ML20092N554
| ML20092N554 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1983 |
| From: | Brown R, Bruggink D, James Buchanan TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092N550 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8407030272 | |
| Download: ML20092N554 (587) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Office of Natural Resources and Economic Development Division of Air and Water Resources AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR DURING OPERATION OF SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, THIRD ANNUAL REPORT (1983) June 1984 .. 8407030272 840628 PDR ADOCK 05000327 R PDR
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
.4 Office of Natural Resources and Economic Development Division of Air and Water Resources
'a AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR DURING OPERATION OF SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, THIRD ANNUAL REPORT (1983) Report Coordinator Donald L. Dycus Authors !. Russ T. Brown David J. Bruggink Johnny P. Buchanan Donald L. Dycus 9 Alphonso 0. Smith C. Thomas Swor David A. Tomljanovich Donald C. Wade William B. Wrenn Contributors Ralph N. Brown Haywood R. Gwinner Charles E. Mulkey Sylvia A. Murray Wayne L. Poppe h Knoxville, Tennessee June,1984 0 .
'., 's ,
,~
,, TVA/0NR/WRF-84/5(a)
TABLE OF CONTENTS -g' Pare List of Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i 1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 c1.1 Purpose and Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . I 1.2 Plant Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Reservoir Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4 Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.0 Physical and Chemical Conditions of Chickamauga Reservoir. . . 14 2.1 Flow Patterns During 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.2 Water Temperature and Mixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.3 Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.4 Comparison of Plant Intake and Discharge . . . . . . . . 34 2.5 Environmental Conditions Prior to 1983 Quarterly Plankton Saeples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.0 Plankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.1 Phytoplankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.2 Zooplankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
. 4.0 Benthic Macroinvertebrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.1 Community Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
,, 4.2 Bioaccumulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 5.0 Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 5.1 Fish Eggs and Larvae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.2 Juvenile and Adult Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 5.2.1 Impinsement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 5.2.2 Gill Net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 5.2.3 Cove Rotenone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 5.2.4 Creel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 6.0 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Appendices are available as a separate volume and may be obtained upon request. L_
LIST OF APPENDICES 2 (Appendices Available as a Separate Volume) Appendix Pa ge, A Analytical Methods for Chemical Parameters, Operational Water Quality Monitoring - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant . . . . . . 1 B Average for Each Water Quality Paraueter (By Stations Quarters Combined) for Periods of 1971-1978 Pre-operational Monitorirg, 1980-1982 Operational Monitoring, and 1983 Operational Monitoring, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . 5 C Average for Each Water Quality Parameter (By Station for Each Quarter) for Periods of 1971-1978 Preoperational Monitoring, 1980-1982 Operational Monitoring, and 1983 Operational Monitoring, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 D Water Quality Data Collected Concomitantly with Benthic Macroinvertebrate and Plankton Samples, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir in 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 E Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Condenser Cooling Water Intake and Diffuser Water Quality Data, 1983 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 36 F Analytical Methods for Chemical Parameters, Intake, and Ef fluent Monitoring, Sequoyah huclear Plant . . . . . . . . . 38 G Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, and Coefficient of Variation of Cell Densities for Each Algal Genus in Phytoplankton Samples Collected During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 41 l H Hean Phytoplankton Densities (No. x 100/L) at Each Sample i Station (Depths Combined) During Operatianal Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . 94 I Individual E mple Totals, Means, Standard Deviations, and i Coefficients of Variation for Total Phytoplankton and Group Cell Densities (No./L) During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . 98 J Chlorophyll a Concentrations, Paeophytin a Concentrations,
.' g' and Phacophytin Index Values at Each Sample Location During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 i
J
,' 'A z -
&g ::j > n .
rg
' # 2' LIST OF APPENDICES '
q; g; (Continued) y n r .
+. .. ,
g b< % %
- Appendix 1
, ya . Page K Carbon'AssimilationRatesatEachSampleLoIation, .
~
OperationalMonitoring(1983),SequoyahNuclearPlanti
, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . .
.; . ', ., . . . . . . .. . . . 107,
( . L 139' Mean, Standard Deviatio'n,'Ra Eeg and Coefficient of 9 Variation or Organism ,Densitien for Each Zooplankt.on 1g. Taxon During Operational Monitoridg (1983), Sequoyah L '~ ' Nuclear ~ Plant, Chi'ckamauga Reservoir
~
. . . . . . . . . . . . 111 n y .:" \
3 M<# MeanZooplanktToLensities(NA./m)$i.EachStationDuring
, Operational Monitoring (1933), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant,
-Chickamauga, Reservoir.. . .'. . .N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 N' Total Macroinvertebrates for Repin ste Samples and Calculations for Totals'and. Individual Taxa, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga ReseEvoir'in 1983 . . . . . . . . 128 s .,
O, Hexagenia (No./m )'Collfctid in*the Vicinity of Sequoyah
^
' Nuclear Plantg Iluring h00pe'r7stional and Operational
-Monit_orieg, 1971 Through,1933 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 P Chfronomidae (No./m ) C llected in the Vicinity of Sequoyah
- Nucle'arqPlant During?Preo~erational and Operational Moniteilng,.1971 Through 1983 . v . . . . . . . . . . . ... 155 Q 011gochaeta (No./m )' Collected in-the Vicinity of Sequoyah .
- Nuclea.r Plant During PreSperational and ' Operational-
.Honitoling, .1971 Through' )itS3 '. . . . . ..
- ..g. . . . ... 171
~
.. , n ,r m,+,
R Corbicula Manilenses-(No./m ) Collected in the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant,'Chicka$auga Reservoir, During Preoperational and Operation $[ Monitoring, 1971'Through 1983' . . ...;. ".**
. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 187 2
S
. Total Benthic Macrot ertebrates (No./m ) Colle'eted in'the Vicinity of Se quoykh" Nuclear Plant During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring 1971 Through 1983 . . . . . ... 200 y
T. Mean Macroinvertebrate Densities of Total and Dominant x Taxa, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1971 Through 1983 . . ...................... - 219
- U Metals-Data f rom Molitisks (While Body, Soft Tissue)
Utilt' zed in Determining Bioaccumulation in the Vicinity- 4,
*'of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir,'
s
, 1983 . ; . . . . ...................... 225 7
k u
/ 11 ~ ~
3 ~ d'
,;g . A id #'
, , I
% 3 g e ,
'a *
, y
-+ . 4.k D' k- _
LIST OF APPENDICES (Continued)
' Appendix Page n
-V List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes Impinged at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During the Period May 1980
.Through December 1983 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 230 W. Mean Number /ha of Each Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983, Number of Samples at Each Location in Parenthesis . . . 232 X Mean Biomass (kg/ha) of.Each Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
-Y Percentage Composition (Based on Mean Number /ha) of Fish
~ Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 Z Percentage Occurrence (Frequency) of Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
.- .AA: Mean Annual Number Per. Hectare of Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970
'Through 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 BB Mean Biomass (kg/ha) of Each Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970
-u Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 p
[
. r- :
111 E _. -
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose and Objective The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) initiated construction of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) in 1969. TVA began loading fuel in the first of two units on March 1, 1980 and in the second unit on July 3, 1981. Important dates in progression of plant testing are in table 1-1. SQN uses water from Chickamauga Reservoir (Tennessee River) for various plant processes and then discharges this water back to the rese rvoir. To evaluate potential intake and discharge effects on the aquatic environment, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (No. TN0026450) requires nonradiological monitoring of the aquatic environment for at least two years after commercial operation of unit 2. Table 1-2 summarizes this monitoring program which was developed
. by TVA and approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Moni-toring programs such as this are designed to detect and evaluate signi-s ficant changes in water quality and biological communities rather than to investigate cause/effect mechanisms. Cause/effect investigations are targeted at specific, identified concerns and are beyond the scope of this initial program. However, these results can be used to postulate potential causative factors when changes are identified, although quantification I
(i.e., relative contribution) of each potential causative factor is not possible. This is the third annual monitoring report following initiation of operation for this facility. The first operational monitoring report (TVA, 1982) included data from 1980 and 1981. The first report did not J
m . _.m. - - - 4 identify changes in the aquatic environment associated.with SQN operations; however, plant operations during 1980 and 1981 were limited because of plant testing. The second report (TVA, 1983) summarized data collected - during.1982, a period of more " normal" plant operation. Plant operations t were judged to cause or contribute to changes in phytoplankton, zooplankton,
'and benthic macroinvertebrate communities during certain periods in 1982, and to attraction of white bass and avoidance by sauger of the discharge 4
diffuser area during summer. Except for these changes, overall differences were considered unrelated'to plant operations,.and the report concluded
~
that SQN apparently had not significantly impacted the aquatic environment I ( to date.- Plant operation during 1983 is described later in this chapter. Data analyses for this third operational monitoring report were similar to those in the first and second reports in that both spatial and
~
. temporal differences were examined. Spatial alterations were determined
-for 1983 by comparing data from stations upstream and downstream of SQN.
- Temporal changes were determined by comparing operational data (data col-lected 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1983) to preoperational data (data collected .
.between 1970.and 1980, dates varying by data type, and reported in TVA, 1978a=and b).
1.2 = Plant Description Sequoyah Nuclear Plant is about 29 km (18 mi) northeast of Chattanooga, Tennessee, _on the west shore of Chickamauga Reservoir at Tennessee River Mile (TRM) 484.5 (figure 1-1). It has two pressurized water reactors with a total nameplate rating of 2,441 MWe. The plant was
~
initially designed in the mid-1960's to use:open-mode (once-through) cooling - [7
~
to-comply _with then existing thermal criteria. More stringent thermal
,C W - . . - __ _ _ _ _ _
criteria were proposed by the State of Tennessee and approved by EPA in
-o- 1972. To meet these more stringent criteria, natural draft cooling towers were constructed to enable the plant to operate in open, helper, or closed .A modes.
Cooling water is withdrawn from lower strata of Chickamauga Reservoir under a deep skimmer wall (figure 1-2). This skimmer wall has an opening length .of 165 m, an opening height of approximately 3 m, and is situated near the river channel where water depth is approximately 13 m. Because of the deep opening at the skimmer wall, water temperature in the intake channel may be lower than reservoir surface water temperature. An intake channel leads from the intake embayment to the intake
' pumping structure, which houses six, 3-m wide vertical traveling screens.
Each screen bay opening is 4.67 m by 7.16 m and screen mesh openings are 0.95 cm . Under open-mode operation with both units operating at maximum
~* '
power, total water demand is 72.45 m /s. Estimated temperature rise across the condensers is 16.4' C. A separate, shoreline-mounted Essential Raw Cooling Water (ERCW) , pumping station is located adjacent to the upstream end of the skimmer wall
~
(figure 1-2). Total pumping capacity of this four-screen intake is 0.5 m3 7,, Water leaving the condensers can be routed in one of three ways: (1) to the diffuser pond and out the diffuser pipes (open mode); (2) through the cooling towers, then to the diffuser pond and out diffuser pipes (helper mode); or (3) through the cooling towers and recirculated to the intake (closed mode) with only blowdown discharged through the diffuser pipes. Surface area of the diffuser pond is about 13 ha. Two discharge p pipes lead from the diffuser pond to diffuser sections which are located in
- O '
~
l l l L_
the main' navigation channel. Each of the actual diffuser sections contains several thousand 5 cm diameter ports, through which heated water is dis-charged at a velocity of about 3 m/s.
- An underwater dam, which crosses the river channel approximately 75 m upstream from the diffusers, decreases the likelihood of any upstream warm-water wedge from the thermal discharge and " impounds" cooler water in lower strata of the reservoir near the plant making this water available for plant intake. The dam is about 25 m wide by 275 m long with the crest at elevation 199.3 m mal.
1.3 Reservoir Description a Chickamauga Reservoir is formed by Chickamauga Dam, situated at TRM 471.0. Water elevation normally varies from 205.7 m msl in winter to 208.0 m msl in summer. At elevation 208 m mal, the reservoir is 94.8 km (58.9 mi) long on the Tennessee River and extends 51.5 km (32 mi) up the , Hiwassee River. Water depths downstream of the plant range from about 20 m at Chickamauga' Dam to about 15 m at the Sequoyah site. Reservoir widths - vary from 213 m to 2.7 km (1.7 mi). At the plant site, the reservoir makes a sharp bend to the right (facing downstream) as shown in figure 1-3. The main river channel in this vicinity is approximately 300 m wide and bordered on each side by shallow overbank areas. Average streamflows in the vicinity of SQN closely approximate flow released from Chickamauga Dam. Flow release records for the period 1957 through 1976 show a mean annual discharge of 1,020 3m /s (36,000 cfs). o Monthly average discharges range between 800 m /s (28,200 cfs) in April and - 3 1,470 m /s (51,800 cfs) in February. The duration of zero flow periods L __ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - . _ - - _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
from Chickamauga Dam is typically short as a result of operating patterns
, designed to assure minimum flows in the Tennessee River near Chattanooga.
According to current operating guidelines which have been in effect since July 22, 1975, TVA attempts to maintain a minimum daily average discharge of 170 m /s-(6,000 cfs) from Chickamauga Dam. The reservoir volume is 465 x 106 m 3 (375 x 103 acre feet) at 0 elevation 205.7 m during winter and 735 x 10 m3 (600 x 103 acre feet) at elevation 208 during summer. Trave 1' time for water movement can be deter-mined from flow through the reservoir and the volume between reservoir locations, excluding the embayment arms. Figure 1-4a shows Chickamauga Reservoir in profile with the approximate locations of the intake opening, underwater dam, and diffuser. Figure 1-4b shows the cumulative volume for the reservoir from Watts Bar Dam. SQN intake, diffuser, and selected sampling locations are identified. Mean annual travel time through the o reservoir is approximately 7 days. Monthly average travel times range between 4 days (February) and 11 days (May), m.- 1.4 SQN Operations Operations of SQN are summarized by month in table 1-1 as per-centage of maximum plant load for the period of operation to date. Table 1-3 provides a summary of monthly output (MWh) and percentage of unit capacity for each unit during 1983. Both units operated near capacity throughout the spring until the middle of July when unit 2 was shut down for refueling and modifications. Figure 1-5 shows the daily electrical output from SQN and the daily intake pumping flow for cooling water. Pumping remains more stable than electrical load which responds dynamically 3- to various load reductions and shutdowns. l f L_ _
l Table 1-1. Important Dates and Monthly Operation of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . Important Dates Staae Unit 1 Unit 2 Approval for 5 percent testing February 29, 1980 June 25, 1981 Fuel load March 1-5, 1980 July 3-7, 1981 Initial criticality July 5, 1980 November 6, 1981 Full power testing license September 17, 1980 September 15, 1981 Attained 50 percent-power level November 17, 1980 February 22, 1982 Attained 100 percent power level January 11, 1981 March 25, 1982 Commercial Operation July 1, 1981 June 1, 1982 Monthly Operation Percent of Maximum SQN Load
- Month 1980 1981 1982 1983 January 0 28 20 55 February 0 5 11 98 March 0 17 48 90 April 0 37 72 99 May 0 24 67 99 June 0 26 83 94 July 0 32 97 73 August 0 29 96 43 September 0 18 51 22 October .3 1 45 67 ,
4 November 6 37 20 66 December 25 36 0 50 , m
f~ Table 1-2. Summary of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Aquatic Monitoring Program, Chickamauga Reservoir Station Location a Tennessee River Date Operational Operational Sample Pa rameter Mile Monitoring Initiated Dates Reported Herein Water Quality 478.2 , 483.4, November 1980 February, May, 484.1, 490.5 August, November 1983 Biological , Plankton 478.2 , 483.4, November 1980 February, Hay, 490.5 August, November 1983 Benthos 478.2 , 482.6 t, November 1980 February, May, (Community 483.4, 490.5 August, November studies) 1983 Benthos 485.0, 482.9 February 1981 February, May, (bioaccumu- September, lation) November 1983
, Fish (larval) 479.4, 482.7, March b80 Mareg to August 484.7, 484.8 1983+
Fish' intake. April 1980 January - (impingement) g December 1933 Fish (gill net) 473.0, 483.6, April 1980 February, April, 495.0 July, October 1983 Fish (rotenone) 476.2, 478.0, August 1980 August-September 495.0, 508.0, 1983 524.6 Fish (creel) entire reservoir July 1979 July g1982-June 1982 Study plan submitted to EPA on December 7, 1978 incorrectly stated location was TRM 480.8. i Added May 1983 to improve comparability of near-field area to control.
- Biweekly.
I Weekly. 9 Monthly.
. .)
Table 1-3. Monthly Unit Loads for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During 1983 Total Unit l' Load Capacity Unit 2 Load Capacity Capacity (1000 MWh). Factor (1000 MWh) Factor Factor Jan. 190 22% 754 87% 55% Feb. 761 97% 779 100% 98%
-Mar. 714 82% 840 97% 90%
Apr. 825 99% 829 99% 99%
.May '846 98% 860 99% 99%
Jun. 837 98% 755 90% 94% Jul. 804 91%' -481 56% 73% Aug. 756 86% Refuel and Modify Outage 43% Sept. 368 43% Refuel and Modify Outage . 22% Oct. 862 98% 309 35% 67% Nov. 658 77% 461 54% 66% Dec. 0 0- 880 100% 50% J -l. u
i l
- -.~ -
-%y,s.
== i j
IND ,~ . _ , _ . :
/ ~~ < P3 6 : /
w y[ P.. L L - _ - { g X %. 'e
~^
* #s s f A_,,[1. N, k,, o
~~
'_h,,, , ,- _ s \
t
.f
< .~
'/ ) '
n'h~' I. -y;- ?( 1 hs ;n. =-e )e- ~'...-9' ib: -w g;-- a ya=
\
}$> $gc : G .-? ? ,
m' - a n 2 1
-----..~.._.. -.-J..~.. .
y _ ,g(.g.5> J
.=- % _ j ~.i f Nx,;
g _.. x __
,1 l-v- s' .
_..(_ ,,,m%, . " i
~ ~ ~ 1 u Ng t
N =,s L.m
. . Y L -- s
,-- <, /bv) d6 4
,,.'- - 1 ,f ~v
+
l g+# J 76 1-
,@ g x y /
4- 3 3 3 M'" 4,
' % , * [; ijv- T" '
Q:~y %. - ,,,;e,! b$erQ d{q_ .MO - , y . 4
!- r 5.
- .-- - C1 N
- / - <- .
if-
. g -b--- - -
t , ~~-T I - ~+ r-- N- ,y- -
-- - w.,
p ,.2..,j,. e.----- ..--.. .-
. p-- .._...- ;#cy t: =.- -t. w
-. .. l... < -
s ' 6'~~ i f .s ..
, ~d:= 4 l'E= = Y g. t Q~T 7 i - = Ne--. g,g, =~
b.'c ' ~~ D- 2/' #%. s O' U ""i n [ Wg f 7= .[i(.</'t.J - ~ , l.t,s'_. - ,n m m ~ - ,
.) m\ / .
\ ~ . . , ,
&. 1ss l I
,-s%-ky,#,., 'i/ ~-
*- 1
-. M ~~ ' 1 ,1 A IM sB ^i
~
'~
'/ f .:.6 TI' L-.", \ G EF0 R O _,
g- [' s ( : _.
/ ~' ,. ... . 1 $'
, h l ! \. . y
, 7, , /'
-. i : * ~~ i anm,
. maam \
l \g .-.
.2 .D_ - -- -
s* , f .- _- - i rr ,, m ;
- - . _ I
- - - ~ ~ . . -
- 3 Figure 1-1. Location of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in the Tennessee Valley, C
Li W W [ TT ?a } :- Q tf W ? V N D -
% .'i * ' %(} *, , T W [n h
.,q n. . .
u5 ? , f.
%S
'I N.rd ,e ,
t G ", , f, >2.b'M v~3 ., .. . :we . - 4 ,WH4 ai4 . bb W = . %.L. '
.,4*< m: V9 i c: : r;y & = , s , .t V. e. -
.. .4; hh- ki h,y ,
M. o
#.. [ " ;f gg W, .
g;c e w- e ERN Pu$ng Stadon gg -{ t% rN g M3 4-A4 ,:c;)MJ,N :%.EVA.; swn ' e+ r. q , p&;;, ~~rcein m 8a 3e". ; n... .- %g'5- r 4$L &..& d, d 1 ;d i( & ,vn w n.yrneerm m e d
$f:dl&,:^?f*';'A D W. '
fx,, ': C .G v
' ;t . v.th c Mk,'hk,,(! \ -[v$,T;3
? , h,$y IH.i
.'. :?",,%
. .1.4 l hyy W;ni;i Q r/ M td4 y ,,d',189 z-
~
;3 J i ' 1 h' f.O [J#e;g - kj Y ! ; *
. i ?)g ,
,.c' "
~
gg;y b * '.3 +S CCW Pumping Station
.,g h,fi% I5N %V
?N> ' 'N<% r , $!
N Vitt M $3 . ~ M N,bdMO..MM# M ' #d,; p' N Q
.- ( Cy kG a. ' . Cooling Towers hit TRM 484 j e,.k(
rw c M y g g . pig y 5 .$.c h;d , ip ~ ~ 4, m 39 g# ; u 4 a Plant W r, y ;4 ;,.ff .,4 a gQ>gny ,% 74 w?w . : S }p ss:.y6,,,;.f .s _ e -
-fpt. A q w g
~ '
A? 1 - b hhhbk hk, hk A[-A: ,sa,gt.;rwy.<.*hy wf; c gy w ,x ,
.c. q;;-w y .,
*\' "p s,'
m,anfr& y, O y&y~;, . sWB N$$$Y[.$yW%rpy ?p :M * : St; "$$f} bg 0biW-(< , " 7; *1 Diffuser Location . . pf, . M
}g(Q,y, y];M c.. y(f..]',y.
, .. rf, :- .g *'
. > . T,q.x.3. y ,$gg,t.a %,.41c.;. ymm~,..~ , ,.is.yf?e M, m +: .
.y ..n,s;Rnp A, ;u
-y y .. n ' c. +
', p .
, .y M n. ,: e~ .
h Jf.hhh0Y f , A
- w.NY$Ih
?. l0 ,,;,j . ;un.,lf' 4 4 M;.,n, o %y ,
W , m &: n i g y hp $h "" # fI- A W h.- a mh'y; h:4 ,-
?
5, . ", ; i
~ T7, s, a .g. g. ,[c / o. -
k(5 k % i . .- i qy c wv. % d ? s #ew, y' r pp&y&.,Qph C ; Lfb lW:: ' {fc ' M' r
~, >i *-b' b
,s 4'. jg: y:;
~
- n. .. ,3 dQ4j .
.o? y h; %
y, N p,,3 9.,.M. syw ,! q: ? . h k~
.o
;f ,y . ,--
+
4's , -:At >s . -- , pv i ..s
.l: y m . ' .Q...t v '. '
- - , \ .
l -
'W f '
Figure 1-2. Major Features of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. bl
W j = j
.i..-
9 5s E E'
- f ^ ie a
I h el 5 O t
- i. n l g
\ s-u
\ l1 8i .
2
.c i
5
,4 g 8
B n 4 Ij, 5 8 # A 6 4
.)
A. CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR PROFILE TENNESSEE RIVER MILE 470 480 490 SUMMER POOL 510 520 530
' ' l ' ' ' ' '
207- 680 - wlNTElk POC'L E 670 h@@@ WATER h
- TEMPERATURE
- 2 01-
- 660 -
STATIONS o b ld DIFFUSER UNDERWATER DAM j- 198- O650
- PORTS 'S
<t > \ j
@ 195- %640 l ( /
_ INTAKE j DAYTON WATTS w 192- w_s 630 - 1 OPENING ' WATER INTAKE BAR W NUCLEAR 4 189 - 620 HlWASSEE RIVER WATTS BAR 610 SEQUOYAH CONFLUENCE DAM NUCLEAR PLANT B. LONGITUDINAL' VOLUME DISTRIBUTION FROM WATTS BAR DAM CHICKA M AUG A DAM 700- y
~
p 600 - g E = .
- O 484.5 o INTAKE
. 500- h200 -
m . 2 W 490.5 STATION
" 400-O o 15 0 - HlWASSEE RIVER EMBAYMENT .
23 XIO6m3 @ 205.7m y 300- w - n 50 X106 m3 9 208m E D - j g 100 4 78.2 d 0
. s 200- 1
~
STATION VOLUME @ 208m 3 483.4 2 . WATTS BAR 3 ! DIFFUSER DAM v 100- o 50 -
. VOLUME (D 205.7 u I I I I I I I I I '
O- 0 470 400 490 500 510 520 530 TENNESSEE RIVER MILE Figure 1-4. Chickamauga Reservoir Profile and Longitudinal Volume Distribution.
t A. SQN ELECTRIC GENERATION .., 1 3 I I I I I I I I I I 2000 - l - j i500 - () ._ 2 I 1000 - O I 500 ;- SAMPLE DATES _ l I I I I I I ' ' ' ' 0 I I O 30 60 90 120 15 0 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1983 B. SON INTAKE PUMPING 2800 g g g g g g g g g g , , y 2400 - u 2000 - 1 - u. a. 2 1600 I L I
~C S
- 1200 ~
SAMPLE DATES 800 - l I I I I I I I I I 400 I I I I I O 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1983 Figure 1-5. Seasonal Operating Pattern for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, 1983.
.. . . - , _ . - - - - . - . _ _ _ _ J
- i. 2.0 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CONDITIONS IN CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR DURING 1983 g s Evaluation of possible effects from SQN operations (intake and discharge) on the aquatic environment is made relative to physical con-
? ' ditions such as reservoir flow, temperature, light, and water chemistry during the study period. Reservoir geometry and flow pattern determine the travel time of water in Chickamauga Reservoir. Heating, cooling, and mixing processes govern the natural temperature patterns in the reservoir. i-Water temperature, nutrients, available light, and reservoir retention time
' lcrgely control the growth potential of phytoplankton.both upstream and downstream of the SQN site. Other water quality parameters may be of general interest and comparative value.
2.1 Flow Patterns Durina 1983 , Large releases from Watts Bar Das usually move toward Chickamauga Dam in a fully mixed manner. However, during periods of low flow, with several consecutive days of sunshine and warming air temperatures, the l ~ [ reservoir can become thermally stratified, and flow can separate into a l surface layer and a bottom layer. During spring and summer the surface [' - layer may stratify during the day but be fully mixed at night. Stratifica-tion is enhanced during low flow periods because reduced velocities provide less mixing energy. These stratification patterns are often strongest in the downstream portion of the reservoir because velocities are reduced by larger cross sections and cumulative heating effects are greatest. l i
. , ,-. ,- , . , - , - . . ,-,,.,,c...,..
2
Water from the Hiwassee River basin enters Chickamauga Reservoir -e
.near: the mid point of the reservoir. Flow from the Hiwassee River repre-sents about 10 percent of the total flow at Chickamauga Dam. Direct effects *
- . L from these relatively cool inflows are moderated by the travel time through the.Hiwassee River embayment that extends about 20 miles up the Hiwassee River.
Water surface elevation at Chickamauga Das varied throughout 1983
;in accordance with the seasonal operating guide curve as shown in figure 2-la.
Daily average flows during 1983 are shown in figure 2-lb. Travel time determines the period for natural processes to occur in the reservoir before water reaches the intake of SQN and after being discharged or mixed with the. diffuser discharge downstream of SQN. Travel time between points can be estimated from the volume between these points div.ided by the flow during the period of interest. Travel times through the entire reservoir prior to the quarterly phytoplankton sampling dates are given in figure 2-lb. Monthly average flows at Chickamauga Dam during 1983 are compared to long-term monthly average flows in table 2-1. Flows were near normal in . January and February. March flows were lower than the long-tern March average. April and May flows were very high due to large store event runoff each month. Flows throughout the June-August period were quite uniform and near the long-teon average pattern. September-November flows were lower than noracl. December flows were near normal. Velocities within the reservoir may be important for evaluating potential effects of SQN on some organis,ms. Average velocity at a parti-
.cular location in the reservoir is determined by river flow and cross-sectional area. The distribution of velocities at a particular site is .(
further dependent on the geometry of the reservoir near the sample location. L_
- ~ . - - . - . . ~ _ - -
V , For sacrobenthic sample sites at TRM 478.2, TRM 483.4, and TRM a i 490.5, the reservoir cross sectional areas are nearly the same, although the geometries are different as shown in figure 2-2. These particular M cross sections do not indicate the general downstream increase in area. The upstream site (TRM 490.5) has a cross section of approximately 6,000 m2
- with a depth of 12 m and an overbank area. The SQN diffuser site (TRM 483.4) is much deeper (17 m) with a similar overbank region and a total cross section of approximately 5,100 m .2 The downstream site (TRM 478.2) has very little .overbank, with a depth of 17 m and a cross section of 5,100 m2 ,
Velocity distributions shown in figure 2-2 were measured during steady flow . of 1,135 ms /s (40,000 cfs), so the average velocity was about 20 cm/sec. The largest velocity gradients (shear) occur along the sides of the main channel. These regions experience the greatest scouring. The velocity , gradients are more gradual at the bottom of the main channel. 'e, f 9 i 16-L_ ;
Table 2-1. Long-Term Monthly Average Releases and Corresponding Travel Times Through Chickamauga Reservoir Compared to Flows and Travel Times During 1983 Lona Tern Averste 1983 Conditions . Travel Time Through Chickamauga Chickamauga Chickamauga Travel , ganReleases Rese rvoir ganReleases Time Month (m /s) (cfs) (days) (m /s) (cfs) (days) January 1,365 48,200 4 1,218 43,000 4.2 Februa ry 1,470 51,800 4 1,274 45,000 4 March 1,300 45,800 4 595 21,000 8.6 April 800 28,200 9 1,020 36,000 7.5 May 800 28,300 11 1,218 43,000 6.3 June 825 29,100 10 1,076 38,000 7.1 July 840 29,700 10 935 33,000 8.2 August 895 31,500 9 1,020 36,000 7.5 September 800 28,300 10 623 22,000 12.3 October 870 30,700 9 481 17,000 16 . November 1,020 36,100 7 765 27,000 9.2 December 1,260 44,500 5 1,444 51,000 3.5 ANNUAL AVERAGE 1,020 36,000 7 963 34,000 7.3 D e L_
A. CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR ELEVATIONS
- 683 - SAMPLE DATES b 681 -
1 -
~
E 679 - I
%677 -
I SEASONAL GUIDE CURVE Id 675 ---~~~~~
- 205.7m d673 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
J F M A M J J A S O N O 1983 I B. CHICKAMAUGA DAILY RELEASES , LEGEN O: 100 - 9 QUARTERLY - 3000 SAMPLE DATES
$ RESERV0lR - CHICK A M AUG A O 80 TRAVEL TIME -- WATTS BAR 8
f 3.5 DAYS 2000$u 60 -. O Y i 7 OAYS i i O s' l , 11 j - 1000 l h 10 0 AYS 0 I I ' ' I I ' f I f f 0 30 60 90 Io 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1983
. Figure 2-1. Chickamauga Reservoir Elevations and Release Flows for 1983.
