ML20079N093
| ML20079N093 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1989 |
| From: | DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-1437 AR, S, WM, NUDOCS 9111110077 | |
| Download: ML20079N093 (54) | |
Text
\ -( , ','
o-UTILITY DnAf .L M \
51TE hs A a t e \lt t b .( \42 -_.
i 0 ENCLOSURES k%utmM do It OMI&M _
< h bedhilo u thi41 - 1rnpunalnvad /
[itdxIlinYn0 l dl\Mk7Rillg AO( TE $ 9 6Cs C(LD b29 te i' uis of obso<om4 ann i
o m md_ S ct.on O $ JJ bAcheso6 c1D hv PS. TSt 3am i ?.i R
( 3) INO bMMM bhu'tYuch0Nd ktputh At* k 6O I .
T1vnlotm e Lic M ua4 1.
( l$ b 1]Q h IAb evenN1d> A _- 1*
64s U L l
l l
l l
l 9111110077 091231 PDR NUREC 14J7 C PDR
4 .
ATTACHMENT Page 1 WASTE MANAGEMENT QUESTIONS A. Spent Fuel Ouestions:
- 1. Which of the following current techniques for at-reactor storage are you using and how?
A. Re-racking of opent fuel.
D. Longer fuel burnup.
- 2. Do you plan on continuing the use of these current techniques for at-reactor storage of spent fuel during the remainir.g time of your operating license or dc you expect to change or modify them in some way?
Modify.
- 3. Which of the following techniques for at-reactor storage do you anticinate using until off-site spent fuel storage becomes available and how?
A. Re-racking of spent fuel.
C. Above ground dry ntorage.
D. Longer fuel burnup.
E. Rod Consolidation
- 4. Will the techniques described above be adequate for continued at-reactor storage of spent fuel for the operating lifetime of the plant, including a 20-year period of license renewal, or are you developing other plans?
Adequate
- 5. Do you anticipate the need to acquire additional lar sr the storage of spent-fuel for the operating lifeti. of the plant, including a 20-year period of license renewal If so, how much land? When would this acquisition occur? Where?
No.
- 6. Do you anticipate any additional construction activity on-site, or immediately adjacent to the power plant site, associated with the continued at-reactor storage of spent fuel for the operating lifetime of the plant. including a 20-year period of licence renewal?
Yes.
- 7. If you answered yes to question 6, briefly describe this construction activity.
Build.#.ng above ground dry storage facilities.
I l
l t .
( - 4 ATTACILMENT Page 2 B. Low-level Radioactive Waste Manacement Oggstions:
- 1. Under the current scheme for LLRW disposal (i.e. LLRW Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and regional compacts) is there currently or will sufficient capacity for wastes generated during the license renewal period be available to your plant (s)? If so, what is the oasis for this conclusion?
We have constructed a vaste storage facility with sufficient capacity to store five years worth of BVPS waste.
- 2. If for any reason your plant (s) is/are denied access to a licensed disposal site for a short period of time, what plans do you have for continued LLRW disposal?
Our facility is already complete and available for storage.
- 3. In a ccuple of pages, please describe the specific methods of LLRW management currently utilized by your plant. What percentage of your current LLRW (by volume) is managed by:
A. Wasto compaction? ___ .__1 %
E. Waste segregation (through special controls or segregation at radiation check point)? O ,
C. Decontamination of wastes? O D. Sorting of waste prior to shipment? O E. Other? Comminaled radioactive matarial is shinned
,q11 site to vendors that oearecate. comnacht decontaminatea and incinerate th.qmtgj;_qt
- 4. In a couple of pages, pleasc. describe the anticipated plans for LLRW management to be utilized by your plant (s) during the remainder of the operating licence and through the license renewal term. What percentage of your anti.cinated waste (by volume) will be managed by:
A. Maste compaction? 1%
B. Waste segregation (through special controls or segregation at radiation check points)? O C. Decontamination of wastes? __
0 D. Sorting of waste prior to shipment? O E. Other? Same as 0.3 l
O < ' >
ATTACHMENT Page 3
- 5. Do you anticipate the nood to acquire additional land for the storage of LLRW for the operating lifetime of the plant, including a 20-year period of licenso renewal? If so., how much land? When would this acquisition occur? Whoro?
No
- 6. To provido information on the timing of futuro low-level wasto streams, if you answorod yes tu question #5, over what ,
periods of clue are those activities contemplated? HLA
- 7. Do you anticipato any additional construction actlyity, un-site, or immediately adjacont to the power plant sito, associated with temporary LLRW storage for the operating ;
lifetino of the plant, including a 20-year period of licenso renewal?
Yes
- 8. If you answered yes to question 7, briefly describe this construction activity.
Storage areas for steam generator components.
- 9. To provido informat3cn on future low-level wasto streams which may offect workforco levels, exposure, .and wasto '
compact planning, do you anticipato any major plant modifications or refurbishment that are likely to generato unusual volumes of low-level radioactive wasto prior to, er i during, the relicensing period for the plant? If so, please describe those activities. Also, what types of modifications do you anticipato to be necessary to achieve licenso rentaal operation through a 20-year licenso renoval term?
Potential for roracking of the. Unit 1 fuel pool.
C. Mixed low-level Radioactive Waste Ouestion:
- 1. If your ;>1 ant generates mixed LLRW, how is it currently being stored and what plans do you have for managing this waste during the licenso renewal period?
s _ . _ . - _ . _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ _ , __- . _ _ - . . _ . . _ _ _ . _ .- _._ _ _ ._ _ . -
' s ATTACHMENT Page 4 AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS
- 1. Post-licensing modifications and/or changes in operations of intake and/or discharge systems may have altered the effects of the power plant on aquatic resources, or may have been made specifically to mitigate impacts that were not anticipated in the design of the plant. Describe any such modifications and/or operational changes to the condenser cooling water intake and
/ discharge systems since the issuance of the Operating License.
There have been no post-licensing modifications in the aparations of intake or discharge systems.
- 2. Summarize and describe (or provide documentation of) any known impacts on aquatic resources (e.g., fish kills, violations of discharge permit conditions) or National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (HPDES) enforcement actions that have occurred since issuance of the Operating License. How have these been resolved or changed over time? (The response to this question should indicate whether impacts are ongoing or were the result of start-up problems that were subsequently resolved.)
Please see the attached 1983 Anr.ual Environmental Report Non-Radiological Appendix A Report Concerning a Fish Die-Off and the Aquatic Systemic Corporation letter January 31, 1989 Observation of Gizzard Shad in Discharoc of BVPS.
We are not aware of any enforcement actions taken by the regulatory agencies with respect to operations under the NPDES permit at DVPS. There are presently no patterns of noncompliance or unresolved compliance issues. However, there are a number of random incidences that occurred on occasion, but we do not believe any chronic problems exist.
In the past, chronic compliance prob 1 cms existed with the Unit 1 sewage treatment plant (outfall 203). This system has been redesigned and upgraded with a Rotating Biological Contactor and the problems have been corrected.
- 3. Changes to the NPDES permit during operation of the plant could indicate whether water quality parameters were determined to nave no significant impacts (and were dropped from monitoring requirements) or were subsequently raised as a water quality issue. Provide a brief summary of changes (and when they occurred) to the NPDES permit for the plant since issuance of the operating License.
The NPDES permits (prior and current) have only contained Best Available Technology (BAT) effluent limitations and have never contained water quality based effluent limitations. Therefore, we are not aware of any significant impacts or unresolved water quality issues.
. - - . - - - . - . - - ~ . - . - - - - . - . . - - . - _ - - - - - - .
ATTACILMENT Page 5
- 3. (Continued)
The station has had only two NPDES permits issued for the operations of the wastewater treatment syntoms. The first permit was issued on May 30, 1975 and the sec;nd permit was issued on November 26, 1984. An application to renew the NPDES was submitted to the Pennsylvania repartment of Environmental resource on May 26, 1989. The Department has not yet acted on the j application. !
i The only significant change between tho first ar.d second NPDES pcruit was the inclusion of the Unit 2 discharges (or outfalls) in the second permit.
- 4. 'An examination of trends in the effects on aquatic resources monitoring can indicate whether impacts have increased, decreased, or remained relatively stable during operation. Describe and summarize (or provide documentation of) results of monitoring of water quality and aquatic biota (e.g., related to NPDES permits, Environmental Technical Specifications, site-specific monitoring required by federal or state agencies). What trends are apparent over time?
Please see -the attachnd 1989 Annual Environmental Report Non-Radiological Report Section II. Summary and Conclusions pages 8 through 12.
- 5. Summarize types and numbers (or provide documentation) of organisms entrained and impinged by the condenser cooling water system since Isauance of the operating License. Describe any seasonal patterns . associated with entrainment and impingement.
How has-entrainment and impingenent change 6 over time?
Please see the attached 1989 Annual Environmental Report Non-Radiological Report Section p Fish Impingement and Section H Plankton Entrainment. The only change with respect to entrainment and impingement overtime has been with the increased numbers of Corbicula. See Section I Corbignla and Figure V-I-7 of the referenced report.
- 6. Aquatic- habitat enhancement or restoration efforts (e.g.,
anadromous fish runs)' during operation may have enhanced the-biological communities in the vicinity of the plant.
Alternatively, degradation of habitat or water quality may have resulted in loss of biological resources near the site. Describe any changes to aquatic habitats (both enhancement and degradation) in the vicinity of the powet plant since the issuance of the Operating License including those that may have resulted in different plant impacts than those initially predicted.
None.
-~ _ . - . . - . - - . . - _ _ _ = - - - - _ _ __- . - - . - - - -
i ATTACILMENT Page 6
- 7. Plant operations ray have had positive, negative, or no impact on the use of aquatic resources by others. liarvest by commercial or recreational fishermen may be constrained by plant operation.
Alternatively commercial harvesting may be relatively large compared with fish lossec caused by the plant. Describe (or provide docosantation for) other nearby ur.cs of waters affected by cooling water system (e.g., swimming, ,s.cating annual harvest by commercial and recreational fisheries; and how these impacts have changed since issuance of the operating License.
It has been observed that there has been increased recreational fishing in the aran below the BVPS dischargc through the years since operation of Unit #1 in 1976.
- 8. Describe other sources of impacts on aquatic resources (e.g.,
industrial discherges, other powcr plants, agricultural runoff) that could contribute to cumulative imec9ts. What are the relative contributions by percent of these' c. ttrces, including the contributions due to the power plant, to os.,rall water quality degradation and loss of aquatic biota?
There are no quantitative measurements of the cumulative impacts as related to activities upstream of the power plant. 011 and chemical spills, increased potential of hydroelectric facilities lowering the dissolved oxygen and the increased use of lawn herbicides end posticidos within the water shed has the potential for degrading overal) water quality, llowever, the loss of heavy industries in the Pittsburnh area and the improved water treatment plant operations in both municipal and industrial facilities have demonstrated an improved aquatic habitat as highlighted by the increased nu:?bers of fish species.
Reference Section E of i ns 1S89 non-radiological report.
- 9. Provide a copy of your Sectioq 316(a) and (b) Demonstration Report required by the Clean Water Act. What section 316(a) and (b) determinations have been made by the regulatory authorities?
None.
Beaver Valley utilizes cooling towers so the Section 315(a) did not apply to us. The Section 316(b) was accepted by the USEPA with no determinations. See the at' cached May 6, 1977 DLC letter to EPA with the 316(b) study and the June 15, 1977 USEPA letter to DLC approvir.g the study.
_ _ _ _ . . _ - ~_. _ . . _ . . _ _ . ~ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ .
. s ATTACHMENT Page 7 SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONS FOR ALL UTILITIES Varjous sources were utilized to obtain information concerning this survey. Our best estimate is based on information and records available.
- 1. To understand the importance of the plant and the degree of its socioeconomic impacts on the local region, OStimala the number of permanent workers on-site for the most recent year for which data are available.
1255 Permanent (Nuclear Group Employee status Report) '
357 Temporary Active Employees
- 2. To understand the importance of the plant to the local regio.1, and how that has changed over time, estimate the average number of permanent workers on site, in five-year increments starting with the issuance of the plant's operating License. If possible, provide this information for each unit at a plant site.
1989 3453 1984 2723 1988 3551 1983 2493 1987 3756 1982 2488 1986 2521 1981 1749 1905 122f 1980 2432 Average 3011.4 Average 2377 Ist increment ,2nd increment Plant operating licence was issued to Unit 1 in 1976 and this information was not readily available beyond the 1980 year. This information was obtained by numbers of radiological badged employees.
l
ATTACHMENT Page 0
- 3. To understand the potential impact of continued operation for an additional 20 years beyond the original licensing term, please provide for the following threc cases:
A) A typical Dlanned outace: To best estimate this number, we will utilize the known Nuclear Group Permanent Strength 1255 and the average of the 3 largest outagen by construction manpower requirements:
6 Refueling Outage i 850 temporary 1 Refueling Outage i 584 temporary 7 Refueling Ontage i 111 temporary 660 average temporary employens Estimate for a typical planned outsgo - 121%
This estimate includes (current) permanent and temporary employees from past outages.
