6 122.3 0.352 Clupeidae 43 5/15/78 1.5 108.7 0.166 Clupeldae 18 Discharge 5/15/78 0.239 Clupeldae 27 5/15/78 3.0 117.0 Unidentified 1 1.5 104.3 0.278 Clupeidae 29 Downstream 5/15//8 0.373 Clupeldae 41 5/15/78 3.0 112.6 Catostomidae 1 1.5 60.1 0.649 Clupeidae 36 Intake 5/15/78 Unidentified 3
M M M M M M M M M M M M'M MM M M M Tatie 41 - cc,nt'd Mund >er of Larval Fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sagla Station and Depth for Each Sample Period 1978 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Samled Per Cubic Meter Family Mtanber Upstreae 5/30/78 1.5 137.6 0.211 Clupeidae 29 5/30/78 3.0 145.4 0.131 Clupeidae 17 Cyprinidae 1 Catcstomidae 1 Discharge 5/30/78 1.5 120.0 0.075 Clupeldae 8 Cyprinidae 1 5/30/78 3.0 128.4 0.187 Clupeldae 21 l . Percidae 1 Cyprinidae 1 Catostomidae 1 Downstream 5/30/78 1.5 108.5 0.166 Clupeldae 17 Catostomidae 1 5/30/78 3.0 107.7 0.223 Clupeidae 24 Intake 5/30/78 1.5 42.3 0 Upstream 6/13/78 1.5 118.3 0.042 Clupeidae 5 6/13/78 3.0 127.1 0.031 Clupeldae 3 Catostomidae 1 Discharge 6/13/78 1.5 103.3 9.019 Clupeldae ? 6/13/78 3.0 124.6 0.064 Clupeldae 8 Downstream 6/13/78 1.5 107.1 ti.056 Clupeldae 6 6/13/78 3.0 114.6 0.044 Clupeldae 5 Ic'ake 6/13/78 1.5 101.7 0
W W W msg am g g m3 m mg y a e g Table 41 - cont'd Nudier of Larval fish Per Cubic Meter of Water at Each Sample Station and Depth for Each sample Perid 1978 Cubic Meters Total Fish Station Date Depth (m) Samled Per Cubic Meter Family Number Upstream 6/26/78 1.5 126.7 0.008 Clupeidee 1 Discharge 6/26/78 1.5 105.2 0.010 Clupeidae 1 6/26/78 3.0 118.2 0.042 Clupeidae 5 Downstream 6/26/78 1.5 93.6 0
. 6/26/78 3.0 101.4 0.020 Clupe1dae 2 l Intake 6/26/78 1.5 147.8 0.007 Clupeldae 1
- 1. Upstream Sr.mple Area........ CPM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area.......CRM 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Downs tream Sample Area . . . .. .CRM 41.0 - 41.5
- 4. In take Sampl e Are.a. . . . . . . . . .CRM 4 3.8 G
W-
1 f Tables 38 through 41 show that the Clupeidae (herring family), which includes the shad, represented the dominant taxonomic group in all sample areas throughout the study. The lesser groups represented during the study were the Cyprinidae, Catostomidae, Percidae, Ictaluridae, Percichthyidae and Pomoxis. A total of 662 larvae were collected during the four year study. The number and percent of the total representej by each of the previously mentioned groups is as follows; Clupeidae 619/93.5%, Catostomidae 11/1.7% Cyprinidae 6/0.9%, Percidae 4/0.6%, Ictaluridac 1/0,2%, Percichthyidae 1/0.2%, Pomoxis,1/0.2%, and unidentified 19/2.9%. Any attempt to describe the distribution of larvae in each of the three sample areas based on taxonomic differences would be less than conjactural based on the
; numbers previously described. The low densities of non-Clupeids is most probably due to lack of suitable spawning habitat in the vicinity of the plant.
The extremely unstable sand and gravel bottom of the Chattahoochee River in the vicinity of the plant and the 0.6 to 0.9 meter per second velocities resulting from a narrow river channel and operation of Andrews Dam (approximately 0.5 miles above the upstream sample station) make that portion of the river under study poor spawning habitat especially for these species which build nest or require semi-lentic spawning conditions.
)
The average number of larvae collected from each sample area, during each sample psriod, is presented in Table 42. Data presented in the previously referenced table indicates peak spawning (at least for the Cyprinidae) occurs during the months of May and June. Temperature and dissolved oxygen data collected during each of the larval fish sample periods are presented in Tables 43 through 46.
- 129 -
.I Table 42 t Average Number of Larvae at Each Sample Station for Each Sample Period on the I Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1975 - 1978 Averace Number of Larvae Per Cubic Meter Sample Ete Upstreaml Discharced Downstreamd Intake 4 E 4/21/75 0.011 0.007 0.013 El 5/9/75 0.042 0.017 0.019 5/19/75 0 0.015 0.014 I 6/6/75 6/19/75 7/1/75 0 0 0 0 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0 _ l 3/1/76 3/24/76 4/7/76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4/22/76 0 0 0 1 5/17/76 0.070 0.143 0.010 0.052 6/1/76 0 0.012 6/16/76 0 0 0.005 . 6/29/76 0 0 0 1 7/12/76 0 0 0 3/6/77 0 0 0 3/29/77 0 0 0 4/12/77 0.015 0.036 0.010 4/25/77 0.053 0.052 0.038 ,1 5/9/77 0.076 0.018 0.020 t 5/24/77 0.009 0.026 0 6/6/77 0.017 0.021 0.026 6/20/77 0.005 0.010 0.005 3/20/78 0 0 0 0 4/6/78 0.004 0 0.005 0 4/19/78 0.030 0.004 0.009 0.021 l1- 5/2/78 0.067 0.076 0.028 0.071 5/15/)8 0.274 0.204 0.327 0.649 5/30/78 0.170 0.133 0.194 0 1 4 6/13/78 6/26/78 0.037 0.008 0.044 0.027 0.050 0.010 0 0.007 1
- 1. Upstream sample Area . . . . . . . .CV 44.) - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area . . . . . . .CM 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Downstream Sample Area......CRM 41.0 - 41.5 I, 4. Intake Sampl e Area . . . . . . . . . .CRM 43.8 (I
- 129 -
M M W M WW M M M M M MM @M M M-W M
~
Tabla 43 Temperature and Dissolved Oyxgen Data for Larval Fish Sample Periods on the Chattahoochee River near Farley Muclear Plant 1975 Tesperature (c)/ Dissolved Oxy 9en (ppm) Date Time Location 0 ft. 5 ft. 10 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 4/21/75 1520 Upstream 17.4/- 17.5/9.50 17.5/9.50 17.7/9.40 4 4/21/75 1545 Discharge 17.4/- 17.4/9.55 17.4/9.55 17.3/9.50 4/21/75 1800 Downstream 17.9/- 18.0/9.45 18.0/9.40 18.0/9.40 18.0/9.30 5/19/75 1750 Upstream 22.5/- 22.5/7.60 22.5/7.60 22.5/7.60 5/19/75 1620 Discharge 22.2/- 22.2/8.00 22.5/7.90 22.8/7.90 5/19/75 1610 Downstream 22.1/- 22.2/7.90 22.1/7.85 22.1/7.85