700 - - - U _ U . U
~
2 p 660 - AREA: - AREA: AREA: 20 4 SiOOm2 25 20 SiOOm2 6000m2 1 d IF ' 1 f 10 15 e i dcm/secI VELOCITY W 15 (cm/sec) 640 - *g It , . VELOCITY - - (cm/sec) 10 I I I I I I I ' I I 620 O 200 400 600 0 200 400 600 0 200 400 600 800 LATERAL DISTANCE, m LATERAL DISTANCE, m LATERAL DISTANCE, m A. TRM 478.2 B. TRM 483.4 C. TRM 490.5 Figure 2-2. Velocity Distributions in Chickamauga Reservoir During Flow of 1130 m3 /sec.
2.2 Water Temperature and Mixina Figure 2-3a shows the seasonal. temperature pattern at the SQN diffuser itation, TRM 483.4. The seasonal warming and cooling was gradual and regular, with few prcnounced episodes of_ rapid temperature changes. Stratification was very limited, with surface temperatures rarely more than 1* C greater than_ bottom temperatures. Temperatures exceeded 25* C during most of July rnd August and decreased to below 25* C by the end of September.
. The lack of stratification suggests that vertical mixing remained moderately strong throughout spring and summer at this station.
Figure 2-3b shows the seasonal temperature pattern at the SQN 6 intake, TRM 484.7. Bottom temperatures were consistently 1* C cooler than , those immediately downstream of the diffuser, whereas surface temperatures 1;, _ during the summer were nearly identical at the two stations. This is J probably the result of the submerged dam that diverts the coldest botton water to SQN intake and causes mixing with the upper portion of the water column as flow passes over the dam. The SQN diffuser discharge usually
. contributes to the vertical mixing and reduced stratification downstream of SQN. Stratification at SQN intake was strongest during June and July, with a 2 to 3* C vertica.1. temperature difference. During this period the surface heated layer remained separated from the remainder of the water column.
Vertical mixing between the surface layer and lower water was minimum for _ periods of 5 to 15 days during June and July with periodic mixing episodes due to surface cooling and wind. Stratification was infrequent in May and September and did not occur during other months. _2m
A. SQN DIFFUSER, TRM 483.4 40 g , , , , , , y , i , g-35 - SAMPLE DATES
~
o 30 - a, SURFACE W 25 - / - - M "
/ w D BOTTOM Q 20 s m ^# ,
W 15 - - E ; g 10 g 5 - O-
' I I I I I I I I ' I I' O 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1983 i
B. SQN INTAKE, TRM 484.7 , 40 g , , , , , ; , i g ; , 35 - - f (SAMPLE DATES i , o 30 - g - 5 3
. SURFACE ' - I W 25 -
f"" -
~
0 J g 20 - BOTTO M g E W 15 - - 2 w 10 - - F > 1 5 - { I ' ' t I I ' ' ' I I I I O O 30 "O
. 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1 1983 l t
Figure 2-3. Seasonal Water Temperature Pattern in Chickamauga . Reservoir,1983. l
2.3 Water Quality The Tennessee River in the vicinity of SQN is presently classi-fled tnr the State of Tennessee as an " effluent limited" stream, where stream standards are met and with no significant sources of pollution (Tennessee, 1978). An effluent limited stream is one where stream standards are met after application of secondary treatment for municipali-ties and best practicable treatment for industries. The Tennessee River from mile 460.6 (Chattanooga Creek) to mile 499.4 (Hiwassee River) has been
. classified as suitable for all water uses--domestic, industrial, fishing and aquatic life, recreation, irrigation, livestock watering, wildlife, and navigation (Tennessee, 1978). A list of various water quality criteria and standards for various uses is presented in table 2-2.
The following section summarizes results of the quarterly opera-tional instream water quality monitoring program conducted near SQN during 1983. 2.3.1 Materials and Methods Field--The SQN quarterly operational water quality sampling stations are TRMs 490.47 484.10, 483.40, and 478.19 (figure 2-4). 1 Norizontal locations at each river mile were selected to coincide with the original river channel prior to impoundment. Water quality data were collected quarterly during four sampling surveys (i.e., yebruary 15, 1983; May 17, 1983; August 4, 1983; and November 8, 1983). Table 2-3 summarises the SQN quarterly water quality monitoring program in Chickamauga Reservoir since May 1971. 8
z-Water quality data were obtained to support assessment of bio-
-logical dati at three of the four operational water quality monitoring stations (TRMs 490.47, 483.40, and 478.19). Biological support water .
quality samples were collected at depths of 0.3, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0 m. These samples were poured from the same subsurface water sample es the first replicate phytoplankton samples. In situ full stratum measurements of dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, temperature, and conductivity were made during sample collection at all four sample stations. Water samples were collected for subsequent alkalinity titrations at the same depths at which these ,1,n situ measure-ments were made. Chemical water quality samples were also collected at all four sample stations at depths of 1 and 12 m. Laboratory--Analytical and sample preservation methods used for chemical water quality characterisations are shown in appendix A. The referenced laboratory methods are the TVA preferred methods, which are approved by EPA. The TVA Laboratory Branch may occasionally use other EPA approved laboratory methods. . Eighteen water quality measurements were made. In addition to Do, pH, temperature, conductivity, and alkalinity, which were measured in the field, biological support water quality samples were analysed for nitrogen (organic, ammonia, and nitrate plus nitrite), dissolved phosphorus, and total organic carbon (TOC). Chemical water quality samples were analyzed for chloride, sodium, sulfate, total dissolved solids, copper, iron, manganese, and sinc. Data _ Analysis--All water quality data were entered into the EPA water quality data ST0 rage and Retrieval (STORET) system and are available , from TVA's Data Services Branch. All data reduction and statistical w
m __ . __ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . - __ . . = - t r I i evaluation procedures used standard statistical routines available through i
, the STORET system. Determinations of statistical dif ference among stations and different samplina Periods were made using Duncan's Multiple Range Test 4
in conjunction with an analysis of variance. 2.3.2 Results and Discussion The 1983 quarterly operational data, collected from February through November, is summarised in appendix 8. Included in this appendix are the parallel gross statistics for the preoperational period of sampling (1971-1979) and the pre-1983 operational period (1980-1982). Statistics based on the season or quarter, but similar otherwise to those in appendix B, l are presented in appendix C. Since the statistics in appendices B and C combinedepth,verticaldifferencesinparametersthatmaystratify'arenot apparent, and care must be exercised in comparing within and between tables. 4 + New data collected during the 1983 quarterly operational period are tabulated in appendix D. O The major factor influencing water quality of Chickamauga Reservoir in the vicinity of SQN (TRN 484) is flow rate. Flow rate inhibits stratifi-cation and establishment of a strong thermocline so that, for most of the year, chemical constituents are reasonably well mixed through the water column in the main channel. Dissolved Omymen--Dissolved osygen profiles observed during the 1983 operational sempting period were similar to most of those observed in a o previous operational periods and in preoperational periods. The low osynen concentrations observed during August 1982 were not observed in 1983. ($ee
- o section 2.5 for further presentation of these data.)
D
s Alkalinity and pH--The State of Tennessee water quality criteria apecify that pH shall be within a range of 6.0 to 9.0 for waters used for domestic raw water supply, industrial water' supply, recreation, irrigation.
- livestock watering, and wildlife (Tennessee, 1942). The criterion used for fish and aquatic life is a pH range of 6.5 to 8.5 (Tennessee, 1942). All pH measurements made during the 1983 operational sampling period were [
within this more conservative criterion range with all values falling between 6.9 and 7.9. , Total alkalinity of samples collected during the 1983 operational period ranged f rom 'l6*to 63 mg/L as CACO 3 and averssed near 50 mg/L, in-
. ~~
dicating a moderate butfering capacity. Except, for s'iightly lower alkalinity values during May at all four stations, very little difference was observed between pH/ alkalinity measurements during 1983 and those during previous operational and pre- -
.s operationalperinda.,
AdditiSalcellyalkalinitydatafromtheDayton, Tennessee, !
^
water treatment plant; 503.A) are shown in figure 2-Se and ranged from ! 40 to 70 mg/L. Alka 11,iity was generally.* inversely proportional to flow.
- N, ,, .
' Alkalinity during ed/ years of monthly 6ampling from Watta Bar Dam tail-r,( , water (TRM 529.9)' rensed from 40 to 80 mg/L, suggesting conditions similar s *. . , to 1943 measurements ;4(' Dayton. n , ,Turbidit
. . . . . [ $ asonal light conditions are governed by ambient solar ra(tation, water . transparency, and vertical mixing. Seasonal water ;
. y e etransparency eserisk derived from' turbidity measurements available from I
- v. s , ,
}. Boyton w' ater treatment plant as al.swn 'An figure 2-5b. Turbidity was low throughoutIC83encept'followingafewrunoffevents,whenlocalrainfall
- f esceeded tso,, inches / day. The I percent light penetration depth is inversely 57 g
- I
)
g5 e
,. ' r *
, tem. -
*p l 4' w ,
4
proportional to turbidity. Turbidaties above 20 NTU would limit 1 percent ligLc penetration depth to less than 1.5 m. The I percent light penetration depth was between 3.5 m and 5.5 m on the 1983 quarterly sample dates. The 1 percent light penetration depth probably ranged from 3 te 6 m throughout most of 1983, based on the Dayton turbidity measurements of 5 to 10 NTU. Nutrients--In 1983, measurements of organic nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, nitrate-nitrite nitrogen, dissolved phosphorus, and TOC, with the exception of one value (0.55 mg/L organic nitrogen at TRM 478.18, 5 m during May) fell within the range of these same measurements during the preoperational period and all values fell within their respective ranges during the previous operational period. Six years (1973-1978) of nutrient data from Watts Bar Dam tailrace (TRN 529.9) indicate that dissolved phosphorus concentrations ranged from
.01 to .03 mg/L, and nitrate concentrations ranged from 0.2 to 0.6 mg/L.
These nutrient concentrations were lowest during the sususer period, although O the seasonal pattern was not pronounced. Ot.her parameters--Summary statistics for minerals, metals, and other water quality parameters measured in 1983 are summarized in appendices B , and C along with parallel statistics for the previous operational and preoperational periods. In most cases, there was little difference fron previously collected data and little difference emong stations or over depth. Table 2 2 shows standards and criteria for some minerals and metals. Nessured values for ammonia, nitrate plus nitrite, chloride, 0 sulfate, and dissolved solids, did not exceed any of the listed criteria in 1983. Two of 30 sine measurewente exceeded epa's 1980 maximum criteria for o protection of aquatic life but sine levels met the 24-hour average criteria
s,
~r g +
s for aquatic life. The'criteri2 for iron and for manganese were exceeded
^
several.tikssinbothupstreamand,downstreamlocations. Thirty-one percent , *s . ofthedownstreammeasurements3rkronexce,ededthemreconservativeof - L v
. . + .
the criteria (300 pg/L) while 43 peccent of the upstream taeasurements w . ., s ,,
-exceeded the.s'ame criterion. Si[$ijaii,y,38'p'dtcentofthedownstream
. , N
.d N manganese observations exceeded 50 pE/L with 64 percent of the upstream
,- v .
observationis exceeding 50 pi/L,,% These higher ccacentrati$ns of iron and nn % - manganese .Ndekprobably associitDd with oxf 6ized. forms (i.e. , particulates), WEI ' s can be.eastly.,%. removed by conventional water, treatment processes, . , . and were
'-- ^
. u
- observed during preoperatinrtal monitoring. Furthermore, the 300 pg/L iron had 50 pg/L' manganese levels are Secondary Drinking Vater Standards which are aesthetic.rather- than health-related. .
'E' Measured concentrations of copper (Cu)'have generally exceeded
. . . . N '
EPA'si1980 ave d e'and maximum criteri[ for the, protection of aquatic life < both during Preope ationaliand operational monitoring at upstream and
. downstream stations. +VA erage conce2trations of Cu have decreased over the period when the preoperational (1971-78), 1980-82,.and 1983 data (see .
appendices,B and C)'are compared, but this decline is partially due to improvement in thesanalytical technique _used to measure Cu in the
. laboratory. During the 1971278 preoperational monitoring, the standard minimum detectable limit.(MDL) for Cu was 10 pg/L whereas the standard MDL during the. 1980-83 operationaF monitoring was in the range of 1-5 pg/L. A S,
large portion of. tho' Cu measurements during both preoperational and ( operational monitorin's were-leds'tban the standard MDL, and since these valuessare averaged as equal
-4 -
to_the MDL, 1980-83 average Cu concentrations ' are less than 1971-78 average Cu' coticentrations,.a .~ { Y v.. m *
# Me a e.,
~
g, 4 [M
*[ n N '
s L _x
The 1983 Cu data are the lowest of all three sets of data at all four river miles, averaging 10-12 pg/L. If the MDL Cu values are averaged as O rather than as the NDL, a lower bound for the mean can be established. For the 1983 data, this lower bound is 5 pg/L. Actual average 1983 Cu concentration is in the range of 5-11 pg/L; 11 pg/L being the average if the MDL. values are averaged as equal to the MDL. Thus, 1983 average Cu levels probably exceed the EPA average criterion of 5.6 pg/L. Both the 5.6 pg/L criterion and the 14 pg/L maximum criterion have been consistently exceeded during both the preoperational and operational monitoring periods and no significant differences have been observed between upstream and downstream stations. Observed Cu concentrations are indigenous to the Tennessee River in the site vicinity. 2.3.3 Summary and Conclusions The water quality of Chickamauga Reservoir in the vicinity of SQN is considered good. The relatively high flow of the Tenneseee River through the reservoir was the major factor influencing water quality and, except for brief periods of weak thermal stratification, this resulted in well
-mixed conditions. DO concentrations at upstream and downstream stations were above the recommended Tennessee criteria on all survey dates.
Several other statistical differences (significant at 0.05 level) were ' observed when 1983 data were compared to previous periods: o . February organic nitrogen measurements were higher than pre-operational or previous operational periods, o February TOC and sulfate were lower than the previous operational period but close to preoperational levels. o February iron levels were lower than observed before. e 4
o May organic nitrogen was observed to be higher than pre-operational measurements but near values seen in the previous operational period, o- May TOC was higher than preoperational levels but lower than the previous operational period levels. o May' sodium, chloride, and sulfate were lower than observed . during the previous operational period but were close to pre-operational levels. _ 12 August organic nitrogen was higher than observed in the pre-operational period but near that observed in the previous opera-tional period. o August chloride and dissolved solids were higher than pre-operational observations but lower than previous operational obse rvations. o November sodium was higher than observed in the preoperational period but close to other operational observations. The above noted differences from one sampling period to another were observed at both upstream and downstream (of SQN) stations. This
' indicates that the=e changes were natural or the result of something other than SQN operation. Vertical profiles of organic nitrogen for February and
- May and TOC profiles for November were different between upstream and down-stream locations, although means of these values at these locations were statistically indistinguishable.
In conclusion, the 1983 instream, water quality monitoring data do not suggest any significant alteration of water quality in Chickamauga Reservoir as a result of the operation of SQN. d'
-- - - . . , . . . . ..n.. , - - .-
Table 2-2. Criteria for Selected Parameters Sampled as Part of the SQN Operational Survey
- Criteria Parameter Concentration pH (Standard Units) 6.5-8,5 '
Nitrate + Nitrite Nitrogen (eg/L) 10.0 3 Ammonia Nitrogen (ag/L) 0.02 unionized Chloride (ag/L) 2501 ,2 Sulfate (ag/L) 2501 ,2 Dissolved Solids (ag/L) I 500 Copper (pg/L) 0 5 I 5.6 , 14 , 1,000
. Iron (pg/L) I 300 , 1,000 Manganese (pg/L) . I 2 50 , 100
.,- Zinc. (pg/L) 47 , 210 5, 5,000 I
- 1. National' Secondary Drinking Water-Standards (EPA 1977)
- 2. Quality Criteria for Water (EPA 1976)
- 3. National Primary Drinking Water Standards (EPA 1975) j
'4. Water Quality Criteria (EPA 1980). Values listed are 24-hour average criteria for protection of aquatic life.
- 5. Water Quality Criteria (EPA 1980). (Maxi-mum criteria calculated for 60 mg/L hardness for protection of aquatic life.)
, 2
( . - .- - f
. Table 2-3. Summary of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Nonradiological Water Quality Monitoring Program--Quarterly Sampling in Chickamauga Rese rvoi r, 1971-1983 Sample Collection Physical-Chemical Tennessee Horizonta}
Location Depths (meters) 3 River Mile Measurements Period of Record 4 496.5 30 - In situ monitor May It v 5 57 1, 3, 5 in situ monitor, nutrients,5 metals 6 May 71 to Nov 78 490.5 21 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 75 59 - In situ monitor 7 May 71 to Nov 75 85 0.3, 1, 3, 5, 12 In situ monitor, nutrients, metals, minerals May 71 to Nov 78 and Nov 80 to Nov 83 484.1 40 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 78 66 1, 12 In situ monitor, metals, minerals May 71 to Nov 78 and Nov 80 to Now S3 483.5 23 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 78 483.4 11 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 78 17 0.3, 1, 3, 5, 12 In situ monitor, nutrients, metals, minerals May 71 to Nov 78 and Nov 80 to Nov 83 51 - In situ monitor. May 71 to Nov 75 480.8 10 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 75
, /4 1,3,5 In situ monitor, nutrients, metals May 71 to Nov 78 (and Feb 82) $' 92 8
In situ m nitor May 71 to Nov 75 9 478.2 75 0.3, 1, 3, 5, 12 In situ monitor, nutrients, metals, minerals hay 71 to Nov 78 and Nov 80 to Nov 83 477.9 15 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov .78 30 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 75 472.8 9 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 78 65 - In situ monitor May 71 to Nov 75 89 1, 3, 5 In situ monitor, nutrients, metals May 71 to Nov 78
- 1. February, May, August, November.
- 2. Percent distance from left bank looking downstream.
- 3. Quarterly preoperational sampling was discontinued in November 1978; quarterly operational sampling was begun in November 1980.
- 4. Profiles of dissolved oxygen, pH, and conductivity measurements made in situ at various depths, depending on station location.
- 5. Nutrients (alkalinity, organic nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, nitrite plus nitrate nitrogen, phosphorus, total organic carbon).
- 6. Metals (chromium, copper, iron, manganese, nickel, zine).
- 7. Minerals (sodium, chloride, sulfate, total dissolved solids).
- 8. Preoperational sampling was at 83%.
- 9. February 82 quarterly operational sarpling was at TRM 480.8.
t
= * ' = *
. g n
i r o t i
. n n M o
_ l a
' n o
i t d 5 r
- e 0 p 9 O 4
g n , ir ri uo Dv r se ns oe i iR t aa cg
, I.
4 ou 8 La
. *. 4 ga m
g nk
- ic li u.
ph a mC S , 4 yn t 3 t a 8 il
/( 4 lP a
ur h Qa e rl ec t u 2-
- y
. WaNh 7 ;.
l a 4 . ay co i u gq
+ oe m *J lS o
i , d) a2 i r8 n9 _ o1 _ N( 1 g;' , c 4 2 '. e r u g i F n
n A. ALKALINITY, DAYTON WATER SUPPLY TRM 503.8 h I I l l l l l l l l l l ;
; 90 - -
p . D 80 - - li 6 II p- 70 - l - I; { SAMPLE DATES , 60 , 1 50 j 40 - k l p 4 i 30 - - I 20 - - < 10 - - e l I I I I I I I I I I l ' O O 30 60 90 120 15 0 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 ' 1983 o
.-s v.
,g B. TURBIDITY, DAYTON WATER SUPPLY TRM 503.8 ,
I I l l 1 1 1 1 l l l l l 90 - - 80 - 3.5 m 5.5 m 4.5 m 5.5 m - 2 70 - -
~
kl% LIGHT DEPTH ON SAMPLE DATES .
>- 60 - -
H 50 - - E__
@ 40 - -
$ 30 - -
SAMPLE DATES 20 - f _ O
%\ g : ; -- - q ;. ,
O 30 00 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1983 Figure 2-5 Seasonal Alkalinity and Turbidity Patterns in Chickamauga Reservoir, 1983. L.
2.4 Comparison of Plant Intake and Discharge In connection with the SQN NPDES permit monitoring requirements, TVA conducts additional monitoring of the Condenser Cooling Water (CCW) intake and dif fuser discharge for selected chemical parameters. Data prior to April 1, 1983 were collected as required by NPDES Permit Number TN0026450 and reported on Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs). On April 1, 1983, a new permit (same number) went into effect, data were collected as required, and are reported in appendix E. The following section summarizes the
- results of the 1983 intake and discharge monitoring program.
2.4.1 Materials and Methods Sample Collection--Grab samples of the CCW intake and diffuser pond effluent were collected once per month. The CCW intake sample was collected by lowering a subsurface water sampler approximately one meter
, below the surface of the intake channel at the upstream side of the intake screens. The diffuser sample was collected by lowering the same sampler into the diffuser pond near the head of the diffuser pipe. At both of these sample locations it was assumed the water columns were well mixed because of the water velocity observed during sampling.
Laboratory--Laboratory analyses of collected chemical parameters were performed by the SQN Chemical- Laboratory (SQNCL) from January 1983 through March 1983. Analyses were performed by the TVA Laboratory Branch (LAB) from July 1983 to December 1983. During the transition period of
, April through June collected. samples were split and analyzed by both labora-tories. -Analytical and sample preservation methods used by the SQNCL for e
A _
analysislof the intake and diffuser water quality samples are shown in appendix F. The referenced laboratory methods are the preferred methods, which are approved by EPA. The SQNCL may have occasionally used other -
; EPA-approved laboratory methods. Analytical methods used by the LAB are shown in appendix A. These also are-the preferred methods, approved by EPA, but other EPA-approved methods may occasionally be used.
Twelve water quality pa'rameters were measured: chloride, sodium, sulfate, total suspended solids, settleable solids, total dissolved solids, total solids, ammonia nitrogen, total copper, total iron, total manganese, and total zinc. Data analysis--An analysis of the split samples collected in the Apriloto June transition period showed that the SQNCL and the LAB were in agreement for most analyses. Analyses for which significant differences were-found are discussed below. Although the LAB April chloride values were approximately 4-5 times that of_the SQNCL' chloride values, the means of the three SQNCL values and the three LdB values were indistinguishable at the 0.05 level - for both CCW and the diffuser discharge data. The LAB values for ammonia-N were' approximately half the values reported by the SQNCL. This trend seemed to exist before and after the transition with SQNCL ammonia-N values very close to 0.10 mg/L before and during the transition period for both CCW and diffuser discharge data. The LAB values during anu after. transition were near 0.05 mg/L ammonia-N at both locations. Total iron and total zine were often not in agreement for a particular split sample, but the means of the three SQNCL values and the .
-three LAB values were usually indistinguishable at the 0.05 level for both
CCW and diffuser discharge data. .The exception is that iron in the diffuser
.. sample was consistently higher in the LAB analyses.
Total manganese during April and May (SQNCL did not analyze for manganese in June) was analyzed as being 2-4 times higher by the LAB at both the CCW and diffuser discharge. These differences do not indicate any water quality problem caused by operation of SQN. In most cases, laboratory reported values for the CCW intake and diffuser discharge were similar and most values were well below established criteria listed in table 2-2. Values reported by both laboratories were also within the range of values determined from samples collected from the reservoir both upstream and downstream of SQN. To determine the overall effect of SQN on water passing through the plant, a paired students-t test was performed on CCW intake data and diffuser discharge data. Twelve 1983 monthly observations (when available) were used in _ the analysis with only the TVA Laboratory Branch results for the April-June transition period being used. All data reductions and statistics were made using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) available through the SAS Institute.
..2.4.2 Results and Discussion All CCW and diffuser data collected in 1983 are listed in appendix E.and summarized in. table 2-4.
The Student's t-test failed to show a statistical difference at the 90 percent confidence level between intake and diffuser water quality for all parameters except TDS. However, because TDS is reported to the nearest 10 mg/L, the 5.7 mg/L increases does not indicate a significant ,. effect from SQN. The mean discharge concentration of 100.8 mg/L was well
)
below the water quality criterion of 500 mg/L. Unlike observations made in
. the 1982 Operational Report, significant differences were not observed for either sulfate or copper. .
Similar to observations made for iron and manganese in the main reservoir body, both CCW and discharge values occasionally exceeded the criteria concentrations listed in table 2-2. Again, these higher values are probably associated with oxidized forms (i.e. , particulates), which can be easily removed by conventional water treatment processes. Residual chlorine values are also periodically determined (by calculation) for diffuser discharge water. Of 125 1983 values, the average chlorine residual was 0.028 mg/L' with a range of < 0.002 to 0.173 mg/L. Permit limitation of 0.1 mg/L was exceeded on two occasions. Because these are calculated values which do not take into account any dissipation of chlorine in the diffuser pond, these concentrations probably did not actually occur. Effects of these chlorine residuals on Chickamauga Reservoir water quality after dilution through the diffusers should have been negligible. 2.4.3 Summary and Conclusions Diffuser water quality is comparable to that of the CCW intake, th'us suggesting that the operation of SQN has had little effect on the
~
chemical composition of the water withdrawn from and discharged back into ~ Chickamauga Reservoir. The reported differences in sulfate and copper reported in the SQN 1982 Operational Report were not observed in 1983. E L
_- a :p - Table 2-4. ' Comparison of Condenser Cooling Water (CCW) Intake and Diffuser Discharge CCW Diffuser N Mean S.D. Min. Max. N Mean S.D. Min. Max. t P>t Reject Chloride (ag/L)' 12 8.3 '4.0 4.0 19.0 12 8.2 4.0 4.0 18.0 0.60 0.56 No-Sodium (ag/L) 12 6.6. 2.0 3.7 9.6 12 6.3- 1.7 3.7 8.9 1.09 0.30 No Sulfate (ag/L) ~ 12 13.1 2.3 9.0 16.0 12 14.2 2.0 10.0 18.0 -1.38 0.19 No Total Suspended Solids'(ag/L) 12 4.7 1.7 2.2 8.0 12 5.9 3.4 2.0 14.0 -1.06 0.31 No Settlable Solids (ag/L) 11 0.091 0.030 0.001 0.100 11 0.091 0.030 0.0001 0.100 0.00 1.00 No Total Dissolved Solids (ag/L) 12 95'.1 31.3 63 180 12 100.8 30.4 '59 180 -2.32 0.04 Yes
. Total Solids M (mg/L) 8 110 38 .66 190 8 111 37 72 190 -0.27 0.80 No Ammonia (mg/L) 12 0.060 0.040 0.005 0.160- 12 0.050 0.025 0.005 0.090 1.45 0.18 No Copper (ag/L) 12 0.032 0.038 .0.005- 0.110 12 0.027 0.029- 0.005 0.100 0.89 0.39 No Iron (mg/L) 12 0.39 0.29 0.16 1.20 12 0.31 0.13 0.088 0.55 0.91 0.38 No Manganese (mg/L) 12 0.073 0.038' O.017 0.160 12- 0.060 0.030 0.150 0.110 1.08 0.31 No Zine (ag/L) 12 0.032 0.042 0.005 0.130 12 0.021 0.026 0.005 0.100 1.20 0.27 No Oil and Grease (mg/L) 12 <5.8 <5 14 12 <5.1 <5 6 No P>t is the probability of being wrong when rejecting the null hypothesis (intake concentration minus diffuser concentration is zero).
t A "No" in this column indicates that the null hypothesis is not rejected at the 90 percent confidence level.
~
2 2.5 Environmental Conditions Prior to 1983 Quarterly Plankton Samples
~
Conditions in Chickamauga Reservo'ir prior to collection of
~
y, e'
. quarterly plankton samples are important for proper interpretation of sample data because these are transient organisms. Analysis of environ-mental conditions indicates how representative of seasonal factors the sample dates were. ' Longitudinal gradients in growth factors such as nutrients, light, temperature, and mixing can be assessed. This section summarizes flows, travel . times, water temperatures, SQN pumping, plant load con'ditions, meteorological information, and nutrient concentrations prior
.to these sample dates.
2.5.1. February 1983 Conditions Conditions prior to the February 15, 1983, sample date are shown S in figure 2-6. River flow was approximately 50,000 cfs and travel time between Watts'Bar and Chickamauga Dans was only 3.5 days. .SQN.was operating at full load- (2,200 MWe) with maximum pumping flow of approxi-mately 2,500 cfs,' representing about five percent of the river flow. Temperatures were about'6* C with an. upstream to downstream increase of less than l' C. Wind speeds'were moderate at 3 to 6 aph, with several sunny days prior to the sample date. : Rainfall had most recently occurred five days prior-to sampling. . Light penetration reached approximately 4.5 m upstream and 3.8 m downstream. Because of high flows and well mixed condi-tions, few variations in chemical parameters were observed between stations or with depth. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were between 11.5 and 12.5 mg/L. Alkalinity. concentrations were 50-55 mg/L and pH values were < about 7.5. Nutrient concentrations decreased slightly from upstream to
---m downstream, although the travel time between these stations was only 18 hours. The sample date was representative of winter conditions, with maximum potential plant effects from two-unit operation of 'QN, although the flow of 50,000 cfs should have rapidly mixed effluent and decreased the likelihood of plant effect.