B) An ISI outace: Because this type of outage work is now planned in increments over the course of several outages, the numbers above still be relatively constant. i_L41E C) The largest sing) outage (in terms of numbers involved) that has occurred to date was the 6th Refueling Outage that involved an additional 850 temporary employees.
T*. goal of the Nuclear Group is to keep the length of M' eling outages to around 70 days.
- 4. 'A ' s .darstand the plant's fiscal importance to specific jt<:2e'ictions, for 1980, 1985, and the latest year for which data are availa':.9, estimate the entire plant's texable assessed value and the amount of taxes paid to the state and to cach local taxing jurisdiction.
A.ssessed Value 80 - $196.4 million (PURTA basis) 85 - V 4 million (PURTA basis) 90 - 95 million (PURTA basis) i million (Local)
Taxes Pald*
State 80 - $ 5.9 million Local 80 - $ 0 million 85 - 8.9 million 85 - O million 90 17.7 million 90 - 1 million
- Total - All owners i 1
. . i so mg 3
8g5 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTICN AGENCY g,j R E G I Ord lit 604 At4D V'*.L'8UT STRECT5 PHILADELPHI A. pet 4ti ,YLV At41 A 19106 Wheeling Field Office 303 lietholict BuildinC, lith & Chat >1ine Streets Wheeling, 'ast Vircinia 26003 June 15, 1977 Mr. Robert J. !1cA111 ster J W 1 7 Rten Ctructural Engineer Duquecne Licht 135 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 RE: Beaver Valley Power Station - Un.t 1 NPDES - llo. PA-0025615 Inpingement/Entrainment Monitoring Report 316(b)
Dear Mr. McA111cter:
We have received and reviewed your ff nal impingement /entrainment monitoring report on your Eeaver Valley Power Station - Unit lio. 1 for 1976.
Based upon the data included in thic document we do not feel that any rodification of the intake structures at the Beaver Valley Power Station is necescary. We acree with the er1cluc4.on that the im-pincement/entrainment impact of the subject facility is not ad-vert.ely affecting the balanced, indigenous communities of aquatic organicms in the Ohio River and therefore approve the study.
Sincerely yourn,
.A-
/ /.+.. . '
v i
James L. LaBuy Aquatic Biologist
'inecling Field Office
Aa 4 .
,tf Sekb*tof7 y f Ed %~n hQ p o t. Pa . tes A*If
?R Duquesne Lidit , ,, . m
.3$ Sinu Ave.iwe gwron. eenamven.. May 6, 1977 Mr. Ptephen R. Wassersug, Director Enforcement Division U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Re' lion III Si.th and Nalnut Streets Phi 1Tdelphia, PA 19106 acaver Valley Power Station - Unit 1 NPDES Permit No. PA 0025615 Impingement /Entrainment Monitoring Report OFE 8700 CWO 629 Dear Mr. Wassersug On September 20, 1976 we submitted to you the semi-ann.2al report for the Impingement /Entrainment Monitoring Program as required by the subject permit. We are here-with transmitting to you the final required report. This finL1 report covers the entire year of 1976 as there was a change in reporting format by Duquesne's contractor.
We trust that this submittal fulfills the requirements ,
of the subject permit. Should you have any questions, please contact us.
Very truly yours ,
qc .' - .- '. . t .
ROBEAT J. McALLISTER Structural Engineer Attachment cca Mr . 11. R. Presten - w/a bec: !!. A. VanWassen S. L. Pernick (3)
T.J. Munsch F. J. Dissert R. D. Scherer R. L. Nelson T. B. McAuliffe
- - - - _ ~ . . . _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _
.. . _.. ~_-. _ - - - ....-..-- - - -
~
t t
d i
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY !
BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION ,
UNIT NO. 1 (
NPDES PERMIT NO. PA 0025615 REPORT OF IMPINGEMENTENTRAINMENT MONITORING PROGRAM FOR 1976 '
t t-APRIL, 1977
- i 1
I TABLE OF CONTENTS
-Impingement ,
Fish Inpingement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Entrainment Icthyoplankton Entrainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Phytoplankton Entrainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Zooplankton Entrainment. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 10 Appendices Impingement /Entrainment Data . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-22 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4
E 9
i i
I r l
l-I. _ _. . . . - -..# ..,.-.2. .. _, . . . ~. . _.. . , ~ . . . . - . ~ . . . . . - . - - , . . , . - , . , , , _ _ . _ , . . .._.....-...,----4 r . - -- - - - ~ ~ - - -
l I
FISH IMPINGEMENT i
A total of 9,102 fish were collected in 1976 (Table 1 ). ;
The ecmbined weight of the catch was 8,264 g (18.2 lbs). ,
Eight families and.25 identifiable species were represented.
No species classified cs rare or endangered were taken. In ;
addition, 483 crayfish, 343 clams, 83 leeches, and 20 dregon- ,
fly larvao were collected.
Emerald shiner was the most abundant species, accounting for 54% of the catch and 4,901 individuals (Table 1 ). Un- !
identifiable cyprinids, shiners, and minnows (thos'e too badly ,
damaged to identify) comprised 29% of the catch. Sand 2 shiner, mimic shiner, bluntnose minnow, and carp made up an ;
additional 9% of total. The ecmbined collections of the '
carp-shiner family (Cyprinidae) accounted for 92% of the total catch and weighed 4,644 g (10.2 lbs) . Channel catfish, the second most numerous species at a catch of 510 individuals I weighing 1,548_g (3.4 lbs), constituted 6% of the total :
catch. The remaining 22 taxa represented only 2% of the total yield.
Of the total catch during 1976, 87% was taken during January and February (Table 2 ). After February, numbers of fish gradually declined to a low of five fish in June. From July to November, collections averaged seven fish per 24 hr period. Large numbers were caught again in October. The results indicate that large collections occur at water temperatures below 40'F.
Fluctuations in catch composition were small. Minnows and ;
-shiners were most abundant in the winter months but were collected throughout the year. Channel catfish occurred in 72% of the collections and were. collected-in all months.
Game' species (sunfishes and some perches) were caught in-frequently and no seasonal differences were apparent. Brown bullhead was the only abundant fish that-exhibited a seasonal change in catch. This species was collected only in the summer.
Channel catfish was the most abundant non-forage species collected. Tne majority of channel catfish in the screen-washings ranged in length from 45 to 265 mm (Table 1 ,)-.
Only four specimens larger than 120 mm were collected.
Three of those larger fish were decomposed, ir.dicating that they had been dead for some time. All of the channel catfish-caught were less than two years old and more than 99t were f
,e-ev.,rw.r --- n wrv- ,-w e - w ww + w ww a-w n-ww w w u - %-3 , w w sw- mm i, e-..-, m -.ew v --
-e--- - - - - - , ,-.-v----+, .--=,+-.-e-,tv e ,-
e - et+se-*v-o m -
young-of-the-year. Ages were estimated frem age-length relationchips given in Carlander (1969). The only species for which mature adults were collected, as determined frcm :
length ranges given in Table 5.34 and data from Carlander l (1969) , were forage fish, mainly shiners, minnous, and ,
gi :ard shad.
On July 8, 1976, l'ntako volocity at the trash bars was determined in each operating intake bay. A Marsh-McDirney Model 201 Portable Water Curaent Meter was used. Readings were taken at the water surf ace, middepth, and bottom at the middle and along the sides of the intake bay, Measurements in intake Bay A were less than 0.4 fps; most readings were ,
between 0.25 and 0.3 fps. The total pumping capacity of this bay is 25,000 gpm. In 9ay D (total pumping capacity 9,000 gpm)_all readings wers aens than 0.35 fps. These measurements are similar to the maximum design flow velocity ;
of 0.2 fps. !
i Almost half of the organiums in screen wash collections were l taken from bays which were not operating during the 24-hr !
sampling period (Table 1 ). This situation may be caused !
by entrapment of organisms on the frames extending out frem :
the screens.- All of the traveling screens have frames ex-tending 6 in, out from their face, running their horizontal ,
length,and spaced every 2 ft along the vertical run, It is !
suspected that when the screens are rotated for washing,
- fish become trapped on the frame plates. This theory ;
is supported by the large winter catch of_ emerald shiner.
This~ shiner is a surface species (Trautman, 1957) and is !'
sluggish during the-cold winter-months. Its surface habit and its slower response in cold water would make it more susceptible to entrapment. Additional-support for this.
- theory is the low number of large fish, since large fish would be able to escape entrapment on the frames. 'The -
majority of the large specimens that were collected were badly decomposed. These decayed specimens were dead for some time before collection and were probably dead before becoming impinged; , ,
The results of weekly impingement collections during 1976 indicate that-BVPS operacions did not affect the fish popula-tions of the Ohio River. Only 18.2 pounds of fish were .
collected in 1976, a negligible amount. This amount of fish is insignificant-when compared to the 344 lbs of fish per-acre estimated to inhabit the New Cumberland Pool (Pres ton , .
1969). -Also,-92% of the catch were cyprinids, a species that has high reproductive capabilitics (Carlander, 1969) and'would not be harmed by the loss of such a small number of individuals.
Almost half of the fish were taken in non-operating bays, bays which have- ero intake velocity. Technically, these-fish'were not impinged but were rather entrapped. >
+
, 4 ;
niver rich Populations vs_ Impingement collections fi Shiners and minnows vero numerically dominant in the river and tho-impingement catches (Table 3 ). Largo numbers of ,
emerald shiner, sand shinor, and bluntnose minnow occurred - '
in both catches. Gi:::ard shad and channel catfish were also ;
common in both collections. Carp, spotted bass, largomouth ;
bass, yellow perch, and walleye, which were common in river !
collections, were collected in low numbers in screen washings. .
There were only slight differences in the rivor.and screen !
catches because predominant species occurred in about the same ;
proportions. ;
1 i
e M
k r
- a. _ x ,_ __; _, : _ __.a.-__.___.-,__ __ __.__.,__._,,___._.--___:_,_.._,;_-
ICTHYOPLANKTON ENTRAINMENT f 1976 INTAKE RESULTS A total of 1,244 larvae, 6 oggs, 10 juveniles, and 135 adults were collected in the intake structure from April through July. At least 12 taxa, representing five families, l 4
were identified. ,
No fish eggs or larvac were collected in intake sampics on i April 15, the first entrainment survey of the 1976 study period-(Table 4 ). River temperature was 54*F. On April.29 the river temperature had incrossed to 61*F and no eggs and 32 larvae (10.44/100m 3) were collected. Most of
- the larvae were either walleye or sauger (Sti:ostodion sp.). On May 12, only one intake bay was operating and no 3 eggs or larvae were collected. Thirty-nine larvae (13.05/100m )
and two eggs were collected tn May 27, when the river temperatur was 66'F. Numbers of larvae collected continued to increase and on June 10, 148 larvac (49.87/100m 3) were collected.
Two eggs were also collected. Cyprinids ( ainnows and shiners) accounted for the majority of the larvae on June 10.
On June 24, 666 larvae (218.87/100m 3 ) were collected and, as with the previous collection, the majority were gyprinids.
The number of larvae declined to 237 (78. 93/100mJ ) by July 8- (Table 5. 38) . A further decline was evident on July 22 when 122 larvae (40.58/100m3 ) were taken.
Cyprinids (minnows and shiners) accounted for 68 to 934 of the species collected. Gi::ard shad (Dorosemn cepedianum),
darters (Etheostoma sp.), sunfish (Centrarchidae), loggerch (Percina~caprodes), one juvenile channel darter '(Percina copelandi) ,. and one juvenile white sucker (catostomus commersoni) were also collected.
i .
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1976) classifies _the channel darter as "indeterminants apparently threatened-but insufficient data currently available on which to base- a reldable assessment of status". Sauger is classified as
" rare", however, positive identification could not be made
- as.to whether the larvae caught were sauger or walleye.
Walleye is not rare, endangered or indeterminant.
1976 River Transect Results 4
A total of 645 larvae, 195 eggs, and 13 juveniles were collected.. Cyprinids (86%) and gi::ard shad (8%) accounted for 94% of the total larvac collected along the river transect.
Centrarchids, percids, and freshwater drum made up the remainder ef-the catch.
River transect samples collected during the same timo pericd as the intake collections exhibited a temporal pattern similar to that of the entrainment samples. No eggs or
! larvae were collected on April 15 (Table 6 ). Three larvac and no eggs were collected on April 29 and no larvae and two eggs on May 12. By May 27, 40 larvac (3.92/100m3) and five eggs were collected. On June 10, 42 larvae (4. 92/100m ) and 165 eggs were collected. The majority of eggs were tentatively identified as emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides). Larval densities continued to increases on June 24 they reached 16.34/100m3 and by July 8 they reached 27.76/100m3 (Table 7 ). After' July 8, densities declined to 13.68 larvac/100m3 .