- 6/6/75 1100 Upstream 25.0/- 25.0/6.85 25.0/6.70
. 6/6/75 I!05 Discharge 25.0/- 25.0/6.85 25.0/6.85 ,; 6/6/75 1250 Downstream 25.2/- 25.2/7.05 25.2/7.05 6/19/75 1230 Upstream 26.0/7.10 26.0/7.10 26.0/7.10 26.0/7.30 6/19/75 1200 Discharge 26.9/7.45 25.9/7.45 26,9/7.40 27.0/7.35 6/19/75 '.050 Downs tream 26.5/8.25 26.5/8.25 26.5/8.20 26.5/8.15 7/1/75 1550 Upstream 27.9/7.55 27.9/7.50 27.9/7.55 27.9/7.45 7/1/75 1540 Discharge 28.1/7.45 28.1/7.45 28.1/7.45 28.1/7.50 7/1/75 1445 Downstream 28.0/7.75 28.0/7.70 28.0/7.60 28.1/7.60 i
l M M M M M M M- M M M M nM M M M M'M M i Tabla 44 Temperature and Dissolved Oyrgen Data for Larval Fish Sample Periods on the Chattahoochee River near farley Muclear Plant 1976 Temperature (c)/ Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) Date Time Location 0 ft. 3 ft. 5 ft. 10 ft. 15 ft.- 20 ft. 3/1/76 1415 Upstream 15.0/11.40 15.0/11.40 15.0/11.40 15.0/11.40 3/1/76 1425 Discharge 14.5/!1.00 14.5/11.80 1435/11.80 14.5/11.80 3/1/76 1625 Downstream 15.0/11.60 15.0/11.60 15.0/11.60 15.0/11.40 3/24/76 1000 Upstream 15.8/10.20 15.10.20 15.8/10.20 16.0/10.20 3/24/76 1010 Discharge 15.8/10.0G 15.8/10.00 15.8/10.00 15.8/10.00 3/24/76 1205 Downstream 15.5/!0.30 15.5/10.20 15.5/10.20 15.5/10.10 4/7/76 1405 Upstream 63.5(OF
; 4/7/76 1450~ Discharge 63.5 (gF))
4/7/76 - Downstream - 4/22/76 1405 Upstream 20.0/8.10 20.0/3.00 20.2/8.00 20.2/7.90 4/22/76 1410 Discharge 20.0/8.00 20.0/8.00 20.0/8.00 20.0/8.10 4/22/76 1500 Downstream 20.0/7.90 20.0/7.90 20.0/7.80 20.0/7.80 5/17/76 1750 Upstream 21.9/8.90 21.9/8.90 21.9/8.90 21.9/8.90 21.9/8.90 21.9/8.90 5/17/76 1740 Discharge 22.1/8.90 22.1/8.90 22.1/8.90 22.1/8.90 22.1/8.90 22.1/8.90 5/17/76 1730 Downstream 22.1/8.85 22.1/8.85 22.1/8.85 22.1/8.85 22.1/8.85 22.1/8.85 6/1/76 1400 Upstream 22.8/- 6/2/76 0815 Discharge 22.8/- 6/2/76 0900 Downstream 22.8/. 6/16/76 1000 Upstream 24.2/- 6/i6/76 1030 Discharge 24.2/- 6/17/76 1110 Downstream 24.4/- 6/29/76 ?345 Upstream 25.0/- 6/29/76 1420 Discharge 25.5/- 6/29/76 Downtream - 7/12/76 1300 Upstream 27.0/7.7 27.0/7.8 27.0/7.8 27.0/8.0 27.0/8.0 7/$2/76 1350 Discharge 27.1/7.4 27.1/7.5 27.3/7.4 27.4/7.5 27.4/7.5 7/12/76 1400 Downstream 27.5/7.5 27.5/7.5 27.8/7.5 27.8/7.5 27.8/7.6
M M $~ M M M M M M MM MM Mi M M M M 'M Table 45 ~ Temperature and Dissolved Oyxgen Data for Larval Fish Sample Periods on the Chattahoochee River near farley Nuclear Plant 1977 Temperature (c)/ Dissolved _0xygen(ppm) Date Tim. Location 0 ft. 3 ft. 5~ft. IU ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 3/T6/77 0820 Upstream 14.0/10.90 14.0/10.90 14.0/10.90 14.0/10.90 14.0/1090 3/16/77 0905 Discharge 14.1/11.20 - 14.1/11.20 14.1/11.20 14.1/11.20 14.1/11.20 3/16/77 1045 Downstream 14.5/11.20 14.5/1!.20 14.5/11.20 14.5/11.10 14.5/11.05 14.5/11.10 3/29/77 1500 Upstream 16.8/8.90 16.8/8.90 16.8/8.90 16.8/8.90 16.8/8.90 3/29/77 1505 Disclearge 16.8/8.80 16.8/8.80 16.8/8.80 16.8/8.70 16.8/8.90 3/29/77 1700 Downstream 16.9/8.60 16.9/8.70 16.9/8.70 16.9/8.50 16.9/8.50 4/12/77 1655 Upstream 19.8/9.40 19.8/9.35i 19.8/9.40 19.8/9.40 19.8/9.30
. 4/12/77 1630 Discharge 19.8/9.60 19.8/9.53 19.8/9.50 19.8/9.55 19.0/9.50 ; 4/12/77 1615 Downstream 19.9/9.30 19.9/9.30 19.9/9.25 19.9/9.30 19.9/9.15 19.9/9.15 4/25/77 1615 Upstream 19.3/8.80 19.5/8.80 19.7/8.80 19.7/8.70 19.8/8.70 20.0/8.60 4/25/77 1600 Discharge 20.6/8.80 20.7/8.70 20.7/8.70 20.7/8.70 20.7/8.80 20.8/8.60 4/25/77 1445 Downstream 20.5/8.70 20.5/8.60 20.5/8.60 20.5/8.60 20.7/8.60 21.0/8.60 5/9/77 1630 Upstream 23.3/8.90 23.3/8.80 23.3/8.8 23.3/8.7 23.3/8.6 5/9/77 1540 Discharge 23.0/9.10 23.0/9.10 23.0/9.10 23.1/9.10 23.8/8.8 5/9/77 1450 Downstream .23.8/8.6 23.8/8.70 23.8/8.70 23.8/8.60 23.8/8.60 5/24/77 1545 Upstream 24.0/7.70 24.0/7.65 24.0/7.65 24.0/7.65 24.0/7.50 5/24/77 1550 Discharge (5') 24.1/7.75 24.1/7.75 24.0/7.75 24.0/7.80 24.0/7.80 5/25/77 1100 Discharge (10 ) 23.8/8.60 23.2/8.50 23.2/8.50 23.2/8.45 23.2/8.45 5/25/77 1055 Downstream 23.8/8.05 23.8/7.95 23.8/7.95 23.8/8.10 23.8/8.10 6/6/77 -
Upstream - 6/6/77 1530 Discharge 26.5/8.60 26.5/8.60 26.5/8.50 26.5/8.60 26.5/8.50 26.5/8.50 6/6/77 1510 Downstream 27.0/8.50 27.0/8.50 27.0/8.50 27.0/8.40 27.0/8.40 6/20/77 1550 Upstream 28.0/7.80 28.0/7.75 28.0/7.75 28.0/7.70 28.0/7.70 6/20/77 1540 Discharge 28.0/7.75 28.0/7.70 28.0/7.75 28.0/7.70 28.0/7.65 6/20/77 1530 Downstream 28.1/8.80 28.1/8.75 28.1/8.70 28.1/8.50 28.1/8.55
m M-M M f M-M M M M M mmmm m WM M M Table 46 I Temperature and Dissolved Oyxgen Data for Larval Fish Sample Periods on the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1978 I Tenperature (c)/ Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 3 ft. 5 ft. 10 ft. 15 ft. 20 f t. Date Time Location 0 ft. Upstream 12.5/10.60 12.5/10.40 12.5/10.40 12.5/10.40 12.5/10.30 3/21/78 1500 12.5/10.20 1115 Discharge 12.5/10.50 12.5/10.40 12.5/10.40 12.5!10.40 g 3/21/78 12.7/10.60 12.7/10.50 12.7/10.50 12.7/10.40 l 3/21/78 1100 Downstream 12.7/10.60 1630 Upstream 16.8/9.70 16.8/9.70 16.9/9.65 16.9/9.65 4/6/78 16.8/9.70. 