2.5.2 May 1983 Conditions Conditions prior to the May 17, 1983, sample date are shown in figure 2-7. River flow was approximately 25,000 cfs which is well repre-sentative of springtime flows, although higher spring flows occurred during 1983 following two major storms. Travel time through Chickamauga Reservoir was 10 days, with 5.5 days between Watts Bar Dam and the upstream sample station, two days between the upstream and downstream stations, and one day between SQN diffuser and the downstream station. SQN was operating at full load (2,200 MWe) and pumping 2,500 cfs, representing 10 percent of the , river flow. Water temperatures were stratified upstream with a vertical gradient of 1 to 3* C. Downstream stratification was 1 to 2* C. The - temperature rise associated with SQN underwater dam and thermal discharge was 1 to 2* C. Sunny conditions prevailed on the sample date, although significant rainfall occurred the previous two days, and windspeed was 5 to 8 mph. Light penetrated to 3.5 m upstream and 4.0 m downstream. Surface DO concentrations were slightly elevated (8.1 to 9.5 mg/L) both upstream and downstream, with DO below 3 m ranging from 7.7 to 8 4 mg/L. Alkalinity and pH were similar throughout the reservoir, with alkalinity between 35 and 40 mg/L and pH between 6.9 and 7.3. Inorganic nitrogen concentrations were constant at approximately 0.3 mg/L, while dissolved phosphorus decreased
- downstream from 0.02 to 0.01 mg/L. The sample date was well representative
, of spring conditions, with full SQN operation.
2.5.3 Anaust 1983 Conditions
-Conditions prior to the August 4, 1983, sample date are shown in figure 2-8.
River flow was approximately 40,000 cfs, which is higher than the average summertime flow of 30,000 cis. Travel time through the reservoir was 7 days, with 1.5 days between the upstream and downstream stations. Only SQN Unit I was operating (1,100 MWe) with a pumping flow of 1,200 cfs,
- representing 3 percent of river flow. Water temperatures were 26 to 28* C
, with 1 to 2' C stratification upstream, but vertically mixed conditions prevailed downstream. The increase in temperature associated with SQN was about 1* C. A cooling episode occurred three days prior to sampling, causing the upstream station to mix vertically. W'eather was sunny with light winds of 2. to 5 mph and no recent rainfall. The strongest vertical
, gradient of DO was found during August (figure 2-9). All stations had DO concentrations near 5 mg/L below the top 3 m, with surface concentrations between 6 and 8 mg/L. A similar pH profile was observed both upstream and downstream, with surface pH of 8.0 and bottom pH of 7.0. Alkalinity ranged from 60 to 65 mg/L. Inorganic nitrogen concentrations were constant at about 0.3 mg/L; dissolved phosphorus was below detection level (.01 mg/L),
and light penetration depth was 5.0 m. Higher than usual river flow and only one-unit operation of SQN produced conditions that were less than those associated with greatest possible summertime plant effects. -e e J
~
L 1 2.5.4 November 1983 Conditions Conditions prior to the November 8, 1983, sample date are shown in figure 2-10. River flow was approximately 25,000 cfs, which is typical for the fall in Chickamauga Reservoir. Travel time through the reservoir was 11 days, with 2 days between the upstream and downstream stations. SQN operations changed from two units to one unit, although pumping remained above 2,000 cfs, representing eight percent of the river flow. Water temperatures were cooling at 17' C with no stratification upstream. Temper-atures were 18 to 19 C at the diffuser, with a vertical stratification of 1* C. Weather conditions were sunny with low windspeed (3 mph). Rainfall had occurred five days prior to sampling. Light penetration depth was about 5.5 m. Because of well mixed conditions, little variation in DO was observed, with all concentrations between 7.5 and 8.5 mg/L. Alkalinity was about 60 mg/L and pH was close to 7.5. Inorganic nitrogen concentrations were about 0.2 mg/L with .01 to .02 mg/L dissolved phosphorus. Except for the reduced SQN load, the November 8, 1983, conditions were typical for fall. - l e
,, A. RIVER FLOW E. SQN PUMPING FLOW u -
ow _ _
~
2 - b . 34 gu
-$. 25 -
gI -
$ 3 0 I I I I I I I I I L I I I I ' I I I I 0
B. TRAVEL TIMES 3 3.5 DAYS WB' TO CHICK $ F.SQN LOAD 2
~
2 DAYS WB TO d90.5
- I ~
8 HRS SQN TO 478 O
' ' ' ' ' ' I 18 HRS 490.5 TO 478
.E O
* $ l.5
. 9 _ C. WATER TEMPERATURE 2 G. LIGHT (-), RAIN (O) uJ ~ w E DIFFUSER y7 iI-
_ f_ _ _ _._ _--M ,
~
_ INTAKE 0.5 - 2 3 -
< 0 Ng~l l I I I I I I I O I ' ! I ' ' I 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 FEB 1983 15 D. W NDSPEED H. WATER QUALITY UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM
- o. 1% LIGHT (m) 4.6 3.8 10 -
,, pH 7.6 7.5
@ (A ALKALINITY (mg/L) 52 51
$ Vi NITROGEN (mg/L) .55 .48
$5 PHOSPHORUS (mg/L) .02 .01 g / 00 (mg/.L) 12.0 12.2 I I I I I I I I I O
6 7 8 9 IC Il 12 13 14 15 FEB.1983 Figure 2-6. Conditions Prior to Plankton Sampling on February 15, 1983 for Operational Monitoring of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. F t l :
l 79 3 y A. RIVER FLOW E. SQN PUMPlNG FLOW u -
@50
- I2 -
9 Se I 25 [ - 0- I - 9 2
- u. 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O O B. TRAVEL TIMES 10 DAYS WB TO CHICK j F. SON LOAD 2
~
5.5 DA'YS WB TO 490.5 e I ~ i DAY SON TO 47Y 2 DAYS 490.5 TO' 478
.E P $ l.5
-23 C. WATER TEMPERATURE 2 G. LIGHT (-), RAIN (G) e -
a 3 21 - g DIFFUSER .o' - .E I.O - H - E
< s E 19 77.54.
.6 N -d!! M g O.5 2 17 INTAKE < .
N IS I I I I I I I I O l N l 0 lA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 M AY 1983 - 15 H. WATER QUALITY D.WINDSPEED UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM is. 1*/. LIGHT (m) 3. 5 4.0 E 10 pH 7.3 7.0
@ ALKALINITY (mg/L) .40 3.8 y NITROGEN (mg/L) .32 .34
$5 - PHOSPHORUS (mg/L) .02 .01 5 / DO (mg/.L) 9.0 8.0 S
I I I I I I I I I O 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 MAY 1983 Figure 2-7. Conditions Prior to Plankton Sampling on May 17, 1983 for Operational Monitoring of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
O 3
-. A. RIVER FLOW E. SQN PUMPlNG FLOW u -
~
O 50 - 3: 2 - 8 . _ Se [ 25 I a 1
- u. 3
- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O O I
- 8. TRAVEL TIMES 7 DAYS WB TO CHICK j F. SQN LOAD 2
3.5 DAYS W8 TO 490.5 " 0 O 2 ~ 2
~
18 HRS SON TO 478 . 1.5 DAYS 490.5 TO 4Y
'5 U .E I.5 33 . C. WATER TEMPERATURE 2 G. LIGHT (-), RAIN (O) g -
8 3 31 -
.E I.0
>- DIFFUSER E -l !
- W 29 - INTAKE $
0.5 h27 4:{:p W" 9 k N825 ~I I I ' ' F ' 'P O l l' l I I 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 JULY AUG 15 D.WINDSPEED H. WATER QUALITY UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM l% LIGHT (m) 5.0 5.0 Eo. 3 - pH 7.3 7.5
@ ALKAllNITY(mg/L) 63 64 y '
N1TROGEN (mg/L) .29 .28
$5 PHOSPHORUS (mg/L) .01 .01 DO (mg/.L) 6.5 6.7 0 I I I I I I I I I 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 JULY AUG
- i. .
Figure 2-8. Conditions Prior to Plankton Sampling on August 4, 1983 for ,~ Operational Monitoring of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. J
r O I I t g* v
./ .g 10 - . .d .:.', -
.s .... -
i y , s**
/ ..
/ .
/ . :
m c 20 -
/ // -
1 a
~
s s' ./ .l l
/ ' Z b 2 LEGEND ,
Q. # 8 30 - ( / / TRM 478.19 a--. a Downstream TRM 483.40 0 + ~ --4 Dif f user (
/
, [ TRM 484.10 W -e Intake I !
TRM 490.47 : i Upstream 40 - f' }f
/ /
o 2 l! l 50 i e , ' ' ' 4.5 5.5 65 7.5 8.5 DISSOLVED 00 GEN (mg/l) Figure 2-9. Dissolved Oxygen (mg/[) Profiles Observed August 1983.
75 3 g A. RIVER FLOW E. SON PUMPlNG FLOW u O 50 - 3' 2 - F b . 33 uu
- 11. -
$ 25 g I e a !
*- I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I o
B. TRAVEL TIMES ll DAYS WB TO CHICK $ F. SON LOAD 2
~
7 DAYS WB TO 490.5 e I ~ 18 HRS SQN TO 47f 2 DAYS 490.5 TO 4Y
.E O e' l '5 23 C. WATER TEMPERATURE '5 G. LIGHT (-), RAIN (O) e -
CIFFUSER 8 3 21 -
.51.0 -
?
N $ 7
$I* Q -
?
h17 INTAKE k OO
- N 15 ~I I I I I I I I I O I ^I I A 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NOV 1983 15 D.WINDSPEED H. WATER QUALITY UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM fa. 1% LlGHT(m) 5.3 5.5 l E IO -
pH
, 7.4 7.4 i
@ ALKALINITY (ing/L) 60 60 y NITROGEN (mg/L) .23 .22
$5 -
PHOSPHORUS (mg/L) .01 .02 E DO (mg/L) 7. 8 8.5 3 I I I I I I t I f 0 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NOV 1983 Figure 2-10. Conditions Prior to Plankton Sampling on November 8, 1983 l, for Operational Monitoring of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. t ,
f f 3.0 PLANKTON SQN bas potential to influence aquatic biological communities through: (1) entrainment of water into the condenser cooling water system (CCWS), subsequent discharge of this wat-r through the diffusers, and entrainment of ambient water into this discharged water; and (2) discharge of heat and other waste by-products including but not restricted to chlorine residual, nutrients, and metals. Entrainment has little potential to affect the phytoplankton community during periods when heat is not added to the discharged condenser cooling water unless river flows are very low so that the plant pulls water from a large part of the water column. When the plant is not dissipating heat and river flows are sufficient that cooling water is pulled only from lower strata, discharge of this ambient water through the diffusers to deep strata does not influence upper strata where most phytoplankton activity occurs. However, both potential pertur-bations could affect zooplankton because these organisms occur throughout the water column. In assessing these data, it was realized that they were not representative of a " controlled experiment" where all variables were kept constant in the control and experimental measurements except the factor being tested; in this case the plant. Rather, this monitoring program provides data from a dynamic system with differences expected from " control" locations upstream of the plant to " experimental" locations downstream of the plant. For this reason, preoperational sampling was conducted to provide a measure of this " natural variability". Preoperational monitoring
e results'have.been summarized by TVA (1978a). Data from the current operational' monitoring program are compared to preoperational data in a
- later section'of this report. Preoperational data-showed differences among ~
s various: sample locations with. general increases in plankton from upper to
- lower reservoir reaches. This is not uncommon and has been identified in
. other ' studies (Poppe et .al. ,1980;- TVA, draf t). Large plankton communities typically do not exist in upper reservoir reaches because turbulence caused
. by high velocities prevents algal cells from staying in the photic zone
- long enough.for growth and reproduction to occur. As water flows downstream, velocity and turbulence are reduced because cross-sectional area increases.
. As a result, algal cells remain in the photic zone longer and can sustain growth and: reproduction. The longitudinal point or transition zone where velocities become suft 'ciently low for the above to occur depends on flows.
At higher flows the transition zone will be pushed further downstream. At
' lower flows it will not be as far downstream. .
Therefore, biological differences among stations were evaluated closely with physical and chemical conditions during each sample period (as
- described in chapter 2). If there were no biological differences among stations,'it was assumed there was no plant'effect. If differences did occur,'they were evaluated as to the likelihood of being plant-induced or resulting.from other conditions.
3.1 Phytoplankton 3.1.1 Materials and Methods Field--Phytoplankton community measurements included in this
- monitoring program ares organism enumeration, phytopigment concentrations,
, E
.and primary production estimates. An 8-L non-metallic Van Dorn water , sampler was used to collect sufficient water for all 3 sample types--100 ml for each enumeration sample; 500 ml for each phytopigment sample; and
.L 125 al for each primary productivity sample. Two replicate samples for each measurement were collected from 0.3, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0 m at midehannel for each of three stations (station 1 upstream of SQN at TRM 490.5; station 2 immediately downstream of the diffusers at TRM 483.4; and station 3 downstream of SQN at TRM 478.2; figure 3-1). Table 1-2 shows collection dates reported here. Enumeration samples were preserved with M3 (Meyer, 1971) immedi-ately after collection. Phytopigment samples were placed in cubitainers with I al of magnesium carbonate suspension added to each sample before they were placed in a cooled, light-excluding box. After transport to shore, 500 ml of each sample was filtered through a glass fiber filter, and each filter placed in 5.0 ml of 90 percent, buffered acetone. Samples were stored frozen until analyzed in the laboratory. Primary productivity samples were spiked with one milliliter (approximately 2 pe) of labeled sodium bicarbonatei suspended at collection depth at station where collected, allowed to incubate for approximately three hours, and 125 m1 filtered through a 0.45 pm membrane filter. After rinsing with 0.1 N hcl and water, filters were folded and placed in scintillation vials for return to the laboratory. A dark bottle was suspended at 0.3 and 5.0 m depths to compensate for nonphotosynthetic assimilation of carbon-14. a Laboratory--Each enumeration sample was agitated, a 15-m1 aliquot removed and placed in a counting chamber, and allowed to settle for a minimum of 12 hours. Algal cells were enumerated at the generic level. References and publications used in identification included: Cocke (1967), Desikachary (1959), Drouet (1973), and Drouet and Daily (1973), Forest (1954), Hustedt (1930), Patrick and Reimer (1966), Prescott (1962; 1964), - Smith (1933), Tiffany and Britton (1971), and Whitford and Schumacher (1969). Phytopigment samples were allowed to reach room temperature, ground with a glass rod, and subjected to ultrasonic vibrations to rupture algal cell walls. Samples were then clarified by centrifugation and analyzed spectrophotometrically. Optical densities at 750, 664, 647, and 630 nm were read. Each sample was then acidified with two drops of 0.1 N hcl, allowed to steep for one minute, then reread at 750 and 664 nm. Chlorophyll a, b, e concentrations were calculated using the Jeffrey-Humphrey (1975) equations, and phaeophytin a concentrations were calculated using the Lorenzen (1967) equations. Phaeophytin index values (ratio of chlorophyll a to phaeophytin a) were also determined (Weber, 1973). . Activity of primary productivity samples was determined using liquid scintillation techniques. Using the conversion table of Saunders, - et al. (1962), total inorganic carbon available at each station was deter-mined by utilizing pH readings, temperatures, and alkalinity values. Mean carbon-14 activity incorporated into algal cells in the light bottles minus that absorbed by materials in dark bottles resulted in an estimate of net photosynthetic activity. Total carbon assimilated by algal cells is ex-3 pressed as milligrams carbon per cubic meter per hour (mg C/m /hr). Thebe values, averaged for depth intervals, multiplied by the respective depth interval, summed, and proportioned to daily solar radiation energy were used to represent total daily productivity that occurred in a column of . 1 n . .s' _.; ;}i' ~ b; ' .
' q :-
- L. ;. ' . 7' _U(
}' .._ j ' s . ~.j . ', %. #. .% " Q
water with a surface area of one' square meter and a depth of 5 m (eg
.; C/m / day).
Data Analyses--Sampling and processing variability of total community and group densities (cells /L), chlorophyll a, concentrations
-(ag/m ), and carbon. assimilation rates (mg C/m /hr) was estimated by calcu-lating the coefficient of variation for each set of duplicate samples.
Coefficients less than 20 percent were considered indicative of good sample replicability. Coefficients of variation greater than 40 percent indicated larger than desirable varianility between replicate samples. Data were transformed (log and tes ud using a two-way analysis 10 of variance. (ANOVA) with stations and depths as the main effects. Signifi-cent station differences resulting from the two-way ANOVA were examined in one of two' ways depending on results of the interaction term. If stations were significant but interaction not significant, station means, calculated over all depths, were further compared using the Student, Newman, Keuls (SNK) multiple range test (Sokal and Robif, 1969) as applied by Zar (1974) to two-way ANOVA. If stations and interaction were both significant, l station differences were examined for each depth using a one-way ANOVA and SNK. For purposes of this report, significant depth df.fferences were not examined because the main point of. concern was upstrea/./ downstream differences, t Phytoplankton cosaunity structure was analyzed using a diversity index (3) applying the following formula (Patten, 1962): 3 = -I' (ng /n) log 2 ("i/n), where 3. s = number of genera; ng = number of individuals belonging to the ib genus; C n = total number of organisms;
- j. 3 = diversity per individual.
h
a
, (t c.,, -
g r . , , , l* < , Diversity index was used only as a reference to evaluate changes among s[ . ,'
' s ta t' ions .
~D .
" Sheilarity of algal communities between reservoir sections was -
determined usfag'a two-step approach. ,Sorenson's Quotient of Similarity, SQS (McCain, 1975), was calculated to-Jetermine similarities based a solely on presence / absence of genera (qualitative characteristics of com-
.x w,_ %.> r munity Eemposition). A percentage simif.arity (PS) index (Pielou, 1975) was
~
.A . .. ..
+,
calculaQd also'to determine similarities based on both qualitative and w . e,
*g
."- quantitative' chsracteristics of comununity structure. In both cases, values 4 m- , .
j .] ofq703 arcen't;4r greater were assumed to shag similarity. p / SQS was calculated as follows: s ~~ SQS = 2s/(x + y) 100
, .n '. j ,.
<c: .
whe re , x r.: number of taxa at station x y = number of taxa at statbn y s = number of taya irt cenunon between , s stations x and y i V , Percentage similarity index was calculated as follows: j
,% s .,
, /,
, PS = 200Ig ,g min (P iX' iY
~ .
. where, P iX
#" IY'#' the quantities of genus i
,,. at stations X and Y as proportions of the s - c
, quantities of 411 s genera at the two
,,. < \ . ,
s stations combined. _ . , Pye 4 Ifc'6hdrisonsbetw'eentwolocatitansprovidedlowSQSandPS
?, values, the cdaununities were considered different. If SQS was high but PS .-
n lowf cosununities were composed of similar genera but differed either in s e b o p 1 4
. 53-
,.~ ~ . , e 9
N, j 'g ' 1 I L
- s. %
L_ _ . _ _ _ .___._d _ _ _ _ .
s absolute cell density or in relative abundance of genera present. When SQS
. was low and PS high (a rare occurrence), communities were still considered
,similar because the low SQS probably was related to random occurrence of rare genera which affects SQS much more than PS. If both coefficients were high, communities were similar in generic composition, relative abundance of. genera present, and absolute cell number.
T I
. 3.1.2 Results and Discussion Spatial Comparisons of Operational Monitorina Data--As discussed in section 2.2, at least one unit was generating power on all phytoplankton sample dates in 1983 (potential effects from both operation of CCWS and thermal input). The following section presents results for each of these sample dates.
.; February 1983--River. flows were high (approximately 1,415 m3 7, 7- 50,000 cfs) during this sample period. High flows would have rapidly mixed g.; ,
discharged water from SQN; hence, potential for plant related effects was low during this period. Most parameters used to evaluate the phytoplankton community changed / increased at station 3 compared to values at stations 1 and 2. For s? example:
- 1. Chrysophyta numerically dominanted at all stations yet decreased in proportion at station 3 due to an increase in cyanophytes which were absent at stations 1 and 2 (table 3-1).
- 2. The dominant genus at stations 1 and 2 was Melosira, a diatom, while Oscillatoria (a cyanophyte) was dominant at station 3 (appendices G and H).
- 3. Number of taxa increased from 19 at station 1 to 30 at station 3 (table 3-2). Diversity index values were relatively high and ;
similar at all stations. ~ o
. , . .- ,, . . - n .-- .. . . ..,, .. , y ,,....,e --n... s. ,, , ,
C
. e ,
s c . - 1
- 4. Percentage simila. sit fride,t,vahres indicated stations 1 and 2 '
were similar'to onelinother' but station 3 was diasimilar to both l (table 3-3). SQS 'valuehndicated similar taxa ' ' ' occurred at all i
~ stations.
~ . ~ ~ ,.
- 5. Cell densities for sll groups were low (table,3'-4 and appendix I) as 'espected under high-flow, . winter conditions -but they were
'significantly higher at station 3 than at stations _1 or 2 as - '
shown by ANOVA and SNK (tabT M 3-5'and 3-6). Test results were tthe same for total density, sad densities for each group.
- x. .
- 6. Both chlorophyll a' concentrations and carbon assimilation rates-were low (tables 337, 3-9, and appendices J, K) as expected and statistica1' analysis failed to detect significant differences among stations (tables 3-8 and 3-10). Phaeophytin index values were..high indicating thE chavaunity was in good physiological Scopdition at alihstations\(table ;3-7).
/
'_8 ,
+ /
The changes observed at etnion 3 were possibly relst.ed to oper-
<- ~
t 3 ation of SQN, particularly the thermal effluent. However, the magnitude of SQN's influence is considered low bec. ruse rapid mixing of eff,luent water v'
' x s - 'with ambient water resulted >
saly a-1" C rise in water temperature. If
~-
. , , j- y +
u thermal stimulation-from'the plant das41arge}y responsible, carbon assimi- '
, , - , -V s a lationratesshouldhavebeenr. tim'ulatedaQJ.heincubationsite'immediately -
downstream of the mixing zone.\ Instead,. daily assimilation rates were
- w. . w.
- 2, simildr among stations (24, 27, and 27 nigC/m / day at stations 1, 2, and 3,
.~
- s- .
n + , . . respectively). Additionally, the afght-hour travel time from the diffusers
~
to station i is insufficient for'the'YM above increases to occur at existing
. ,. * - , Y. ,
temperatures. Presence of Oscillatoria-at station 3 was more likely related'to habitat differences among stations,or to seeding from several large iverbank and eabayment areas located near or just upstream of station 3 than to operation of SQN. For these seasons SQN was not con-sidered a dignificant influence on th phytoplanktorf during this sample period.' N 1 . . May 1983--Chapter 2 describes river flows as seasonally noimal (approximately 710 m /s; 25,000'cfs) durinythis sample period. Generally r
,..h
\
s - m i - , - 4,,
r 4 sunny conditions existed on the day samples were collected but rain stores
, had occurred on the two days preceding sampling (rainfall I to 3 cm).
yLocal runoff resulting'from these storms was probably responsible for the relatively low light penetration (1 percent of surface illumination occurred at 3.5 m) which in turn could have adversely affected phytoplankton.
.SQN plant generation was.near the maximum possible with the plant
. entraining almost 10 percent of the river flow. Hence, potential for plant j .. ' induced effects was great. However, the following data show the phyto-plankton community was depauperate at all stations and few differences existed among stations.
t,
- 1. Cell densities were very low for a May sample period ($ 0.2 x 10 cells /L, table 3-4), and statistical analyses failed to detect any differences among stations for. total or group densities j (table 3-5). Cyanophytes were absent from all stations.
- 2. Number of taxa was also low ($ 16, table 3-2), while d values
... were.relatively high (range 2.76-3.17).
=3. Chrysophyta. comprised 57-60 percent of the total density at all stations (table 3-1), and one of three diaten genera (Melosira,
~
-Asterionella, tor Frasilaria) was dominant in all samples (appendices G and H). Similar genera were collected at all stations (all SQS at least 76 percent, table 3-3), but PS values indicated the relative composition of taxa was different at station 3 than at stations 1 and 2,.which were similar.
- 4. ' Chlorophyll a concentrations and carbon assimilation rates were
~
-also low (tables.3-7 and.3-9), and statistical differences were
'notfdetected (tables 3-8 and 3-10). Phaeophytin index values indicate the community was in relatively poor. physiological
" condition at!all stations (table 3-7).
Data for May indicate a generally depauperate (low cell densities
.and few genera present), inactive.(low chlorophyll a and carbon assimila-
, htion rates),.and "unhealthly" (low phaeophytin index values) community at 'I all2 stations. -Such communities during this sample period could have been i. caused by any or al1~ of the following: (1) relatively heavy rainfall on Y? i" -
.the:two' days prior to sample collection- previous studies (Poppe, 1976; and
- e i Wade'1984, unpublished thesis) have shown very large decreases in phyto- 1 2
plankton-communities following rainfall events; (2) low light penetration , i a probably associated with local runoff; and (3) grazing from a very large
-]
Ezooplankton community (see section 3.2). Influences from the above factors were apparently much greater than influences from SQN as indicated by
' similarity of the upstream station to downstream stations.
August 1983--River flows were near.the seasonal average during this sample period (section 2.1). SQN was operating with one unit, and these river flows provided low CCWS entrainment percentages and large _ dilution of discharge water. Summer sample collections during previous years have shown that, when seasonal river flows exist, the plankton community increases from upstream to downstream. Data for August 1983 follow the trend of previous years with increases in most phytoplankton measurements from.up- to downstream.
- 1. Cell densities for all three major groups increased from station 1 to stations 2.and 3 (table 3-4). Statistical analyses indicated .
these increases were significant for all test groups--station 1 lower than stations 2 and 3, which were not different (table 3-5 and 3-6). 12 . Percentage similarity coefficients also indicated stations 2 and 3 were similar to one another but dissimilar to station 1 (table 3-3). Although quantitative differences existed, similar taxa were found at all stations as indicated by high SQS values (table 3-3).
- 3. Number of taxa was the highest of any sample period in 1983 but did not follow the same trend of' increases at downstream stations--station 3 had the least taxa (56) and station 2 the
.most (65, table 3-2). Diversity index values were similar among stations.
- 4. -Cyanophyta was dominant at all stations as expected during a summer sample period (table 3-1). Cyanophyte genera dominated at .
all' stations but the dominant genus changed from Oscillatoria at
-station 1 to Anacystis at station 3 (appendix H).
m i
- 5. Chlorophyll a concentrations and carbon assimilation rates generally followed the same trend as density data (increased downstream) and provided similar statistical test results (tables 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, and 3-10). Phaeophytin index values increased from up- to downstream indicating the community was in a better physiological state in downstream areas and better able to synthesize chlorophyll and assimilate carbon. Highest carbon assimilation rates at station 2 were probably associated with highest chlorophyll a concentration also at that station.
Large increases at station 2 over station 1 indicate the area of
. increased phytoplankton reproduction was between these two locations. The plant is not considered a major contributor because sufficient time does not exist from exposure at the diffusers to sample collection at station 2 for observed differences to occur. Increases at station 2 were possibly related to increased reproduction resulting from lower velocities between stations 1 and 2 or to exchange of water between overbanks (typically more productive than channel) and the channel. Similarity of station 3 to . , . station 2 indicates SQN had little effect on the phytoplankton community. .
November 1983--Only one SQN unit was generating on O.e sample day but both units'had been generating only a few days prior to sample col-lection. The watermass which was sampled at station 3 had passed SQN when
- only one unit was operating. River flows were normal (710 m3 /s, 25,000 cfs) for fall and had been relatively stable for most of the summer and fall.
Several phytoplankton measurements increased slightly from up-stream to downstream.
- 1. Total cell densities were low (< 0.2 x 100 cells /L, table 3-4) but were significantly greater at station 3 than at stations 1 and 2, which were not different from one ancther (tables 3-5 and 3-6). Chlorophyte and chrysophyte densities generally followed the same trend but did not show the distinct increases at station 3 shown by total density. ' Cyanophyte densities were very low with no significant differences among stations.
L N
- 2. Number of taxa also increased from up- to downstream,(14 at station 1 and 22 at station 3, table 3-2), likewise d values were highest at station 3. The same taxa were collected at all stations (SQS values high), but PS values indicated that relative abundance of these taxa were different at station 3 than at stations 1 and 2, which were similar (table 3-3).
- 3. Chrysophyta was dominant at all stations (table 3-1) with Melosira .
the dominant genus in all but one sample (appendix H).
- 4. Chlorophyll a concentrations and carbon assimilation rates were low at all stations (tables 3-7 and 3-9). Statistical analysis of these data indentified a slight trend (two of four sample depths) toward higher chlorophyll a concentrations at station 3 than stations 1 and 2 but no distinct trends for carbon assimi-lation rates (tables 3-8 and 3-10).