Intake Spatial and Diel Trends f
A spatial distributional pattern was apparent among the '
, intake bays. Larvae were collected in all bays sampled throughout the period but densities were higher at intake Bay B than at Bays A, C, and D. Bay B yielded 54% of the larvae for the entire period. However, Bay B was sampled on the three dates when the highest number of larvae were collected. Species composition among the intake bays was not noticeably different.
A large difference between mean larval density values for the day and night samples indicated diurnal movement (Table 8 .). Night sampling yielded 83% of the larvae collected during the entire sampling period. The largest mean night larval density, collected on June 24 in intake Bay A, was 353.53/100m3~whereas during the day the highest density was L 28.70/100m3 . It is possible that the bright lights on the face of the intake structure and the work lights inside the intake bays attracted-the larvae. Marcy (1976) showed '
-- similar results during day / night intake and river cross section sampling at the Connecticut Yankee Plant.
River Transect Spatial and Diel Trends The river transect data shewed little difference among the depths sampled at those stations having two or more depths.
Mean larval densities were much higher along the north shoreline (Station 5) on the opposite shore from'the BVPS than at other stations located along the transect.
i _Approximately 43.4t-of the total larvae-were collected at Station 3 (Table 9 ).
I No, diurnal differences were noticeable along the river transect except at Station 5. Overall, 53% of the larvae were collected during the day compared to 48% collected during the night (Table 9 ). Densities at Station 5 were significantly higher during the day than at night.
~ _ __ . __. _. _ , _ _ . _ , _ - __ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ ,
! Intake vc River Tranccct Comparison Total nean density values from the intake and the river transect differed (rigure 1 ). The largest mean larval density for the intake was 218.87/100m3 (June 24) whereas the largest for the river transect was only 27.26/100m3 (July 8).
8).
Although densities differed, the species composition of intake and river transect samples remained similar.
Cyprinids comprised 81% of the intake catch and 86% of the river transect catch; gincard shad comprised 60 and 84, respectively. Etheostoma sp. (darters) were found in both the intake samples (84) and river transect sr.mpics (<1%) .
Entrainment Losses Calculation of the percentage of larvac entrained vs larvae in the river was based on the formula: -
Percent Entrained = 100 N F gf/N Fr r (Ma cy, 197G) where Ni = average number of larvac per cubjc meter in the intake, Fi = flow rate into the intake in m-/sec, Nr "
average number of larvae ner cubic meter in the river, and Fr = average flow rate (mb / sec) of the river past the plant.
Intake flow rates were based on individual intake pump capacities in use on the sampling day. The river flow rates (monthly averages) were obtained from ORSANCO monthly reports.
Several assumptions were made:
- 1) ichthyoplankton densities were uniform throughout the sampling site. .
- 2) spawning for each species occurred continuou. sly during the spawning season.
.3) ichthyoplankton populations near the intake were not depleted but were repopulated constantly.
- 4) the flow of the river was uni-directional and the larvae passed by the plant only once.
The percentage of fish larvae entrained at the intake vs those passing by the plant is:
i l
I r, -
l Based on Mean Based on Minimum Monthly River Monthly River Flow Flow April 15, 1976 0 0 April 29, 1976 6.33 15.70 May 12, 1976 0 0 May 27, 1976 0.92 1.54 June 10, 1976 3.76 5.65 June 24, 1976 4.95 7.43 July 8, 1976 0.85 1.47 July 22, 1976 0.86 1.49 The maximum percentage of eggs and larvac is entrained during minimum flow.
The largest estimated percent of larvae entrained (mean and minimum flow on April 29) was probably not characteristic due to the relatively few larvae that were collected in the river. The other mean values, ranging from 0.85 to 4.95%,
are ccmparable *o results reported by Marcy (1976) at the Connecticut Yan%Ca Plant (mean 4%; range 1.7-5.8%) and Voigtlander (unpunlished) at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (range 0.93-2.81%). At minimum low river flow (5,000 cfs), '
about 1.2% of the flow would be drawn into-the Power station.
Calculated entrainment losses . wore similar to predicted -3 losses. Entrainment losses are' judged to be negligible, j
- r PHYTOPLANKTON ENTRAINMENT '
In general, the ecmposition and quantities of phytoplankton entrained were similar to thoce of the river samples. The following paragraphs discuss observed differences.
Monthly mean phytoplankton densities were slightly higher in river samples than in entrainment samples in J9 of the 12 months sampled (Table 10 ). The only largo d;'forences were among the green algae in May, June, and July. The '
flagellated algae, especially the cryptophyten and dino-flagellates, were more abundant in the rivu while diatoms had similar densities in both the river and entrainment samples. The small differences observed between entrained and river phytoplankten wqre probably related to shore effects. '
The shore zone, where substrate, light and other requirements are more readily available than in open waters, would be more favorable to the production of periphytic species.
Growth conditions for true planktonic species would be best in the main flow of the river. Since the BVPS intake structure is a flush-to-shore design, periphytic species are more likely to be taken into the plant than are planktonic species. !
~
In January, the periphytic diatoms Melosira varians and species of Navicula and Nitzschia were more abundarit in
'entrainment samples than in river samples. In March, the green alga Chlamydomonas, which is indistinguishable from i zoospores of periphytic green algae, was again more abundant in entrainment samples. Densities of most species in April were slightly lower in the river samples than in the entrain-ment samples. In May, the cryptophyte Rhodomonas minuta and most species.of green algae'were more abundant in the river while diatoms were more abundant in entrainment samples.
The greatest difference between entrainment and river, especially;among cryptophytes and green algae, occurred in June. From July through December, differences were similar to those observed previously but were considerably smaller. >
Species whose mean densities in 1976 were noticeably higher in the river. samples than in entrainment samples included the green algae chlamydomonas snowii, Ankistrodesmus convolutus,'and Micractinium pusillum and the cryptophyte Rhodomonas minuta. Differences were most noticeable in May and June. A number of diatom taxa were slightly more abundant-in entrainment samples than in river samples, but largo differences were not observed. A few colonial species, such as the blue-green alga.Microcystis aeruginosa, showed L
differences in densities that were due to onfy a few, but many-celled, colonies. -
E
c j '
4 tion of phytoolankton densities were cmall. The f diel variarien _s e>:pected since few phytoplanktera
%gy' '
ca':-ble of mr.e than the slowest movement and diurnal 1%W, '
e , are unlikely. Occasional high densities of
..hyteplankton seemed to be associated with san'ples 4 1RJ ', nigh n ncrmal suspended solids, possibly fypf .r n t. tem sedi -. Dying phytoplankters that settle out
, 'q watrr colum are commonly found in high densities at
. J N- wi_ter-c. dd interf ace.
y.
ion r.ntraihment le: es, based ten DVPS withdrawin .. % of the iver flow during minimum low river flow of 5,000 cfs, are judged to be negligible.
h mog
?
i
_9
~, . .. -. - --. . -.. . - --
. m ZOOPLANKTON ENTRAINMENT !
' Species occurring in the entraine samples were similar to
-those found in the .er (Table 11 ). Mean scoplankton densities and group percent composition data for each month-agree closely with data for the. river transects.- Zooplankton densities were low (<400/1) from January through March.
Seasonal peak densities of 5,336 and 7,093 organisms /1 were reached in April and June. May densities were only 2,905 organisms /1.
De:.sities det eased thereaf ter to less than (4,000 organisms /l from July through Scptember and Jess than 500 organisms /l for the remainder of 1976.
Protozoa composed mc, than 80% or more of all organisms in all months except June through September. Rotifers were abundant in the'? months, composing as much as 88 and 70% of the cooplankton in June and September, respectively.
Abundant taxa in entrainment and river samples were similar throughout 1976.
Dial Trends Diurnal fluctuations in total zooplankton densities were small_durin; all months of the study. The fluctuations which did occur followed ne definite pattern and probably reflect intake. slight differences in river populations passing the structure. Variations among :coplankton densities
. collected diurnally were no greater than those observed among the different river stations on a given date.
In: April Vorticella microstoma wan' co:n..aderably less abundant.
at .the intake bays .(<5000/1) than at a.J. the river transects-
.(>10iO^0/1); however, this was likely a result of differences
-in region.
current velocity, turbulence, etc. at the intake bay C,onclusions
.utrainment lossea, based on BVPS withdrawing J.2% of the river flow during minimum low river flow of 5,000 cfs, are judged-to be. negligible.
?
s3 a. 4 L mm mm,.2 & 44.,At.mM--. : u42< * , 6 A--G-.>-iaA J e A-Wei,3-44_4 6 h wd.a4 4 4 m ,L.p.3,_z.,*-4.,.h_. ,_4.,.aq,(AA. a y,.ux s p a - m e d . 4._mui m. - m 34,,a64 Av 4
. A a h _4.3 4 e .d4M m.-a s.; A m v a we it- 4 .- e, 4 .: ^
)
- i,\
t P
)
W r 4 E..-'
APPENDICES f
n
- - ' , n.-..., ,, . -- , ~~ - N-*
- TABLE 1 SUte1ARY. OF FISIIES COLLECTED Off TIIE TRAVELING SCREEtiS. AT DVPS JAllUARY TIIROUGII DECEMBER '1976 [
Forcent Wweer and Walet (si cf Fish Collected
, Frequency Oywrattag i23 Non-creratte4RI of Fercept AtlulLI tv edidl Attve We4 Length Psege Tama **d e r Occorrence Conww>el t tom
- essate r Welet ma=be r mt%t >=te r Wa . qW Ne+ce we t et _ (H Cizzard shad 93 28 1 1 6.5 78 1314 4 14 180.7 30-265 Carp 4 0 <1 1 4.s 2 62.5 1 3.5 '67-170 Erurald shiner 4901 45 *
'54 93 65.4 3579 2214.6 123 19.e - 1106 67e.9 25-%
Sand shiner 453 33 5 25 20.5 20 2 134.8 42 26.0 184 84.3 23-77 ,
Nimic shiner 106 23 2 3 1.9 124 76.s 39 20.7 F1-75 Bluntnose sinnow- 206 34 2 19 15.4 63 41.0 21 22.4 103 63.6 31 *5 g tfoldentif teJ cys.nlatJs 2635 45 23 1839 496.5 1897 559.0 1 White sucker 2 2 4 1 2.1 1 2.7 62-65
' hesa te catfish 26 23 <1 1 2.3 5 15.2 16 37.7 4 6.2 55-35 Teltow tmtIheed 1 2 <1 1 13.4 105 ,
crown tsalthead 21 19 41 6 10.6 7 102.6 e 18.5 12 s91 Channel catftsh 510 72 5 69 193.5 187 664.6 186 526.1 6e 143.4 45-265 stoneemt 2 2 <1 1 6.8 1 8.A 93-110 CalJentified catfish 12 15 c1 . 2 2.9 10, 23.2 35-75 Trout-Perch 1 2 <1 1 1. *B 71 ,
Banded k111tfish 1 2 <1 1 6.8 r.6
'g 1 5.4 32-67 Retk 1 ass 4 8 <1 3 9.5 g
Creen sunfish 12 8 <1 9 24.1 1 11.8 2 6.4 47-100 Pumpk insee d 22 ,30 41 7 27.1 s 12.0 10 54.7 3d-95 Bluagitt 5 9 <1 .2 3.0 3 4.8 42-57 scallowsuth base 1 2 ci a 12.3 103 Sl otted bass 1 2 41 1 30.6 1 75 White crag pie 4 e <1 2 3.5 2 28.4 40-439 e 4 2p-55 Untaentified sunf t sh 5 <1 4.6 1 0.4 Jvhnny darter 5 e <1 4 3.7 1 1.0 43-53 Unidentified darter 1 2 <1 1 1.0 33 Ye1Icw perch 3 6 <1 2 25.1 1 3.6 75-111 e <1 1 1.0 1 1.0 2 1.9 5 4 -t,5 la?t.cr ch 4 Walleye 1 2 41 1 4.5 to Total scuadwr 9102 237 5409 420 3036 res cent of Totat Num4er 2.6 5%.4 4.6 33.4 e
Weight 3st.g $205.1 $46.3 1830.4 Fcscent of Total Weight 4.6 67.0 10.2 22.1 (a) Intake boys that. had intake pumps og aratin9 in the 24 he sampting pe'. lod ,
(b) Days that hed no pumps operating during the saepling gwetod f.) Remetive to enternal stimuli, returns
- to river (J) Unreactive to st!=ull or g*artfelty decayed i
I e
5 f
. e tid 3LE 2 RIVER COJDITIONS SU:O'.ARY OF FISHES COLLECTED CN THE TRAVELING SCREENS, BY DATE JANUARY THROUGH DECE:GER 1976 BVPS u see u i e.e.e e t .t.
n ,,,.u..m..._,,,
6...
__.. s.ee, _e
.ae .,.m.