16.8/9.65 16.8/9.60 16.8/9.60 l 4/6/78 1720 Discharge 16.8/9.70 Downstream 17.3/9.40 17.3/9.40 17.3/9.40 17.3/9.35 17.3/9.30 4/6/78 1445 Upstream 18.0/8.60 18.0/8.60 18.0/8.60 18.0/8.55 18.0/8.50 4/19/78 1222 Discharge ?8.0/8.70 18.0/8.70 - 18.0/8.70 18.0/8.70 18.0/8.60 g 4/19/78 1236 18.0/8.70 1P 0/8.70 18.0/8.75 18.0/8.70 18.0/8.50 u 4/19/78 1245 Downstream Upstream 18.5/- i8.5/- 18.5/- 18.4/- 18.4/- 18.4/- 5/2/78 1950 18.5/- 1945 Intake 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 5/2/78 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 5/2/78 1930 Discharge 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 18.5/- 5/2/78 1915 Downstream Upstream 21.5/9.25 21.5/9.25 21.5/9.35 21.5/9.3 21.5/9.25 l 5/15/78 1608 1600 Intake 21.5/9.25 21.5/9.25 21.5/9.2 21.8/9.2 5/15/78 21.8/9.2 21.8/9.2 21.8/9.2 5/15/78 1517 Discharge 21.8/9.2 21.8/9.2 Downstream 22.0/9.0 22.0/9.0 22.0/9.0 22.0/9.0 22.0/9.0 5/15/78 1505 1300 Upstream 23.0/8.30 23.0/8.30 23.0/8.30 23.0/8.30 5/30/78 23.0/8.0 23.0/8.0 5/30/78 1515 Intake 23.0/8.10 23.0/7.9 Discharge 23.1/8.50 23.1/8.40 23.1/8.40 23.1/8.40 23.1/8.40 5/30/78 1342 23.9/9.00 1435 Downstream 23.9/9.20 23.9/9.20 23.9/9.20 23.9/9.05 5/30/78 1700 Upstream 24.0/7.2 24.0/7.2 24.0/7.2 24.0/7.2 6/13/78 23.8/7.2 23.8/7.2 6/13/78 1910 Intake 23.8/7.2 23.8/7.2 1615 Discharge 24.7/7.5 24.7/7.5 24.7/7.5 24.7/7.5 6/13/78 24.8/8.3 24.8/8.3 - 6/13/78 1530 Downstream 24.8/8.3 24.8/8.3 1305 Upstream 27.5/7.90 27.5/7.70 27.5/7.70 27.5/7.70 27.5/7.70 6/26/78 27.5/7.45 6/26/78 1600 Intake 27.5/7.50 27.5/7.50 Discharge 27.5/7.70 27.5/7.80 27.5/7.80 27.5/7.70 27.5/7.70 6/26/78 1347 Downtream 27.8/7.90 27.8/7.80 27.8/7.80 27.8/7.80 27.8/7.70 6/26/78 1515
E Conclusions Larval fish studies conducted in the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant, during the period 1975 through 1978, indicated poor spawning success for fishes other than the Cyprinidae or Shad. Unstable bottom conditions resulting from high river velocities and associated operation of Andrews Lock and Dam are expected to be the primary contributing factors for low larval densities. Data collected during the study did not indicate that any differences among the three areas could be contributed to plant operation, but were closely tied to variations in natural environmental conditions in that portion of the river under study. I l -- i i I I Q l I I
- 134 -
I Adult Fish Studies The collaction of fishery data on the Chattahoochee River near the Farley Nuclear Plant was begun in April 1975 and terminated in Novembe r,1978. Fish were collected from both the east and west banks of the river at three sample stations. Sample stations included. (1) an upstream sample area located approximately 1.2 miles above the plant discharge (2) a discharge sample area, and (3) a downstream sample area located approximately 2.0 miles below the plant discharge. Fish were collected from each of the previously mentioned areas on a quarterly basis, with the exception of the first quarter of 1975, during the four-year study. Electrofishing studies conducted in the vicinity of Farley Nuclear Plant resulted in the identification of 35 species. Table 47 contains a list of the connen and scientific names of the fish collected, es well as the sample areas in which they occurred. Fishery data obtained from electrofishing studies were used to detennine relative abundance and relative conditions (Kn) values for each species collected. The relative abundance of fishes collected during the study is based on the nuter of captures per minute of electrofishing. Catch per minute (or relative abundance) values were computed for each species collected during each of the 15 sample periods. Catch per minute values are presented in Tables 48 through 51. Catch per minute values computed for each species collected during the four-year study fluctuated considerably from season to season and year to year. Total catch per minute values were also computed for each of the sample areas for each sample period and averaged for each sample year. Total catch values and average yearly values for each sample srea are presented in Table 52. Average yearly catch values for each sample year indicate higher densities occurred in the discharge sample area during all yecrs, with the exception of 1977. A comparison of
.p.
I TABLE 47 Common and Scientific Names of Fishes Collected From the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant I Locations Collected Cocynon Name Scientific Name Uns tra wl ni t e hn rer.2 nw ne.tronm3 Largemouth Bass . Micropterus salmoides x x x White Bass Morone enrysops x x x I Striped Bass Striped X White Bass White Crappie Morone saxatilis Morone sp. Pomoxis_ annularis x x x x x x x Black Crappie Pomoxis_nigromaculatus x x x l y Bluegill Sunfish Lepomis_ macrochi rus_ x x x Redear Sunfish Lepomis microlophus- A x x Green Sunfish Lepomis cyanellus x x x Orangespotted Sunfish Lepomis humilis x x x I Longear Sunfish Lepomis megalotis x x Redbreast Sunfish Lepomis auri~tus x x x Spotted Sunfish Lepomis punctatus_ x Wannouth Sunfish Chaenobryttus gulosus x Chain Pickerel Esox niger x x x Esox americanus x x I Redtin Pickerel .x Channel Catfish Tctalurus punctatus_ x x x White Cacfish Ictalurus catus x Spotted Bullhead Ictalurus serracanthus x x I Corrnon Carp Smallmouth Buffalo Greater Jumprock Cyprinus carpio Ictiobus bub-lus
~
Moxostoma Th. Ti r x x x x x x x x Spotted Sucker RTnytrema HieTr.. E x x I River Redhorse Lake Chubsucker Maxostoma carinatum Erimyzon sucetta Erimyzon oblongus x x x Creek Chuhsucker I SkipjackHerring Spotted Gar Longnose Gar Alosa chrysocnloris Lepisosteus oculatus Lepisosteus osseus x x x x x x x Amia calva x x I Bowfin Needlefish Gizzard Shad 5trongylura marina ITorosoma cepHianum x x x x x x x Threadfin Shad Dorosoma petenense x x x I Brook Silverside Blacktail Shiner Notropis sp. Labidesthes sicculus Notruois venustus Notropis sp. x x x x x x x I .