Data for November indicate the phytoplankton community had com-pleted its transition to winter levels. These data are similar to February data in that there were slight increases in the downstream area. Effluents from SQii may have influenced these slight increasen, but the influence of SQN as well as the increases themselves are considered inconsequential. Temporal Comparisons of Preoperati6nal and Operational Monitoring Data--Data collected during preoperational monitoring (1973-1977) indicated Chrysophyta always dominated the Chickamauga Reservoir phytoplankton community - in winter. Chrysophyta usually dominated during the transition periods of spring and fall but Chlorophyta was occasionally dominant (TVA, 1978a). Dominance during the summer sample period changed from either Chrysophyta or Chlorophyta in 1973 and 1974 to Cyanophyta in 1975, 1976, , and 1977. Dominance during operational monitoring (1981, 1982, and 1983) I showed a continuance of these trends. Chlorophyte dominance in Chickamauga Reservoir (both up- and downstream of SQN) during spring and fall has occurred more frequently during operational monitoring than in preopera-tional monitoring but sufficient data are not available to determine if - this actually represents a change from preoperational conditions. bf
' Several genera were collected both upstream and downctream of SQN w -during essentially all'(17 of 19) preoperational sample periods. These included the chlorophyte genera Chlamydomonas and Scenedesmus; the chryso-4 phyte genera Melosira, Navicula, and Synedra; and the cyanophyte genus Dactylococc<psis (TVA, 1978a). These genera were collected during all operational monitoring years at about the same frequency ac during pre-
' operational' monitoring except for Dactylococcopsis which was collected less
. frequently during the operational period. In addition to the above genera, several others were collected during 11 of 13 operational sample periods at both up- and downstream locations.- These include the chlorophyte genera-Ankistrodessus and Chlore11a; the chrysophyte genus Stephanodiscus; the cryptophyte genus Cryptomonas; and the euglenophyte genus Eualena (appendix E of this report; appendix C of TVA,1982; and appendix E of TVA, 1983). It is interesting to note that the chlorophyte genus Pyramimonas, 1
an abundant and common genus in 1981 was not collected in 1982 or 1983.
. This organism occurs primarily during seasonal transitional periods, and its presence-one year yet absence the next. indicates a weakness of quarterly-monitoring programs.
Preoperational and operational cell densities at the 1.0 m sample depth (the only depth consistently sampled during these two monitoring periods) for stations 1 and 3 are shown in figure 3-2. Total cell densities
' during preoperational monitoring were usually largest in summer (maximum of 6
9.2 x 10 cells /L in summer 1977 at station 1) and lowest in winter, spring
~ or (usually) fall (minimum of 0.07 x' 10 cells /L in winter 1974 at
~
4; station.1). Cell. densities during operational monitoring were largest in 6 summer and winter (maximum of 11.1, '4.1 and 4.8 x 10 cells /L in summers b 1981, 1982, and 1983, respectively, all at station 3) and smallest in fall 1
0 (minimum of 0.1 x 10 cells /L in fall 1980 at stations 1 and 3, 0.1 x 10 0 0 cells /L in fall 1982 at station 1, and 0.05 x 10 cells /L in fall 1983 at station 2). High cell densities during most seasons of 1981 reflect continu- a ance of a trend toward increased densities over time during preoperational ) monitoring (TVA, 1978a). However, densities during all seasor= of 1982 and 1983 were lower than in 1981 and for most seasons were similar to densities which occurred in early years of preoperational monitoring. Results from the last two years of operational monitoring indicate that the trend toward increased phytoplankton densitics in Chickamauga Reservoir has peaked with an apparent return to conditions which existed in early years of preoper-ational monitoring. However, such an interpretation is premature based on only two years, and data from subsequent years will be necessary to better define this trend. The general trend of increased densities from upstream to down-stream identified during preoperational monitoring was also apparent in operational monitoring, except in May of 1981 and 1982. Increases
' downstream occurred during all seasons of 1983. .
Chlorophyll a concentrations during preoperational monitoting were usually lowest in fall and highest in_ summer with no particular upstream / downstream trends (figure 3-3). -Considerable variation existed among years during operational monitoring. Concentrations were higher in 1981 than in either of the other two operational years or any preoper- , ational year. Concentrations in 1982 and 1983 were similar or only slightly 1 higher than in most preoperational years. Larger concentrations in 1981 were associated with greater algal production which could have been caused by the longer reservoir retention times during most sample periods or by a . tendency toward a more productive reservoir. Reservoir flows during 1982
a: and 1983 were near normal and could account for their similarity to preoper-
, ational periods. These fluctuations do not appear to be related to initi-ation of operation of SQN because increases in 1981 were also apparent
- , upstream of the plant.
Daily carbon assimilation rates for stations 1 and 3 during pre-operational.and operational monitoring periods are presented in figure 3-4. Comparison of absolute carbon assimilation rates between preoperational and operational periods must be made conservatively because of a change in laboratory procedure to a more efficient liquid scintillation counter for operational samples rather than the thin-window, low-background gas flow
. proportional counter used for preoperational samples. Preoperational carbon assimilation rates were typically highest in spring end summer and usually higher at station 3 than at station 1. Winter and spring rates showed no definite trend of increases or decreases during the preopera-
'tional period, but summer and fall tended.toward higher assimilation rates from beginning to end of the preoperational period. Carbon assimilation
; rates during operational monitoring were highest in spring and summer and lowest in fall and do not show any definite upstream / downstream trends.
It should be noted that carbon assimilation data for 1980 and 1981 reported in TVA (1982) were incorrect because an incorrect constant was used in the computer program. Because the error was constant, it would
' affect absolute values but not relative values. Hence, spatial tests on 1981 data'in TVA (1982) were correct. However, absolute comparisons among years in figure 3-4 should not be made for this reason and because of the change in laboratory methodology discussed above. This error was corrected prior to analysis of 1982 data and all values for 1982 and 1983 are correct.
6 62-
~.m. .+---4 y p. ,y ww.. + =wwoq. . - - -,.w .-.s, - - . , , - - - , g. ,. -w. w-- - . . , c ., ,. ,- -
5 ] 1 Preoperational.and 1981 operational monitoring data indicate a tendency toward increases in the .Chickamauga Reservoir phytoplankton com-munity. -However, 1982'and 1983 operational data do not reflect continua- ti Et ion of theseLtrends established in'the mid to late 1970's and continued in
.'1981. .The 1982 and 1983 data are more similar~to data collected in early 1970's'except for cyanophyte dominance which also has been apparent during summer since~the mid-1970's. Data to be~ collected in 1984'will be evaluated
~
(to determine if this apparent return to a phytoplankton community charac-t'ristic.of e less productive conditions continues. An~ interesting trend noted in the spring sample' period of the firstltec operational years (1981~and 1982) is a general decrease in cell
~
' densities,' chlorophyll a concentrations, and carbon assimilation rates from
-uo- to downstream. Considerable discussion of these data was presented in
'TVA (1982 and 1983). Data for 1981:and 1982 are not totally alike, but
'they follow the same trend. Decreases in 1981 were thought to be related to characteristics of different watermasses, rather than operation of SQN.
-This conclusion was reached because plant effects should have been mani- -
fested in stimulation rather than depression of most parameters during this time of year and because decreases were apparent at station 2, which is too
-~
close ' ta) the diffusers for plant induced effects to have time to be mani-fested. Decreases in 1982 were not as-easily reconciled. Reservoir flows were lower.and SQN w.,ter demand was higher in 1982 than 1981 resulting in , the plant using about 30 percent of the river flow in 1982 compared to 10 k percent in 1981. Longer reservoir retention time and conflicting trends in phytoplankton parameters in 1982 made interpretation of those data difficult. -As a result, three explanations of possible causes were postulated but no singular causative factor could be identified. Data for
May 1983 did not show the same trend found in 1981 and 1982. Phytoplankton e- _ communities at all stations during that sample period were depauperate, inactive,.and "unhealthly." Several possible causes for this type of community were given, and the influence of SQN was considered unimportant relative to other factors. Data from subsequent years may give better insight. into causative mechanisms for decreases such as those which occurred in spring 1981 and 1982. . Decreases in 1982 are of special concern because the plant had entrained such a large percentage of the river flow. A point of interest is that phytoplankton measurements were quite high during winter 1981, apparently a result of very low river flows. However, in 1982 and 1983 river flows were high during the winter sample period and phytoplankton parameters were low. Comparison of operational to preoperational data do not indicate any long-term changes which could be attributed to operation of SQN.
' 3.1.3 Summary and' Conclusions SQN operation during periods of sample collection in.1983 was two units during winter and spring and one unit during summer and fall. When river. flows during sample periods were compared to long-term flows, they were near normal for each respective period. Flows greatly influence
. plankton, and therefore, results of this monitoring program.
Data for winter and fall 1983 ' sample periods indicated slight increases.in most measurements from upstream to downstream stations. This 54 believed to be related more to habitat differences among stations and/or
- increased retention. times and greater overbank/embayment areas for seeding in lower reservoir reaches than to operation of SQN g
v-
Data for spring 1983 indicated depauperate, inactive, and "unhealthly" communities at all stations. Several possible contributing factors for this' type of community exist but no single cause was identified. -
-The influence of_SQN is considered unimportant relative to other' factors.
The phytoplankton community exhibited increases from upstream to downstream' stations during the summer 1983 sample period. Similiar increases occurred during previous summers:(both operational and preoperational) when similar river flows existed. Although stimulation from plant operation can I not be ruledEout, it appears that plant operation had little effect on the phytoplankton during this period. When operational data were compared to preoperational data, increases which were apparent in preoperational monitoring and the first year of operational monitoring were not apparent during the second and third years of operational sampling. Rather, data for 1982 and 1983 indicate similar conditions to those in the early 1970's. SQN has ap-parently had little influence on Chickamauga Reservoir phytoplankton because similar trends were apparent both upstream and downstream of the . plant. Data for this third operational period indicate that SQN has had little influence on the phytoplankton community during winter, spring, summer, or f all. . The depauperate community during spring 1983 prevented I resolution of any SQF effects. O
Table 3-1. Percentage Co"mposition of Phytoplankton 'o Groups During Operational Monitoring Periods (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir
~' 'Phytoplankton. Tennessee River Mile Group Date 478.2 483.4 490.5 ~Chlorophyta Feb 1983 16 23 19 Chrysophyta 46 68 70 Cryptophyta 3 8 8 Cyanophyta 35 0 0 -Euglenophyta 0 1 2 Pyrrophyta 0 0 0 Chlorophyta May 1983 24 31 33 Chrysophyta 60 59 57 Cryptophyta 8 10 10 Cyanophyta 0 0 0 Euglenophyta 2 0 0 Pyrrophyta 6 0 0 Chlorophyta Aug 1983 23 26 32 Chrysophyta 12 10 16 Cryptophyta 0 0 1 Cyanophyta 64 63 50 Euglenophyta 0 0 0 Pyrrophyta 0 0 1 Chlorophyta Nov 1983 37 34 40 Chrysophyta 38 61- 43 Cryptophyta 7 2 3 Cyanophyta 16 0 -11 Euglenophyta 1 4 3 Pyrrophyta 0 1 1 a
e ~ J A e L4 Diversity Index Values (d) and Number
~
.l Table 3-2. i A .'of Taxa for Phytoplankton Communities During Operstional Monitoring (1983),
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga , Reservoir s r Tennessee River Mile - l 478.2 483.4 490.5 No. , No. , No. , Date- - Taxa d Taxa d Taxa d
~
Feb 1983 30 '2.93 21 '3.19 19 2.99 L May 1983' .15 3.17 16 2.95 14 2.76 b .Aug 1983 56 3.80 65 3.96 59 4.21 L -: Nov 1983 22 3.31 14' 2.55 15 2.92 h * [ -- j ._
.3 D+
(. ?' e t ;- r T T O
5 Table 3-3. Similarity of Phytoplankton Community Composition / Structure During. Operational Monitoring in 1983 Based on Sorensen's Quotient of Similarity and Percentage Similarity, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Station Sorensen's Quotient Percentage Date Comparision of Similarity (%) Similarity (%) Feb 1983 TRM 490.5-483.4 90 84 TRM 490.5-478.2 73 57 TRM 483.8-478.2 71 56 May 1983 TRM 490.5-483.4 87 92 TRM 490.5-478.2- 76 65 TRM 483.4-478.2 77 69 Aug 1983 TRM 490.5-483.4 92 60 TRM 490.5-478.2 90 64 TRM 483.4-478.2 86 84 Nov 1983 TRM 490.5-483.4 83 73 TRM 490.5-478.2 70 51 TRM 483.4-478.2 72 58 3'
,)
c d in AMNe M $9 .* N O @ e a0 NNNN *=e N N 80 e=- OOOO O * * *
- N M. M* M
- *
- eo
* *@ 4=
C 4
@ OOOO OOOO N******
* + + +
OOCO 0 a M C 4 Om4 4 th e ad M *t in @ O * * * * *
- O N a0 @ O O* N en w M N. N. N. N. . . . M. 4 4. @.
he0 0OOO OOOO. ". O. O. O. A 4 @4MN OOOO Q. av 4 9 O N 4 @ @ ** emem e. ge 80 ** in *F eNO@ m
. a0+ w in. 7 4 ao. se. e.e. M. N. w. M. 4 pe
. N. *. ==.
M 4 N OOOO OOOO 44MN 00OO e6 m w at G en. in@4@ == N w he o O. eo. M. @. O. O. O 4 OOOO OOOO *OMO OOOO
.M.*
a 4 4 4CNN oe A = 4 s M ** 90 0. N. 0 9 OOOO OCOO d a 4 4 N i 4 ** OOOO O e w >
*J Q 4
he N n444
+ @@NO 44 et e6 N
NN.**.**.
- a=*
- m. to* . en. O. O G OOOO OOOO NNNa=
ee
~t 0OOO ne I O e P= N @ ee
****ae** M@@@ e44@ NMM4
.O eb e O
. . . . ** O. O. O.
00OO M. N. M. N. O. O. O. O. 9 4 C000 000O OOCO e to 4 so W >
** A Q. 4 4 80 e6 4 NeeO e - @ @ 00 in @@MM g aM * .* .* * = = . * .O. O. O. a*
M >9 OOOO
. e. 4. M. M. C. O. O. O.
.e .F OOOO OOOO OOOO A A
- u V 1
Cal
** O 4 in et 4 N. MeON enMMe
^ +
- ne e9 M+ N = *N * == -**C* ** *
- O @* M* *-t N @ N -t N OOOO 15 OOOO OOOO OOOO* * * *
>J O N> N OOOO* , @ k oe m en 6
MM to N -t M M e6 4 M 4 4 m a0 4 4MNM ee O* O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. ao e8 e OOOO @. N. -t. to. O. O. O. O.
** 2 4 OODO OOOO C000 4J 9 w p-M >
es u A -t @ e to in hw A - 000O 4 4 -t N seeMO 4 N 4 **
'=e A OM * * *
- OOOO en O O 80 COOO
** ba te e3 = * * *
. O.
4 OOOO OOOO+ *****O OOOO ee .A W U g O A. + 0 N eJ l *l M$0 M M e0 e M -t so en N a .e n6 e' 0
- a. b. o.O.N O. O. O. O. b. eo. N. @. O. O. O. O.
g ** 4 0000 0000 mOOO 0000
** 4, ce 3 0 W.
YA ga g Ge % P
- o G M W 3 w g y A M. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. M. C. C. O. le g me Q ** M an O ** M to O == M so M. O. 3. O.
O ao M in g 4
- 9 M M 6 e
b n
** 6 A ee A 4 9 ak ee a 9 % j J > 6 O na. m. O >= s aC HE 4t
-69
Table 3-5. Results of Two-Way Analysis of Variance on Total Phytoplankton and Group Cell Densities, Operational Monitoring During 1983 at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Total Chlorophyta Chrysophyta Cyanophyta Phytoplankton F-Ratio P>F F-Ratio P>F F-Ratio P>F F-Ratio P>F Feb 1983 River Mile 17.50 0.0003, 15.93 0.0004 23013.41 0.0001 125.83 0.0001, Depth 5.05 0.0172 2.58 0.1024 3.32 0.0570, 4.77 0.0206 River Mile & 2.13 0.1253 2.19 0.1169 3.32 0.0366 1.59 0.2322 Depth May 1983 River Mile 3.58 0.0604 1.02 0.3897 - - 0.77 0.4853,
, Depth 2.26 0.1343, 3.09 0.0676 - -
4.53 0.0241, y River Mile & 7.76 0.0014 2.78 0.0622 - - 5.44 0.0063 Depth Aug 1983 River Mile 34.31 0.0001, 31.23 0.0001, 151.57 0.0001, 281.42 0.0001, Depth 11.49 0.0008 26.56 0.0001, 27.67 0.0001, 70.57 0.0001, River Mile & l.36 0.3070 4.32 0.0150 4.17 0.0170 6.10 0.0040 Depth Nov 1983 River Mile 16.70 0.0003 6.37 0.0130 1.98 0.1804 14.02 0.0007 Depth 1.44 0.2792, 0.52 0.6778 1.07 0.3993 0.90 0.4685 River Mile & 3.76 0.0243 1.60 0.2299 1.63 0.2219 1.59 0.2324 ; Depth ' Significant at a = 0.05.
T;blT 3-6.1 -Disposition' ef Phytoplankton Density' (Celle/L) Data Set') with' Significant F-Rati'.: ?
/
Identified la Tabla 3-5, Oper::tional~ Monit';; ring During 1983 ct Sequoyah Nuclzr' Plant,_Chickamaug')'Re = rvoir
~
-Test Sample F-Ratio- F-Ratio- SNK Date . Group- Depth (a) Two-Way.' ANOVA ' One-Way ANOVA Low Mean, High Mean.
Chlorophyta t- 17.50 1 2 3 Feb 1983 Chrysophyta i 15.93 2- 1- 3:
+
Cyanophyta+ ~ 0.3 12219.95 0 1 2 3 1.0 2102.72 I ~ 1- 2 3 3.0 16878.03 0 1- 2 3 5.0 16878.03 0 l' 2 3 4 toplankton - Chlorophyta.f 9 Aug 1983 34.31 1 3 2_
+
Aug 1983 Chrysophyta+ 0.3 53.76 0 _1 2 3 l.0 130.05 5 1 3 2_ l 3.0 3.44 1 2 3 5.0 1.40 1 3 2
+
Aug 1983 Cyanophyta+ 0.3 33.90 0 _1 3 2 1.0 53.43 0 1 2 3 3.0 18.28 0 1_ 2 3 5.0 89.27 I 1 3 2'
- . *. - . ;+. , ; .
.a. .. .
4- ' .; - -j Table 3-6. ;(Continued)
- Test . Sample . - F-Ratio' - F-Ratio- SNK Date Group Depth l(a). Two-Way ANOVA .'One-Way,ANOVA- Low Mean High Mean' toplankton 0.3 -107.29 I 1, t3- 2_ -
1.0' 79.17I- 1- 3 2I 3.0 41.85 0 1 '3 -2 5.0 59.38 I 1 3 2 Nov 1983 Chlorophyta d.3 0.22 2 3 1 I 1.0 ll.09 2 1 3_ 3.0. 4.75 1 2 3 0 7 5.0 8.36 2 1 3 Chrysophyts i 6.37 1 2 3 Total Phytoplankton 14.02 1 2 3_ Student, Newman, Kents Multiple. Range Test; means ranked lowest to highest using station numbers; i means underscored by same line are not significantly different at a = 0.05, means not so under- ' scored are significantly different. Tennessee River Mile 490.5 = station 1. Tennessee River Mile 483.4 = station 2. Tennessee River Mile 478.2. =-station 3. t Depths combined in one-way ANOVA because interaction was not significant.
+
+ Depths tested separately with one-way ANOVA because interaction was significant in two-way ANOVA.
I Significant at a = 0.05. u_. _ . . . _ . ._
k
- Tr ble ' 3-7.- Mean Phytoplankton Chlorophyll a Concentrations (ag/m3 ) and Phaeophytin Index Values at Each Station During Operational g Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Depth TRM 490.5 TRM 483.4 TRM 478.2 i
- Date (m) Chloro Phaco Chloro Phaeo Chloro Phaeo
~
Fab 1983'- 0.3' 4.05 1.61 3.57 1.66 4.26 1.70 0 1.0 3.89 1.45 3.31 1.63 3.17 1.61 3.0 3.00 1.70 3.30 1.70 3.41 1.58 15 . 0 3.60 1.68 3.41 1.55 3.47 1.46 M:y~1983 0.3 4.51 1.45 4.40 1.44 4.62 1.44 1.0 4.68 1.38 4.62- 1.41 5.42 1.45 3.0 4.34 1.40 4.57 1.37 4.45 1.33 5.0 4.00 1.39 4.85 1.41 4.40 1.39 Aug~1983 0.3 5.79 1.25 11.99 1.60 8.87 1.58 1.01 5.91- 1.48 12.72 1.60 9.19 1.63 3.0 - 4.79 1.47 9.84 1.61 9.49 1.58
.5.-0 3.47 1.44 8.67 1.57 6.47 1.49 N:v 1983 1.70 0 10 . 3 1.55 1.59 1.66 2.17 1.57 1.0 1.44 1.70 0 1.61 1.70 0 2.04 1.70 0
'3.0- 2.03 1.47 1.75 1.70 0 1.64 1.70 0 l 5.0 2.07 1.50 1.49 1.70 0 1.97 1.70 I c-TInnessee River Mile.
t Chlo'rophyll.a concentrations. Phreophytin index values. I Actual values were higher but are reported here as the theoretical maximum cf 1.70. k Y Table 3-8. Results of Statistical Analyses (One- and Two-Way Analyses of
~
. Variance and Student, Newman, Keuls Multiple Range Test) on Phytoplankton Chlorophyll a Data, Operational Monitoring During 1983 at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Results of Two-Way ANOVA Station Depth Interaction Date F-Ratio P>F F-Ratio P>F F-Ratio P>F Feb 1983 0.42 0.6651 2.47 0.1119 0.85 0.5562 May 1983 2.74 0.1049 3.44 0.0519 2.14 0.1240 Aug 1983 129.60 0.0001 22.36 0.000l 1.34 0.3116
.Nov.1983 6.71 0.0111 0.75 0.5456 4.77 0.0104 Results of One-Way ANOVA and SNK on Data Sets with Significant F-Ratios Sample F-Ratio SNK i
Depth (m) Date, One-Way ANOVA Low X High X _ -Aug 1983 II 3 2 Nov 1983 0.3 12.20 1 '2 j3 1.0 20.51 1 2 3 , 3.0 0.71 3 2 1 5.0 24.73 2 3 1 Significant at a = 0.05. i student, Newman, Kuels Multiple Range Test; means ranked lowest to highest using station numbers; means underscored by same line are not significantly
. different at a = 0.05; means not so underscored are significantly different.
I Depths. combined'in one-way ANOVA because interaction was not significant.
'I Station 1 = Tennessee River Mile 490.5.
Station 2 = Tennessee River Mile 483.4. Station 3 = Tennessee River Mile 478.2. Y L - - . - . - - - - -
Tabla 3-9. -Bourly and Daily Carboa Assimilation Rates ct Each Samply Location During Operational Monitoring. _ (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga. Reservoir TRN- 478.2' TRM 483.4-- TRM 490.5 3 ma C/m2/ Day 2 ~ Date Depth ma C/m /hr ma C/m /hr ma C/m / Day ma C/m /hr - ma C/m / Day Feb. 1983 0.3 1.16 1.16 1.91 1.0 2.74 2.25 1. % 3.0 1.29 1.54' I.28 5.0 0.30 0.32 0.33 Surface To 5.0 M 27 27 24 T-May 1983 0.3 -13.42 9.26 8.10 1.0 -10.63 8.38 9.90 3.0 1.15 1.58 1.64 5.0 0.49 0.21 0.44
- Surface to 5.0 M 243 205 217
+
Aug. 1983+ -0.3 18.04 39.22 18.57 1.0 26.29, 33.04 24.87 3.0 6.36 6.63 6.56 5.0 1.38 1.03 0.94 Surface to 5.0 M 488 720 ~431 Nov. 1983 0.3 2.37 4.00 2.95 1.0 4.13 5.36 3.35 3.0 2.24 2.15 1.07 5.0 0.73 0.44 0.42 Surface to-5.0 M 98- 110 79 Tennessee River Mile. fDatafromonlyonereplicatesampleavailable.
+ Calculations for August assimilation rates were based on historical alkalinities because alkalinity data for August were not available.
Table 3-10. Results of Statistical Analyses (One- and Two-Way Analyses of Variance and Student, Newman, Keuls Multiple Range Test) on Phytoplankton Carbon Assimilation Rates, Operational Monitoring During 1983 Near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Results of Two-Way ANOVA Station Depth Interaction _ Date F-Ratio P>F F-Ratio P>F F-Ratio P>F Feb. 1983 0.34 0.7157 170.00 0.000l 6.12 0.0039 May 1983 0.81 0.4694 28.90 0.0001 0.42 0.8512 Aug. 1983 4.21 0.0412 233.27 0.0001 2.46 0.0867 Nov. 1983 23.38 0.0001 283.06 0.0001 8.82 0.0008 Results of One-Way ANOVA and SNK on Data Sets with Significant F-Ratios i Sample F-Ratio , SNK , Date Degth (ml One-Way ANOVA !.ow X Hish X Aug. 0 1 3 2 Ns v. 0.3 11.76 3 1 2 1.0 7.48 1 3 2 3.0 16.57 1 2 3 5.0 119.77 1 2 3 Significantly different at a = 0.05. T Newman, Kuels Multiple Range Test; means ranked lowest to highest using station numbers; means underscored by same line are not significantly different at a = 0.05; means not so underscored are significantly different. Depths combined in one-way ANOVA because interaction was not significant. I Station 1 = Tennessee River Hile 490.5. Station 2 = Tennessee River Mile 483.4. Station 3 = Tennessee River Mile 478.2. o D 9 O i ' g n
-a 3
I3 i == 1 NNl Ef4 d
- e 4
4
, a I
2,t 3
. l. . 102 i "aa
.s j '
- Be l Eli a
e@. Ms g"u 5 g 55
%)
C(; a 4 i
\d i e
0 sa m-ts e e e t s r e
\. -
A . ng ou ia t m o 33 p O
. aa eg tk sr .
, S c ee i ss ee ,
dh ee eC fT
.. t c ,
/ . v.
. et l n
^
ea Sl b P
. f or a
he
. tl
. . pc eu DN
. eh N .
l a py mo au S q
. e rS
, e t ,
H .. eg Mni
.v er
,. no Ot
^
i b , t n ao M s
. el
. i a t n
\w . io si 6 \ .
nt ea
. Dr e
- np oO g . t kd t
r o 4 nn aa S
,,. l pl oa
. t n yo
- - hi Pt
.- a f r oep so
* . ne .
orr spi i o rgv
. anr
- pi a
. mrr
- - . oue 43 -_
. CDR 6s e7 e4 ss .
se , r ae , 2 TT se w .s . 3 e e . e i
- s. .
W e r u
- g
\ .
i F
+
- e
.s.
.i i*8*"sI O*
SEQUOYAH CHLOROPHYLL A DATA PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL PERIODS 36.0-e 13 N i e E 24.0- l s j 4 I' '
$ z i
( 12.0-En f: '
\ . .
E
- i oo.o-O g% gy 4 S' 4
*?4 A f 1 S 3 I Vg4 1
4 6 Or 4 , g*Y
' ,1 ', , e ," #4 , e **s 4t*'s Figure 3-3. Comparisons of Phytoplankton Chlorophyll a Concentrations at the One-Meter San:ple Depth of Selected Stations During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring Periods, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir.
O g s 4.'
- f. , .; I-- ,,
?.
- J e
w . s *- - . < ., 4, 4 7 o *AP . 7 . ..,
~:4 .
. . . . e .
SEQUOYAH PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITY DATA PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL PERIODS i E l l 2234-E 3 1117- g O s e o-E
- gS #7 ST 4 sh y
*>4 O yb i
Op p* t gb 4 , 1
#7 $0
*c*+4 1' 16 3 7,
f 50# l ep
- gG 1* #r, * , g f*g i
S t* 4 Figure 3-4. Comparisons of Phytoplankton Carbon Assimilation Rates at Selected Stations During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring Periods Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir. 1
I, d? ~ l f~ p ' ~ . ;y r , , u, .
/
5 -/ *
/ s r
.y , 1
~ *
{ 3.2 Zoopf.: t_on '
, y .
3.2.1 Materials and Methods
~
Field--Two, replica'tezooplantonskleswerecoller'edquarterly
,1 O w
(see t'able 1-2) from mid-chantal at each of three stations (stetion 1 at TPfl 490.5, upstream of SQN; station 2 at TRM 483.4, immediately downstream N of the diffuser 4-pipes; and sta' tion-3 at TRM 47'8.2 downstream of SQN; fisure 3-1). A half ineter"hlankton net (80 pm mesh) with a flowmeter
, suspended in the throat a desYribed'byDycusandWade(1977)wasusedto
,;% ?
collect these bottom ' to surfa,e camples., Samples were preserved with
/ Formalin immediately after collection .
Laboratory--Samples were diluted or concentrated, depending on theabundahte,otdetritusandorganisms. Four 1-m1 subsamples were taken from the magnetically stirred sample using a 1 m1 Hensen-Stempel pipette
, s ., '
and, each subsample won placed in' .s 'Sedgewick Raf ter cell. Organisms were
~
3 enumerated st the lowest practical taxonomic level, usually species, on a compound microscope ~at 35 X or 50 X. Af ter submacSe enumeration, the re-mainder of the sample was scanned under a dissecting microscope at 14 X for any additional taxs not encountered in subsampling. Resultant counts were extrapolated to numbers per cubic meter. References and publications used in identifications include: Ahlstrom (1940, 1943), Brooks (1957), Deevey and Deevey (1971), Coulden (1968), Harrina and Myers (1926), Ruttner-Kolisko (1974), Voigt (1856), and Ward arid Whipple (1959). Data Analys_es--Sampling and processing variability of total com-
. munity and group densities was estimated by calculating the coefficient of variation for each set of duplicate samples. Coefficients less than
20 perecct wers crooid: red indicative of good samplo replicability. Co-efficients of variation greater than 40 percent indicated larger than
' desirable variability among replicate samples. .
Total'and group numbers were transformed (log and tested for 10
-statistical differences among stations using a one-way analysis of variance *
(ANOVA). The Student, Newman, Keuls multiple range test (SNK) was applied to data sets which were significantly different as shown by the ANOVA. All
~
' tests were evaluated at the 0.05 level of probability.