. e emu au,% s. t .e .i i .ee n.e.,
.e.e.e m
e m ce t t ers ee eu .~ n t n oeT wa4 d' an' was I1 i g % *r see to. i Jeenary a sie e le ist al se e 43. g oil.a o als a le so n nel a a 31.e sea .e
, le Sat 9 19 341 il 318 s e 31.3 see . s 33 til le le F74 of 433 e 34.1 64.0 30 1846 38 7 3413 la he a 34.3 sig.e p obre.tv 4 1911 && 1 600 en ete a 31.4 ud .)
- 1) 674 9 4 171 H 4JS a 31.e 644.9 to He 3 e att e 4 s a 41.s 447.e af 464 3 4 434 4 3e e a a 43.5 8 71.9 sere 4 e 81 1 3 49 9 3e e a 41.e ese.e la lit 3 4 !!G 9 47 a 44.0 644 .9 19 48 44 6 11 4 31 s 43.5 647.5 34 44 5 & te e 4 s 48.5 Hl.3 navil I in 44 4 7 1 4 s a 53.8 ha .0 9 43 43 9 9 0 3 s 64a .9
$Je4 16 3 41 9 4 0 1 a 64.4 us .e
. 33 . 41 0 1 9 e e a a 54.3 441,3 as 3 41 9 0 3 9 a m $3.8 %4.0 met 1 41 0 e 4 a 1 1 51.0 t-e . 0 14 4 41 9 8 8 9 s 60.e MS.1 34 4 en 1 3 9 0 a e 58.4 444.4 It 4 41 0 9 1 9 e a 49.4 M1. 8 emme e e 0 0 0 0 9 e a 44.9 441.1 In '
9 4 0 0 0 S s a 41.5 645.9 le 4 4 4 4 4 8 e a y 16.4 445.9 J1 5 41 1 3 9 I a e ?? e 644.9
- ely 3 4 44 0 3 e a a see.e 1 71.s 9 14 48 0 1 3 a a 9 11.8 644.0 le 3 48 1 1 1 4 a e 11.5 441.3 as t 41 1 3 e a e 645.8 4 1 11.9 30 to 41 0 1 3 e e a 71.3 4 641.1 4 sgust 4 7 tl 8 a e
& S & e 11.3 641.5 Il 5 53 4 3 & 4 e a e 14.0 641.1 to 33 41 9 4 9 3 s a 13.9 461,5 31 13 *a 3 le 9 4 s e it.9 669.5 sept emen e 3 5 41 1 e 2 e 3 13.0 641.1 19 3 in 9 e 4 9 e a a 13.3 6es.e af 4 44 6 3 3 e a e 14.0 644.0 31 4 41 f 1 3 9 a a te.e sol.s thetnes e 1 4 44 9 8 4 e i s 47.5 443.4 4 44 11 28 3 8 8 0 e a
- a a 64.5 549.9 41 9 34 9 6 a s e a 54.4 es t.0 33 6 44 e 3 3 a s 53.5 ess.o F9 14 44 4
- 4 1 a e 50.3 647.1 the*eeke t 1 4 41 9 e 4 9 a 11-3 49.1 est.e I 44 9 9 1 8 s 41.0 461.6 49 8 El 1 $ % 9 a a 44.9 464.3 34 le 41 8 9 8, 9 s 43,4 644,9 ,
i .i u 4 4: .
n i i i . s .i!. u.73 It lie i
i.
e 143 in e (4 i a a u. u s .3 >
34 e 33.3 644.1 Lit & 34 44 48 s ,a 3%
le 34.3 u4. 3 1+4 3 49 et at 16 a 33.4 a M1.0 Totel 9603 331 $40, ele 1936 P*"** 4 3.4 St.4 4.4 33.4 fel letene teve t%es hee let.aae e-mie oweating sa the 34 he ...ptleg p etet Le t Seye tad t had e.s pm geef etl% der het LAs e giing yet tent is l toeet!*e te eetteven t ellee.4 4. ,4stted ge e 6*ef 146 Seessettee top ettens&& ee pos t6 4es e yed
.~ -~
l TABLE 3 l
COMPARISC:I OT FISHES COLI.ECTED I!! Tl!E !!EW C*JM3ETCJiD POOL CF Tl!E 01!!O RIVER A: D FISIIts CO'?"CTED C:1 T11E TRAVELI!;G SCFIE:iS OF THE BVPS i
JAliUARY TliFJDUGH LECEMBER 1976 !
Total Number of Percen" Ccepositon of i Fishes Collected Fishes Collected l Traveling Traveling Taxa . River Screens River Screens Longnose gar 2 0 <1 0 Gizzard shad- 10 93 1 1 Coldfish 2 0 (1 0 Carp- 12 4 1- <1 Emerald shiner 81 4,901 10 54 Spotfin. shiner 35' 0 4 0 Sand shiner 302 453 36 5 Mimic shiner 12 166 1 2 Bluntnose minnow 272 206 33 2 Creek chub. 1 0 <1 0 Unidentified cyprinids 0 2,635 0 29 Quillback- 2 0 <1 ,
White sucker' O 2 0 <1 Yelle> bullhead 1 1 .< 1 <1 Brown bullhead 3 21 <1 <1 10aite cc.tfish 1 26 <1 <1 Channel catfish 16 510 2 6 Stonecat. O 2 0 <1 l
- Unidentiflad catfish 0 12 0 <1 Trout-pe rch 0 1 0 <1 i Baried W 12'.tish 0 1 0 <1
. Rock L. s 3 4 <1 <1 G..en sunfish 1 12 <1 <1 Puwp'tinseed 3 22 <1 <1 Bluegill 3 5 <1 <1 Smallmouth bass- 6 1 <1 <1 Spotted bass 17 1 2 <1
.Largemouth bass 12 0 1 0 Whit.e craprie 2 4 <1 <1 Black crappie 3 ') <1 0 Unidentified sunfish 0 5 0 <l.
Johnny dirter 2 5 <1 <1 Yellow perch 24 3 3 <1 Walleye 9 1 1 <1
. Logperch 0 4 0 <1 Unidentified darter 0 1 0 <1 Total 037 9,102 s.
G d s
t e 1
l TABLE 4 ADULT FISil, FIS!! EGGS AMD L ;RVAE (per 100m ) COLLECTED IN THE BVPS IUTAKE W TH A 1 m, 505 MICRON FE H PLTM TON HET APRIL-JUNE 1976 BVPS ge er e
...s e e ee u_
meaen au_ an
_,,,,,,.,te.g.,,,G_
.r ww
,,,,.J.M, _
.ee wt.
f.**U*ft, u ,
e 0,te es. ies .. - . - - - em-
- H.&.. .vo e . t , u
.W, e..e g . .u.... 3... . e.,t .
.i. li. 3.
ite
,mu . . . e m, .., ,4, ..... ....,
_ e t e me.un toi . . 3..
. . n. . 3.
. e i,e4 wn_,,T"Usie ha. e filteted l te l 16.4% f t.41 Mot SMet.IB 14.4% ?4.41 ee. et 3eroes esinected MT SW1.F0 364.44 i 18 8 13 n be. et sees ee setteeted e e 9 8 le e eest y 4.38 43.48 8.84 11.44 ts.44 1.ecoes aatter.41 t?"Sth*J4,3 tot e 4 4.13 3.11 s.st 4 at 108el e 4 4.44 4 Mint lese ndee 1! 8.fiMmg.T.se teneae gg 9 4 0 4.39 4.s %
9 9 e.3)
!gg we,e g,)g2.em, e e. ee.etinti8 eni i n, 4a.um. i.evee .i . n n a.. 6
- 4. .i i.4... J f 4...83
- 3. 3 .... l N.e.Mi ,eee u t., esu.ee m ins = . - = = . - =
. et oe u.... n. . . . = - =
Dee 447 e # #
Po e velt'.e. Ir t'd estee fileseef leb 14.60 14,69 SOf S MP LIO 907LMFuS $4.49 et 390.74 ao. of le+ese sotioctu 3 H I e 31 ee. es egge se14*e soe 1 6 8 8 3 teoster 4.63 49.53 3.48 0 13.8%
tersee em e ==ee e e po.i t e...e in3On 1.34 1.34 1.34 e 1.84 C rye se 44ee s en a dU 1.34 1.34 nitst. eel t it.f ill 9 4 f .8 '
eiec.e se tes te 4e tiu a s.6s n.3e a 3,3a tentTM (Jee 4tbi 9 %.34 0 0 0. H t e hen s e ume so , 4 33.43 f UsiWiereed e atti tett 6 8 8.43 451% d.34 4. H O O 8.II t es e sgy sheenee 1.34 4 4 Lele 0.41 e
no, se neeeee settested se f 64t*eed leb ' 14.85 14.49 14.49 14.89 sov 4Amst2a mot swun 198.14 I e e 431 141 me, et esse eetnessed n 4 e 5 4 ee es 3evenues rettested n 4 4 4 3 se. ed esease eetteesee e t 0 3 3 peeest y 3.44 13.83 S.34 119.41 43.37
&arese tie **1 f atef teeg int 6 6 4 8.34 4.43 e oenee w s i e %= t t.u 9 6 6 4.34 6.33 3[$ u%e5 r
(f It&l leasese 86f te46 tRI lII 4 e
6 1.34 9
4 18.II 48.60 1 44 fe,ieete44*e ta des tus,deae bited3 t EL) 44 11
%.34 19.3% 4.48 43.33 46 "1 frpeteldee (sehdesettled) (LL) G G 1.34 9 4..
he.e ee t te 47'*.Q'*_t,1g* (04- 9 6 4 4.34 8 '4
' e tenfte ee _ w,,a .es gg e o e 3.48 9.s ?
. s e e i ge g La ese e u 4JI 1.34 4 0 0 . 6.38 MNie, spDt 4 4 1.34 36.43 14.e4 ltwee s ee tiemejetey (J) e e e 1.34 4.33 io.Ga.UTI4We s esee 6 e e 4.e4 4.se Spa -
- .,,e ee..e uu s.u ..u . . i.a . 4, u . .. a I vet'
- e wetee t%ueved te t 14.49 14.88 16.48 18.85 tecer twt.43 Wof tasG&Aa 304.48 me. et 42evue eet teeted 93 Sit 133 3at 444 so. of e gJ seineeeed & 6 4 4 8 ee. of )*wevee e esteet.e4 4 4 6 3 1 Dame 6 ty 5 ft 543.14 113.3% 311.83 313 49 te rese
>2e
%ggeog gefoeduve Lt;3 1.33 38% se.e4 t.I te . ... . i t . .t. ' l 81 ene.e.ee, eueen trui eni iae o e u.es .
eves selene t ee 6deos i t t eet int 39.88 111.10 114.03 SJa.e7 snt Surba8 i.s Cypo te ndee tes.6 e tt! t ted) (L;.4 8 49.17 9.43 pret 4WLan 114. t e Cype t tidae IWhe deet.a f ass 4el 34.55 14.3%
- 4 1.30 %. N S.33 Coote seusee 9 4 L t.4 4 4 94 te,3ere t e se veeent rue Itu 4 1 19 0 0 0.33 teg e75 esiiMU W tJ) 4 9 4 % .19 0.11 land Memo ep, u.17 4 6.13 6.3) v.Mio.i e t Lta 4 30.70 6.81 **
Meyes e#. o t.sn e t .a t 3.sg i
n j ps. IJO 4 9 9 4.38 h'Mee d fleM e linee 3.30 e e 4.30 S. H sue e.st
,,_e n eas e . 1.30 e e 1.36 4.41 u
las t eeen v6the eeueet a teet speete, esee. eelt ene teve esta toe e=ve seeeet te, teve see,..e, un e ab see s ee etesame tes e 66 speese. eessen i mee retese oesen e.ein eadise et t gaeae=tee. eve.
eedie , ** ses se f te essee ca re cie emee e.r ett eseessee ese see seeeeeet us e a se.neiseene 6. #e aen en
.a eekee eteneese et tee des e n t e.e e . ow spear eame es t eeees e e s e ee t p e e ee s t .
e e - , sve sesee we n t eteees et t ae one ce ese . ,,e eHoe apees e 6 ees e usee ttee. e nes eue r eser e ed e t e net es t ze useeed eyec a f ee.s n o ..tet t e.
ae oes.cos sti e o tienee one yees se eee, ftee eceeteenete edent,.
til 491 e e Laos of eeegees e tese==se setermen tee fee oestattee leset telset6en.
beessetos ee de t e r nee nt e.s.
e sou n t spesto tti ee nouseee.eee==_efege *.
a e. pe e setse, f eefeeeeese e, reeellee. s,. e e ees tass e .
4'h .. e . L lees i f t. ee k ph. sene.ye
. t .te .
e,. ee t,.e e n t e,,,gt eed [t,ee,se s eo e,.