- 1. Upstream Sample Aren........CRM 44.7 - 45.2 I 2.
3. Discharge Sample Area.......CRM 43.0 - 43.5 Downstream Sample Area. . . . . .CPJi 41.0 - 41.5 I I
- 136 -
k
'I I !I' I
I it '
~ ; 8.;8 89 8 ;9 8 8
.. ... . . . . l:
l 3 O j y L' 8.E S. 3
. E. 8. 8. 3. 9 E! %j
'%e a si -.
;i
! 8 :5 8 8 8. 88
- g. . . . . . .
a)P
- -E.
s~ t ; e 8 93. 88 8 t
, 3.M e
.a I
- 35
- ~ p 2 8 Em 3 4 5 3. 3. 3. 3 2.
58 IE: 3y : I a . a
=
fI I e as = a sz s:: e w
- .. a
~
I 2=
*fj
~21y s, ~
ji& g
& d ai dd &
I g I s-[3= gg'
's .
j* n:di
===se didds s
i d i a s
==
d: u a m
!= :::
I
~
33 d, n: ::: =m z s naam ad; 5 .tg" da did ia a i dada 96g I EEE
- 1 . v.
5 M4 :R.:.:. 8. . 8:;88 4 iii y . mL;.. : I - a
. 2
$4,.
,t s :,s - 1 :- tr 3-1 .rt-i I
- :..:s, 7et ,2 s es -
- s:a
- s i.g3: 2:im:--
3..:::=es
- . 3.:! ac u
,- !:a s sa.1 - ,: : :2-Ee a ,ac=3 .
- .:s- e-c.e .:1 im
- e.g:a =. 2 : a :e : :i dii I
z.
. t t . a. : ..
e :::: y .
- Osassas aa s :-
c3333.33&g s:13-cal 3 s:las:a s : Al3m I . w.
M M M M M M M M M'M M M M M M 8 M M M Table 49 Catch Per flinete for Varlows Species of fish Collected frae The Chattshenchee River near f arley shaclear Plant 1976 September movende 7ebrus Aprli fishSjg{es, l_ {r~eae I b,,Id@7 Dmes tream Ilpstreme Qstkarg Elr3 @ lreas Bl[cEa j II6eidlWas Ifrgses Dhib j landeIr^rs 0.06 0.05 0.23 0.41 0.23 0.11 0.11 0.31 0.29 large.outh Sass 0.06 0.05 0.06 a lte gass Striped Bass Striped I blhlte Sass 0.06 0.05 Este (rapple 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.17 0.05 1.48 1.00 stad Crapple 0.63 S.70 0.52 0.99 1.33 0.75 Elvegill Sunfish 0.06 0.11 0.05 0.50 0.15 0.23 0.06 0.18 Redear Sunfish 0.10 ~ 0.06 Leeen $wnfIsb 0.05 0.55 0.05 0.11 0.33 Giangespetted Seaf tsh 0.06 Insapear Sunfish 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.78 0.17 Rc4stereast sumfish ' O.05 Scatted Sunfish
- Waranseth Sinnfish 0.17 ilialm Plclerel 0.05
[$ 0.05 0.05 RcJfle Fitterel 0.12 0.05 0.05
- thannel Catfish W lte Catfish 5 etted Ballbead 6.05 0.12 0.06 0.05 0.05 fo==== Carp 0.15 0.06
$mallmowth seifale 0.05 0.06 9.16 0.05 0.14 Greater Jumpreck spotted S uter River Reds.orse 0.05 taae Chabsetter Creek thubsetter 0.06 0.GS 1hipjad tierring 0.11 0.21 0.16 Sretted car 0.17 0.05 0.06 1opgnose Gar 0.05 0.06 0.11 0.21 0.09 0.05 0.22 0.10 En-f its Needlefish 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.34 0.84 0.05 5.15 3.60 3.02 0.69 E.lsrard Shad 0.48 1.09 0.36 1.19 2.45 0.53 Ihreadfla Shad 0.24 0.22 1.40 stroon $llverside 0.46 0.33 Bla(6 tall Shiner 0.80 e."
r .sh sp. - - - - - - - - - 1.66 2.75 2.13 3.09 2.01 i 1. Calth
- 0.43 0.30 1.40 2.49 1.69 1.04 rer slowle 0.18 j - - - - - - - - - - - ---
45""2 l!'Ussteca 01 scharga%e7 FArta........ Sample Ares. . . . .m W 43.0
. .tlet .7 - 43.5 *Girrard and threadfin shed not included la total catch
- 2. va se to laability to count large masbers sighted.
- 3. The=m tream $ aerie Area... ... Ort 48.0 - 43.5
l Ii 32s Out R = = :s su s'.E!. saa a a a as se sa I aI}f!==s=s=s
,bb $ $bb b a
b s b
==
s n 0 lh.s,,888 888 i-8
, t...
. 8 8. n.- n f."
I -
~lR b
SWC 2 b&b 2 2 b b 2 $2 b Y$ A N u I , R is a w O O OOO . 9 O O-4 W
- i s
I :.} a i t g iss
=s2 saa sss s
s s a 4 n s a s sles al g2' e I e i8
;26 el 12 io s;
-o 4
o 8 o 8 2 o o s o 8 i_t I 4 m s"k i as gb ] E 2- B .l-
- 3- 21==g 2e a as e s es am a = =.
R : & 4 ad d a da da d d 1 *', l * -l*.5
.E n I,. ~. == s. s s; ;
Ig 11 h_ .. . . .. -
- t. 2 33 e
$ "g a h
t es =ce =ss si as s en = = I '# di ddd d did di & && & A ye Y ag 44 aa 984 a-- 4 a 44 o o E 4 EE 4 a o a- a
$. k
~;;;
RE E I _ N $ ee Ss0 sse I e s$ ee o e aa NE s ww 4 i .! ,; I
- a A
2
.3 k.:3 ,
.2 t
. . 5 3,,,5 tle I Cl ti j
f *J "f
- ..:5, i.i.j:j
- =
- *t :.g t e ,i 7_2 S :j E 21.
.t :It*.Itr 2:
E E
.a 53.2
}' ,3a $:,:a
- 4 I.
'd;g $ 4 t - cmi".t.3 pet it g
23! 0 : 4 .g5.;1.,jg( a c:!2"s : [.a1 ,t. a e I .s t i
; .- e 42 in
.:::: : y E p g. g .ss3:,s;.l_3al"s:ar.14s y ..g g g,:12 e 31.p43p a rax a:s a,
- 5. - -
- ! Ofassss-sa_}3.t,s: .
s g t a:us1a
~
- 139 -
I I, hjo as o- a. o, 8 o a o
==
ao W~; $ fa na: das d a a:a e wd d dad ; Gi
- l 18 t u n=u naa a : n nu n :
d dJd aad d d d ad d 4
. "1 8-
; 9 8 5 4 j;o o o o o o 5 e
~ ~
- :: 4 s s 32 2 5 l h)9d dd d d a a ad .:
34 sg a n. .s-
~
en as n aa aan c , E .I 1 d dd d d6 ddd ai
,{ .
1 5 m n!
- 6 $
;o ;
o o a= o o aa: o o o aa ao
=
il , e-t 1 3-
.I I -
t
. 33 3)E s- er 2 a = sm: a
= ss:s s to i-sps 4 s : d d da; d d ddad a e!