Rotifera and adult members of the Copepoda and Cladocers were used to determine the number of taxa in each sample. Zooplankton community structure was analyzed using d (immature forms excluded), SQ8, and PS in the same manner as for the phytoplankton (see section 3.1.1), except soo-plankton analyses were based primarily on species rather than genera. 3.2.2 Results and Discussion Spatial Comparisons of Operational Monitorina Date--At least one unit was generating power on all zooplankton sample dates in 1983. The. . following section presents results for each of these sample dates. February 1932--High river flows existed before and during this sample period. These high flows provided ample dilution for SQN effluent such that community alterations as a result of this effluent would be unlikely. The scoplai.hton community was numerically dominated by Rotifera (90-92 percent of total density) et all sample stations (table 3-11). Synebaeta (a rotifer) was the most numerous taxon at all stations (appendices L and M). , l
s-Diversity indir values were relatively low (1.15,1.62, and 1.17 at stations 1, 2, and 3, respectively, table 3-12). Number of taxa (25, 33, and 21) followed the same trend.
. Taxa present at-stations 1 and 2 were sufficiently similar to one another;thattheSDSvaluehan'above70 percent (table 3-13). Taxa present i
at station 3'were sufficiently different.from those at stations 1 and 2
~
that SQS values for station 1-3 and 2-3 comparisons were below 70 percent and considered different. These'1'ower SQS values for station 3 comparisons were related to collecting fewe, rafeipecies(i.e.,thoserepresentedby only a few specimens) at.that'statf % . ~ 4 , ;. -
-N ' Percentage-similarity, aimorei thorough measure of community t
. similarity than SQS', indicated all sta11ons were similar (table 3-13).
? ,, * ,
This test is more thorough becahse it include's botfs quantitative and quali-
..tative characteristics of the community at two stations being compared and t
is not affected as much as SQS by. pres'ence/ absence of, rare species.
~ Total orgTuisa mean denst'Cies were Irela$lirs1h high for a winter
~ ,
. sample per{od and ranged from 29,700 per a at stat' ion 3 to'49,800 per m3 6
~
T ~! ..
^
at station 2 (table 3-14 and figure 3-5). Densities for the numerically dominant group,- Rotifera, showed the same patte'rn fas, total den' s ities (range 3 26,800 to 46,000*per m at stations 3 and 2, respectively). Cladoceran
~ densities ranged from 600 to 1,100 per a . Copepod densities were also similar~amongstations-(2,300,),000,and2,400atstations1,2,and3, respectively). No statistical significance was detected among these means
~
,( table 3-15).
- l. . -
Data'for February. indicate little difference existed in the zoopla kton community between up- and downstream stations'. Perturbations i; I L
resulting from plant operations were probably negligible compared to high
. river flows which existed during this sample period.
May 1982--Chapter 2 describes flow conditions in Chickamauga
- Reservoir during this sample period as seasonally normal. Flows during the May sample period in previous operational years were unusually low. Hence, conditions.in May 1983 represent more typical conditions than those which existed in previous years of operational monitoring.
.Cladocera was'the dominant zooplankton group at station 1 (61' percent of total density) with Rotifera dominant at stations 2 and 3 (81.and 74 percent, respectively; table 3-11). The change in dominant groups did not result from decreases in cladoceran densities (densities of
- the most numerous cladoceran, Bossina longirostris, were 131,800, 73,900, and 153,700.per 3m at stations 1, 2,.and 3, respectively; appendices L and Rather, several rotifer-taxa increased substantially from up- to
~
M).
, downstream. The most nuscrous rotifer, Conochilus unicornis, increased from 51,300 per 3m at station 1 to'304,800 and 356,500 per 3m at stations 2' and-3,.respectively. Several other rctifers (Asplanchna spp., Keratella .
earlinae,' Polyarthra spp., and Synchaeta spp'.), also increased sub-stantially but showed.a more step-wise progression from station 1 to
- station 2 to station 3.
Parallel'to increases.in densities of these taxa, the number of taxa present at each. station and the diversity of the community at each station increased from upstream to downstream. Number of taxa was 30 at station 1, 38 at station 2, and 42 at station 3, and diversity index values.
~
Lwere 1.70, 1.73,'and 2.00 at stations 1, 2,.and 3, respectively'(table 3-12). Similar~ taxa were collected at all stations as indicated by all- .-
.SQS comparisons above the 70 percent " cutoff" value (table 3-13). However, w
+
PS values 'were. low for station 1-2 and station 1-3 comparisons yet high for
, the station 2-3 comparison because of the large increases in densities at b'oth stations 2 and 3 (table 3-13).
Total zooplankton density was quite high and showed a trend 3
=.toward increases from station 1 (221,500 per m ) to station 2 (473,400 per 3
m )fto station 3 (683,100 per m3 ) (table 3-14 and figure 3-5). However, the one-way ANOVA failed to detect a significant difference among these means (table 3-15), because of large variability among replicates. This indicates a distinct weakness in collecting only two replicate samples.
' Group densities generally showed the same trend but the ANOVA detected a a ~
significant difference only for'Rotifera. Tne'SNK on rotifer densities indicated station 1 was significantly lower than stations 2 and 3, which were not'significantly different (table 3-15). These data for 1983 indicate several increases were evident
- ~ '
between'the upstream station and the two downstream stations. During the
.. spring sample period of 1982, the zooplankton community exhibited decreases from up- to downstream. Several possible causes for these decreases were
- presented in the report summarizing 1982 results (TVA, 1983) without resolu-tion of the exact cause. ~ However, thermal effect was ruled out because increases rather than decreases would be expected under the thermal regime which existed at that time. In.1983 increases were indeed evident and some may have been influenced by the-thermal effluent. Increases at station 2 probably were_not plant related because the proximity of this station to the diffusers does not allow time for increases due to thermal stimulation 1..
to be manifested. These increases at station 2 more likely resulted from increased reservoir residence time downstream of station 1. Increases at
- , . station 3 also. reflect this greater retention time but also were probably i
influenced to some extent by the thermal effluent. Such stimulation should not be considered problematic unless it was the cause of the very large zooplankton community which in turn was responsible for the very low phyto- - plankton densities in lower Chicksmauga Reservoir; thus, effectively controlling pelagic primary production. Identification of community inter-actions such as these are far beyond the scope of this monitoring program. If these types of community changes occurred frequently, more detailed studies would be required; however, up to this peint in operational moni-toring, this type of plankton commanity change has occurred only in May 1983.' August 1982--River flows before and on the sample date were near the seasonal average for this time of year. These river flows typically cause. a = relatively short retention time in Chickamauga Reservoir and limit
' accumulation of plankton in upstream reaches.
The zooplankton community was dominated by Rotifera at all stations.(57, 66,'and 57 percent at stations 1, 2, and 3, respectively, table 3-11). Bosmina locairostris, a cladoceran,~was the dominant taxon at . all. stations (appendix M). Densities of most taxa increased from station 1 n to station 2 then decreased at station 3. k*
. Number of taxa was lower.at downs'tream stations-(36 at station 2
_and.33'at station 3; table 3-12) than at the upstream station (40). Diversity index. values were.similar.among stations (3.21, 3.75, and 3.22 at stations 1, 2, and 3, respectively). - Taxa present at each station were also similar _.
-among stations'as all SQS values were well above 70 percent (table 3-13).
However, PS indicated community structure was similar only at stations 1
.and 3 reflecting similar densities at these stations' . Low PS values for .
comparisons. involving station 2 are not surpsising given the increased densities of several species at that station I E'I h
Total organism density was similar at stations 1 and 3 (69,000 and 42,800 per m , respectively) and higher at station 2 (112,300 per m3 ; table 3-14 and figure 3-5). Densities for each group followed the same trend as total density. When densities were tested statistically, total number, Cladocera, and Rotifera provided the same results--no significant differences were identified (table 3-15). Mean copepod densities were
-different but the SNK only separated the smallest mean (station 3) from the largest mean (station 2).
Increased densities of most zooplankton taxa from up- to down-stream are expected under flow conditions which existed during the August sample period. Retention time is usually not sufficient for increased zooplankton densities to be manifested except in downstream reservoir reaches. Such increases were observed from station 1 to station 2. However, contrary to expected increases at station 3, decreases were observed. With the plant operating only one unit, mixed river temperatures were well below lethal levels for these species, and the plant was only entraining about 3 percent of total river flow. Therefore, the likelihood of a plant induced 7 impact was quite small. Differences such as this occur in plankton studies, and monitoring' programs of this type are r.ot designed to identify causes. Rather, in this situation where sample data differ from the expected trend and study design is not intended to address specific cause/effect mechanisms, one must assume differences were the result of characteristics of different watermasses. In this case the community sampled at station 3 passed SQN about 18 hours before the community that was sampled at station 2. This was enough time for these to have been different communities. l. November 1982--Only one unit was generating on the sample day but j- both units had been generating only a few days prior to sample collection L
v c(chapter 2). The watermass which was sampled at station 3 had passed SQN when only one unit was operating. River flows were normal for fall and had been relatively stable for most of the summer and fall. - Cladocera numerically dominated the zooplankton community at stations 1 and 2 (67, and 68 percent, respectively; table 3-11) and Copepoda
' dominated at staton 3. Bosmina longirostris, the dominant taxon at stations 1 3 3 and 2, decreased from-7,200 per m at station I to 5,600 per a at station 3 (appendix M). Nauplii (larval copepods) were dominant at station 3 and 3
increased from 1,700 and 2,600 per m at stations 1 and 2, respectively, to
~3.
3,800 per m at station 3. Number o'f taxa was lowest at station 2 (22) and highest (31) at station 1 (table 3-12). Diversity index values were also lower at station 2 (1.31) but highest'at station 3 (2.45).
,Conrounity composition was similar among stations as indicated by
.all~SQS values ~over 70 percent-(table 3-13). However, PS coefficients
" indicated only stations 1 and.2 had similar community. structure. Decrease in B. lonairostris and increases in nauplii at station 3 probably accounted .
for the dissimilarity of station 3. Total organism dens'ity was lower during this sample period than
'during any other sample period in 1983. Densities ranged from 8,700 per m
~
at-station 2 to 11,200 per m at station 1 (table 3-14). These means were-not different when tested atatistically (table 3-15). Likewise, significant
--differences were not detected. for cladoceran densities. Statistical results indicated differences between stations for mean copepod and rotifer densities.
-Mean copepod. density was higher at station-3 than at stations 1 and 2,
~
which were not'significantly different, reflecting increases in nauplii at .. station'3. Rotifer densities were -lower at station 2 than at stations 1 and'3, which were not significantly'different. ~
Several station differences existed for November data which
. . - indicate a transition from station 1 to station 3 with most measurements lowest at station 2 (e.g., number of taxa, d values, densities of most taxa). These differences are not thought to be related to SQN. The tran-sition from station 1 to station 3 involves decreases in some taxa yet increases in others. These inconsistent responses indicate factors other than operation of SQN (for the species present under the conditions which existed). Lower measurements at station 2 are not thought to have been related to SQN because decreases could only result from destruction of organisms in the CCWS of the plant. Decreases resulting from mortality of mixing organisms in ambient water with effluent water would not be evident at station 2 because of the proximity of station 2 to the diffusers.
Because hydraulic entrainment was less than 5 percent,-plant effect is considered unlikely. Temporal Comparisons of Preoperational and Operational Monitoring t Data--Data collected during preoperational monitoring show either Rotifera (usually)lor Copepoda (occasionally) was the dominant group during winter
- and summer and either Rotifera or Cladocera during spring and fall (TVA, 1978a). These trends continued into operational monitoring with either Rotifera or Copepoda dominant in winter, Rotifera in spring and summer, and Cladocera in fall. In addition to group composition being similar during
!~ the two monitoring periods, all taxa occurring consistently in Chickamauga Reservoir during preoperational monitoring were also collected during operational monitoring. A trend identified in the preoperational monitoring report was that more taxa were usually collected downstream of SQN (TVA, 1978a). This (, . trend was not apparent in operational monitoring--station I had the highest I ! r e
1 S
, number of taxa during about half of the cperational monitoring sample
, periods. Although this' represents an apparent change from preoperational conditions,-the number of taxa during operational monitoring varied little
- among stations with no apparent upstream / downstream trends.
Enumeration data for preoperational monitoring indicate maximum
- densities of organisms in Chickamauga Reservoir usually occurred during spring. Preoperational data also showed that organisms were more numerous downstream of SQN during spring, summer, and fall but higher upstream during winter. Data collected during operational monitoring generally show
-similar trends, although exceptions do exist.
A comparison of mean zooplankton densities at up- and downstream stations for each season during preoperational years (1973-1978) showed fluctuations with a general increase from year to year apparent for all seasons, but especially in spring and summer (figure 3-6). Operational data varied among the three years with densities higher during most seasons (except spring) of 1981 than in 1982 or 1983. When operational data were compared to preopera tional data for the upstream station (TRM 490.5) and the farthest downstream station (TRM 478.2), the general trend at both stations toward increased densities established in preoperational moni-toring was apparent only for spring samples. Data for operational years indicate the trend of' increasing densities observed'in preoperational monitoring during winter, summer, and fall has not continued. Another point about spring sample periods is that zooplankton
- densities have usually been either similar between up- and downstream stations or higher at the downstream station (figure 3-6). However, as discussed in TVA (1983), densities during spring 1982 exhibited drastic .
reductions from up- to downstream. Similar reductions, although not as
.n
- - -- - , + ~ ~ , - , , - - - . - - - . . . - -, -- ,,---
great, were also apparent during one spring preoperational sample period _ (19 74') . .Three explanations for decreases in 1982 were provided: (1) popu-lations peaked 'in upper or middle reservoir segments rather than in lower
' segments as a result'of low river flows, (2) differences among stations reflected characteristics of different watermasses, and (3) reductions were
, associated with operation of SQN. Of these, only the second can explain reductions for spring 1974 because flows during that sample period were 3 relatively high (850 m /s; 30,000 cfs) and SQN was not in operation.
~
Spatia 1- differences owing to different watermasses or patchiness make interpretation of plankton data, especially quarterly data, difficult. For this reason, only potential causative mechanisms for such differences can be postulated. As stated previously, the relative contribution of SQN effects on these reductions cannot be determined; however, it seems a safe assumption that plant operation was involved to some extent because SQN entrained about 30 percent of the river flow in spring 1982. Data for spring 1983 follow the expected trend of increased density from up- to
- downstream.
Identifying the effect(s) of SQN on fluctuations in zooplankton
. densities ;over years is difficult because other physical factors, espe-cially river flow,-have such an important influence on plankton dynamics.
However, these data do not show any preoperational/ operational trends. Rather, most operational densities (other than spring) fall within the range of preoperational densities.
. 3.2.3 Summary and conclusions Data for winter 1983 indicated almost no differences between up- .- and downstream stations; therefore, SQN had very little influence on the zooplankton during that period.
e = r -< n ,- - .4---4 ,-
Data for spring 1983 indicated large increases from up- to down-stream stations. These increases were expected based on increased retention time in lower reservoir reaches, but stimulation from thermal enrichment - could'not be ruled out. The phytoplankton community was depauperate during this sample period. -The very large zooplankton community may have been
- partly or completely responsible for very low phytoplankten densities. If the-thermal effluent from SQN had stimulated zooplankton-reproduction, this stimulation would only.be considered a problem if it caused the zooplankton to exceed available food sources and depress pelagic primary production.
Data from this type of monitoring program are not appropriate to delineate this type of community interaction. The zooplankton community exhibited differences among stations in summer and-fall. In summer, the community increased from' station 1 to
~
station 2-but decreased from' station 2 to station 3 instead of continuing
.to increase as expected. This was not considered a plant effect because the plant wa's entraining a small amount of the river flow and mixed river temperatures were well below lethal levels. In fall, there was a .
transition from station 1 to station 3 with most measurements Icwest at .n stationL2. Neither the transition nor lowered measurements were considered
. indicative of plant effect because the transition resulted from increases 'in 'some taxa yet decreases -in others (inconsistent responses) and because -
lowered measurements at station'2 could not have resulted from the plant
~
entraining less than 5 percent of the river flow. When operational data were compared to preoperational data,
~
trends apparent in preoperational monitoring (i.e., increases in zooplankton densities over time) were not apparent during three of the four . sample periods of each' year of operational sempling. Only during May of
each operational year did trends observed during preoperational monitoring
, continue.
Data for this third operational period suggest that SQN had
-little influence of the zooplankton community during winter, summer, and fall under physical conditions which have existed during monitoring periods. However, there may have been some thermal stimulation in spring. ,%~
{ L i-i
s 1 Table 3-11. Percentage Composition ~of Zooplankton Groups During Operational Monitoring Periods (1983),
.Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Tennessee River Mile Zooplankton Group Date 478.2 483.4 490.5 Cladoccra ~Feb 1983 2 1 3 Copepoda 8 6 6
- C' JRotifera 90 92 91 Cladocera May 1983 23 17 61 Copepoda 3- 2 3 Rotifera 74 81 35 Cladocera Aug 1983 30 18 27 Copepoda 13 16 17 Rotifera 57 66 57
.Cladocera Nov 1983 34 68 67
' Copepoda 46 24 20 Rotifera~ 20 8 13 3
^ s e
4 4
4
^
. Table'3-12. Zooplankton Diversity Index Values (3) and Number of Taxa During Operational Monitoring Periods (1983),-Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Tennessee River Mile 478.2 483.4 490.5 No. No. No.
Date Taxa 3 ' Taxa 3 Taxa' 3 Feb'1983. 21 1.17 33 1.62 25 1.15 May,1983- 42 .2.00 38 1.73 30 1.70
-Aug 1983 33 3.22 36 3.75 40 3.21 Nov 1983 27 2.45 22 1.31 31 1.66 i
r s'--
k-- ' Table 3-13. Similarity of Zooplankton Community Composition / Structure p-During Operational Monitoring in 1983 Based on Sorensen's
' Quotient of Similarity and Percentage Similarity, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir .
l I Statica Sorensen's Quotient Percentage Date Comparision of Similarity (%) Similarity (%)
- Feb 1983 TRM 490.5-483.4 72 81 TRM 490.5-478.2 79 89 TRM 483.4-478.2 65 75
'May 1983
.TRM 490.5-483.4 79 46 TRM 490.5-478.2 73 48 TRM 483.4-478.2 84 81 Aug 1983 TRM 490.5-483.4 80 67 TRM 490.5-478.2 81 71 TRM 483.4-478.2 85 52 Nov 1983 10m1 490.5-483.4 73 84 TRM 490.5-478.2 74 60
~TRM 483.4-478.2 84 62 9
e 4 e
., y- , .,
Table 3-14. Summary of ' Zooplankton Data Collected'During' Operational Monitoring Periods (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear. Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir.: Date River Mile Rep No. Group 3
- No./m .Mean STD CV Feb. 1983 478.2 1- Total 23547 29742~ 8761.I' 29.46
'2- 35937 1 Cladocera' 422 554 186.7 33.70 2 686 1 Copepoda 2071 2400 464.6- 19.36 2 2728 1 Rotifera 21054 26789 8109.8 30.27-2 32523 Feb. 1983 483.4 1 Total 44165 49786 7948.6. 15.97 2 55406 1 Cladocera 760 715 63.6 8.90 2 670 1 Copepoda 2640 3031 552.3 18.22 2 3421 1 Rotifera. 40765 46040 7460.0 16.20 2 51315 Feb. 1983 490.5 1 Total 22245 35253 18395.4. 52.18 2 48260-1 Cladocera 617 1056 620.8 58.79 2 1495 1 Copepoda 1921 2258 475.9 21.08 2 2594 1 Rotifera 19707 31939 17298.7 54.16 2 44171 May 1983 478.2 1 Total 818922 683097 192085.6 28.12 2 547272 1 Cladocera 190057 157313 46307.0 29.44 2 124569 1 Copepoda 22235 21334 1274.2 5.97 2 20433 1 Rotifera 606630 504450 144504.3 28.65 2 402270
1 Tcbla~3-14. - (C::stinued) 3
- Y Date- River Mile Rep No. ' Group No./m Mean STD CV May 1983 483.4 1 Total. 430510: 473396 60649.3: 12.81 2- 516281 1 Cladocera 84336 79261 7177.1 9.06 2 74186 l' Copepoda 7974 11065 4370.6 ^39.50 2 14155 1 Rotifera 338200 383070 63455.8- 16.57 2 427940 May 1983 490.5 1 Total 298699 221483 109200.6 <49.30 2 144266 1 Cladocera 172538 135279 52692.9 38.95 2 98019 t 1 Copepoda 9611 7653 2769.7 36.19
, 2 5694 g 1 Rotifera 116550 78552 53738.0 68.41 ' 2 40553 Aug. 1983 '478.2 1 Total 54030 42827 15844.1 37.00 2 31623 1 Cladocera 15922 12977 4165.6 32.10 2 10031 1 LCopepoda 6977 5636 1896.5 33.65 2' 4295 1 Rotifera 31131 24214 9782.1 40.40 2 17297 Aug. 1983 483.4 1 Total 118587 112286 8911.0 7.94 2 105985 1 Cladocera 20343 20188 219.2 1.09 2 20033 1 Copepoda '17648 18313 939.7 5.13 2 18977 1 Rotifera 80596 73786 9631.5 13.05 2 66975
- .~ . . . y ,.
i ,,- :j s . - r Table 3-14. (Continued)
-Date River Mile Rep No. ' Group 3
- T
'No./m Mean STD ' CV Aug. 1983 490.5 1 Total' 52877 68996 22795.0 33.04 2 85114' l' .~Cladocera 14769 18428 5173.9 28.08 2 22086 1 Copepoda. .9249 11577 3292.3' '28.44.
2 .. 13905 1- Rotifera 28859 38991 .14328.8 36.75 2.~ 49123 Nov. 1983 478.2 Total 9899 1 9741 223.4 2.29 2 9533 1 Cladocera 2962 3282 452.5 13.79 2 3602 1.. Copepoda 4717 4465 357.1 8.00. 2 4212 I Rotifera 2220 1995 318.9 15.99 e
.2 1769 Nov. 1983 483.4-- 1 Total 7511 8723 1714.0 19,65 2 9935 1 Cladocera 4906 5924 1439.7 24.30 2 6942 1 Copepoda 1871 2111 338.7 16.05 2 2350 1 Rotifera 734 689 64.3 9.35 2 643 Nov. 1983 490.5 1 Total 9199 11245 2892.8 25.73 2 13290 1 Cladocera 5734 7490 2483.4 33.16 2 9246 1~ Copepoda 1927 2275 491.4 21.16 2 2622 1 Rotifera 1538 1480 82.0 5.54 2 1422 Standard Deviation.
t Coefficient of Variation.
.Trblo 3-15. -Results of One-Way-Analysis of Variance and Student, Newman, Keuls Multiple Range Test on Zooplankton Data for Operational Monitoring in 1983, Sequoyah Nucler Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Tennessee River Mile SNK High i
~
Date Test Group F Ratio P>F Low i LFeb-1983 . Total zooplankton 1.12 0.4326 483.4 490.5 478.2 J Cladocera - 0.97 0.4723 490.5 483.4 478.2 Copepoda 1.16 0.3999 483.4 478.2 490.5
~,
Rotifera. 1.16 0.4234 483.4 490.5 478.2 May 1983 Total zooplankton 5.98 0.0899 478.2 483.4 490.5 Cladocera 2.79 0.2067 478.2 490.5 483.4 Copepoda 6.69 0.0954 478.2 483.4 490.5 Rotifera 10.29 0.0454 T 478.2 483.4 490.5
.Aug.1983 . Total zooplankton 5.68 0.0955 483.4 490.5 478.2 Cladocera 1,91 0.2914 483.4 490.5 478.2 Copepoda 10.89 0.0421 T 483.4 490.5 478.2 Rotifera. 6.07 0.0883 483.4 490.5 478.2 ,
N;v 1983- Total zooplankton 0.85- 0.5094 490.5 478.2 483.4 Cladocera 5.31 0.1033 490.5 483.4 478.2 Copepoda. 13.06 0.0331 478.2 490.5 483.4 Rotifera. 47.73 0.0053 i 478.2 490.5 483.4 Student, Newman,' Keuls Multiple Range Test;.means ranked highest to lowest fuging-Tennessee River Mile' (TRM) to identify stations; means underscored by
- ccme line are not significantly different at a = 0.05, means not so underscored cra.significantly different.
4 Significant at a = 0.05. e
-100-
80 WINTER 883.1 SPRING 880 - - 40 - - 1 - 520 - - 20 - - - - 500 - '"
~
478.2 483.4 490.5 .45 TENNESSEE RIVER MILE 380 _ 383. _
~
ti 120 200 - l -
~ ~
- SUMMER CLADOCERE I -
~
E 100 -
/ -
180 - - n COPEPODA- - - 80 - - 180 - - g 80 - - 140 - 3 - - - - 40 - - 120 - - c - mim , 0, 20 - - 100 - - 0 80 - ' - 478.2 483.4 490.5 _ _ 80 - , l - 40 - ,
~ ~
t FALL ,
- g summ ,
478.2 485.4 490.5 478.2 483.4 490.5 l. Figure 3-5. Mean Concentrations of Zooplankton During Each Quarter of Operational Monitoring 1983, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir.
-101-
18 n
=
Mi Speteg Summ., F.H Wa nt., TAM 490.3 % e Thu4003 - ',j You s yg.3-TRefeygg ~ m
" 1 s --4 \- e-- -. ---4 j
J e--- % . - , % ---.-4 ) 8 .e.
- 'hs o .
N i 'b. .
.w a
y h'* ,. EDD M a , Y< ' N l , N ,, ,. . o o
,5 - ,. ,. n ,. ,, - o n = ,. n = ,. =n n . ,. ,. n ,. ,. . . o = ,
v.., v.., i v.. , v.., 1 Figure 3-6. Comparisons of Zooplankton Densities at Selected Stations During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir. s *
- 4
4 a
. 4.0' BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATES a
Several characteristics of the benthic macroinvertebrate com-4 - munity make this group ~of organisms useful in evaluating environmental i n change. First', many species are sensitive to pollution and respond quickly to it. :- Second, many have a relatively long and usually complex life cycle
- of a . year or more, and their presence or absence helps describe environ-mental conditions over a period of time. Third, because many have an attached, or sessile, mode of life and are not subject to rapid migrations, they reflect exposure history and serve as natural monitors of environ-mental conditions.
Evaluation of power plant effects, however, can be difficult because macroinvertebrate species composition and population levels also respond readily to naturally occurring factors such as availability of food, nature of benthic sediments, current flow, and reproductive success j (Cummings, 1975). Reproductive success of many members of the benthic
, community (insects including Hexamenia and chironomid taxa) depends, in part, on factors outside the aquatic environment, as these organisms spend the adult phase of their life cycle in a terrestrial environment, returning to the water only after mating to deposit their eggs before death. Other
. organisms such as Oligochaeta (aquatic worms), Gastropoda (snails), and
. Pelecypoda (bivalve mollusks) do not leave the aquatic environment.
Even though the aquatic environment is relatively stable, changes in any one or a combination of the above factors can result in }. . large changes in population levels. Therefore, abundance data over a !. period of time would be cyclic rather than linear under natural conditions i l'
- b. (Clark et al. ,1967). - Environmental intrusion from SQN might appear as L
I b-L - 103-i 7 ----1 *'* -g 1-1wy-t e--m-F*- r= g+ e:++--s v.= .:--1mgm--igw-- - - - - ww-- y e-we e4 yw- r--mc w- *- y q, -..e-,-g -'es-rm-v+-+-+-wp- - -- qp re,+twm'- =
= interruptions in the natural' pattern and is best interpreted relative to a control. station.
4.1 Community Studies
.4'.l.'l. Material's and Methods Field--Benthic fauna samples were collected quarterly from
- Febspary 1983 through-November 1983 in the vicinity of SQN at TRM's 490.5 (station 1, upstream control), 483.4 (station 2, downstream), and 478.2 (station 4, downstream). Beginning in May, samples also were collected at TRM 482.6 (station 3, downstream) along the left descending channel. As recommended in the 1982 SQN report (TVA, 1983), this sample location was added to prov'ide a station in the near-field area with a substrate similar to that,at station.1 and thereby increase'the validity of comparisons between the near-field area and control. Samples were taken in midchannel at TSM's 478.2 and-490.5 and along the truht descending channel margin at TRM '483.4 (midchannel is bedrock and unsuitable for sampling). Ten Ponar ..
grab samples were collected at each station. Samples were washed'over a standard number 30-mesh (589 pm opening) brass screen to remove clay, silt, and fine sand particles. Residue was_placed in plastic bags, tagged, preserved'with 70 percent alcohol and returned to the laboratory for processing. In Februsry and May a single sediment sample was collected with each set of macroinvertebrate samples to characterize substrate composition. ?Two sediment samples at each station were collected during 1
- August and . November to better assess ef fects of substrate differences upon the macroinvertebrate data. .