Ost titi ebeie7 Aoi as n'lTekaJ te ne es os s 4 tees e. en e ~o ptee s ow s. a tte'**
Teetalliele" Dies tf 6ed se ene rea t e o c e ae teswo piehee.l p 44 7.'.e==,e' ent eQo le sees a f tee e esmee teet tee uns toeaedes tersee set,sk. 6tre.11 4 4te ~aaeteeseeos saettee a'eles. 'teiene eer eos be 4e4 Tike er the ta t t saad esdaan ee nsee eines s ee esi.oe e.ee s eeeee.a e f f .
neee4 A s tee t ten s ee t e n a ve . t. Enw.Mt *** a 11titet
- Lat hee **e te, ik este al e tevee.
6 TABLE 5 .
' ADULT FISH ,
JUVENILES AND FISH LARVAE (por 100m ) COLLECTED IN THE BVPS INTAKE WITH A 1 m, 505 MICRON MESH PLA';F. TON NET JULY 1970-BVPS
. . . . .n e e.,. ...s u. e .. e 6 c .n u.4, hit 111 3 til t!13 11: '.r.1 til Elin ser swtan' mot sansun h.twe3..in
.s. 4 sait t i.'s 16.st is.s s 16.as ts.44 sas.4 me. .e tae... .u..i .e a 13 M 137 aat a.. 4 3 .= sin eeuws. a e e a s m .a es.4ee unut.4 e a e e e s.ty' 13.es s a.s3 as.es ten.st a
to.s e L.e.u I
mee g 3Miya GM 4 5.61 9.8J 4. 44 30.01 8.40 sua e e e a.st o.as p;e.m.a.e.i.t,.m.au cres iw se ti ss tru,3 a 3.si 3.e4 s.es s.as 12.L4 7.8) 34.9 1 30. 81 134.17 49.J4 try. i.AJe.1.n&d.
c,,. ..u.e 41f t.d.l u
- u. iu4 9..o . i.u
.. .n.
e .i . = .i. 3 e.u s
e e e 4.s t a.es c.h..t
- u- 8".
o g.,e t t s'ka 9 e e 3.94 0.90 e m.J . 4ul -0 1. M 9 1.30 - e.45 es.m.e.m Hasate 44 e 3.34 0 3.44 4.Se de ellee' y2st.gtg gth.et le.g 4 4 9 3. 6 L d.4 %
en t.eio dti tr'*t # # # 3*38 8 33 Be +t a.e Past .q 3.44 e 9 0 0.45 Ae.14.
,= ..vte e.. i w ta.e_ e a-.as e o e es a tr 11. 1954 sue aa ,6 o seg saa,sm
- 4. ed aed flieued 1.') 11.18 11.14
- a. 13.10 ~ M. 36 343.87
.# ter... nus.a se se 4 u.. 4 Je.enal 8 I 4 is ist 8.ne t t y e &
43.29 130.00 9 38 1 3.71 40.10 s4 e
$.e..me eu.dl s. Ital 6 3.64 e e' eM trys a.4dee t.asee.a n t tedi (Tu e 1.93 CFy 0 0 - 3.98 =
481) St.Ge 103.99 3.M Cyt.ft.14 &ald lea 4.ne n fl.dl
( sdenetf & dl (h4 e 1.33 31.11 34.91
- 4w.
t
- 4. e,. (ELI G G 0 6 e.nl 4.34 3.64 0.99
}.t gyp d&&l 4.3J 8.33 9 U.ed.ne 6 4 6a41, e 4.44 9 8.44 e e 0.64 Jish *tnust.vtaMS tae 9 3 38 e e s.33 na e. ine u e t., 4.u. ..tv n. 6.re .ite tae p.,. w.e en. ,4 4.
tai is . ame e op.es On - as . sa.et
- a. .ua reta .a.u.e ett ,1 4
- a. . mien , eta .%/.e a.. e e. . .u. .
eeuus.
tael 4.. . . .. t e ..a se .nses ese eer. e esser et e. .e. a e ee.e..s..
in u. . s, .. La sa
- a. .=se.n saa ure e a,..r e s
- t. .* en.r,.e.as 4 ua ..e eus ran. .,,nou u em. e e s .a t 4.st.,
Ist a . s, u. .een tane sevis . u et sie es. .u u. es,.e.n a. e tt asu a.a e,.o n me
- a. ene pic.nusi .t ee.te. e.u t ,.e ti er tal o es e,.u in e.e. e .. . se
- w. e. em.gtm.. g. 3. . , .t tuu a.a 3,L
, . gg. y. se .c ajm...
a se u al..s.e snu.a .
i..u. g. .-i g..t. 11. g.t. igg e ti u... f d8
- su e $,.na t 4.*
.u. e' ha.pC.t.
iv u**s. n*ie..."w..e "" 'n t'r** L b' d
& titt*.tri 1 ""*"> n "*"I'ul t '3"' 8 8 'a "* "a** -
ist ini.4 u a, a.c.s..
ej s ei a .e e,,e .a .+.nu, t.ua r us he .w= L s e s.n n. * . a . ..
e.,.a u 4.anin..e 44 .u...
e t.-
th. .= f an a dandun ut.u tiet n.. .4. .
e- .
TABLE 6 FISH CGGS AND LAP'11d: (per 100 m ) COLLLECTED 16T THE ENTRAlm'ENT RIVER TRidSECT WIT 9 A 1 m, 505 MICRON MESH PLANCON NET APRIL-JUNE 1976
. DVPS
..t_
..:.g o..w. . - u..tu.i ). n.n.
.k"J J1.
.g._
!M3.
__ ..<_ . .e __ twyg .e, f.I'A Jb t.inA .P L IT.l. .P2 blu te . H tr.it m
&. s.ti.ee.. s p. ..e tini.e a.n s l uo..e
- i.'sn.* .el let .es I
44.9%
e 6:e.40 e
tes.se e
n .81 e
as.se e
e.u e
se.sa e
- s te. n e
e e e 9 e e e e 4.gs e e e e e 9 9 e e e e e e e e it.M..1*
. . ei JM.. . re s.u.e s.Je ee.es es.ee tst. .t it. p rea.ee us.n w . e, so. n u ..e u.sa e., t.e.u um.e e 8 e I e e en.es e.. m se t e e e 3 e e e e e e e ew 4u.a.sa. we 9 8 e e e e e e
, e e e
- , ast e a 6 e 4.3e e I .e. e.e4 e e e e a 4.n fu 0**'r*s*e tu i 4t ttsvill.e '48 e e e 3.u e e e e e e.se a ta .o. in e 4.3e e e e e e e e e
e P:lisu bisi inti tm.we.u. 68 e e e e a se 4.64 e e a e e e, te 3.1Aeg31rgagg 33 4" e 4.8e e e a e e e e e 9.10 b
. . n.n e t. u on.n e.
% e I.dD...
- 4. e .e a.nn 44 s.e n.e s
..e s.1 e e es. .e e
in.w e e nu. se e
n.n e
e . ,e . .n e
es.is e e 9 9 $ e e e e e e 4et e e 3 F e e e e e e e e e e l'A*L.M. 4 ..O.. 4 4 44..we M.Se 198.00 e3.3e lee..e 448.4% be t.se $44.e5 e. . ft a.. t. . .u n .e e at it ,5) n. le 4..M.f 3 B e e a e e an e e 4 se 5 e e
% e.e.
a 8 6e h. s s .e .e e 4 0 - 9 8
4 e e
e a
e e
o e e e 4ep e e .
84.48 8.19 e.lt e 3.4% 9 8.34 4 4 8. .e 3.e4 6.
peg g t.p.t ,,,a ftJ e eM e B.H e W e e e e M w..m ....... gj t e e Ly.e.. g ...n ,si.e,gg,
. .e n.
ig e.
e e e. us .u o.lt a.n o
9
. e.
e e
e e
. e. M a .*
i.n e e i. e e m e e e 9m
..ytj g.a..y c4y .es e e e e e e e iy .e, p..;g eat e - .3,os14 e e e e e e 3e Ft e e e e e e te p' se.4 9 e-o g[.ag sei.e
.. ist e e.99 0 e e e e e e
- 6. sets e
e t.ee e
e e.tl
- e.
e e e e e e. s e e.J9 h.g.J e e ta. e4 6 e.....y e e e e e e 8. et e 34 0.99 e e e e
, e e e e e.H e,se es e e
' m.e 9. It e e e 4e.si.e6
.a tt.e .w e e e e e 0.88 e e 0 39 e.1e e e e e 9 9 te (r.19 ."e I
e.4 e . fl t it . l.
e 4.e.e e.at..ee.e e
De nt ee. te e l. )e 154.48 Ice.as - tes.ee to.33 13.99 B4. 91 e as ett be e .. u a.e .e e e 3
S 6
e -
e 18) e 8 e B e et e 4 y B e it e les e to.M n Es
- 4. u 4.4e 3. M 8.fo 4.48 t.e4 I 4 se 44. u e 9e g.g y ggygene em 9 3.e4 4 9 9 e e e e e e e e.39 M mo 4 ... ggye n. 9.e3.sta.e. fi l
Du e e e e e eH e 3.58 9
- fye e e et 4.99 3.ee e.5%
team. thia.d. lata e S.Al e evy l 4 8e.9 3 3.4e 4. M.
E .e 4.38 n et tyry,s,3 t te gg[21g 4 IN ste.et.:
e e e e e o e.94 e
9.
e e e e 5.se
.t.to e
le 8.u 4.se e e 4.34 e e.13 e *
.P.3. nu .p . s ea t asst e 4.e e e e 4.M s.e3 e e e 1.44 8. M e St
- e. 4.4e 8.n e e e e e e e e.n e e e.48 es 44 4. .
e *9 e e wu. v.t.e.hs.un.e.41
. .. e ...n e e ue 0-e e e 9.J 9 e e.34 e se - i.n ut.n e a a.8 e 9 8 -e 'e e s.w aa e.s . e e- e e.n o e e.n i.m e 9 e.u e e e e e.n
-c n. .3
- m. .ou en u..e se.w su..e ice.u
=.ia.- - u ei.n in.u no.u w.u
. ~- -n.nm.e n.e .
e w e
- u. a e et .. .
. u..n i9.3e i.e..,s. 3, e.
e e i e ., n wo,..-a- .u u um.e e 0 m.n .
i e
e.n e e . .e -9 e
e e
e
.* e .n .a t. . 1.n 1. n eJ.. .Lo it en.y. e 8-r.se.~.,. e.u. u, e" e *-
e m ., mt. e e e" .ue .$.n" e
e e e e-e" 8-e."w u,.......n..N..
e,
. ....a o . : .s
.e
- i .n e.n e ut i.e.
e i .a un u.
e.n e
n.
e.u o
e 4.n e
s.n i.u - us.u e
e n.u e
on
. . .e em o ta e e e e e e.w uem im. mw p'in tu.m.,u e ea
- e e
e
- e e s e e e eae wui.u._,,sw. m,s, seu
- e e e e e.u e e e *a
.u
.n.
e e- e o e e .e .e e .e s a,t a.n e e e e e e i.n e eae e e e o.a ee9.
. u e. O e e - i .n e e.u e e e . e.
n.et.. ,.- . .....a u..a.. ......e.. .
in t. . .e.
.n m 4 -.
.....e ee i
-n.e.e,......m.,....n..........i.m....n......,...e.....
. - . u. o
. . ... ..... . . o.. . . . . . . . . . . .. ... .m . ..-. .. ..... .. .n. .a .eo . .. n ...-...e,
..e
.. . e- .m m ,.
.. .e .o wn. 3 e. ns. 8.
.,m.. . - .- o ~~.4- t.c t uuwns. t. aus. a. ~w.n.o
- t. e - --e.
e u-a. sun .e. .t. ewn w
.m, e .. . .~... .
.. m - u. .o..~
e.m o m_
N**............:......
.. .... - .u.
tus.4 w e t.w ca a c. ausm-e.o ~ ., . .. e .. . -, - n .e . . .. i.e..
-- - .~
- g. .i-. - - - . .
TABLE 7 JUVENILE PICII AND FIS!! EGGS N:D LARV7d' (por 100m ) COLLECTED AT TIIC ENTRAINMENT RIVER TPRJSECT WITil A. 0. 5 m, 505 MICRON MESl! PLtd:KTON NET JULY 1976 BVPS
=_
...i e s t- .. tt-m. eFa-te e n.~
t 4
% .,,. i p r.4, ..
I*1 *TI I'd hk k UE$ b b b *!rl ply e. L9't
. 6. 4 ..e.s f u s.. 4 s.g s 13.44 164.48 94.6 4 tk.39 349.19 14 4.9 e 69 44 96.84 le .14 68.91 l as t . 43
- s. of 1.a... 4 4 t .d le et 4 && 44 le 44 4 el H $ PS
- e. .f 3 .A s . . g g n.rt.4 e e 4 8 4 & e e e e 4 8 $. .ii4 6..t.4
- e e e e e 4 4 9 p _
8 ...,u.. .
.e.n u.n i.a n.u e.u 4.4, .e. .n au. n . .e ia..e 9
nae t s.,.