I W e=r a 8 e s 4 s d an dd 4 s= 6 d se s= s s 5= 11-4 t. 3
- dd 44 4 as I 5 C
1 8 , 3 r3 3 A ESR3 S $ 2 :S E XR a I u 5 y d addd i d d di d 44 a m OO G I 1 g3 I 82 28:8; :i 8 oo aaoao o a
; 8 o o 888 ::
ooo -o 444 mgy
- EEE I
- E t 28 di 3RR ddd 88 dd 8
s i 82 32 di ad E !!! a lij lfn .: I : 5 3.,,5 x a
&. < r .e
.2 -
_ , i s51 4
-I -Iit m
I :.. 5 .:- .s t r-s::sgi.j::s-3::7et,2 3
- !t 3 53. -A .
, Ee 2 -. es:4.5, !_-
9_4 23 t -
!a
'. Hca=33.3 1: s2 t 3_
m e.2:_=e
. .e s.3 s g3: ]3*a gs,s,..e.,3 : , a :t _a r,:2:
usq c. e .:::::s.:
. as p.
- ssassaaaa_p g g=..
g:36s;x Ja:h : :.>-
- - u :s 3 se _
l : amas . : d_ 1 h::a a m at sh:
- 140 -
I 'B; Table 52 Total Catch Per Minute of Electrofishing for Each Sample Period on the Cha'.tahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1975 - 1978 Upstream l Discharge 2 Downstream 3 Aprii .1970 3.26 3.51 2.62 August, M75 1.35 1.16 1.00 Octobe r , .195 0.80 1.53 0.88 i Xverage li75 1.80 2.07 1.50 February,1976 0.18 0.43 0.30 April,1976 1.40 2.49 1.69 September,197 1.04 1.66 2.76 g Neverbar,,1976 2.13 3.09 2.01 g Average 1976 1.19 1.92 1.69 l March, 1977 June ,1977 Septeuber, 1977 2.05 1.27 2.49 3.75 1.49 2.72 2.78 2.33 1.35 December, 1977 2.45 2.22 5.01 8 Average 1977 2,07 2.55 2.87 Nrch, '.978 1.94 2.83 1.97 June ,1978 2.58 4.01 2.63 August, 1978 1.73 1.17 0.72 I ;iovember, 1978 Average 1978 4.14 2.60 3.78 2.95 2.65 1.99 Average 1975-1978 I 1.92 2.39 2.05 I
- 1. Upstream Sample Area........CRM 44.1 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area. . . . . . .CRM 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Downstrcam Sample Area......CRM 41.0 - 41.5 I
i 1
- 141 -
m mm M M M M M M-m' W W W W W M M M M FIGURE 50 TOTAL CATCG PER flINUTE OF ELECTROFISHING tow-sen s l mmm , s _
= =
A c g.
, .I 1 4
g
/
e * . . t. g
~
- t. .' : :
. .t \ : : :
'. .. . g . . . .
\
s s
- s. a . .
l '. I ' . . ca l 1- : l
,, ,.s. . .e. :s. .
.i .
; I
~
'. 'y
. \; ./ s. . :
. 1
- x. .
'. \
t
~ l \, / l. . \ ; I
, \ ' '
\:
o
\. .
l !. . . l '. V. .I . l
.l
' \ ll
'~
~ '/\!
\. .: :i
- t
'x:. . . '.. . .. l .jfs, l/ \;
- .::l1*
\'- \f
~. . '. ll ;J
\. .
'. l*
s./ .
's#/
I I I I i I i I I I I I I a-w e-w ti-w 3-n e-n e-n so-n 3-w s-w e-n s s-w 3-w e-w so-w 4-w SAffFLE PERIODS
I catch per minute values using the " student's t" test indicated significantly higher (95% C.L.) catch per minute values were obtained in the discharge area when compared to the downstream sample area using quarterly values from all sample periods. Catch per minute values were also found to be significantly higher (80% C.L.) in the discharge aret when compared to values computed for the downstream san;,le area. Total catch per minute values computed for each sample area during each sample period are prasented graphically in Figure 50. The relative condition (Kn) of selected fish species was computed for each fish collected and averaged for each species by sample periods. Relative condition values were computed by dividing the weight of a particular fish by a computed weight for a fish of that species and length. The length-weight data used for computing Kn values were obtained from a fifteen-year study conducted by the Department of Fisheries and Allied I Ac,uacultures, Auburn UniversityI . Condition values were computed for each fish for which data was available, and averaged for each species during the fifteen samp?? periods. l Average relative condition values computed for each species are presented by sample year and period in Tables 53 through 56. Relative condttion values for each species varied considerably fmm sample period to sample period, both witnin and among sample areas. The average conditior value for all species within each sample area was r.omputed and is presented by sample period and year in Table 57. The average condition values for all species which appear in the previously referenced table were compared statistically to determine if any differences existed between sample areas within sample years . Statistical comparisons using the " student's t" test indicated the i I Swingle , W.E. , and Shell , W.E. ,1971. Tables for Computing Relative Conditions of Some Coman Freshwater Fishes. Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn I unive sity, Circular 183:55p ! l
- 143 -
W NM NM
~
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Table 53 Condition (Kn) Values for Yorlevs Species of
. Fish Collected free The Chattahoochee Alter flear farley Nuclear Plant 1975 April August October g
fish Species (Wstrearn I Dischargef Ibwnstream-{ IIpstreen Discharge Ilownstream tipstream Ulscharge, Downs tream largenouth Bass 1.03 1.08 0.91 0.84 0.88 0.94 0.86 1.10 0.79
. White Sass 0.93 0.99 0.98 E lle Crapple % Black Crapple 1.24 1.25 1.14 0.89 1.19 0.78 1.07 *- Sluegill sunfish 1.02 0.84 1.04 1.00 1.08 1.02 1.01 1.04 1.03 . Redear Sunfish 0.93 0.89 0.83 0.93 1.08 Green Sunfish 0.92 1.00 Orangespotted Sunfish 1.50 1.12 tongear Sunfish 0.87 Redbreast sunfish 0.84 0.74 0.71 0.87 1.03 1.18 0.76 Warmouth Sunfish m ain Picterel 0.97 Channel Catfish 0.83 0.98 0.99 E lte Catfish 0.95 Censzon Carp 1.04 1.01 0.81 0.86 0.95 1.1,2 0.93 Smallmouth Buffc's spotted Sucker 0.94 5&lpjack Hesrin9 0.82 Spotted Gar 1.02 longnose Gar 0.83 0.96 1.41 1.09 1.07 Glarard Shad 0.95 0.86 0.95 0.93 1.01 0.88 I.0I 0.99 0.is9 Threadfin Shad TsiiT~5picles follected 10 11 11 6 8 6 6 8 8
[vn Fn Value 0.97 1.02 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.89 1.01 1.02 0.92
- 1. Upstream Sample Ares.......CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area......Cidt 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Duwnstreae Sanele Ares.....Cset 41.0 - 41.5
1
,I; lEl
=ti 2
d S SSC Jai E J J d "l & e I- h 2 a aussz e adsda i d o d b:l I - I E BR2 % add a 3 d d gi & ~
*g 2
2 238 R 2 E 2 3 8 i :dd : & & J d e J e I u j g $ 4E
= E S
A J J R25 ddd n d 8 I *I
}}
I" g I E i di a Es d Xe l - g s 3 EE no E. o E 58 4 o -~ ~ o o E o I .r g"%
-6*n fgg 3 W
EEEEE. E. E. U. s E5 5 g cooco o - -o o o = o I g A 'j}: Ej SE22F e E S 2 E R
~3 j dddad i a i d e d 34 w C 'I.