Laboratory--Macroinvertebrate samples were rewashed with water
' over a atandard number 30-mesh screen, placed in white enamel trays, s
-104-
- mme-
,2. -._,- -s, m. ,. w._ .- , _ - - - - - , . . - . . .,-,.e e.--_. m- . , < . . . - + - , . . - - - - - - _ -,-.-,_.-r. -
e---
separated from remaining detrital material, transferred using forces into e vials, and preserved with a solution of 70 percent ethyl alcohol and 5 percent glycerine. Macroinvertebrates were classified to the lowest taxo-
.1 , nomic classification practicable and enumerated. References used in identi-fication include: Berner (1950), Brinkhurst and Jamieson (1971), Burks (1953), Cook (1956), Curry (1961), Davies (1971), Johannsen (1934-1937),
Macon (1968), Needham ar.d Westfall (1955), Needham et al. (1935), Pennak (1953), Robak (1963), Ross (1944), Usinger (1971), Walker (1953, 1958), and E Ward and Whipple (1959). Sediment samples were processed through a series , of sieves to determine percent composition of silt and sand particles. Data Analyses--Enumeration data were converted to number of organisms per square meter. Spatial and temporal comparisons were made for total macroinvertebrates and dominant taxa (Hexagenia and Corbicula manilensis) and/or taxonomic units (011gochaeta and Chironomidae). i'
. Spatial comparisons utilized Sorensen's Quotient of Similarity-(SQS) as described by McCain (1975) and Percentage Similarity (PS) as described by Pielou (1975) to evaluate differences among stations based on community structure. A criterion of 70 was chosen as an estimate of simi-larity. Values less than 70 would indicate different communities based upon taxonomic structure (SQS) and/or distribution of organisms among taxa
-(PS). Diversity indices (d) (Patten, 1962) and equitability (e) (Weber, 1973) were calculated to determine community diversity at each station. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student-Newman-Kuels multiple range test (Sokal and Rohlf, 1969) were used to aid in evaluating station differences in each season using transformed (log 10} * "*## '""*# *~
j brate densities (number /m ). P 105-e nw-- - - m g n u- --+e- - w e ---
e Temporal comparisons over the_ entire period of monitoring (1971-1979, preoperational;' 1980-1983, operational) were made for each season. Densities- (number /m ) of Hexagenia, Corbicula manilensis, Oligochaeta, - Chironomidae, and total macroinvertebrates, using transformed (log data, 10
~
were evaluated over time in a one-way ANOVA and Duncan's New Multiple Range Test modified for unbalance'd sample design (Steel and Torrie, 1960). An unbalanced design was required because sample replication from spring 1971 through winter 1976 was~1ess than 10 (usually 3). Graphical comparisons of upstream (control) and downstream (experimental) stations were made over time for total and dominant group densities. Data also were analyzed to detect any' changes in taxa occurring downstream of SQN. l 4.' 1. 2 Results and Discussion Spatial Comparisons--Spatial data are discussed separately by season for the 1983 monitoring period. To avoid repeated reference of-tables and appendices which summarize and present data for all seasons, the following list'is provided. . Macroinvertebrate data by station table 4-1, and season appendix N Community similarity , Sorensen's Quotient (SQS) and table 4-2 Percent Similarity (PS) r Community diversity Diversity (d) and Equitability'(e) table 4-3 LStation comparisons of organism' table 4-4 abundance--ANOVA and SNK Sediment composition table 4-5 Februr.ry 1983--SQS, a. qualitative estimate of community similarity which considers only the presence / absence of taxa and not the
-106-7 -
_m _ m ________._____.__a - _ _ _ - _
- distribution of organisms among-taxa, shows stations 1 (control) and 4 (farthest downstream of SQN) were most similar (78.6 percent similar),
having 15.and 13 taxa, respectively, with 11 taxa in common. This com-le. parison was very similar to the 1982 comparison of the same two stations (SQS = 78.3), even though the number of taxa was increased at both stations
- in-1983. Station 2, -located immediately downstream of SQN, was dissimilar
~
to both' stations 1 (SQS = 61.5) and 4 (SQS = 58.3). While station 2 was similar to both stations 1 and 4 in 1982, the dissimilarity in 1983 repre-
.sents a' shift in fauna caused by sampling a more sandy substrate (compared to 1982) which increased habitat differences between station 2 and other stations in 1983. Sediment data (table 4-5) and the replacement of taxa common to silty substrates -(Branchiura sowerbyi, Chaoborus, Hexagenia, and Hirudines) by those preferring sandy or rock substrates (Sphaerium, Truncilla donaciformis, and Xenochironomus) indicate faunistic dissimilarity at station 2 did not result from operation of SQN.
~
Percentage similarity, which considers organism abundance as well 1 as presence and absence of taxa, shows dissimilarity among all stations. Like SQS data, comparisons between stations 1 and 2 (PS = 26.5) and 2 and 4 (PS = 18.8) were especially low. The dissimilarity between station 2 and other stations resulted from a much lower macroinvertebrate abundance (162 organisms per m ) at station 2 than at stations 1 (737 per m2) and 4 (873 per m2 ). In contrast with stations 1 and 4, reductions in abundance at station 2 primarily resulted from reductions in Alabesmyia, Chaoborus, i Coelotanypus, Corbicula manilensis, Hexagenia, and Procladius. Stations 1 and 4 (PS = 58.6) compared more favorably than with station 2, but were
~ below the 70 percent value chosen to indicate similarity. This g_
dissimilarity which was caused primarily by more Hexagenia at station 4
-107-
, , . , . , - - , . ---ww-- n,
,, v.
r
- (288 per-m ) compared to station 1 (34 per a ) and more Procladius at
-2
- station 1 (1571 pe'r m ) c'ompared to station 4 (20 per m2 ) does not represent
- a.SQN impact, but rather habitat differences. Station 4 contained more silt.-.than other' stations for every quarter- in 1983.
Diversity index-(d) values relate organism distribution among ^
. taxa" represented in'a~ sample. - Equitability (e) compares that distribution with -one' frequently observed in nature--one with several relatively
;abund' ant. taxa and increasing numbers of taxa represented by only a few
~
- -indiv'iduals (MacArthur, 1957). While d lacks sensitivity to distinguish 1 slight;to moderate levels of community degradation,'equitability (e) is
. sensitive to-even-slight levels of degradation which' generally reduce Lyalues below 0.5'(Weber,-1973). Lowest diversity (2.53)-and equitability 1 .
~
.(0.61) occurred at station 4. However, these values are not substantially
, different~fram-respective values which were calculated at stations 1-(2.89,
.0.69) an'd 2-(3.07,-1.08), nor do they indicate-any environmental stress.
'In February 1983, a spatial comparison of total macroinvertebrate abuddance identified a highly significant difference (P > FL= 0.0001) among
~
- stations. ' Station 2, located immediately downstream of SQN, was different 1
' from stations 1 and 4 which were alike (figure 4-1).' .This difference
~
> - reflects the reductions-in abundance at station 2 which are discussed with !
the..PS comparisons. The different' community at station 2 likely resulted-I :from habitat'and:subntrate differences which existed among stations. ,
},.,.
Substrate at'. station 2.was' comprised of 43.5 percent sand and 56.5 percent
' silt-clay in contrast to 4.2 percent sand and 95.8 percent silt-clay at station 4'and 12.5 percent sand and 87.5 percent silt-clay at station 1. A
~
-more thorough discussion of habitat differences at station 2 can be found .
in. sections 2.1.2 and 4.1.3 of the 1982 SQN operational report (TVA, 1983). r 108-M4 Mk I = ,ar--.----, =y-4-ewen- u s * - ---
May 1983 1 -Evaluation of taxonomic occurrence (SQS) during the sspiing quarter shows statio.us 4 (farthest downstream) and 3 (the new near-field station) both were similar'to station 1 (control). SQS values for o' stations 1-4 and 'l-3 were *76.2' percent and j8.3 ' percent, respectively, _ . Stations 3 and 4 were also similar (76.9 percent). Stations 1, 3, and 4
, had 9, 14, and 12 taxa, respectively. Based upon substrate composition, the similarity of station 3 with both stations 1 and 4 is surprising since station 3 contained 60.3 percent, sand and 39.7 percent silt-clay compared to'20.9 percent sand and 79.2 giercent silt-clay at station 1 and 2.6 percent sand and 97.4 percent silt-clay at station 4. Macroinvertebrate data f rom
' station 3 show a dominance of tLbificids and Hexaaenia (silt-clay preferring taxa) which suggest the sediment data did not adequately reflect the macro-
~~'
invertebrate habitat sampled in May. SQS comparisons between stations 2 and 1.(45.5 percent), 2 and 3 (59.3 percent), and 2 end 4 (40 percent)
* ~
followed an aircady established trend at station 2 as being different from
~
other stations'in both substrate composition (sand as opposed to silt-clay) and macroinvertebrate fauna. Stat' ion 2 was represented by 13 macro-s
, , f ..
invertebrate taxa., .SQS coefficiente and sediment data indicate the absence s of,ef fect from SQN upon macroinverts beste court. unity structure. Comparisons based upon PS coefficients, which were very similar
.. to those based upon SQS data for stations 1 and 4 (PS = 70.2), stations 1 and~2 (PS = 41.3), and stations 4 and 2 (PS = 28.8), showed that stations 1 and 4 were similar while station 2 was dissimilar to other stations.
However, station 3 in the near-field area, which. appeared similar to both a stations I and 4 in SQS comparisons, was dissimilar to stations 1 (PS = I ' 52.0) mid 4 (Pd =50.1).
- Through compairing' taxa ,and their abundance (table
- o. 4-1) and cotal abundance variability (appendix K) for stations 1, 3, and 4, p .
~
v A
.p --w--
' it appears /that two substrate types (sand and silt-clay) were sampled at station 3 whereas one substrate type (silt-clay) was sampled at stations 1 and 4. Station 3 chowed a reduction of the silt preferring chironcaid -
Coeiotanypus- (20 per m ) compared 'to stations 1 (194 per m2 ) and 4 (175 per s2-
) and th' eoccurrence of Caenis, a mayfly which prefers rocky-sand sub-strates, both suggesting sampling a hard substrate. These results are supported by data'from'the' single sediment sample collected from station 3.
Abuddance of tubificids and Hexaaenia and the presence of Branchiura sowerbyl at station 3 indicate predominance of silt-clay. Sampling
- variability at station 3 (CV = 42.7) compared to stations 1 (CV = 15.1) and
' 4 (CV = 15.6)~also indicate greater. substrate variability at station 3.
Field notes for the May survey indicate difficulty in keeping the sampling
- boat on' station. This may have impacted sampling efforts. During May, substrate differences and lack'of historical macroinvertebrate data from station 3 precludes a further assessment of SQN impacts (based upon PS) in the near-field area.
I Diversity (d) downstream of S'QN was greater than at the control . .'a station. Diversity-ranged.from 2.18 at station 1 to 2.81 at station 3. Equitability was better'than 0.50 at all stations:and was greater at
~
~' ~
stations 2 (e = O.69) and'3.(e = 0.69) than at the control'(e m.0.67).
~
. Diversity and equitabi.ity data indicate similarly diverse communities up
, and downstream of SQN and suggest the absence of impact from SQN.
Spatial comparison of ' total macroinvertebrate abundance
' (illustrated'in figure 4-1) identified a highly significant difference (P > F = 0.0001) among stations. Stations 2 and 4, having respectively the !
' lowest.(148 organisms per n ) and highest (618 organisms per m ) abundance, .
were statistically different from each other and other stations. 1
-110-
t v Stations.1 (403 organisms per a , control) and 3 (304 organisms per m , 4 nearfield) were similar and indicate the absence of measurable effect from SQN. 1 Low abundance at station 2 represents a substrate-habitat effect
. apart from SQN whicli is evaluated in the discussion for the winter quarter.
August 1983--Comparisons of taxonomic occurrence during the summerl i uarter between-stationd 1 and 3 (SQS = 85.7),1 and 4 (SQS = 88.0), a and 3 and 4 (SQS =,82.8) indicate very similar macroinvertebrate communities in the' control, near-field, and far-field areas. These
^
respective locations contained 12, 16, and 13 taxa with the greatest number
~
of taxa occurring in the near-field area. As' usual, the community at i station 2, when compared to stations l'(SQS = 44.4), 3 (SQS = 45.5), and 4 L(SQS = 42.1), was dissimilar, containing only 6 taxa. Macroinvertebrate communities at stations 4 (far field) and 3 (near field) both were similar to station 1 (control) based upon PS data (1 and 3, PS = 70.4; I and 4, PS = 75.0), indicating absence of SQN impact. 7 Stations 3 and 4, though,both similar to station 1, were different from each other (PS = 58.2), largely due to a greater ai..gdance of Coelotanypus and Corbicula manilensis at station 4. -Substrate diiferences likely contri-buted[to the dissimilarity; however, this cannot be substan'tiated because substrate samples for station 3 were lost. s -t Macroinvertebrate diversity,at' stations 3 (5 = 3.15) and 4 (5 = 2.32) and respective equitability values (0.79 and 0.52) were very similar to diversii.y (5 = 2.46)=and equitability (e = 0.63) at the control station,
' indicatina!1ack of SQN-induced changes. Diversit a ataiion 2 (5 = 1.41)
* 'was low, alth'ough equitability (e = 0.55) we. x.e 0.50 level chosen
'to indicate community degradation (Weber, 197'J). Low d at st ifn 2 was 2
5
-111-
~ '.
t _k. -
N l caused .by a community composed' of only a _ few (6) taxa dominated (63 percent) by the chironomid Xenochironomus. Figure 4-1 depicts AuBust spatial distribution of macroinverte- -
.brates up- and downstream'of SQN. Total macroinvertebrate abundance was
,significantly .(P > T =.0.0001) greater at station 4 and lower at station 2 than at other stations. Macroinvertebrate abundance at stations 1 and 3 were alike. .Hence, spatial distribution of abundance was the same in both
. spring and summer quarters, although overall abundance at stations 4, 2,
~
and.1 was slightly' lower during the summer (see table 4-1). This decline fin abundance from. spring.to summer was caused by a decrease in Hexamenia
'and was related to insect (e.g., mayfly) emergence rather than operation of
~
SQN. An increase in abundance'at station 3 from spring to summer was _- caused by'an increase in Corbicula manilensis. Hydrolab* profile data (pH, temperature, Do,-and depth) indicate the overbank habitat (6 meters deep)-
' was sampled in August rather than the channel habitat-(12 meters deep) t
_ .w hich was. sample'd in May. 'This,likely. accounts for the increase-in C. manilensis. . November.1983--Taxonomic structure of the macroinvertebrate com-
._,munity was'similar- based upon SQS comparisons .of stations 1 and 3 (SQS =
~
80.0),:1 and'4 (SQS = 69.6), and stations 3 and 4 (SQS = 73.7). At station 3
. :(near. field) the number of taxa was reduced from 14 and 16 (spring and'
-summer, respectively) to'a low of 8-in the fall quarter. Missing taxa
;which occurred during other seasons at TRM 482.6-(station 3) included I
_ Xenochironomus, Procladius,'Crntochironomus, Chironorcus, and Branchiura i
.sowerbyi, which-never formed a' dominant part of the benthic community.
- -This. station appeared sim'ilar-to the" control'and far-field station because .
~
- all' 8 taxa' at station 3 were also present atlthe other stations. As usual, _
- station '2 was : dissimilar- to . stations 1 (SQS. = 55.6) and 4 (SQS = 69.6) . $
-112-
Station 2 was, however, simile.c to station 3 because of the low number of taxa.which occurred at stations 2 (6 taxa) and 3 (8 taxa). Comparisons based upon PS also show a high degree of similarity between stations 1 and 4. However, station 3 in the near field was dis-simfiar to both control (PS = 59.7) and far-field (PS = 66.8) areas. This dissimilarity resulted from a combination of the low number of taxa which
. occurred at station 3 and an exceptionally large number of Hexagenia (225
'2 per m ) compared to stations 1 (18 per m2 ) and 4 (29 per m2 ). Substrate data indicate sediment textures were similar at stations 1, 3, and 4. An increased population of Hexagenia in the near-field area above other seasons indicates sampling of a location ideal for Hexagenia. This location con-
'tained greater relative amounts of silt (90.9 percent) than during the spring (39.7 percent) and likely the summer quarters (no sediment data available during summer). Presence of a relatively large population of
~
Hexagenia at station 3 along with substantial numbers of Corbicula manilensis, Procladius, Tubificidae, and Branchiura sowerbyi indicate absence of adverse impact of SQN upon the near-field area of Chickamauga Reservoir. As usual, station'2 was very dissimilar to stations 1 (PS =.10.1), 3 (PS = 6.8) and 4 (PS = 7.9). Again station 2 was composed largely of sand (63.5 percent). Diversity (5) was similar at stations 1 (5 = 2.25), 2 (5 = 2.35), 3 (5 = 2.25), and 4 (5 = 2.14). Equitability values greater than 0.50 at all. stations indicated absence of community' degradation. Total abundance of organisms at statien 2 (29 per m ) 2was much reduced compared co other stations and seasons. This abundance was too low to allow meaningful
, ' interpretation :of equitability at station 2.(Weber,1973).
Spatial comparison of total abundance (figure 4-1) shows the e ' expected recovery attributed to reproductive success, with station 3 (near
-113-e
- ' field) showing the largest increase. With the exception of station 2, which is habitat limited (TVA, 1983), control, near-field, and far-field locations were not significantly (P > F = 0.0001) different, indicating -
absence of SQN impact. The large reduction in abundance at station 2 will be' discussed under Temporal Comparisons.
'A total of 30 taxa was collected during 1983. Only 2 taxa (Gyraulus
'and Pseudochironomus) occurred exclusively upstream of SQN, while 9 taxa occurred exclusively downstream (table 4-6). With the exception of Xenochironomus, taxa occurring either exclusively upstream or downstream were very infrequently encountered, and then at very low densities.
Xenochironomus, which occurred downstream at stations 2 and 3, appear to be
- associated with sandy substrates (which were never documented at stations 1 and 4) rather than any impact of SQN. A similar trend for more taxa occurring
.exclusiv'ely. downstream of SQN was noted in 1981 and 1982 and is attributed to greater downstream sampling effort and substrate variety.
Temporal Comparisons--Temporal data for the entire period of monitoring are presented by season in appendices 0, P, Q, R, and S as . replicate sample values'for Hexaaenia, Chironomidae, Oligochaeta, Corbicula manilensis, and total macroinvertebrates, respectively, and in appendix T as mean values for each sampling station and date. Data for Corbicula manilensis and total macroinvertebrates are not reported for 1981 because C. manilensis was discarded in the field without being enumerated, which also affected community totals. Mean values for each station were plotted for all years and are shown in figures 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, and 4-5 for winter, spring, summer, and fall quarters, respectively. Trends for each' dominant taxon or taxonomic group of macroinvertebrates for the entire monitoring . period (illustrated in figures 4-2 through 4-5) are statistically evaluated
-114-
in table 4-7. A discussion of these data follows for each quarter, allowing
<9 a more complete evaluation of 1983 spatial observations in light of historical trends. Data for TRM 482.6 (station 3), though provided for 1983 in the above appendices, are not included in the temporal discussion because they only exist for one year.
Winter--For the entire period of monitoring, 1971-1983, winter macroinvertebrate densities have been cyclic, resulting in significant yearly differences for every comparison except Corbicul'a manilensis at TRM 490.5:(control). These cyclic differences approximate the normal abundance
. patterns expected in an aquatic ecosystem over a period of years (Clark, et al., 1967). Data for 1983 demonstrated maximum abundance of Hexagenia at station 4 and Chironomidae at station 1 for the entire monitoring period at those stations; however, all 1983 macroinvertebrate abundance data were not
- statistically different (a = 0.05) to data collected during preoperational monitoring. In 1983 populations of Hexagenia (station 4), Chironomidae (stations 1 and 4),.and the total macroinvertebrate community (stations 1 and 4) were much increased over 1982 levels of abundance and were more representative of the maximum abundance of these taxa documented in preoper-ational monitoring (figure 4-2). Therefore, operation of SQN has not .
altered winter abundance patterns from those established during preoper-ational monitoring. Spring--Spring macroinvertebrate densities were comparable to those for winter in that variability among years was highly significant and followed a cyclic pattern. Maximum abundance for Chironomidae at station 1 occurred in 1983. Other spring 1983 abundance data were in the lower range for other taxa and stations (e.g., Hexagenia at stations 1 and 2). However,
, these data were not significantly different from other spring densities
-115-r , er = 7
. _ _ . . . _ m w
measured during preoperational monitoring. Thus during this season, it cannot-be shown'that operation of SQN had any adverse impacts upon macro-invertebrate abundance. 'In 1983 abundance was increased over 1982 values - -
'for,Hexaaenia at station 4, Chironomidae at stations 1, 2, and 4, and total macroinvertebrates at station 1.
Summer--Significant differences in yearly macroinvertebrate abundance existed for all comparisons in the summer season. Data for 1983 demonstrated significantly (P > F = 0.0001)-fewer Hexagenia at station 1 than any previous year of monitoring. Because station 1 is located upstream of SQN (control), the reduction in Hexagenia does not represent an impact from'SQN. In' fact, Hexagenia populations at all monitoring stations have been lower'(although differences.were not statistically significant) during all three years of operational monitoring (see figure 4-3). Reduced numbers in samples for.these years might be the result of Hexaaenia emergence
-occurring prior to sample collection. Comparisons in table 4-7 show that I -1983 macroinvertebrate densities were comparable to preoperational data, witti the exception of Hexaaenia at' station 1. ..
Fall--Except.for total ~macroinvertebrates at station 4, varia-bility among years was significant-for-all comparisons with maximum abundance
' generally occurring in 1973, 1974, and 1975. Macroinvertebrate abundance
; increased in'1983 for Corbicula manilensis (stations 1 and 4), Chironomidae (station 4,), and total macroinvertebrates (stations 1 and 4), representing abundance levels'more similar (than'other operational years)
<=to preoperational densities. Therefore, fall comparisons do not-indicate 3 significant adverse effects from operation of SQN. Although 1983 total
' macroinvertebrate abundance at station'2 (29 per m ) was the lowest on .
-116-
n - record for that station,' 1983 macroinvertebrate abundance at station 2 was 7 similar to 1976, 1978, and 1982.
. Temporal comparisons of taxonomic differences between preopera-w tional and operationai years are shown in tables 4-8 and 4-9 for reservoir
~
areas upstream (TRM 490.5) and downstream (TRM's 483.4, 482.6, and 478.2, f combined) of SQN, respectively. More taxa. consistently have been collected downstream of SQN because of additional sampling effort (3 stations versus 1 station) and greater _habicat diversity. Comparisons _ of preoperational versus operational monitoring (years combined) show similar numbers of taxa have been collected both upstream (29 taxa versus 30 taxa) and downstream (42 taxa versus 39 taxa) of SQN. Lowest number of taxa collected during a single operational year occurred in 1982 (16 taxa upstream, 24 taxa downstream).
-In 1983,.21 taxa were collected upstream and 28 taxa downstream of SQN.
Taxonomic differences downstream of SQN between 1983 and other operational
.and preoperational years do not indicate adverse impacts from SQN. Taxa collected downstream of SQN during preoperational monitoring and'at least one operational year but not in 1983 included Cransonyx, Culicoides, Parachironomus, Polypedilum, Sialis, Amnicola, and Duaesia. Downstream taxa collected for the first time in 1983 included Coleoptera, Truncilla donaciformis, Psidium, and Planariidae. All except Amnicola were encountered infrequently and at very low densities. Amnicola occurred in relative high numbers'(range = 5-78 organisms per m ) prior to 1982. This snail had been collected previously only at station 2 (sand substrate), occurring in
. spring and summer of 1978, and winter and spring in 1981. Its absence in 1982 and in 1983 could represent a SQN-induced impact; however, sampling phenonema seem more plausible because of Amnicola's low (4 out of a
. possible 39 quarters) frequency of occurrence.
-117-
4.1.3 Summary and Conclusions A spatial comparison of macroinvertebrate taxonomic associations and abundance patterns was made for the winter, spring, sumwer, and fall quarters in the' vicinity of SQN. Comparable habitats, consisting of pre-dominately a silt-clay substrate, contained similar macroinvertebrate communities both upstream and downstream of SQN, indicating absence of impact from SQN operation during 1983. Nontarget substrates were sometimes encountered (sana at station 2, all quarters; sand / silt combination at station 3'in spring) which usually resulted in spatial differences not thought to be related to operation of SQN. For this reason, station 2
~always contained a different macroinvertebrate fauna from other stations. .Even within the target (silt-clay) substrate, relatively greater amounts of silt'were sometimes encountered which is positively correlated with Hexagenia abundance (TVA, 1983). Resulting greater abundance of Hexamenia increased
- dissimilarity in comparisons with other stations (i.e., station 4, winter; station 3, fall). Nine taxa occurred exclusively downstream of SQN (were not found upstream)' compared to two taxa found exclusively upstream. -
Except for Xenochironomus, which occurred only downstream, all of these taxa were very infrequently encountered and low population densities were assumed. Xenochironomus was found only in sandy substrate which was not sampled upstream. An overall taxonomic advantage was also documented down-stream with.28 taxa eccurring downstream of SQN and 21 taxa occurring upstream. - These dif ferences were attributed to greater sampling effort and substrate variety downstream of SQN rather than to effects of SQN. Temporal comparisons for individual stations were based upon total macroinvertebrate abundance and the abundance of dominant taxa - - (Hexagenia and Corbicula manilensis) or taxonomic groups (011gochaeta and
-118-e- w
Chironomidae). -The only comparison which identified a statistically signifi-
~
n ,- cant reduction in 1983 compared to other years was for Hexaaenia at station l' during the summer quarter. Since station 1 (control station) is located upstream (TRM 490.5) of SQN, no SQN-induced effect is suspected. Fall macroinvertebrate data indicated a return to population levels recorded during earlier years of preoperational monitoring, reversing a general
~
trend of declining densities since 1975. The number of taxa encountered during operational monitoring (1980-1983) (30 taxa upstream, 39 taxa downstream) was similar to the
. number of~ taxa encountered during the preoperational period (29 taxa. upstream,
-42 taxa downstream). More taxa were collected both upstream and downstream of SQN in 1983 than were collected in 1982. Taxonomic difference downstream
.of SQN between 1983 and other operational and preoperational years do not indicate adverse impacts from SQN. Overall conclusions, therefore,_ based upon spatial comparisons of 1983 macroinvertebrate data and temporal com-
,_ parisons of 1983 data with' other operational and preoperational years, indicate absence of adverse impacts of SQN upon near-field and far-field macroinvertebrate communities.
6
-119-
- = - - -- -,w-. -
ywr- -g- i
+-4------g --+3 - e ew-----
~
Table 4-1. Mean Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities (No'./m ) at Each Sample Station During Operational Monitoring (1483), Sequoyah Nuclear-Plant, Chickamauga Reservcir Feb. 1983 May 1993 Aug. 1983 Nov. 1983 Tennessee River Mile Taxa 478.2 483.4 490.5 478.2 482.6 483.4 490.5 478.2 482.6 483.4 490.5 478.2 482.6 483.4 490.5 Ablatesmyia , 90 0 22 14 4 0 0 7 11 0 2 2 45 0 9 Branchiura sowerbyi 0 0 0 11 4 0 7 23 4 0 13 0 0 0 0 Caenis sp. 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae 0 ,0 0- 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chaoborus sp. 38 0 32 4 -0 0 0 14 5 43 18 43 14 5 59 Chironomidae 0 5 0 0 0 '7 0 2 7 0 5 5 0 0 0 Chironomus sp. 2 7 5 0 2 2 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 Coelotanypus sp. 279 27 227 175 20 49 194 113 45 0 50 234 270 2 151 Coleoptera 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 .0 0 0 Corbicula manilensis 72 32 110 135 67 . 47 86 250 110 7 176 254 146 9 198 Cryptochironomus sp. 23 4 9 5 2 2 0- 0 5 0 4 0 0 0 0 Cyrnellus fraternus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dicrotendipes sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 , Enallagma sp. 0 .0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C Epoicocladius sp. .5 0 5 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 2 T' Gyraulus sp. O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Hexagenia 288 0 34 212 . 88 0 34 9 27 0 9 29 225 7 18 Hirudinea 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hyalella azteca 0 .20 65 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nemata -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Decetis sp. 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pectinatella magnifica 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 Planariidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 Procladius sp. 20 4 157 2 5 5 16 7 63 0 23 2 0 0 4 Pseudochironomus 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Psidium sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 Sphaerium sp. 5 22 4 4 25 0 11 22 34 2 9 16 27 0 4 Truncilla donaciformis 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 Tubificadae 45 23 54 52 40 11 49 77 56 2 52 70 34 4 54 Xenochironomus sp. 0 16 0 0 41 11 0 0 23 99 0 0 0 0 0 ' Total 873 162. 737 618 304 148 403 532 402 157 365 659 763 29 505
< ETable:4-2. Similarity of Benthic Community Structure During Operational Monitoring Period (1983), Based on Sorensen's Quotient of JT Similarity and Percent Similarity, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir Station CS I Date Station NT* Comparison NC SQS(%)0 PS
'Feb 1983 TRM 490.5(1) 15 1-2 18. 8 61.54 26.45 483.4(2)- 11 1-3 -N/A N/A N/A N/A 482.6(3) N/A- 1-4 17 11 78.57 58.61
[ 478.2(4) 13 2-3 N/A N/A N/A N/A
. 2-4 17 7 58.33 18.78
- 3-4 - N/A N/A N/A N/A May-1983- TRM 490.5(1)- 9 1-2 20 5 45.45 41.31-483.4(2)- 13 1-3 14 9 78.26 52.04 482.6(3) 14 1-4 13 8 76.19 70.19 478.2(4) 12 2-3 19 8 59.26 44.18 2-4 20 5 40.00 28.77 3-4 16 10 76.92 50.10
~Aug 1983 TRM 490.5(1)- 12 1-2 14 4 44.44 - 11.03 4#
483.4(2) 6 . 1-3 16 12 85.71 70.42 482.6(3) 16 1-4 14 11 88.00 74.95 478.2(4) 13 ~ 2-3 17 5 45.45 14.19 2-4 15- 4 42.11 7.31 3-4 17 12 82.76 58.19 Nov 1983 TRM 490.5(1)- 12 1-2 13 .5 55.56 10.14
... 1483.4(2) 6 . 1-3 12' 8 80.00 59.66 482.6(3) 8 1-4 15 8 69.57 81.11' 478.2(4) 11 2-3 9 5 71.43- 6.82 2-4 12 5 58.82 7.85 3-4 12 4 73.68 66.84 Number of taxa present at each station.
i Nam'ber of. taxa present at combined stations.
' Number of. taxa in common between two stations being compared.
'E Sorensen's Quotient of Similarity, expressed as a percentage.
' I
. Percent similarity. i- -121-
. - . , .- . r -, ,r -e,-- , c , .% - - -
,.,w-, , , - - . , - , - - , - - - - - - , , ,m.y, .-y w -y , .m.