D g.a.g ge t.m tytt IU e e e e 8.V1 NI e e e e e e.14 8.84 3.19 e 4.44 EMA ty,. UJI.t.ur*ettLI , iets np n.a 4.09 e 4 4.M 4.ee 18. 4 sn.4.6d 4.i.t i 8.u e e e. i e e e u.n 3. e.e i..
(e.l nf t g (Eti gg e .4 34s 41.e4 ) et 1.44 $ < 49 4-el 18. e% e.44 M.48 64 96 30. e1 te p. 6. e J ne. gf6 ltut e 4.44 e e e e e o e 3.2e e 1e J*.Rjg. 8848 %'i 4.10 e e 4.M e e. e e e e e .30 I? gjg e e e 0 e e e 4,63 e 3.30 1".t.t&1 pp. 4341 k - 6.34 e 4.44 9 4.M e e e e e 4 9. le gl.JJ f *a.33 t.t_l3.*y(a_k8 g t g.J (80 e e e 0 0 6.44 e e e e e.no e=M. 4 6 4 a.u. H e * *- G 8.44 e e 3 18 e e e e e4 4 4 a..H8 .
e e e 4.09 e e e e e e talt*f11 An tivew2tit.{1 awt eled. e t . e e e 8. e* e e el e e e e o. l.e e.4 Sgs. '
231".111 #1Ntim tf 9.t'*I . e e e e e 3.n 4 4.e4 e e e.1, s
delf &.Ik.# l!..it.# filt...d 4.') 94. M el.4 4 e4.43 Lel.ee 441.34 lee il 19 89 St.84 4 4. 0e 6. 18 964.14
- a. e t 4.r... 4 4..t.d 83 8 44 = 4 4e 4 4 2 le is 131
. .t 3. 6 6.. .44 t.d 1 e e e e e e e e e 1 uut.4 0 e 4 3 e e e 9 es,
-a .4,e.g. e. .e u.n e .' e
_...e- .. e.n u. 1. . n ia. u..n ie.u n . e.
La s.
esp.t.44 tu.4 4 Lif t.41 ITU - 4.00 e 8. M e 4 1.10 1.14 fry.t. nee. te44 648 8.d lElkt e=&d ttis.4 Itta H.64 e
8.10 e g 1.58 4.10 . 9.1s e
' 4.44 e
3 49 e e
- 4. es e.
- 3. L e
91.13 38.ee e
4 it.et e
4.10
- 1. n o.le e.de.at tin: ea. 8. 8 e e L. L3 e e e e e e 1.54 e.44
- 4. 4 s..
attratit d'10~L111 s.es e e e e e e o e e e.n Inumi cauut 4. n e e e e e e o e e e.u -
e,..
=w.ig 133.e t .14.. e o e o e.u . e.34 s .rt e e e e.ts
. I n vs. . see n.a . u. 6. .uen v u 4/u .u ,1.wi.e ... e... e.
t ai as . se,..a . s ..s.s v.u u.. t.. u. .as 4. .u.e # 64 su. d ..ia, . at. u. e. e.
en u.e c. .e i.. u,. 4 6 L .v,s e,t .u e e=t..m....:
. ni
.ee a.. n..
.t u t a t.
w . i. ..ue. se.u i u. u . e i. . i u . .. . .,,. 4. .u u,..u=
n . ie. t.r i no.. d 6.,.4 ie: ein=.n e, m..u .a.i+. t a .
is 4. n o ,..i.. ,.=,. ere ,i mie .e in.
- i. 1. tat s 5. trMr r t* R 80* 5- . ! **. H"' *** f1**** M 'b .6 **=8 n
.g
...r .i i.,.,e 6.t. i i. g in .c u. e a.enam.yun.64..usani.a f 4 e. .u sp syn.nn. y ty*Jn, k mu*21. F 68. ****uttuu i ..
40 b.w.t t: e.a, v tle,. n. s,,n..euui 1. ti.m...u?t.ies .
n: e.. m.4 .r. a.t ui o.4.
.e. . t ne s e..itet.4 .. WJut 11M*ht-
$ $$$ 8.sl.d.. ..tr 1.F. .sul ) m.il . m 4+ s+. .f .gg.. ' f.4.% o.y t e. wps.l 6 4 9e e .f RJa. 4.dl.1euel l... .L t h. . 4e.. .. w .d f.
- d. .
1 i
I l
- l m_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(
~
TABLE 8 EllTRAINMENT. PROGRAM (INTAKE) -
SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION
' MEAN NUMBER OF FISli LARVAE PER IlUtIDRED CUDIC METERS ?
OF WATER SI.MPLED IN OPERATIt!G BAYS DVPS
' APRIL - JULY 1976 ,
?
)
i Day' A Day Night
- Day Bay D tilght fiay Day C' Day D CombinedI *I !
tJ i g h t Day flight
' April 15, 1976 0 0 IDI - . - - - - -
April 29, 1976 1.30 ,22.18 - -
2.61 15.66 - -
'10.44- ,
May , 12. 1976- 0 0 - - - - - -
0 4
May 27, 1976 4.02 45.52 - -
2.68 0 13.05 .i June 10, 1976 2.68 12.05 .5.36 179.41 - - - -
49.88
- June 24, 1976 28.70 353.53 ,172.20' 317.03 - - - -
217.87 [
July.8, 1976 13.05 93.93 26.09 182.65 - - - -
78.93 I July 22, 1976 13.20 120.08 '- - ' - -
5.28 23.75 40.18 TOTALS 62.95- 647.29 203.65 679.09 2.61 -15.66 7.96 23.75 '
i L
i -
TABLE 9
- SPATIAL' DISTRIBUTION OF ICHTHYOPLANKTON (MEAN NUMBER /100m ) IsT T!!E ENTRAINMENT RIVER TRANSECT APRIL-JUNE, 1976 BVPS No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. ? C y btned'*I DS tJiaht h Night Dy teight M Wait Dag Nieyh t April 15,1976 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 April 29, 1976 0 1.20 0 1.04 0.61 0 0 0 0 0 0.28 May 12, 1976 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
. Hay 27, 1976 0 10.69 2.17 4.55 0 2.45 0 5.28 0 23.40 3.92
? June 10, 1976 0 16.10 3.72 F.00 3.99 3.74 2.88 4.43 1.90 10.32 4.92 i
June 24. 1976 24.82 7.99 9.92 4.35 6.36 7.36 6.37 2.25 128.96 40.47 16.34 July 8, 1976 41.32 58.11 5.13 15.32 ,9.44 6.67 14.05 12.24 7L 40 105.00 '7.26 July 22, 1976 32.48 3.70 11.31 0.98 6.88 2.22 7. M 2.18 122 13 18.46 13.60 TOTAL 98.62 $7.71 32.25 32.24 27.28 23.44 30.R5 26.38 330.99 197.65 f
(a) Individual values rot:nded off. Totalm may not t>e c<1ual to the sure of the individual values.
O
_._ _ m
. . - - . .. . _ . . . - . - . . . . . _ - . . ~ -.
a
'} ',
FIGURE 1 COMPARISON OF MEAN LARVAE DEMSITIES FOR THE INTAKE AMD RIVER TRANSECT SAMPLEb BVPS (1976)-
4CC - .
200 - /s \
/ g
/ s
/ \
10 0 - Rivga / \
~
IP TAKE B AY$
i
/ g 60 -
- ,/ \
l s 40 - j %
R . /
E- /
20 - #
/
% l t
3 10 ; j g i -
w.
0- l\ l 5
6-
- !\
I \ l l
@ 4- I \ l r -
!i\ -l z l 3
2-
-l I
{
\
fl l/
I ~l \ !
E \ l 2 I w
0.8 . .
g g
0.6 - .; \ g I \ l 0.4 -
I l' \ l
\f 0.2 - f \ I 1t
~
l l \!
I '
\
t 0.8 ( , i +- , , , , ,
4/IS, 4/29 S /12 S/27 8/10 6/24 7/8 7/22 SAMPf.!NG OATE 197G W
e
k TABLE 10 t>HYTOPLANKTON DENSITIES IdiD PERCENT COMPOSITZON IN ENTRAINMENT AND RIVER SAIGLES MEAN OF ALL SIG1PLES JANUARY - DECEMBER 1976 BVPS Entrainment
.. ,s . o...
uu E uu un un im E uu uu ue na ua Sutt .
- >;;it: U u . . n n. ni 2n a n no n 3 3 3 i i 3 . n. i n. 3 4., i 3
u,tipu' n il n
4 n,
i i.in n . . n.. , i...n 13 . . n. . > . ..: n. 43
..... .n n
u 3 n.
- 3. n ,
n
,. ., ,t.
. i 3 3 3 . 3 1 3 e .n. .i
. .i . .i .i . .i .
""ti;;M . . 3 ,
. . . . . a. n. n. n. .i
$ & 4 6 !? 473 14. 549 348 491 41. 11 43 9 384 4 3 3 S 13 3 4 3 5 3 4 3 5
- "0I.10 0* n.i 2 l.o.
2n 33 s.n 3
4.in 32 3.4 n 4. n.4 4
i . .'s . Un 4 n inu n.
o i
- n. 4 3.in 33
'""ifi;n""" . n. 3n ..i u> n ni n. n, n, o
. 3 n. . 43 33 . 3 3 3 ai 1, 3 m.
Total
. cells /al f 393 349 369 3.341 It n. 15.. 4' 11. 33 83.93s n3. 41 1,1 4 .43 43.
River 4 s wti.e e t.
ua E uH MM ua uu E E Ua icin Ma~ M ~i
. .rees Cyanophyta
' evits/mA - 13 13 3 4. 44 . 11 164 .1 11 l- 4 at 4 se 31 54 143 3 3 ,,. 1 S A ge, 4 1. t 3 CAlessphyta
(
eelle/en 1. 34 41 *64 13.417 18.15.
7,119 . 174 Y8 4 le 11 1,336 933 331 63 4,411 33 4 ?? ,S t 4 43 43 33 'll L
.gtoaopaye.
e4418/mi . . I 4 3 1 11 1 3 3 4 3 1 s . . . .
{ pyrrhophyta
- ceile/mi 1 3 1 35 31 4 19 t
14 1 3 1 13 t
j ':- Cryptophy.a '
i a lts/mi 11 4 it 33 lett) 935 399 1 174 463 94 1. 3. 393 4 3 1 3 1. 9 4 3 5 4 4 4 3 5 Ch ry sop.iyt a sella /o1 lif . til 39 1..d5 3,143 4. 9. . 4. 11 4.3 1 e..t. 47. 314 431 3,1 3 4 44 ?) el 19 19 11 31 39 31 31 35 ?! 21 8L3ereft.g.4tatea celle/mi 31 le 99 339 443 17. 914 793 31. 393 IS6 11 347 4- 1- S 39 13 J 3 7 3 4 1 16 6 S totet een.e i n3 ni al 3. ni n,n3 n..u n.n. n.u 3 n. s. 3,s.. ... ... j
Tid 3LE 11 ZOOPLANKTON DENSITIES AND PERCENT CO'GOSITION JANUARY - DECEMBER 1976 BVPS Entrainment total Crvetaces Ioctlankton Preterea en tifers and othere
$4eptingtg ThricT71- IwJ e r /1~ T Cw,ner/1 4 t v-berd [
January 19, 1974 330 256 OO 56 19 8 2 February 23 1976 289 254 89 31 11 1 *1 March 19, 1976 349 308 et 40 11 1 41 April 29, 1976 5.336 4,870 91 455 9 4 <1 May 27, 1974 2,905 2,400 43 487 17 to <1 June 17, 1976 7,093 741 10 6 214 88 98 1 July 13 14,1976 3,705 2,286 62 1,375 37 44 1 August 17 18, 1976 3,178 1.765 58 1,404 44 9 41 September 22 23, 1974 3,6'S 1,050 29 2.590 70 S 1 October 19-20, 1976 .485 420 af 63 13 1 <1
.flovember 9-10, 1*16 396 347 88 47 12 2 <1 December 9-10,1976 401 )S2 88 47 32 2 <1 River Total Crustacea 300Pla Qtp3 tmtJt toa._ _ Po111 A _.% _s nLo,the u_
samp11eig Date Number /1 ' ilun%er/l % Nu=@e r/ L Number /l j January 20 J27 276 45 48 15 2 1 February 24 311 - 274 88 26 12_ 1 et March 19 347 305 88 38 31 5 1 April 28 , 10,948 10,774 98 149 2 4 <1 May 26 . 2 516 1,490 67 800 32 10 el Jma 17. Sell! 706 12 4.t64 45 ;,1 2 duly 13 3,344 1,903 !? 1,196 #2- 43 1
~
. August 18- 3.296 1,676 51 1,597 44 23 1 September 22 3,$21 808 23 2,443 75 49 2 OC.ober 19 510 425 82 49 17 3- 1
, November 9 446 396 39 44 11 2 41 Decenter 9, 557 492 45 74 .14 e 1 e
r
- GO
_ , _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . .- - -l
REFERENCES Carlander, K. D. 1969. Handbook of freshwater fishery biology. Vol. 1. Iowa State Univ. Press, Icca.