.I kk oc ko ka w ka
*t *.
- COG i D E 2 ;;. : 8 H H 14.
1 g oo o - o e o J,A ,, ; I .g I EEE M. M. M.
- $.2 S.3 $. . ..
e
- o ao w a E- & 4:t
, =t < ".
.5 8
., t 3,,5 , e r "Lafk itt '
3* 2 "5tg!
- "T ~pj :33'
* .: 5 :se=-]"3 5:r 5 1: *5503. t05 .:5,,3g3::A , -:g*Sg e -G t *m : j u 0;6 5 -
a u- 5;: c g.: m,t,cu 3 tr t 3 i esa 2s e C., * := diE mEtd,p a et _p 1..a366svl 1.: 3;ep::d3: ae0G tt-3 e al :44 l .
'5!
t S 83 3 5 E 33 2
& ad i i d ad a 4 e
2 S E99 @ 8 9 o -oo o - . o
) a:4 I
2 2 2 2. E. . 33 . 8 . o -oo e on o - e o I E
- 3 R E E d & d i w d I
g a o nn s , ao - o aw oo a a o a . 6 5 wE
- E 3 22 SE E 2 E g ; d dd d 44 d ~ d 1- I
. . s h I. o E.
o E o 5 a w 5 o
*: 6 -
gee @ b p e - E NES $ $$ M a o :" E:e i e sa d ddd a di .~ d e -we 4
~3 5 E5 g R 32 E R$2 3
=3 : 6 dd d a did a d 7 &
35 _a 5 58- ~.~~E. 5 U. E 45
~~
EE.
~
E I
~
S
~,,
- n. mm-www M N N WWN M 0 0 %
- 2 M@NWW8 =e*-9. 9 e = N e '. * ~oo
- g g -co-oo - o - -oo y o gag g www EEE g MMM 2 23 2E2 23 o 220 . $ !!!
O ad add dd a add - d ::4 J{E
^ *"
t
, 5 ^4 - *-{
- . *st e e m _p w m[*Im
* $ 2* 52 yct ^ Sit uw15 5 a52 3 ,
- R i}o : s al%: S, b e 'J 2 *rv % :::
m 0 . " Si t? k" ~f"s"m : *;t:" 6 e"t j:E -"e R* i T t ,3 T4Ft" ~5 0 *t']* *
~I",:
,5: 5 := = =.-E rger -I'22 d o amwssw ti s ,m gc=3t m:e
- 2: T *1 t um-W
- mm
- <rl...
s wl 2--
=
Nm
- 147 -
E E E E E W W W M M M M M M M M W. W i Table 55 1 I Condition (Kn) Values for Various Species of l
. Fish Collected from The thattahoodee River Hear 1 Farley shsclear Plant (
1971 . Sep tend >er Deceedier March . lune I Upstream I Discharge2 Downstream U \ pstream Utscharoe Downstream I&s tream Discharge Dturns tream IIpstream DIschar9e & westress fish Species 1 0.64 0.97 1.04 0.95 0.98 1.01 0.92 0.97 1.03 0.89 0.98 Iargemouth Bass 0.93 0.95 1.09 0.99 0.99 m ite Bass 0.92 0.73 White Crapple 1.06 1.32 1.25 1.16 1.16 1.25 1.17 Blad trapple 0.87 0.80 0.78 0.89 0.86 0.97 0.93 0.62 0.81 0.78 0.64 0.88 0.74 0.90 0.87 0.89 a Bluegill Sunfish 0.87 0.74 0.89 0.97 0.90 0.97 0.82 0.83 0.73 0.97 Redear Sunfish r,een Sunfish 1.33 1.15 1.39 1.57 1.28 Orangespotted Sunfish 0.88 longear Sunfish 0.66 0.59 0.74 Reaareast Sunfish Waimuuth Sunfish 0.90 (hain Piderel 0.78 1.01 0.89 tharniel tatiish 0.99 1.02 Wite Catfish 0.97 1.12 0.98 0.95 0.88 0.97 0.77 famen Carp 0.99 0.90 0.82 5mallacuth Buffalo 0.92 0.97 Spotted Sucker 0.61 1.00 Skiplack flerrir.9 0.98 1.03 Siotted Gar 1.01 i 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.93 tongnose Gar 0.76 0.95 0.% 0.9) 0.80 0.77 1.11 0.60 0.86 Girrard Shad 0.8. 1.06 0.94 0.e5 0.76 0.81 0.78 Ilareadfin Shad 10 9 TilW5iRies to 12 6 8 5 7 9 8 12 Collected 7 0.95 0.96 0.99 1.08 0.'J4 1.00 0.89 0.85 0.94 0.87 0.85 Ayg. In Value 0.88
- 1. t!pstream Sanple Ares.......CRM 44.7 - 45.2
- 2. Discharge Sample Area......CRM 43.A - 43.5
- 3. Downstream Sample Area.....Clet 41.0 - 4f.5
I Table 57 Average Condition (Kn) Values for All Species of Fish Collected from the Chattahoochee River near Farley Nuclear Plant 1975 - 1978 Upstream l Discharge 2 Downstream 3 April, 1975 0.97 1.02 0.98 August, 1975 0.98 0.95 0.89 October,1975 1.01 1.02 0.93 Average 1975 0.99 1.00 0.93 February,1976 0.85 0.92 0.93 April ,1976 0.90 0.87 0.99 j 8 September, 1976 November,1976 0.95 0.93 1.09 0.95 1.00 1.05 r Average 1976 0.91 0.96 0.99 March, 1977 0.88 0.89 0.85 June, 1977 I 0.94 0.87 0.85 Au9us t,1977 0.96 0.99 1.08 December, 1977 0.94 1.00 0.95 Average 1977 0.93 0.94 0.93 ,E March, 1978 0.95 0.93 0.99 June, 1978 0.86 0.90 0.78 !I August, 1978 November,1978 0.82 0.93 0.85 0.82 0.8d 0.78 Average 1978 0.89 0.88 0,85 8 i Average 1975-1978 0.92 0.94 0.93 i I I
- l. Upstream Sample Area. . . . . . . ,CRM 44.7 - 45.2 l
- 2. Discharge Sample Area.......CRM 43.0 - 43.5
- 3. Downstream Sample Area. . . . . .CRM 41 .0 - 41.5
- 148 -
l
) following differences at a 95% C.L.: (1) condition values of fish in the discharge area were significantly greater than values computed for fish in l the downstream area during the 1975 sample year, and (2) condition ,41ues of fish in the downstream sample area were greater than values computed for fish in the upstream area during the 1976 sample year. A statistical
' comparison of fish conditions using quarterly averages for all sample years showed no significant differences existed among the three sample areas, even at a confidence limit of 60%. Graphical presentations of quarterly and yearly condition values, averaged for all species in each of the three sample a*reas, are shown in Figures 51 and 52.
I Conclusions Fish population values computed for each of the three sample areas-in the vicinity of Farley Nuclear Plant fluctuated considerably from season to season and year to year. Catch per minute values computed for each of the sample areas indicated the presence of higher fish densities in the discharge area, as compared to the upstream and downstntam areas. Di f ference in condition values computed for fish in each of the three areas indicated significant differences existed among sample areas during only two sample periods during the four-year study. It is concluded, based on the data collected, that variations in fishery population parameters do not indicate any significant changes in fish populations among the three sample areas during the study, but represent normal population fluctuations and habitat differences.