7 A Table 4-3. Macroinvertebrate Eiversity Index (d) cad Eq;it. bilityL (d) VJ;1ue; During Oper;tionalL' Monitoring Periods _(1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga.-Reservoir-i Tennessee River Mile 478.2 482.6- 483.4- 490.5
~ No . _
No. , No. , . No . _ Date Taxa d e Taxa .d' e' -Taxa d- e- Taxa d' e Feb'1983 13 2.53 0.61' 11 3.07 1.08- 15 -2.89 0.69 May 1983 12 2.27 .0.54 .14 2.81 0.69 13 2.66 0.68 9 2.18 0.67 Aug 1983 13 .'2.32 :0.52 16 3.15 0.79 6 1.41 .0.55 12- 2.46 0.63 . Nov 1983 11 2.14 0.54 8 2.25 0.81 6 .2.35 .l.12 12 ~2.25 0.55
*The station at TRM 482.6 was added to the' survey beginning in May 1983.
Ui i l t
Table 4-4. Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance and Student-Newman-Keuls ar Multiple Range Test on Total Macroinvertebrate Data (Log Transformed)CollectedNearSequoyahNuclearPlant, Chick 0amauga Reservoir, February Through November 1983 Date Grouping
- T F Ratio 'P>F Mean N Station Feb 30.51 0.0001 A 2.9333 10 4 A 2.8213 10 1 A
B 2.0745 10 2 May 29.63 0.0001 A 2.7867 10 4 B 2.6022 10 1 B 2.4457 10 3 B C 2.0786 10 2 Aug 16.18 0.0001 A 2.7052 10 4 B 2.5389 10 3 B 2.5380 10 1 B C 2.1780 10 2 Nov 44.22 0.0001 A 2.8713 10 3 ., A 2.7137 10 4 A A 2.6878 10 1 A B 1.1517 10 2 Means with the same letter are not significantly different (V = 0.05). i Means are log1 0 ransfo rmed. Stations are: 1 = TRM 490.6 2 = TRM 483.4 3 = TRM 482.6 4 = TRM 478.2 O
-123-
, . , , , , , , . - , , - , _ ~ , --,.,-r ~ --
- , Table 4-5. Particle Size Analysis. of Substrates in the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant for February, May, August, . and November 1983 Survey TRH
'* t 1 Date Substrate Characteristics 478.2- 482.6- 483.4 490.5 FEB Depth (a) 15.0 5.0 9.0 Percent Noisture 60.72 31.40- -50.81 Percent Volatile Solids 8.25 4.71 -6.42 Percent Solids (finer than 2.00 mm) 100.00 -100.00 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 0.50 mm) 99.64 98.88 100.00 i Fercent Solids (finer than 0.125 mm) 97.50 69.65 97.25 Percent Solids (finer than 0.063 mm) 95.84 56.50 87.53 MAY Depth (a) 15.0 12.0 5.0 11.0 Percent Moisture 58.91 32.76 31.06 47.93
- Percent Volatile Solids 8.26- 3.10 4.30 6.21 i Percent Solids (finer than 2.00 mm) 100.00 100.00- 100.00 100.00
! . Percent Solids (finer than 0.50 mm) 99.76 99.78 99.78 99.72 { G Percent Solids (finer than.0.125 mm) 99.05 57.74 '77.77 93.37. 1 i Percent Solids-(finer than 0.063 mm) 97.40 39.64 60.50 79.15 AUG Depth (m) 14.0 5.0 - - 11.0 Percent Moisture 59.71 26.15 42.94 Percent Noisture 56.08 26.09 51.60 Percent Volatile Solids 8.66 3.16 6.06 Percent Volatile Solids' 8.02 2.64 6.92 Percent Solids.:(finer than 2.00 mm) 100.00 100.00 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 2.00 mm) 100.00 100.00 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 0.50 mm) 100.00 99.26 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 0.50 mm) 99.76 99.41 100.00 J Percent Solids (finer than 0.125 mm) 98.24 58.27 93.87 i Percent Solids'(finer than 0.125 mm) 98.10 47.33 98.52 I Percent Solids (finer than 0.063 .m) '96.48 46.82 79.73 i Percent Solids (finer than 0.063'am) 96.56 38.01 89.41 l i ) l i-
o -
,o. or .. .o 1 o .;
Table 4-5. -(Continued)
~
Survey TRM Date Substrate Characteristics 478.2 482.6 t 483.4 490.5 NOV Depth (m) 15.0 11.0 5.0 8.0 Percent Moisture 58.09 52.56 22.54 47.31 Percent Moisture. 51.13 41.07 27.99 52.79 Percent Volatile Solids 8.35 7.61 2.65 6.57 Percent Volatile Solids 8.01 7.59 3.02 7.01 Percent Solids - (finer than 2.00 mm) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 2.00 mm) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 0.50 mm) 99.26 100.00 100.00 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 0.50 mm) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Percent Solids (finer than 0.125 mm) 97.27- 96.40 43.17 97.72 Percent Solids (finer than 0.125 mm) 98.41 96.57 50.85 97.66 Percent Solids (finer than 0.063 mm) 95.53 90.72 33.66 82.94 Percent Solids (finer than 0.063 mm) 96.40 91.15 39.34 89.38 T
- Particle sizes J0.063 mm = sand.
Particle sizes FO.063 mm = silt-clay. The station at TRM 482.6 was added to the survey beginning in May 1983, however the samples from the August survey were lost.
Table 4-6. Hacroinvertebrate Taxa Collected Exclusively Upstream or Downstream of Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant, During Operatioral Monitoring, February 1983 Through November 1983 . Taxon Downstream Upstream
- Coleoptera X Cyrnellus fraternus X Dicrotendipes sp. X
.Gyraulus sp. X Nemata X Oecetis sp. X Pectinatella magnifica X Planariidae X Pseudochironomus sp. X Truncilla Donaciformis X Xenochironomus sp. X
. Upstream: River Mile 490.5 Downstream: River Miles 478.2, 482.6, and 483.4.
O e e
-126-
U Q_ Je: , -
.Q/ g-m.
J-G (.. o~
- 7 M_ ...,
, ,__ s i <
4 4
? ' "
4 4 7 ,
+
r _ _ s Table 4-7. Macroinvertebrate One-Way Analysis of Variance and Duncan's New Mult'iple Ran8e Test ' Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chicka seu8a'. Reservoir,1971 Throu8h 1983 Season TRM Data Rank (a = 0.05)* F Value P>F R-Square Highest Lowest-
. Winter 490.5. Hexaaenia' . 7.22' 0.0001-- 0.542 1978 1975 1974 1976 1977 1973 1972 '1983 1982. '1981 (1971-1983)' ..
' ***""I*
3.00 0.0085 0.343 1973 1977^ 1974 1975 1976 1981 1982 1972 1978 1983 (1971-1983) . 478.2 Nezamenia 21.31 0.0001 0.777- 1983- 1977 1981' 1982 1975 1974 1972 1978 1973 1976" (1971-1983) 490.5 Cironoeidae 12.39 0.0001 0.670 1983' 1981' 1978 1975 1982 1972 1974 1973 1076 1977 (1971-1983)
.!. 483.4 Chironomidae 7.38 0.0001 0.547 1981 1982 1974 '1975 19R3 1972 1976 1973 1977 1978 p -(1971-1983) 478.2 Chironomidae 15.39 0.0001 0.716 1974 1983 1975 1973 1981 1972 1976 1977 1982 1978 (1971-1983) 490.5 Oligochaeta i 12.19 0.0001 0.648 1975 1981 1983 1982 1974 1973 1978 1976 1977 (1971-1983) 483.4 Oligochaeta i 12.64 0.0001 ~0.656 1975 1982 1981 19781976 1983 1973 1977 1974 (1971-1983) 478.2 Oligochaeta i 4.47 0.0003 0.403 (1971-1983) 1982 1981 1983 1974 1978 1977 1973 1976 1975 4
!V g
- J*, . - I. ' * * *
- . , - , ., , e -
' ' * ~
S amJ__
r c2 s - C Table 4-7. (Continued) Rank (a = 0.05)* Season TRN Data F Value P>F R-Square Nishest Lowest 490.5 Corbicula maailensis 1.61 0.1479 0.219 '1982 1977 1974 '1983 1976 1975^ 1973 1978 1972 (1971-1>S3,_ 483.4- Corbicula maaileasis 5.89 . 0.0001- 0.506 - 1982 1975 1974 1976 1977 1972 19831978-1973 (1971-1983) 478.2 - Corbicula maailensis 5.19 0.0001 0.474 1977 1982 1983 1978 1974 1975 1973 1972 1976 (1971-1983) 490.5 - Total Nacroiavertebratesi 7.57. 0.0001' O.568 1975 1983 1978 1974 1982 1973 1977 1976 1972 (1971-1983)- 483.4 Total Nacroinvertebrates 3.78~ 0.0018 0.397 1975 1982 1974 1983 1977 1976 1972 1973 1978
- d. (1971-1983) 5 478.2 Total Necroinvertebrat.sI 5.30 0.0001 0.440 1973 1975 1983 1974 1976 1977 1982 1972 1978 (1971-1983)
Sprins 490.5 hemaaemia 7.23 . 0.0001 0.512 1973 1978 1977 1972 1981 1974 1982 1976 1983 1975 (1972-1983) - 483.4 Nezaacmia -7.08 0.0001 0.517 -1972 1976 1981 1978 1982 1973 1974 1975 1977 1983 (1972-1983) 478.2 Benamesi= 4.23, 0.0002 0.391 1975 1981 1983 1977 1973 1976 1982 1974 1972 1978 (1972-1983) g g S 4
$ h + . #
.v .; ,
c _ v ;m - .g . - _ tj ~
-Table 4-7. (Continued) .
Rank (e = 0.05)* Season' TEM Data F Valse P>F R-Square Minbest Lowest 490.5 Chironomidae 4.23 0.0003 0.380 1983 1978 1977 1981- 1982 1973 1974. 1976 1972' 1975 (1972-1983) 483.4 chironomidae 9.28 0.0001' O.574 1981 1983 1972 1982 1976 1977 ~1973..:1975 1978 478.2 Chironomidae '10.27 0.0001 0.599 1981 1977 1983 -1972 1982 1975' 1976. 1973 1978 .1974 (1972-1983) 490.5 011gochaeta - 5.39- 0.0001 0.439 1975 1981 1978 1977 1976 1983 1982 1974 1972 1973 (1973-1983)
- 2. 483.4 0118cchaeta 13.66 0.0001 0.665 1982 1972 1975 1981 1977 1976' '1978 1983 1973 1974 y (1973-1983) 478.2 01180 chaeta 6.14 0.0001 0.471 1982 1981 1977 1978 1983 1975 1976 1974 1972 1973 (1973-1983) 490.5 Corbicula manilensisI -34.51 0.0001 0.839 1978 1974 1983 1976 1973 1982 1975 1972 1977
.(1972-1983) 483.4 Corbicula manilensis 7.13 0.0001 0.518 1982 1975 1976 1978 1977 1983 1972 1974 1973 (1972-1983) 478.2 Corbicula manilensisI. _15.76 0.0001 0.704' 1974 1976 1983 1982 1973 1975 1977 1978 1972 (1972-1983) 490.5 Total MacroinvertebratesI 8.81 0.0001 0.571 1978 1973- 1977 1983 1972 1976 1974 1982 1975 (1972-1983)
~
.f
~
. Table'4-7. (Continued)
Rank (a = 0.05)* Season TRM Data F Value P>F R-Square Mithest Loesest -
~
483.4 Total Macr-invertebrates . 17.02 0.0001'. 0.720 1982 1975-1972 1976 /1977.1983 , 1978- 1974 1973 - (1972-1983)- 478.2 Total Macroinvertebrates '9 58 0.0001 ~ ' O.591 1977 1976 1983 1982 1974 1975 1972 1973 1978
.(1972-1983)
Sumuner. 490.5' Hexamenia'- 11.98 0.0001. 0.652 1978 1972 1977 1973 1974 1975 1971 1982 1976 1981L 1983 (1971-1983). 483.4 Hexamenia 5.88 0.0001 0.490. 1971- 1976 1977 1972 1973 1974 1975 ~ 1978 1981 1982 1983 478.2 Hexamenta I 9.99 0.0001 0.620 1978 1975 1977 1972 -1971 1976 1982 1983 1974 1973 .. h .(1971-1983) 3.76 0.0005 0.370 1977 1983 1978 1973 1972 1971 1981' 1976 1982 1974 1975 490.5 niron mih e 483.4 Chironomidae 4.78 0.0001 .:: 427 1972 1983 1975 1971 1974 1982 1973 1977 1978 1976 1981 (1971-1983) 478.2 Chironomidae I' 5.36 0.0001 0.467 1983 1978 1977 1976 1971 1972 1974 1982-1975 1973
. 490.5 Oligochaeta 3.43 0.001 0.349 1981 1982 1983 1978 1973 1976 1977 1972 1975 1974 1971 (1971-1983) 483.4 Oligochaeta 5.95 0.001 0.482 1974 1975 1977 1981 1971 1978 1976 1973 1972 1982 1983 (1971-1983) e ... .* .- .,__ _j
O .. . - Q .. fC' ] l i l Table 4-7 (Continued 1 Rank (a 2 0.05)* Season TRM Data F Value P>F R-Square Hishest Lowest Susume r 478.2 Oligochaeta I 2.84 0.008 0.317 1975 1976 1978 1977 1983 1982 1974 1973 1972. 1971 (1971-1983) 490.5 Corbicula maailensis 12.42 0.0001 0.670 1983 1972 1971 1973 1976 1977 1975 1974 1978 1982 (1971-1983) 483.4 Corbicula maallensisi 3.13 0.004 0.339 1971 1975 1974 1976 1977 1973 1978 ~ 1972 1982 1983 (1971-1982) 478.2 Corbicula manilensis I 17.21 0.0001 0.738 1976 1983 1971 1982 1978 1972 1977 1973 1974 1975 {1971-1983) 490.5 Total Macroinvertebrates 13.51 0.0001 0.689 1977 1972 1978 1983 1973 1982 1971 1974 1976 1975 2 (1971-1983) M 483.4 Total Macroinvertebrates 2.14 0.041 0.259 1975 1971 1977 1974 1978 1983 1972 1982 1976 1973 (1971-1983) 478.2 Total Macroinvertebrates I 3.93 0.0007 0.391 1976 1983 1978 1974 1977 1975 1973 1971 1982 1972 (1971-1982) Fall 490.5 Hexagemia 12.51 0.0001 0.653 1976 1973 1972 1974 1977 1978 1975 1971 1980 1982 1983 1981 (1972-1983) 483.4 Hexagenia 19.23 C.0001 0.743 1973 1972 1971 1980 1975 1974 1983 1976 1981 1977 1978 1982 (1972-1983)
r Tahle 4-7 (Continued) Rank (a = 0.05)* Saason TRM Data F Value P>F R-Square Highest Lowest 478.2 Hexagepta 8.29 0.0001 0.555 1977 1976 1982 1980 1971 1978 1972 1981 1983 1974 1973 1975 (1972-1983) 490.5 Chironomida 4.55 0.0001 0.407 1973 1977 1983 1972 1971 1982 1978 1976 1974 1981 1974 1980 (1972-1983) 483.4 Chironomida 12.95 0.0001 0.661 1972 1980 1971 1973 1981 1982 1976 1977 1978 1983 1974 1975 (1972-1983) 478.2 Chironomidae 3.44 0.0007 0.341 1973 1974 1971 1972 1983 1982 1980 1975 1976 1981 1977 1978 490.5 Oligochaeta 4.82 0.0001 0.421 1975 1977 1983 1978 1972 1982 1981 1974 1980 1976 1973 1971 (1972-1983)
- 2. 483.4 Oligochaeta - 5.76 0.0001 0.464 1977 1974 1981 1980 1978 1972 1975 1976 1971 1973 1983 1982 j' (1972-1983) 478.2 011gochaeta 2.97 0.003 0.309 1978 1971 1977 1981 1975 1983 1976 1974 1980 1982 1972 1973 (1972-1983) 490.5 Corbicula maailensis 7.38 0.0001 0.536 1983 1974 1977 1982 1980 1975 1972 1976 1973 1971 1978 (1972-1983) 483.4 Corbicula maailensisi 6.89 0.0001 0.519 1975 1974 1971 1977 1980 1972 1973 1976 1982 1983 1978 (1972-1983)
. . e * . .
d - O ,
- Table 4-7 (Continued)
Rank (a = 0.05)* Season TRM Data F Value P)F R-Square Highest Lowest 478.2 Corbicula manilensis 56.04 0.0001 0.897 1976 1983 1971 1980 1982 1974 1972 1977 1973 1975 1978 (1972-1983) 490.5 Total Macroinvertebrates 18.27 0.0001 0.741 1973 1975 1977 (972 1976 1974 1993 1978 1982 1971 1980 (1972-1983) 483.4 Total Macroinvertebrates 7.82 0.0001 0.550 1973 1972 1971 1975 1980 1974 1977 1976 1982 1978 1983 (1972-1983) 478.2 Total Macroinvertebrates 1.83 0.0734 0.222 1974 1973 1976 1971 1975 1972 1977 1983 1980 1982 1978 (1972-1983) {
- Years underscored by the same line are not significantly different.
t 1972 data (winter) are not included. Taxa of oligochaeta were not identified; therefore, conversion from en lengths to organisms was not possible.
+
+1981 data (all seasons) are not included. Corbicula were discarded in tne field and are not enumerated.
1981 data (summer are not included. Simples were not collected from the specified habitat. I 1 I r
Tchle.4-8. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Taxa Collected Upstream of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring, 1971 Through 1983 Preoperational Operational Taxa (1971-1978) (1980-1981) (1982) (1983) Amphipoda (scuds) , Crangonyx Gammarus Hyalello azteca X X X Ceratopogonidae (biting midges) X X Bezzia X X Culicoides Chironomidae (midges) X X Ablabesmyia X X X X Chironomous X X X X Coelotanypus X X X X Crictopus Cryptochironomus X X X
~
Dicrotendipes X Epoicocladius. X X X X Glyptotendt3s L Parachironomus Paratendipes X Polypedilum X Procladius X X X X Pseudochironomus X Xenochironomus X Chaoboridae Chaoborus X X X X Ephemeroptera (mayflies)
-Caenis X X '
Ephemerella X Hexagenia X X X X Stenacron- X Odonata (dragonflies, damselflies) Coenagrionidae Argia X Enallagma X X Hirudinea (leeches) X X Erpobdellidae Glossiphoniidae Nemata (nematodes) X X Megaloptera Sialis X Pelecypoda (bivalve mollusks) Anodonta X Corbicula manilensis X X X X Psidium X Sphaerium X X X . Gyraulus X 011gochaeta (aquatic worms) Tubificidae X X X X
~
Branchiura sowerbyi X X X X
-134-
-Table 4-8 (Continued)
Preoperational Operational Taxa (1971-1978) (1980-1981) (1982) (1983) [ ' Trichoptera.(Caddisflies) X Cheumatopsyche X Crynellus fraternus Neureclipsis Nyctiophylax Oecetis- X
.Orthotrichia X Bryozoa X Lophopodella X Pectinatella magnifica X X Gastropoda (snails)
Amnicola Hydrobia
'Campeloma.
Physa- X Nematomorpha Paranordius Turbellaria (flat worms) Planariidae Cura foremanii X Dunesia a Total 29 19 16 21 a 0
-135-
Table 4-9. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Taxa Collected Downstream of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring, , 1971 Through'1983 f. Preoperational Operational Taxa (1971-1978) (1980-1981) (1982) (1983) Amphipoda (scuds) .. Cransonyx X X Gammarus X Hyalella azteca X X X X
. Ceratopogonidae (biting midges) X X Bezzia X Culicoides X X Chironomidae (midges) X X X X
.Ablabesmyia X X X X Chironomous X X X X Coelotanypus X X X X Crictopus X l Cryptochironomus X X X X t Dicrotendipes X X X X Epoicocladius X X X Glyptotendipes X Parachironomus X X Paratendipes X Polypedilum X X
--Procladius X X X X Zenochironomus X X X X Coleoptera X Chaoboridae * .-
.Chaoborus X X X X Ephemeroptera (mayflies)
Caenis X X -;
'Ephemerella X' Mexamenia X X X X Stenacron Odonata (dragonflies, damselflies)
Coenagrionidae ArgLa.
.Ena11aame -
X X Hirudinea (leeches) X X X X Erpobdellidae X Glossiphoniidae X Nemata (nematodes) X X X Megaloptera Stalis X- X Pelecypoda (htvalve mollusks) X ' Anodonta X Corbicula maailensis X X X X Psidium. X Sphaerium . X X X . Truncilla donaciformis X Oligochaeta (aquatic worms) Tubificidae X X X X Branchiura sowerbyl X X X X
-136-
_ - _ . , _ - . . . , . , - - , . , , . --. , .gn-- , .,, nn,.g.,,.,_.___n,wg-, _.,,-,.,.._.z.n
-_y a
--m. -- L,. [ qq;{- -- xp-e-
'w c Table'4-9 (Continued) -
.o Preoperational Operational s Tnxa (1971-1978) (1980-1981) (1982) (1983)
,.;Trichoptera (Caddisflies)
- ' ' ~
X Chrumatopsyche ,
. ~ 7- Crynellus fraternus X X X 3 Neureclipsis '
X .
.Myctiophylax * -
.. - X '
- Oecetis . X j X X X Orthotrichia Bryozoa X-
,Lophopodella Pectinatellasignifica X -? X X X Gastropoda (snails).- .
Amnicola X X Hydrobia X C_an.pelona ._X X Physa , X Nematomorpha . Paranordius 3. , X Turbellaria (flat worms) Planariidae X Co ru "foremanii ,,, , X Dugenia .X X X o Total 42 '31 24 28 4 _e
,E-ti-O 9 w y sP# -
O i4 g N
'& o ,
O, .% y 6 P g
-137 '
e
SEQUOYAH BENTHIC MEAN DOMINANT ORGANISMS i AT EACH STATION 1983 ! N 900- e' _ s N _ g e I s E o e e
= soo- ,;
- l =
{ = *. 2 E i 2
* =
m * > 3 $ ], 3
- l g
z M M >'
=
b g 7 i 300- hX I 4 . 4 @ -- N - 2
- . g : q -
W M m x - - 1 4 b./ 7 w A A- M. Pi. , ..
-:$.s===
. ._s o
5 WINTER 83 SPRING 83 SUMMER 83 F ALL 83 QUARTER l Nel C H I R O N O M I D A E I l COR8tCUL A
' LEGEND : ORG ANISM M OLIGOCH AET A I WANAN HEXIGENI A i i
l I Figure !.-l. Spatial Distribution of Dominant Leroinvertebrate Taxa in the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear ; l; Plant, Chickamauga Reservair, Tennessee, February, May, August, and November 1983. l l . , , l
- m -
1 6 4 WINTER . BARTER e- Heus se93 J. ' Corbiculo monilensis
,, s-S 7 -.
$4-O
. e -
3 -
. - , , - 8
%s 4 -
O ~
; hl -
O'g
-m o
O O E
# o
~
N
, /g O'O \0D/ 'O Ds !
I 2 3 4 5 Il 7 8 9 IO 11 12 Prooperational Ope-stional o a 2'* " Q "O I YY4 5 M 7 Y 9 10 ll 12 P,eoper.tional Operationoi Chironamideo to-Tot. . .i.e.,t .t.e
- i. . -
- i. -
44 -
- 7 -
12 - 0 - o a 24 o =
/ 'a o L,o
.- a
.\o
/\ a -- a' s o h j~e. ,' ao -6o
\o
;e
\ ..
b.sab o.7/g 2 3 4 . . . io li in a e
,e,..,n.i o,.,.u ..
6' I \ l O' 4 "
'O 5- '
^ #
O Oli gochaete
^
= -
O ,
.1,qo a _. s 34
.i -
A A 7 -
*~
l 2 373 s7 8 9 10 l - 12 _
..
- A m e,..,e,.n....i o,e,.u .
3-4 = LEGEND _ g3 . g A i e i.1, . . 7. ii. ...
- = , _ O ..
2 1972 7 els77 121983 _ 3 e1975 . 3 e igre 0 e 7mM 490 5
- g b $? AdB-E $
4 e1974' d 7RtI 4es 4 e e 4e78 s altto to etoes O e7 met 47s a 1 2 3I36 7 8 9 to il 12 Proope,etional Ope,ationel
~
m Figure 4-2. Winter Macrointertebrate Densities During Preoperational'and Operational Monitoring at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga y Reservoir, 1972 Through 1983.
-139-e N
a.
- D7 * "
- SPRING QUARTER
_H6a o 08 nlo Corbiculo monllenoie 8- 5-7 - N g4 -
"o 6 -
= 3 -
=5 -
"2 2 -
AU o.3- / 0 0-0 C AA D' 2 -o -- O O 2 .
/
a I 2 3 4 5 67 8 9 to il 12 1 A D-D
/ \
\
o\
^j- /
Prmperational Operational
^ ^ - ^ ' "
O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 Prooporotional Operational Chironomidos 11 Total Meereinvertebratee 10-16 - g - 15- , g . 14 - 9 7 - 13 6 - 12 - 3 9 _ - II
$4
,0- 3-9 9 -
2 -
"8 -
g - O ,g -o o "a 7 . D' O -- ^^-
- 6 - .
D-D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 z 3 , a Prooperational Operational 4 O ^ [\D-O [. Oligochooto a 2 - \ O O\ 0
^^
/ A. a, 9
g-- 7 6 - t23 4 56 7 89 10 Il 12 = Prooperationdl 5 - Operational N a LEGEND 3 _~
, e , o r, a eesta-7ees77
,,...e.
12:1983 8 - oA ,o 3 eesta e e ret s o 7nu 4eo-s - A D a.u Mo 4 e is74 ' s e sseo a e inu 4es.4 gh, a e es7s ,o e stel D e Tau 47e a 0 20 l 2 --4 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Prooperational Operationel e Figure 4-3. Spring Macroinvertebrate Densities During Preoperational and Operatiensi Monitoring at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, . Chickamauga Reservoir, 1972 Through 1983.
-140-
1 I 1 SUMMER QUARTER l Hemonenio Corbiculo monilensis 8- 5-7 -
"g 4 -
N " o6 - 3- g
, 5- 2 2 AO U 2 4 -
1 -g 3-0-n_ ng a 3- O 3 z 2 - O j 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 la 12 O
/ Preoperational Operoiional e
g
- # ga' 9DjD^-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Prooperational Operational Chironomidae Total Mocrcinvertebrates lo-16 9 - 15 - N o8 - 14 = 7 - 13 - N, 6 - 12 - g5 - II - z4 - 10 - 3 - 9 - 2 - 0 7 - 0 32_2 6 _ _o "I 6 - L2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 1112 5 - U O Preoperatienol Operationet 2
-s g/ o 4
3
\
O O
/ / Oligochaeto 2
0 O sg[ 0g T gA 8-
} l -
7 _ 0 N o 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 to il 12 Prooperational Operational ,"2 4 _ LE9END 3-
. . .o 7i e e iste n ..se, g 2 -
a a = 1972 7 e 1977 12s1983 3 e te73 4 e se74 e e lore O etnu 4to s e e teso A s7mu 4es 4 Oh~U D O~ 0 ^ e e so7s to a teor O s7nu 476 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1.2 Prooperational Operational Figure 4-4. Summer Macroinvertebrate Densities During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1981 Through 1983.
-141-
FALL QUARTER Heaonenlo Corbiculo monilensis 8- A 3- . 7- 9 4 .
"o-6- -
3-N g
~ '~ ' " *
~ <
y3-z 2 O ,0\ O
/
O Oq I'~s 0 ^a f-9b
-- 0 0-1 l 2 3 4 5 67 8 9 10 Il 12 e/
1^ g
-. A/
/
- \
0 0 0 Preoperational Operational
' ^^^^
O ' I 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 t t 12 Prooperational Operational Chironornidae 11 o 10-Total Macroinvertebrates 16- ] O I~ 15- g - H - N I ~ O o 13 12
/ ]6 -
u 5-11 - D (4 - u e, 10-
^
O h3 -o gf D D gA 1\ 2 so,D'o
.- 8 -
^/ , _G i D-gre "a 7 -
C'O O ^# 76 D' g 0 l D'\0 / O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 z 5 oO Preoperational Operoflonel
- A 4 -
~
O 2
/\ A6 0 O Oligochooto _.
0 l -
\7 A
8-0 T - 0 0 6 - l 2 34 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 5 - Prooperationel Operatiorial "a 4 . LEGEND 33 z O I e to71 e s 1978 11 e test 2 - 2 e 1972 7 a 1977 12s1983 - A 3e 1973 4 e 1978 Os 7RM .90-5 0 " kOO f
. . :9 7.
6* 8978 9 . i9eo to
- 1989 A.7....>. 7 ; ,'" 4 , , , , , , ; ;;
D *7AM .78 2 Preoperoflonel Operational Figure 4-5. Fall Macroinvertebrate Densities During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant,
- Chickamauga Reservoir, 1971 Through 1983.
-142- '
4.2 BI0 ACCUMULATION Copper and nickel are the principal constituents of SQN condenser cooling water tubes. Iron, zinc, aluminum, and cadmium are other components of interest in the SQN system. Investigations were performed to determine if these metals were being accumulated in the food chain of Chickamauga Reservoir downstream of SQN. Freshwater bivalve mollusks were chosen as test organisms because of their method of feeding. Filtering action of the gills, with assistance of secreted mucus and numerous cilia, retains parti-cles from water directed through the mussel's incurrent siphon at rates up to 35. liters of water per day (Allen, 1914). Only limited bioaccumulation occurs from dissolved metals within the volumes of water filtered; the primary source of metals within mollusk tissues occurs through ingestion of plankton and other particulate matter (Lord et al.,1975). Therefore, metals have been preconcentrated (complexing, inclusion, precipitation) 1.
... the seston prior to ingestion.