Commomicalth of P6nnsylvania. 1976. Pennsylvania Fish Commission permit no. 9.
Marev, B. C. 1976. Planktonic fish eggs and larvac of the lower Connecticut River and the effects of the Connecticut Yankee plant, including entrainme:,t. In:
D. Merriman and L. Thorpe (eds.), The Connecticut R.tv e r ecological study: the impact of a nuclear power plant.
Am. Fish. Soc. MonOgr. No. 1, pp. 115-139.
Preston, H. R. 1969. Fishory , composition studies - Ohio River Basin. In: Federal Water Pollution Control Administration 7:es entations . 70th meeting, ORS?dCO Engr.
Comm., Sept. 10, 1969, Cincinnati.
Trautman, M. D. 1957. The fishes of Ohio. Ohio State Univ. Press, Columbus.
M b tg
a
. AOU ATIC . j pc scm SysTeus , nmmuao" om ,sm CORPORATION M2 367&o 31 January 1989 To: Wayne McIntire Duquesne Light Company Nuclear Safety and Licensing Dept.
p.O. Box 4 Shippingport, PA 15077 From: Robert Shema (ASC)
Greg Styborski (ASC)
Subj: Observation of gittard shad (Dorosuma cepedianum) in Discharge of BVPS 12 January 1989 At approximately 1115 on 12 January 1989, ASC received a telephone message from Wayne McIntire (DLCo) that there had been reports of 20 to 30 dead fish floating and/or on the shore in the discharge area. At 1125 Shima talked to William Wirth and informed him that we were collecting our equipment (boat, water n ;ters, etc. ) and were leaving within the next few minutes.
Au 1245 we arrived at the discharge and talked with the foreman in charge of the road construction as to our intention of taking scme physical / chemical measurements of the discharge.
We also observed four (4) anglers and inquired what types of fish they were catching. It appeared that white bass (Morone c!1rtscp3) were being caucht on a regular basis. No other game fish sas montioned as being caught that day.
We walked the entire shoreline around the discharge and observed and collected ginnard shad, on the north shore of the diccharge there were 27 gi :ard shad. Their age class was approximataly 1 year. On the west end near the newly con-structed road there were approximately 60 very small fish.
However, from their position in the stones, it appeared that these fish were land-locked whenever the water elevation was up approximately 1 foot. When the river elevation receded, these L fish were left exposed on the stones with no water around them.
The larger fish however, were either floating or near the water line. Twenty (20) fish (10 from each age class) were collected and returned to the laboratory for examination.
In the lab the fish's length (total length) and weight (grams) were recorded along wi th a notation as to the color of the fish's gills (white, pink, or red). This was done to try to estimate when the fish died. Since all the gills showed at least some pink, the fish probably died within the last few days. Since_the discharge was inspected on the previous Friday
as part of our routino observation, we are confident that the deaths ocurred sometime within the last week. In addition, since there were variations between color (white-pink, pink, and red-pink), we can assume that the fish did not die all at the same time, please see attached data sheet.
The water temperature and dissolved oxygen (D.O.) were measured at the discharge and imar the intake structure. The results are prcvided in the folle> wing Tabic, TADLE T.em_p OF D.O. Saturation D.O. Measured Intake 38.7 13.35 mg/l 14.6 mg/l Discharge 76.1 8.45 mg/l 8.6 mg/l Barometric pressure 29.95 and falling.
Realizing that the dissolved oxygen was above saturation, this alerted us to look for signs of " popeye or gas bubble disease" in the fish. Although no signs were visible, diffusion of the gases could have already taken place and obvious signs could have vanished.
The fact that there was only one species involved ar.d since the number (20 to 30) was relatively low compared to the numeroun gizrard shad that were observed breaking the surface, it appears that a chemical or thermal shock was not the cause.
Mr. McIntire also informed us that he had already contacted s plant chemistry and operations personnel to establish if any
) releases or unusual situation ocurred during the past few days.
He was informed that everything was normal.
The search for explanations as to why gizzard shad congregate and subsequently die-off in heated discharges has been going on since the 1950s. Some theories involve the idea that. this was once a marine species that got-land-locked. Since the cooling tower blow-down has higher salt concentrations this may be one of the reasons gizzard shad are attracted to the discharges.
Heated water is another reasonable explanatio'.c as to why this species congregates in the discharge area. Some research suggests that since these fish are crowded, they also become stressed. This stress leads to higher metabolic rates, subsequent fatigue, and higher vulnerability to disease.
Additional information on the possible causes of attraction and die-off of the gizzard shad is attached. This report was co-authored by Robert Shema.
T AMERN GilZARD f 4 AD
=
Dormeme reped.anm (Leserun Y f N e'nN p.ra',0Y. . @ e n ....W ; /-f
/w '$',Y k Yb $\ $ V C g4 9 > wpa/mm mM..o.i,0WOWV.$y,,,.., h h$hi A '@tw- g
.,3 : ,i hk k I,t; Q, f
ww an :
m.
w%x -33www . 1 m;
. . - . . . . - . _ _ . . . _ . . _ _ - _ . , . _ . . ._._.~. _ _ - _.m..-. _ . . . _ . - - _ _ _ _ . - _ - - _ -
,g - .. >
esamens AOUATIC ') no Bousm Sysreus y nnseucon c4 is23, CORPORATION / 412 367 1000 LAB-LOG NUMBER: Ed90 -
Of FISil LADORATORY WORK SilEET Client Name SVPS- Ext <,
Client Number. Copies sent tot Type of Samplo be-t - Yes No S ta' tion Cr ,es ke ar.,)E ab Ne Date Sample Collected Section Leader
/-/2 -87 ect Manager
~Date Sample Analyzed /- /2 - 6 9 Sample Analyzed by- C2M-5, M cAJ M.O. Central File __
Fish Letgth eight Scales %
K VOUChi
-No. Species.Name- L( FL, SLh' W(grams) Taken Factor NUMBEl'.
&w 01 hzaM 0
$wo 340 .
406 s5 YE"
- 02 34Z. 4o0 A 03 " X "
32'7 361 04 'd 306 >
. &s?O _
(?~u _
05 U Scx] 2//.5 Ji "
06 -d 3'14 390 x Bw-R~u, 07- W 2 8 'c . 22.5 A R., x 08 "- 285 132. 4 e '?~ 5<
09 0 Z/9 X R,q f<
,- 1Cf3 d 3S4 10 95 x Ec o- Rak 11 " (04 \ M P~A l 12 -- H S4 \ "
13-.
8'1 h to g _ - 14 /CD k #
L 15 "
/o$ _k &
16' '"
89 lbB Rak 17 " 9f f 4-Rax
" n 10 _g] /
19- 4 fo / 4 20- _ _ _ $*7 )
- 21-22
- _ _. _. ._ _ . . ~ _ - . - - . _ . - . , _ , ,
.. . . . . . . . .. - .- . - . . ~ . - _ - . ~ . . . - ~ . . . . .
- ~ - - . - . . ~ . - - . .
'A STUDY OF TiiE EFFECTS OF Tile OPERATION
.o OF A STEAM ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION ON Tile AQUATIC ECOLOGY OF PRESQUE ISLE-BAY, ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA By Daniel G. Bardarik, PhD., Director Jon'C. Alden , M.S . , Project' Leader
! obert . L.
Shema , B.S., Aquatic Biologist POR PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY r-April, 1973 9
v..
Aquatic ~ Ecology Associates-5100 Contre Avenue Pittsburgh, Pa. 15232
~
L l
l l.
l i.
l t 4. Some Possible Causes of Attraction and Die-off'of the Gizzard Shad
- a. -Factors Attracting Shad- ._
Movement of the schools of gizzard shad f rom the outer areas of the bay toward the boat basins occurred with the onset of winter. The shad were observed to be moving toward
l 312 l
the boat basins within a 65*F temperature regime as the bay waters progressively cooled. That the condenser cooling water discharge during the winter months attracts the fishes, can-not be disputed.
Preliminary cbservations indicate however that there are other subtle factors operating that attract the live fish to the intake and discharge structures once they are in the boat basin area. The fact that the lake emerald shiner was attracted to the auxiliary llo11and Street intake on several occasions, from an area where water temperature and chemistry were unaffected by power station operations, very strongly points to intake velocity as being a factor responsible for attracting them to the intake portal. A personal observation of this phenomena was made during investigations on the Ohio River in the vicinity of the Shippingport Nuclear Pouer S tation during 1958-59. At that time, massive schools of the emerald shiner were observed immediately in front of the in~
i take structure. No other reasons except intake velocity could account f or the attraction.
Similarly, velocity seems to be a factor operating at the main intake as well as at the discharge. Why certain gizzard shad swim with the cu rrent at the intake while others swim against the current in the discharge channel cannot be explained without further investigation.
Another factor which may provide an attraction to the gizzard shad during the winter months is the gradual buildup of dissolved solids in the east and west inner boat basins 1
313 i
as a result of the discharge of the backwash from the de-nineralizers, and the ash pond discharge to the vicinity of the east slip in frent of the main intake structure.
Specific condu ctance measurements indicated a very decided increase in the dissolved solid concentration particularly after the ice formation in the bay. The "ba thtub of f ec t" created by the thermal barring previously described causes a recirculation of the dissolved solids and as a result, a noticeable increase occurs.
Throughout the winter of 1971-72 a station log was kept which contained observations of the quantity and general size of the gizzard shad which were removed by the traveling screens. In addition, the log entries made note of general weather conditions and the length of time of operation of the tisveling screens. One notable phenomena co:..siste.itly appears in the log. A heavy influx of gizzard shad which invariably required the activation of the traveling screens, always occurred when there was a very decide.d drop in air temperature accompanied by adverse weather conditions. What is implied here is that a combination o' change in atmospheric pressure and air temperature stimulates the massive movement of gizzard shad into the intake canal. As nearly as can be determined this in not principe11y a water temperature oriented response but apparently .e associated with a change in weather
'onditions. This movement, associated with a change in weather has been suggested by others. The exact details of the trigger-ing mechanism are not known and require f urther invest igation.
1
. - . - - - - - - _ - -.-,~ - . - ...
'314 ,
- b. Gizzard Shad-Die-Off
~
The exact.cause of the dio-off of the gizzard shad has not been determined. What has been determined is that max-imum discharge temperatures and maximum fluctuations in discharge temperatures in excess of a 2*F change in any one nour period ?oes not cause any fish kills. The various fluctuations in temperature in che inner boat basins during winter acting synergistically with other factors may be in-directly responsible for the die-off of the fishes but-has yet to be demonstrated.
The increase in dissolved solids that occurs in the inner boat. basins during the winter months as a result of regeneration of demineralizers, the ash pond discharge, and the leaching from the coal storage pile may also be acting as an attractant to the gizzard shad. Temperature tolerance and avoidance studies that were conducted by Meldrim and Gift (1973) using certain. estuarine fishes found that the response of the fishes to variations in water tempei'ture wasfinfluenced by variation in salinity (i.e., specific con-ductance) and turbidity. Since-the gizzard shad is histor-l-
ically an ocean fish which has become land-locked in fresh water and r till reta.. ,s certain structural and functional characteristics more appropriate to an ccean environment, 1
the-increase in dissolved _ solids in the boat basins may be an important fcctor to take into consideration.
(-.
Field observations conducted during Canuary of 1972 ,
provides evidence pointing to the physical and chemical I
II _ _ , . - -
-.r .-,
A 4 %f
<c a.
- e SO 3
NNNN g/ %Q'%V IMAGE EVALUATION //// f j 'f,? @ [fj s -
ty!!f# TEST TARGET (MT-3) '% '
Rh> s 4 ;*'
'%q8s#'W
\\%
44 k?
it f 28 P25 I,O . va a st Ia [3$ !!!!! ?.2
, . Em:1 3i l.]
h"=S i-- p pu=.s l.25 I .4
[ie=L6
]a
.c -- 150mm
- 4 6" ->
A 44 db 4S 4% /A%l '
i qp,py> ,/ .
,fgd'*n'g.'),a -
r#a%
8 'Wf ,
, Q s F t p'
~, z Ofbb s+
A'. -_ . - - . - - _ _ . - -.--.--.._-__-u.--__.--_-__-_____-a - m - _ _ . _ _ . - - _ _ . - - - _a-
a -
$}. + Y t p (O t .Q o c/ o#
e ,~ # +s".
w g_1-J' , .
NA
+ti @ IMAGE EVALUATION
/ Y, V'f.$ff
/
\[g/ l TEST TARGET (MT-3) l /'?[ygG' &,
v f
Y+W $<e$
1.0 Da L Ri p 2.2
?A 5
-. --- t-m W L &.u
- 3. vt n =~ .__
l.1 :
1.25 1.4 n 1.6 L
4 150mm >
4 6"
- O
$3' N e # y: n g ,
4)4 9,/> , ,
41 g 3f4 '
//+%
x vgoy :
2
~4:v y g.