- 149 -
FIGURE 51 CONDITION UALUES BY SAMPLE PERIOD
$975-1978 8.5 f.4 _ 4pgratm mm, 8.3 _
E N 1.8 _
.. .\
s a
'. s l
. .. / . V ' 'g - N g t 8 -
., , -7 '
/ ,, .s.,,,
. u -
. _ '_ e
\ 's "-
g e.s
- s. s . .*g
~. -
.. .\.
- s, .,
..y/* ,.
s - .. g ., g e.s s-
.,e s 9.7 _
e.s _ e.s 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 3-n e-n se-n e-n 4-n e-n e i-n 3-n s-n e-n as-n 2-n e-n e-w a s-n SAMPLE PERIODS
M M M M M ;M~W m m m m M mm mm m mM FIGURE 52 AVERAGE CONDITION VALUES BY SA!1PLE YEAR im-im 3.5 ,
?
A 0 W STSEfWO g .....
~~~
30unefagme 4 8.35 _ 4 E C O H D
- i~ '
1 ! <n 3 Q ----.....,,, , _ . - . . . , ,
--- ------..... 7.. m . , ,,,,
y ,, I ~ ,* 6 , M V 4.75 . A L U E 4.5 I I een sm - sts sm SAMPLE YEARS
I I t Impingement Studies Impingement monitoring at Farley Nuclear Plant began on L December 1,1977 anc' extended through November 28, 1978. Fish and other equatic organisms impinged on intake screens were collected for one continuous 24-hour period every two weeks during the study. Organisms impinged during the 24-hour sample periods were obtained by passing the effluent from the screen wash system through a collection basket. Fish collected d ring the study were identified and individually counted. l wieghed and measured. The weights of fish were obtained as previously no!.ed, with the exception of small shad (Dorosoma sp.). Small shad were weighed in aggregate in order to increase the accuracy of weight determinations for this species. Impingement data were collected on 27 sample periods during the 12-month study. Impingement dcta collected during the study are presented in Table 58, which includes the number and weight of each species collected during each of the 24-hour sample periods. Impingement monitoring at Farley Nuclear Plant resulted in the collection of 2,537 aquatic organisms (see totals Table 58). The clam Corbicula Fluminea and the shad (both gizzard and threadfin) were the most numerous of the organisms collected. The Corbicula ,I and shad accounted for 88.27% and 7.96%, respectively, of the total organisms collected during the study. Thus, these two groups represented 96.33% of all organisms collected during the 12-month study. Aquatic organisms collected during the impingement study were divided into three general categories, which included game species, comercial species and other species. Organisms collected during impingement studies, and ci .sified as previously described, are presented in Table 59. I
- 152 -
z
a M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Tabie 58 FNrleyNuclearPlant
- 28. 1978 Impingement Record by Sarspling.Date for Sampling Period December 1,1977 - Novedser 1977 e 1978 ,
. ,- . .,-.. ,-n I ..... ... ,--.w, m .. . . . . . . n, - r. .
smin
. .n u .n . .*
u .. m . r..
.. . .. . .. ... .. .. .. . . ..m ... ..
- t. u. .s .
..... .. .....m
. ..n ...n .. .. .. .. . .
niu unr es.
..m
_ e.m .. m . . - sm .. .. ..... .. s.. ... . . ,.. s...us m a w n.s .. .. . ...., ..q. .. .n .. ... . . ... ,. .. . ... .... s.. . cm 1 canes
... . . = .. on ..... .. . . . .n .. n .. .. . ..
1 n.e canis . .. :
..co ..= .. . .. c= .. .. .. o . ..n ....
.uau ese..neo.
..m
.. o .. . ..co
.. . . ..n
.. . ...e. n 3 :
m . . . . .. ..... an a can u. .
..co ..co .. . . . . . ..n n g" ..as .. . .. o ...n . . . . ..
nnsn.u canes,. . . ..
. 90 . 00 .. m ..on . .m .. e . . .ny e.no c.m .. m ..m . .ee. .,o r . g.,
i.nusc. - su meus
.... ..e. .. . . . ..... .. . .. ..... .. n . . . . .. . . .. . . .n. ...s s , . . . .
.nm s . . . . ,
... ..u ..m ..n . . = . .e , .. n e. n e. , e.e ,..n ...a . . .
n 4 . omun.s ..
.. . ..., .. s. . . .s. . . .n. ..
...s. .. n , .. .. . .. .. .
.. .a s.u n . .
.. .....n .. . - . .. .. ... ,.
I , .u.... . . ..n .. . .
..= .. .. .. . . - . .. ...a ei.tw.n. na ... .. c, . . . .. .. .
.. . ..c .. .. , . ..n .. ..
c... c. .
.u .s.,
... .m. .
r.rus nu wcns .... sn
- s. u w.
..n .. . ..n u
s.
,.u
..s . ..
.. . .m
- Upper and lower values in each column represent total numbers and weight (Ibs.),respectively. .
I * , I co . , 8 I e e-eo a 3 1 t i i i 7 i i
- It *t ::
i i s' i 7 e' J =; i
-)
i i ki Ni p t tg og og og rg og og -g eg og g og og og og =g g mp I k l i i
- -1 *E *i 'E a i i i
i i i
-1 i
i i i i
*E 'I 'I *E 'E i i i i
e' i i
'E i
i i s'
*F *E *B -5
. i i
e' e e' i 2 i i s' i i
~
E ~ tg rg og eg og og og og -g og -e og og ~; eg og y =g ~I
- a i e i i i i i i i i i i i e i e i i 8
S : 'F 'E 'E *E 'S 'E 'S 'a -E *E ; *f *E 'E -f 'E ; *; i i i i i e i i a i i a i e i i i i I ". i
*E 5, iel 'E i *f i 'li *S i
't *E *E *E 'E i i i i .' i
'S *S 'E *E 'E 27 i i i i a i 27 i
- u. -
I j J Ed I 't 'S 'I *! f i i i i
*E i
'E 'S *S 'S *E i i i i a
*E i
'8 *E *E '8 '8 ::
i i i i i *.: t 83 *E 'I *t *E '8 'S '8 " 'S 'S 3 '8 'S '8 25
- Iv
. Li c
yg.a - g i i i e' i e i i i i i i i i i i i i l
- o. -u :. eg og og of "I *E '8 *E '8 *E *E *E *E '8 *E *E tt if I
'EL i i- i i i i i e i i i i e i i i i i
'S I*:o 'E E mR-} '8 'I *E *B
- i
*: 'S 'S *S 'S i i i i i i
'S '8 'S.*S 'E ::
i i i i e 'i 37
'i o
5
'"Wp
* -*iiii
?
- t.
- s.
- E. ' E, ' E,
- 8 ' S,
- 8 ' 8 ' 8, *S 25, I
E,
- ,,m. . . . . . . . . . . ' .8, . q
. ' .E ' 5,.
- E, . . .
'E E : 'E =s as es as 'sas=8'F'S *E *E 'S *5 *8 '8 3: 3:
w"
- f i i i e i i i i i i i 4 4 4 i i i i I "
a o m c =s 's as *:
; i i i i
*E i
as as - -: *s e i i e i
-e i
*si asi 's4 *ee asi g:: .
se e : .: 's as =se as as s as as as == as as as as as sa s: I. m g gi e i i i i e i e i i i e i e i e I os u e
- 5 y
e e 3 a e e g a e c e a e a ; e s a j 8 . . , I
! : : v-
. 5 j : -
3 m . a c:
- s = a = = -
a a ; . : s ;
-:=5 = . : -
c :
- v ! e s . ! 1 5 c c
v
ll D.% 3. 't 4 0.54 50f. O.9 e 1 iI./4 O. TO 15't.
di Ill C A f F ISf 3 ICl At tJ14US l'UltCADJS I4 2.pu 099 s.3o Io.41 . <M i91, o.na to,es ICT4Lalitus SEldi AC484TiltlS 24 8%. ".se t 89, e t
$ 111 leiA H t'.Pd IIt. lit 38 0 . 14 iM. U.41 1.51 0.47 ICI AllHil!S CAIlfS o.ese n. ss
.Hillii Call IS!i TJjin $4IIF14 n C&JEl'itt lg 41 OutfS SP 1 n.01__ _ 17 n.t7 o.14 ._.t7 o 47.