=1 - - - - - _ _ _ __ _
-_______________,_w______________
e,p $6 '
(O
.Oa ..
- i. .
o 't,@ a~ '
'g IMAGE EVALUATION %
g '('l' {sf IEST TARGET (MT-3) </
[y"ib } yg, f s, t
////
'\ ( @ $4 (f"{g, wse R 2 L S 33wlll!)a w.2
.; y I ! 2.0 l,l {^**lE==
jj ts
.=
i.25 i.4 i.6 4 150mm --
< 6" >
w *r(j +b/A' A + -
s
/fx
,y/ ,,p,;a g %g yy ,v
<p s o,/, .
L 43,e V
I.
, _ .. :J. _
__ u
.g Q, h ,
do -
o v, t *? ^ &# g IMAGE EV Al.U ATION /Co, O </ /?,I? g,
\//,j// 1..',' 4[f? TEST TARGET (MT-3) ff g"
/l/
'%ff gh>
6fg% '~
Q
" \.0 l
i llll p=2 u=- T
,a g,
l,l m
- r. ym2e la=L8=
l.25 If I.4 "hg i.6 11 m ee emm 4 150mm >
1 6 >
4 A% #p/
a'+i,Ao ex%y.
- v. .
,/
-- 4,s y Ax
,'y. n, o
- ' x;' 4GV' f(ds* e;[+
// ff*
.s
315 l
complexities associated with the die-off of fishes. It appears that ice formation, severe winter temperatures, dissolved solids, and dissolved gases react synerg is tica lly and to varying degree wi thin the inner boat basins to create a situation of considerable stress which cannot be tolerated by fishes. Obviously the formation of ice and the extreme low winter temperatures cannet be con-trolled.
A description of the events which occurred between January 9 and 19, 1972 is of considerable interest. On .
A January 9th, massive schools of the lake emerald shiner were sttracted to the intake by the thousands. They were too small to be removed by the traveling screens , and were killed upon passing through the condenners. Between the 10th and the 14th the large adult gizzard chad were ob-served to be bobbing to the surface and gulping air. De-tween the 14th and lfth air temperatures took a severe drop to 0*F and the bay froze for the first time. In the power station between the 15th and 18th, boilers were drained on five occasions.
On the 18th, large numbers of gizzard shad were found dead along the banks in the discharge area. They appeared to have been dead for several days. While these fish were being examined a Lidden fish kill took place in the vicinity of the discharge. The kill was not confined solely to tne a
gizzard shad but included several other species as well.
During the fish kill. fiches formerly observed in the dis-charge tank adjacent to the power station were no longer
4 316 present. From the immediate reaction displayed by the fishes it was suspected that a heavy metal ion might have been responsible for the sudden fish kill. Analysis of water s amples taken from the vicinity of the discharge prior to, during, and after the fish kill were analyzed for heavy metals. The results of the annlysis for various he ivy metals (Table 26) show that the levels were well b(-
loat those concentrations known to have a toxic affect on fid. life.
Analysis of water samples obtained at the time re-vealed that ammonia nitrogen levels reached 2.5 mg/1, and field measurements of the dissolved oxygen revealed a drop to 2.5 mg/1. The ammonia nitrogen concentration was the highest e ter measured and the dissolved oxygen was the low-est concentration ever measured. The results of tests con-ducted in the past indicate that ammonia levels of 2.5 parts per million with a pH from 7.0 to 7.4 are toxic or lethal to certain species of fish and that the toxicity of ammonia is intensified by reductions in the dissolved oxygen. It appears therefore, that the ammonia and dissolved oxygen concentra-tions were primarily responsible for the sudden fish kill that occurred on that date. Subsequently, a series of investigations <
were conducted to determine the causa of the increase in ammonia.
In cooperation with local authorities , an attempt was made to s determine if ammonia could have entered the discharge canal or the west basin from private, adjacent facilities.
During the week of February 9, 1972, dye studies were con-ducted along the entire ad j acent water f ront , t:o evidence of 1
l l
i l 317 l Tat,le 26 Analysis of Water Samples from Station WB1 for lloavy Metals Prior to, During and Afte. the Fish Kill of January 18, 1972, Presque Isle Bay, Erie, Pennsylv ania .
PARMiETER DEPTil* 11/15/71 1/18/72 2/11/72 Chromium T <.01 <.01 <.01 B < 01 <.01 <.01 Copper T <.003 0.027 0.009 B 0.003 0.033 0.009 Nickel T <.01 <.01 <.01 B <.01 <.01 <.01 Cadmium T <.004 <.004 <.004 B <.004 <.004 <.004 Lead T <.03 <.03 <.03 B <.03 <.03 <.03 Iron T 0.75 2.28 1.06 B 0.75 1.23 1.27 Manganese T 0.039 0.069 0.103 B 0.049 0.057 0.094 Zinc T 0.071 0.049 0.049 B 0.089 0.058 0.049
- T = Top B = Bcttom
-1 i
-- 318 -
~
dye appeared at any time in either _ the east or- west boa t basins.__ Subsequently, a complete examination of the various chemicals that are.used in the operation of the plant was.
conducted in-an attempt to determine whether any chemical or chemicals in combination eith one another might, during the normal operations of the plant, result in the formatica of ammonia.
It was determined that the only possible source of ammonia might have been f rom the use of hydrazine (N!! 2N I2) which is-used as an oxygen. scavenger in boiler feed water treatment. From the examination of plant records and cal-culation'of the concentration of.hydrazine that could have entered the basins, it appears unlikely that this would
-have been the cause.
An experiment was initiated on the 14th of February to determine to what extent the presence of dead gizzard shad ,
in the boat basins might-contribute:to the buildup of ammonia thrnugh_the' natural decay process. Results of this_ experiment have. been previously described in the section on bay chemistry land the results of laboratory tests are contained in Table 6.
.To reiterate briefly, these results indicate that the decom-position of the: gizzard shad in the -basins and the ash _ ponds
. contribute a-significant amount of ammonia to the surrounding
? waters particularly after ice formation and the. formation of
-thermal barring which results in the complete recirculation of water between' the east and the west basins. This continues until dissipation once again occurs in the bay after the ice
319 l
- leaves in the spring.
The high concentration of ammonia and the associated low concentration of oxygei was apparently the cause of the January 18th fish kill in the west basin. The cause of the gradual die-of f of the gi :ard shad was observed to commence about the middle of November when ammonia concent. rations were
, lower and oxygen concentrations were higher. I t. appears that a combination of f lu , cu a ti ons in watur chemistry, changes in climactic conditions, and the condenser cooling water tem-o peratures combine in some way to produce a subtle chronic condition which eventually has a lethal effect on the 912:ard I
shad.
There is some indication that the solubility of gases in water is being affected by atmospheric pressure, air tem-perature and water ter:>erature and directly relates to IIenry's y law of solubility of gases in water and Dalton's law of partial pressures. Since oxygen and smmonia have not been a problem, except for one incident described above, the only other gas remaining to be examined is nitrogen. The effects of excess dissolved nita agen gas in water on fishes has been known for some time. It produces a characteristic disease referred to as gas-bubble disease and is usually found in fish hatenery operations, home aquaria, and occasionally in the tail-race waters at the base of large reservoirs at certain times of the year. Very recently the occurrence of gas-bubble disease in fishes in the heated effluent of a steam generating sta-tion was reported for the first time (DeMont and Miller, 1971).
l
- s * *
-320 Gas-bubble disease:can occur when the blood of fishes becomes supersaturated with gases. They state that this condition may result when a fish at equilibrium with air-saturated water is subjected to an increase in temperature, a decrease in pres-s u re , or bo th . More commonly, gas-bubble disease develops when a fish is exposed to an environment that is supersaturated
- with dissolved gases. When the degree of supersaturation is great enough, fishes develop a characteristic external symptom {
in which gas bubbles can be observed accumulating in the head and in the fins. It also causes an accumulation of bubbles in the tissues behind or within the eye causing them to became distended outward. The eye condition is referred to as " popeye" l and is readily detectable. These extreme characteristics were not noticed in the gizzard shad L in the boat basins but this does_not totally disallow the possibility. Although fishes may recover if the condition is not severe, mortality may be
- - heavy. Susceptibility and reaction to the gas-bubble disease differs among various species and in some, may have only a debilitating affect rather than causing mortality.
- A series of -water samples were collected on Uanuary 17, 1973~and analyzed.for nitrogen gas concentrations. The results
=
of - these analyses - (Table 27) indicates that a variation exists l which suggests the possibility that supersaturation of nitrogen in the basins may be a contributing factor to-the die-off of-l che-gizzard shad. These preliminary results strongly suggest i
f urther investigation.
s I
,e.-, w-wr< T-^-%.mwww w
- s= +
321-Table-- 27 : Nitrogen . Saturation Levels in the Inner Boat. Basins, and at the Discharge, Presque Isle Bay, Erie, Pennsylvania, Jenuary 17, 1973
- 1. Satura tion ppm N,3- ml/l Temp.
op
- East Basin 103.9 21.4 17.12 41
.. West Basin 111.0 20.65 16.52 49 End of 122.7 18.. 14.76 68 Discharge 126.5 19.01 15.21 Channel 125.9 18.93 15.14 Intake ~ 109.6 20.38 16.30 49 112.9 21.00 16.80 Discharge 130.3 18.43 14.76 75 Tank 129.8 18.38 14.70 t
J u.__-A_w,, -
, ,- - -=m=, - - . - m,
i l 322 l
A n.2mber of investigations have been carried out mainly with game species such as the salmon and trout. Wes tg a rd (1964) found that the nitrogen gas-bubble disease caused blindness in salmon and that mortality occurred as a result of invasion of fungi and bacteria into the damaged eyes.
Rucker and flodgeboom (1953) found that gases in the atmos-phere are often forced into water when it is pumped, in-creasing both the oxygen and the nitrogen content. Removal of excess' nitrogen in a hatchery' water supply system by means of a trough deaetation system has been successfully demonstrated (Rucker and Tuttle, 1948). Ilarvey and Stoith (1962: in Ebel, 1970) indicated that saturation as low as 108% produced gas-bubble disease in fingerling trout. Ebel (1970) also found that major causes of supersaturation of water with gases are heavy concen-trations of algae, warming of water without adequate circula-tion and exposure to the atmosphere for equilibration, and falling of water into an enclosed catch basin. Observations of migrating salmon in the Columbia River passing thermal 4 plumes from reactor stations were observed to be under stress.
It was determined that fishes exposed to supersaturation of gases had less tolerance to rapid temperature increases, and losses of fish which inadvertently had entereo the thermal plume were inevitably high.
The following figure shows a comparison of the percent nitrogen gas saturation ';r the samples collected in the boat basin area on January 17, 1973.
!t 323
_J~"
{
104*.
11 l */. 41' F
, 49*F +
1
! 111 */.
g ,
12 5*/.
4 9' F.
n
)
68'F 13 0*/. H 8f A"5.,f 175'F ... 1
- ~', ~ '
FRONT STREET
}***~~
/ DiscHAnct STAllON The pattern conforms with the observations of Westgard (1964).
g Gases escape from the intake water as temperatures are in-creased through the condensers and pressures build up which exceed atmospheric pressure. Since gases enter solution according to the product of their solubility and partial pressure, more nitrogen apparently remains in solution as 1
it equilibrates with its increased partial pressure. Upon leaving the power station, supersaturation occurs as the water exits into atmospheric pressure.
One remaining possibility that has been tentatively suggested as being a causal factor in the formation of nitrogen gas-bubbles in the blood stream of fishes is suggested by Jester and Jensen (1972). He attributed die-off of gizzard shad from s
nitrogen gas-bubble disease to a bacteria, Acrobaccer aerogenes. .
This bacteria is common in surface water and is not necessarily of fecal origin. It is harmless to fishes under ordinary
n-1.
324 -
' conditions but may cause a gas-bubble disease when fishes are subjected to strong envi ronmental stress , such as ex-treme crowding.. Since-the gizzard shad in the west basin usually occur in extremely dense numbers in a very con-fined space, the severe crowding may be a contributing
-i f actor in this.- case . - In any event, severe crowding ob- l served in the west basin does cause stress by way of depletion'of oxygen due to the large nuiabers of fish present and the abrasion from close contact with other individuals and;with physical features of the basin.
Body contact creates physical trauma and renders the fishes more susceptible to invasion by bacteria and fungi.
Various. complex ramifications of the gizzard shad die-off phenomena suggest the need for additional inven-tigation to determine the most feasible method f or reducing and hopefully, eliminating-the problem. Solving of the
-problem-may entail investigation of the feasibility of additional temperature,-water flow velocity, and dissolved i
1 solids control.
l --
l 1
l l.- -_ ;_ - - - - _ . . _ _ , . . . . _. _ _ . ,_ . . - , - -