?O. /'i 1.54 V?v. 0.84 S t.v5 of 4.81 18102. 2.64 Ittl ALS CH4sicatCl48. 'd*l.CILS 515 4.3/ 4 2. pp 31 l'. In Idog. 3.50 15.04 3.to 1
*il //Luf t SilAls inNitGir4 A CEPElli A 4 TIM 14.42 4.87 >210 6.If t>. 4 4 144 1.01 3 Ms. 6.44 !
lit!41 4111: 144 %31 449 INNfSaud 4 PETEfil f45ti I O.01 14. c.04 0.95 p.*14 I4 o.ns n tf 1 eiollet Salltf a:# lluTL1101.PJS Citystit_lifCAS 0 O.11 4 55 . 4 4 4 0. O. fl.16
!!ill 1lNP. IlYL A CitiLilE A l *l. D.04 0.14 4 .fl4 72. '8.489 n.YI 1 2 U.04 o.1/
F oll Sil.4 4 t til MilSSEL ??4/ 's . 84 4 4461. m.17 47.70 $i9.5 7 1Ho v . t id.4 ? out!st::nt 4 Comticitl 4 ri asselftE A d 94.61 ft.m 's? .4 9 11714 O.4's 7/o.f4 74'e 8 14.02 7d 7 IOf Al.S ofillit SPt:CILS 4W1.t rl 09.14 19075. 4. i'i #48.5% 251# 29.5U OJ40 Irvi.fwl fuf 41.5 All Set-CILS
I I The previously referenced table includes the total number and weight of each species collected, as well as the estimated daily and annual impingement rates for species identified. Data presented in Table 59 shows that l estimateo annual impingement rates for game, commercial, and other species were determined to be 268, 929 and 33,779, respectively. The estimated annual impingement rate of 33,779 organisms, as shown for the classification of other species, includes an impingement estimate of 30,891 for Corbicula. I Thus, the estimated annual impingement rate for all species of fish is 4.016. The estimated annual weight of fish impinged on intake screens was g determined to be 5.69 pounds (2.58 Kg) for gama species, 57.69 pounds (26.22 Kg) for comercial species, and 220.16 pounds (99.86 Kg) for other species. The estimated annual weight for all orghnisms impinged on intake . screens was detemined to be 283.55 pourds (128,62 Kg). The distribution of fishes and shellfish over the 27 sample periods I is presented in Figure 23. Most of the fish collected during the impingement study occurred during the late winter and spring. The impingement of fish during the previously mentioned period has been seen at other power plants throughout the State and is thought to be related to increased movement of fishes associated with feeding and spawning behavior. Variations in impingement rates for corbicula (see Figure 53) were very pronounced over the 12-mcnth study and are without explanation. The withdrawal of water through the intake system at Farley Nuclear Plant is characterized in Figure 54. Data presented in the previously referenced table indicates the minimum and maximum rates of water withdrawal which could have occurred during each of the impingement sample periods. Average flow rates for each 24-hour period could not be obtained since available infonnation on pump operation indicated the number of pump; running in continuous mode and the number of pumps set in the automatic mode. Thus, 1
- 155 -
y .; p - 7 , Table 53 I FISH AND SHELLFISH COLLECTED DURING EACH 24-HOUR SAMPLE PERIOD - see 8
- rien
;; utsu se,,
see _ n : u ;; . n .
- m _
r ; .
. c u, o 3+e _ -a L ; :. .
e t . t ; ; .
~
- ; .s.
c
, eee _
r - o . see .
- e. ...- : ,
e - ^ ~ _ _ I I
- W I I I I I
~
I I I
'X I I I I
I I I 1 I I I I I I I
- 2 4 s a t e e as s as as se is is av s as se as se as se as as s7 SAMPLE PERIODS
{l l 1 u f l F E
- la s l5 3
- 3 e d
1 r
- 2 8
- 8 2
- l 2
'rS - l 9 1
8
=
1
- l 7 8
< . l 8 1
S l
= - 5 D 1
O S
- l 4 1
I R E 4 5 l b e.
- - l l
3 1 3 1 P E L mT = a P l 1 1 l r A
, l 8 S
=
3 l 9
==
8 h == 3 l 7 8
" =: 5 I3 4
1 I a 3 t
. I
. j : :
- l l\
m r-i data in Figure 54 shows flows known to occur (minimum flows) and flows which could have occurred (naximum i ows), based on the number of pumps on automatic. Data presented in Figure 54 is also shown in Table 60, which also includes sample dates and periods. The rate of water withdrawal, as previously shown, did not appear to be related to impingement rates for fish. Periods with high flow rates typically had lower fish impingement rates. The impingement of Corbicula, especially during the latter part of the study, did coincide with periods of high flow rates. However, the peak impingement period for Corbicula occurred during the second sample period when flows were low. The results of impingement studies at the'Farley Nuclear Plant indicate that the removal of fish and other aquatic organisms from the Chattahoochee River is sufficiently low that no significant harm to the I aquatic communities is expected to occur. Impingement rates for game species 4 were deteminsd to be extremely low. Estimated daily impingement rates for 5 game species of 0.73 is less than 2% of the daily creel limit per fisheman l for sunfish, as set by the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. The impingement rate for commercial species was also considered to be low, with an estimated daily rate of 2.54 Tish. Impingement rates for shad and Corbicula, which represented the majority of organisms collected, were lower than would be expected based on the abundance of these organisms in the vicinity of the plant. I I I - I
- 159 -
I l l s Table 60 Intake Minimum and Maximum Flows Durino Twenty-Four Hour Imoincement Studies Date Study l Started Samole Period 3 Minimum Flow (M / min) Maximum Flow (M3 / min) 12/1/77 1 162.8 162.8 I 12/14/77 2 108.5 162.8 !n 12/29/77 3 108.5 162.8 !g 1/11/78 4 0 108.5 1/23/78 5 108.5 162.8 ! 2/6/78 6 108.5 162.8 !E 2/20/78 7 162.8 162.8 'E 3/7/78 8 0 162.8 3/20/78 9 108.5 162.8 I ' 4/3/78 4/18/78 5/2/78 10 11 12 108.5 108.5 108.5 162.8 162.8 162.8 5/15/78 I 13 108.5 217.0 5/30/78 14 108.5 217.0 7/13/78 15 108.5 271.3 6/26/78 16 108.5 271.3 I 7/12/78 7/25/78 8/9/78 17 18 19 108.5 217.0 208.5
- 217.0 217.0 271.3 8/22/78 20 108.5 217.0 l 9/5/78 21 162.8 271.3 9/18/78 22 0 217.0 10/2/78 23 271.3 271.3 I 10/17/78 10/11/78 11/13/78 24 25 26 162.8 162.8 108,5 217.0 162.8 217.0 I 11/28/78 27 162.8 162.8 I
I I I
- 1:0 -}}