4.2.1 Materials and Methods Field--Two species of freshwater mussels, Cyclonaias tuberculata and Amblema plicata, and the asiatic clam, Corbicula manilensis, were collected from source populations such that animals used throughout the L . study were from a common gene pool _for the respective species. Mussels were collected November 4, 1982, from Wilson-Dam tailwater (TRM 258.3), and class were collected on the same day from Spring Creek embayment on Wheeler Reservoir near TRM 283.8. After collection, mollusks were held for 36 hours in charcoal-l filtered tap water to purge gut contents. They were then packed between t
-143-W'
Icysrs of wat burlap and transported in styrofoam or plastic ice chests to SQN incubation sites. Samples of each species were retained to determine initial metal concentrations. - e Test animals were placed upstream (TRM 485.0) and downstream (TRM 482.9) of SQN-in nylon mesh bags and suspended from racks made of polyvinyl-chloride pipe anchored with concrete. Sufficient test animals were placed at each site to allow removal of guarterly samples. Each sample of mussel tissue consisted of three individuals (whole body) per species while a sample of C. manilensis con-
-sisted of 5-10' individuals, depending on size. Following collection, mollusks were held three to four days in charcoal-filtered tap water to purge _ gut contents. Stainless steel knives were.used to remove r 'lusk tissues from the shells. Tissues were rinsed with deionized, distilleJ water, placed in plastic bags, and frozen until chemical analyses could be performed.
Laboratory--Metals analyses were performed on whole body homo-genates of the test animals. Tissues were analyzed for copper, nickel, . iron, aluminum, zinc, and_ cadmium. Standard atomic absorption spectroscopy techniques were used for all but cadmium, which was measured by graphite furnace atomic ' absorption methods. Data Analyses--Metals data were graphically illustrated for
~ February, May,. September, and November'1983. ' Initial (November 1982) metal concentrations (from source populations) for C. tuberculata, A. plicata, and 'C. manilensis were also included as a reference to assess net metals
-accumulation after a year's exposure, although the reference data do not necessarily represent background levels in Chickamauga Reservoir. .-
-144-1
Differences between species, season, location and possible ad-
.; 'ditive or l'nteractive effects of group combinations were tested using univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests (Snedecor and Cochran,1967).
.A balanced three-way multivariate analysis.of variance (MANOVA) was used to test for overall_ effects of species, season, location and group combi-nations'(Morrison, 1967). These tests were also used to evaluate dif-ferences.among upstream, downstream, and reference data to indicate metal accumulation after a full year's exposure. Because values for nickel were b'elow the detection levels for our equipment, they were not included in the statistical analyses.
4.2.2 Results and Discussion Tissue contents are summarized in table 4-10 for each mollusk species, collection period and sampling location. Individual sample con-
.c centrations are shown in appendix'U. Differences in bioaccumulated metals
.. among species.were anticipated because the three test organisms represent two. taxonomic orders. Also, differences in metals accumulation were ex--
?pected to vary by date (season). because of differences in physiological state of the. mussels, varying abundances of microscopic organisms in the water and sediments, and differences in water hardness and other inter-related factors which affect both concentration of metals in water and rate of bioaccumulation. In particular, Frazier (1976) reported losses in
' mussel body residues of zir.c (33 percent), copper (50 percent), and cadmium
~
(33 percent) from m'id-August through mid-September. Phillips (1977) reached
- p. a similar conclusion regarding seasonal differences in metals uptake by mollusks in estuarine environments. Although tissue differences between
!*o species, dates, and locations were analyzed, location differences involving i i
-145-
a control'(TRM 485.0) and experimental (TRM 482.9) station are best suited
' for determining -impacts of SQN. Two hypotheses were tested to determine SQN impacts. Assuming mollusk species placed downstream of SQN would
- indicate increased concentrations of metals in the environment through higher concentrations in their tissues relative to a control, impact of SQN would be determined if downstream taxa consistently exhibited statistically higher tissue metals'for one or more sample dates. The second hypothesis tested was that, after a year's exposure (November 1982 to November 1983),
SQN impact would be determined if control (upstream) tissue concentrations remained unchanged (no significant difference between control and initial reference concentrations) and downstream tissue concentrations increased (were significantly different from control and reference data). Metals data for iron, copper, zinc, nickel, aluminum, aad cadmium are illustrated
'in figures 4-6 and 4-7.
Comparisons of Seasonal Data (First Hypothesis)--Data shown in table 4-11 were analyzed to determine main effects: differences in tissue metals for (1) species (combining dates and locations),.(2) dates (combining - species and locations), and (3) locations (combining species and dates). These comparisons are identified in table 4-11, respectively, as comparisons I, II, and III. To detect subtle differenc'es in tissue metal, data were stratified in two dimensions, e.g., species by date (comparison IV), location by species (comparisen V), and location by date (comparison VI), and also in three dimensions, e.g., location by date by species (comparison VII). Species were held constant for each three-way group to facilitate interpre-
- tation of'the results by the three-dimensional stratification. Only com-parisens.III and V-VII lend themselves directly to testing of the first -
hypothesis (consistent location differences for species and/or sampling b
-146-7- 9M - e e
date). These results are summarized below by metal. Comparisons I, II, L.; and IV have been added to indicate seasonal and species differences in tissue metals and to support statements at the beginning of this section 2* that we expected such differences. Iron--The amount of iron in body tissues of Cyclonaias tuberculata and Amblema plicata was respectively 5.7.to 6.5 times as great as that in
.the clam (tables 4-10 and 4-11, comparison I). Tissue iron was approximately
- 35. percent greater during the first part of the year- (February and May) than in 'the latter part of the year (September and November) corresponding with. peak concentrations in the river'(figure 4-8). Greatest seasonal accumulation of iron by species (table 4-11, comparison IV, combined locations) occurred in May for A. plicata, February and May for C. tuberculata, and February for C. manilensis.
Statistically significant location (upstream-downstream) differences by species and date (table 4-11, comparison VII) are summarized as follows. Species- Sianificant Location Differences
- A. plicata Greater concentration upstream in September Greater concentratica downstream in November C. tuberculata Greater concentration downstream in May C. manilensis None
- The above differences do not illustrate a consistent increase in tissue 7 iron downstream of SQN. Therefore, based upon the first hypothesis, SQN did not contribute to iron accumulation in mollusks. This conclusion is
- , ., supported by the overall main effect of location _(table 4-11, comparison III),
and other location comparisons (V and VI), where location differences were <C not significant.
-147-sy~--
-b- - 4 - r-- 9 9 - evy-ywc, - , - - - - - - - - -
y -m, -
Copper--Whereas C. manilensis contained small amounts of iron re-lative to the mussel species tested, this clam exhibited greatly increased 4 in concentrations of tissue copper, having 4.7 and 7.1 times more copper *
' than C. tuberculata and A. plicata, respectively (table 4-11, comparison I and figure 4-6). Greatest concentration of copper in A. plicata tissues occurred in February. Concentrations of copper in C. tuberculata and C. danilensis varied significantly over seasons but did not show a definite advantage of one date over others except for C. tuberculata where November concentrations were higher than those measured ia February, but similar to concentrations in May and September (table 4-11, comparison IV).
No location differences in tissue concentrations of copper were identified for any species or date. Thus, SQN did not impact copper bioac-cumulation in mollusks. Zinc--All three test organisms accumulated tissue zine at signi-ficantly different-levels (figure 4-6, table 4-11, comparison I) with C. tuberculata having the greatest concentration and C. manilensis having the lowest. ' Greatest zine concentrations were measured in May (combining . species and location' data). Greatest seasonal accumulation of zine by species occurred in May for A. plicata and C. tuberculata and in February
' and May for C.-manilensis (table 4-11, comparison IV).
~
Statistically significant location differences by species and date are summarized below (see table 4-11, comparison VII). . Species Significant Location Differences A. plicata Greatest concentration upstream in May C.:tuberculata' Greatest concentration downstream in May C. manilensis None
-148-e +- , --~,---,v--- - ,- ,-.,--.n ---- - - m-,-
As with iron, no consistent increase in tissue zine downstream of SQN was documented. .Therefore, based'on the first hypothesis, no SQN impact is in-dicated. This conclusion is supported by the overall main effect of location which was not significant and, additionally, by observing that zine data by species but pooled over date, in fact, identified an increase in tissue zine upstream of SQN for A. plicata and downstream for C. tuberculata (table 4-11, comparison V). Aluminum--Approximately twice as much. aluminum occurred in tissues of C. manilensis than in tissues of either mussel species (virtually equal amounts in both mussel species). Greatest aluminum concentrations in mollusk tissues occurred in February while lowest concentrations were measured in November. Statistically significant location differences by species and date are shown below.
- w Species Sianificant Location Differences
- A. plicata None-C. tuberculata Greatest concentration upstream in February C. manilensis Greatest concentration downstream in February Greatest concentration upstream in September Again these results are very inconsistent in terms of concluding SQN-effect 4
based on the first hypothesis. Cadmium--All three test organisms accumulated cadmium at signi-ficantly different levels such that concentrations in C. tuberculata and A. plicata were respectively 2.2 and 1.7 times as great as in C. manilensis. Cadmium was the least concentrated metal (of the five examined statistically) in mollusk tissues. Greatest concentration of cadmium was measured in May while the least amount occurred in September (table 4-11, comparison II).
-149-
-- - --_m -
- _ .- = --
No location differences in tissue cadmium were identified for any species or date. Thus, SQN did not impact cadmium bioaccumulation in mollusks. . Nickel--Nickel remained at concentrations less than 1 pg/g for all test organisms and seasons except in May when there was very little difference (j0.2 pg/g) between upstream and downstream concentrations (table 4-10). Similarly low concentrations of nickel were encountered in 1981 and 1982. Manly (1977) compared concentration sites for various
. metals in the freshwater mussel Anodonta and showed the greatest concen-trations of nickel occurred in the kidneys whereas other metals (i.e., -zinc, cadmium, and copper) concentrated mainly in the digestive gland, -ctenidia, mantle, and gonads. Relative small size of the kidneys compared to total body may have accounted for poor detection of nickel by these specimens. Statistical evaluation of nickel data was not possible.
The series of univariate ANOVA. tests given above examined indepen-dent. patterns of variation in specific tissue metals and/or association of variables (date, location, species). In addition to these tests, a multi- .. variate MANOVA test was used to analyze all variables simultaneously to-Jexamine contrasting variation among multiple populations, namely all five metals. -Good agreement existed between the univariate and multivariate tests. A summary of the MANOVA results is given below. Factor Wilk's Criterion Probability > F
^ -Species- O.0133 0.0001 Date. 0.0385 - 0.0001 Location 0.9298 0.6520 .Date x Species. 0.0622 0.0001 .Date x Location 0.6873 0.2943 .
Species x Location 0.6450 1 0.0279 Species x Date x Location 0.2979 0.0016 150-
*--P__-2-_ _---- ._,__,__+m_,,, __,,.m._._-.-,,..,,_.,_-,,p._,,,w , --r - - - -r' . - - - * +ey ,m
MANOVA results are supportive of the univariate findings which have been
,, discussed for each metal, in that significant differences in tissue metal concentrations occurred among the three test organisms and four dates included in this study. Also, the location vector was rendered not signi-
.ficant, meaning that the amount of metals bioaccumulated upstream was equal to downstream. However, significance of interaction between (1) location and species, and (2) location, date, and species indicate possible masking effects of the vector describing location. This interaction is realized in the sometimes conflicting results regarding location in the univariate-based discussion for iron, zinc, and aluminum, which forced the conclusion of no SQN impact (based on the hypothesis regarding seasonal data).
~ Comparisons of Annual Data, November 1982 and November 1983 (Second Hypothesis)--As previously stated, SQN impact also would be indicated if, after one year's exposure, downstream tissue metal concentrations significantly increased and upstream concentrations remained unchanged from initial (reference) levels. Results of univariate analyses of the November data are in table 4-12. Concentrations of tissue metals for the three test organisms were similar to those described in the seasonal analysis, in that the clam Corbicula manilensis contained greater concentrations of copper and aluminum compared to the two mussel species, while the mussels (C. tuberculata and A. plicata) contained greater tissue levels of iron, zinc, and cadmium (table 4-12, comparison I) compared to the clam.
Statistically significant location (reference, upstream, down-r l stream) differences by species (table 4-12, comparison III) are summarized below. l l
-151-L..
Species' Metal Sianificant Location Differences A. plicata Iron Greater, downstream; upstream and reference alike Copper None - Zinc Greater downstream; upstream and reference alike
- Aluminum Greater reference; downstream and upstream ,
alike Cadmium None - C. tuberculata Iron None Copper None Zine Greater upstream; downstream and reference alike Aluminum Upstream and downstream alike; downstream and reference alike Cadmium None C. manilensis Iron None Copper None Zinc None Aluminum All different; greatest reference, lowest upstream Cadmium None Indicates SQN effect From this analysis, significantly greater downstream concentrations of iron and zine in A. plicata tissues compared to upstream and initisi (reference) concentrations, support the hypothesis of SQN effect and indicate SQN may have contributed to an increase of iron and zine in one of the three test organisms. These results were supported by the multivariate analysis (MANOVA) which are summarized below, indicating significance of the location vector as well as species and species-location interaction. Factor Wilk's Criterion Probability > F Species 0.0015 0.0001 Location 0.0344 0.0001 Species x Location 0.0511 0.0003 F'
-152-
4.2.3 Summary and Conclusions Concentration of metals in mollusk tissues is a function of metal availability and physiological processes involved in metal uptake. The main concern of this study was to examine metal content at two sampling locations and to evaluate the impact of a power plant located between the sampling sites. After identifying significant variations in tissue metal concentrations among the three test organisms (Cyclonaias tuberculata, Amblema plicata, and Corbicula manilensis) and among the four sampling dates, the null hypothesis of no effect was accepted, based upon inconsistent location (upstream, downstream) differences within the seasonal data. l .However, examination of upstream and downstream tissue metal concentrations following a full year's exposure (November 1982 and November 1983 data only) identified significantly greater concentrations of iron and zine in A. plicata tissues downstream of SQN, indicating possible additions of iron and zine to the aquatic environment by SQN. Significance of these findings
, will be evaluated further following completion of current studies.
i i. i
-153-
Tchle 4-10. Mesa Metale D:ta from Mollunks (khole Body, S ft Tiecuns) Utiliz d in Detercining Biceccumulatica in the Vicinity of Seqcoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1983 Date Number of Mean Metal Concentration (pa/a) Collected Species ~ ssen) cr- Location
- Iron Copper Zine Nickel Aluminum Cadmium 11/4/82 Cyclonaias tuberculata 3 Background 216.7 2.3 61.7 <1.0 3.0 0.29 Amblema plicata 3- Background 180.0 0.6 36.3 <1.0 5.1- 0.12 Corbicula manilensis 3. Background 21.3 6.8 19.3 <1.0 8.5 0.09 2/23/82 Cyclonaias tuberculata. 3 Upstream 310.0 1.5 40.0 .<1.0 33.3 0.17 3 Downstream .260.0 1.6 46.0 <1.0 13.6 0.11 Amblema plicata 3 Upstream 250.0 3.4 48.0 <1.0 24.0 0.38 3 . Downstream 240.0 3.0 39.0 <1.0 32.0 0.25 Corbicula manilensis 3 Upstream 70.0 10.3 19.7 <1.0 41.7 0.11 3 Downstream 110.0 10.8 21.7 <1.0 64.3 0.11 5/24/83 Cyclonaias tuberculata 3 Upstream. 206.7 2.2 61.7 <1.1 10.3 0.56 3 Downstream 306.7 1.8 91.3 <1.3 11.0 0.78 Amblema plicata 3 Upstream 376.7 <0.2 82.7 <1.0 12.3 0.37 g 3 Downstream 360.0 <0.2 53.7 1.2 9.0 0.31 y Corbicula manilensis 3 Upstream 29.7 11.4. 20.3 <1.1 11.1 0.37 3 Downstream 25.0 12.3 31.0 <1.1 7.1 0.33 9/8/83 Cyclonaias tuberculata 3 Upstream 180.0 1.7 48.7 <1.0 2.4 0.35 3 Downstream 173.3 2.8 50.3 <1.0 3.3 0.31 Amblema plicata 3 Upstream 256.6 0.6 53.3 <1.0 11.0 0.15 3 Downstream 183.3 1.0 40.0 <1.0 4.7 0.19 Cor'icula manilensis 3 Upstream 36.3 8.2 15.3 <1.0 24.3 0.15 3 Downstream 22.7 8.0 14.3 <1.0 4.5 0.15 11/30/83 Cyclonaias tuberculata 3 Upstream. 223.3 2.7 45.3 <1.0 <1.0 0.45 3 Downstream 216.7 3.6 64.0 <1.0 1.9 0.45 Amblema plicata 3 Upstream 210.0 1.2 35.7 <1.0 <1.7 0.35 3 Downstream 280.0 1.6 46.3 <1.0 <2.6 0.43 Corbicula manilensis 3 Upstream 18.0 8.5 14.7 <1.0 1.7 0.08 3 Downstream 20.0 10.4 14.0 <1.0 4.7 0.11
- Upstream = TRM 485.0 Downstream = TRM 482.9
Table 4-11. Summary of Univariate Analysis of Variance Tests pa/s Comparison Iron- Copper Zine Aluminum Cadmium Species (S)
.I S1 (Amblema) 269.58c 1.40a 49.79b 12.08a 0.30b S2 (Corbicula) 41.46a 9.99c 18.88a 19.93b 0.18a S3 (Cyclonaias) 234.58b 2.12b 55.92c 9.62a 0.40c 3
Signifigance of S ** ** ** * ** 95% LSD 20.56 0.67 5.27 4.94 0.05 II Date (D) D1 (2/23/83) 206.67b 5.10b 35.67a 34.71d 0.19a D2.(5/23/83) 217.45b 4.70b 56.78b 10.17c 0.46c D3 (9/20/83) 142.06a 3.72a 37.00m 8.37be 0.22a D4 (11/30/83) 3 161.33a 4.66b 36.67a 2.26a 0.31b Signifigance of D 95% LSD 23.74 0.78 6.09 5.71 0.06 III Location (L) L1 (Downstream) 183.14 4.68 42.61 13.22 0.29 L2 (Upstream) 180.61 4.32 40.44 14.54 0.29 3 Significance of L NS NS NS NS NS IV S x D Interaction S1 D1 245.00s 3.18b 43.34a 27.67b 0.31b S1 D2 368.34b 0.20a 68.17b 10.76a 0.34b S1 D3 220.00a 0.82a 46.67a 7.82a 0.17a SI-D4 245.00s 1.40a 41.00a 2.08a 0.39b L. S2 D1 90.00b 10.55bc 20.67ab 53.00c 0.11a S2 D2 27.34a 11.86c 25.67b 9.10ab 0.35b S2 D3 29.50s 8.08a 14.83a 14.42b 0.15a
'S2 D4 19.00a 9.45ab 14.34a 3.20a 0.10a S3 D1 285.00c 1.55a 43.00a 23.47b 0.14a S3 D2 256.67be 2.04ab 76.50c 10.64a 0.67d S3 D3 176.67a 2.25ab 49.50ab 2.87a 0.33b
'S3 D4 220.00b 3.14b 54.67b 1.50a 0.45c SignifiganceofSD 95% LSD 41.12 1.34 10.54 9.89 0.10 V- S x L Interaction S1 L1 265.83 1.45 44.67b 12.02 0.29 S1 L2 273.34 1.35 54.92c 16.20 0.31 S2 L1 44.42 10.38 20.25a 20.16 0.18 S2 L2 38.50 9.61 17.50a 19.69 0.18 S3 L1 239.17 2.22 62.92d 7.46 0.42
'.- S3'L2 230.00 2.01 48.92bc 12.78 0.38 Signifigance of SL NS NS NS NS 95% LSD 7.45
-155-
E Table'4-11 (Continued) pa/s Comparison- Iron Copper Zine Aluminum Cadmium - l VI D x'L Interaction ! D1 L1 203.33 5.12 35.45 36.53 0.16 . D1 L2 210.00 5.07 35.89 32.90 0.22 LD2 L1 -230.56 4.80 58.67 9.11 0.48
.D2 L2 204.34 4.60 54.89 11.22 0.43 D3 L1 126.44 3.94 34.89 4.18 0.22
- D3 L2 157.67 3.49 39.11 12.56 0.22 D4 L1 172.22 5.20 41.44 3.04 0.33 D4 L2 .
150.'44 4.12 31.89 1.48 0.29 Significance of DL NS NS NS NS NS VII S x D x L Interaction S1 D1 L1 240.00ab 3.00 38.67ab 31.67b 0.24 S1 D1 L2 250.00be 3.37 48.00ab 23.67b 0.38
- S1 D2 L1 360.00d 0.20 53.67b 9.20a 0.31
'S1 D2 L2 376.67d 0.20 82.67c 12.33a 0.37 S1 D3 L1- 183.33a ~ 1.00 40.00ab 4.67a 0.19 S1 D3 L2 256.67be 0.63 53.33b 10.97ab 0.15 S1 D4 L1. 280.00c 1.60 46.33ab 2.53a 0.43 S1 D4 L2. 210.00ab 1.20 35.67a 1.63a 0.35 S2 Dl-L1 110.00b 10.77 21.67ab 64.33d 0.11
-S2 D1 L2 70.00ab 10.33 19.67ab 41.67c 0.11 S2 D2 L1 25.00s 12.33 31.00b 7.13a 0.33 ~'
S2 D2 L2' 29.67a 11.40 20.33ab 11.07ab 0.37 S2 D3 L1 22.67a 8.00 14.33a 4.53a 0.15 S2 D3 L2 36.33a 8.17 15.33a 24.30b 0.15 S2 D4 L1 20.00a 10.40 14.00s 4.67a 0.11
- S2 D4 L2- 18.00s 8.50 14.67a 1.73a' O.08 S3 D1 L1 260.00be 1.60 46.00a 13.60a 0.11 S3 D1 L2 310.00c 1.50 40.00s 33.33b 0.17
-S3 D2 Ll. 306.67c 1.87 91.33d 11.00s 0.78 S3 D2 L2 206.67ab 2.20 61.67be 10.27a 0.56 S3 D3 L1 173.33a 2.83 50.33ab 3.33a 0.31 S3 D3 L2 .180.00s - 1.67 48.67ab 2.40a 0.35 S3.D4 L1 216.67ab- 3.60 64.00c 1.93a 0.45 S3 D4 L2 223.33ab 2.67 45.33a 1.07a 0.45 1
Signifigence of DSL
- NS *
- NS 95% LSD '58.16 14.91 13.98
~**PR'> F = 0.0001; *PR > F > 0.05; NS = Not significant.
~ Significance determined by analysis of variance.
2
- 95% LSD = 95% least significant difference.
Similar letters in any column indicate similarities between means in
-given group.as determined by 95% LSD.
-156-
Table 4-12. Summary of Results for November Data Between Reference and Test Locations pa/a Comparison' Iron Copper Zinc Aluminum Cadmium
.I Species ('J)
S1 (Amblema) 223.33b 1.12a 39.44b 3.08b 0.30b
, _ S2 (Corbicula). 19.78a 8.57c 16.00m 4.98c 0.09a S3 (Cyclonaias) 3 218.89b 2.84b 57.00c 2.01a 0.40c Signifigance of S ** ** ** ** **
95% LSD -25.75 0.94 4.86 1.03 0.09 II Location (L).
-L1-(Reference) 139.33a 3.21a 39.11b 5.54c 0.16a L2 (Upstream) 150.44ab 4.12a 31.89a 1.48a 0.29b L3 (Downstream) 3 172.22b 5.20b 41.44b 3.04b 0.33b Sigaifigance of L 95% LSD 25.75 0.94 4.86 1.03 0.09 . III~ S x L-Interaction S1 L1 180.00a 0.57 36.33a 5.07b 0.12 S1 L2 210.00m 1.20 35.67a 1.63a 0.35 S1 L3- '280.00b 1.60 46.33b 2.53a 0.43 S2 L1 21.33a 6.80 19.33a 8.53c 0.09 S2 L2 18.00a 8.50 14.67a 1.73a 0.08 S2 L3 20.00a 10.40 14.00s 4.67b 0.11 S3 L1 216.67a 2.27 61.67b 3.03b 0.29a S3 L2. 223.33a 2.67 45.33a 1.07a 0.45
- - S3 L3 216.67a 3.60 64.00b 1.93ab 0.45 I
Signifigance of S x L NS NS 95% LSD 44.59 8.42 1.79
**PR > F = 0.0001; *PR > F > 0.05; NS = Not significant.
Significance determined by analysis of variance. 2 95% LSD = 95% least significant difference. l Similar letters in any column indicate similarities between means in 1 given group as determined by 95% LSD. I t.' l' i
-157-
1 L.", GENO - OPE] f.Tue0LG a (04Tn0L
-KLif ET) STWSOLS EXPEIsastnTLL '
__-__ . GtCIGa0Ust0 $0ssC:IT3AT80N BROM ' COPPER 4 a gg-a a o O A 10-e
~ ~~ ~ ' ' **
- o O. 'e g 3,
---------_-_-- - - - - am pa.. .s.: ; __________________________,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
g s -
- g. E
_ _ _ _ _e_ _% _ _*_ aA.* _ _ _ _ _ .*-:C . ...........c., No : . 0 - t C.m.69..6. tai ____---___- -- + - _ - _ - _ A pn. .t. t 6 3
- ^ -
0 0 FES MAT SEPT NOW FSS MAT SEPT uGV l 2seC se-9- g A
- O-C3 l
T l . g - - - = _ _ _ - = + - _ _=__ =__ C.tet.r..s... foi ' 2 "'C"
"s- e e
a
*a -
e _-_____=____-___=___=.....:., a/* s.O-1.5 3-a.: e A
; i.o- - - - - - - - - A n i .. i .< s == = =
__. _ _ - - _ - _ _o_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ C....u.... a a n . e.. . . . . . < i .0
- 0. .
i-0.0 0 MAY SEPT NOV FEB M AY SEPT NOW FEB Figure 4-6. Concentrations of Iron, Copper, Zinc, and Nickel Found in Mollusks Whole-Body Tissues . Upstream (TRM 485.0) and Downstream (TRM 482.9) of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1983.
LEGEND OPEN SYMBOLS = CONTROL CLOSED SYMBOLS m EXPER. MENTAL
------- 2 S ACKOROUND CONCENTR AT,0N CADM,UM S-ALUMINUM 80- 4 -
I S0 - k 3 - e. i - 0 2 -
&. 40 9
A O 20 - 1 -
.78 .
0 h ^ :::-- t ,;;"..,*.".T:l C..... .....> 0
------ - w+ -. + -- - - p -C.
...... . . . i . i
- - 2 . . . ... . . . 3 , c.
FES MAY SEPT NOV FEB MAY SEPT NOy m003Meis(E) Figure 4-7. Concentrations of Aluminum and Cadmium Found in Mollusks Whole-Body Tissues Upstream (TRM Chickamauga 485.0) and Reservoir, Downstream (TRM 482.9) of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, 1983.
e i t A. DAILY TURBIDITY 11 0 - g g a g , , , 100 - 90 - 80 - 3 ,
$ 70 -
>t 60 -
50 - g 40 - O' ' ' I I ' ' O 30 60 90 120 15 0 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1983 B. DAILY TOTAL IRON I I I I I I i i i i i i 11 - . 10 - - - 9 - 8 - - E g7 - 6 - 7 g5 - - 4 - 3 - 2 - Of w n k h L. _ t di dt .;n k O 3d 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 1983 Figure 4-8 Daily Turbidity (NTU) and Total Iron (ppm) Concentrations , Measured Downstream of Chickamauga Reservoir During 1983
-160-
e 5.0 FISH
.g .
. Potential impacts to the fish community of Chickamauga Reservoir
<-- from' operation of SQN can include: (1) losses of planktonic-fish eggs and larvae entrained by the CCWS; (2) losses of juvenile and adult fish impinged on plant intake screens; and (3) effects of thermal or chemical discharges
. on relative abundance ' and distribution of fish in the reservoir. To identify effects of entrainment losses of fish eggs and larvae, periodic densities immediately adjacent to the intake skimmer wall, as well as densities passing the plant, were estimated. Entrainment estimates were then calcu-lated'as a percentage of eggs and larvae passing the plant. While total numbers removed from the reservoir can be estimated, total numbers produced
- in the. reservoir cannot-be estimated from these data. Therefore, these d
estimates represent the proportion of eggs-and larvae moving past SQN that I are removed. Because many more larvae are produced each year in Chickamauga Reservoir than actually pass SQN, entrainment percentages in this report are much higher than. if reported losses were based on total reservoir production. Weekly sampling of juvenile and adult fish impinged on intake L screens provided estimates of annual losses. Unlike entrainment losses, impingement losses are not expressed relative to numbers of fish adjacent i to the plant. Rather, these are related to annual standing stock estimates from cove rotenone samples. In this manner, impingement mortality is l . viewed as the quantity of reservoir fish standing stock (estimated from coves) removed by SQN each year. in. Gill nets are passive sampling devices that effectively sample
- ( only those fish that swim into them and become entangled. Gill nets do not
-161-
. sample all' fish present.where they are set but are selective as to size and species of fish captured. Some species (e.g., sunfish) may be abundant in an area while few are caught in sill nets; other species (e.g., sauger) are P
. quite susceptirle'to capture in gill nets. Therefore, gill net data are not used to estimate actual number of fish present in an area but are used a's. indicators of relative abundance, movement, and spatial distribution of species. Although gill netz are selective, we assume the greater the number of fish in or moving through an area, the larger the catch will be.
Cove rotenone. sampling is a quantitative, active sampling method. Fish in a cove are' isolated from the rest of the reservoir by a block net. Toxicant (rotenone).is then applied and all fish are collected, yielding quantitative estimates of fish populations in coves. These estimates are not equivalent to. standing stocks in the-entire reservoir, nor are they true population estimates because fish are not distributed evenly. However,- cove rotenone samples represent the best available quantitative estimates . I-of relative abundance:from year to year. As such, these data provide indications'of reproductive success, year-class strengths, and size of fish - t'
' stocks. Cove rotenone data. are useful in determining long-term trends of
- these' parameters for .several important species in a . reservoir.
i-Angling success 'is determined thrbugh creel surveys. These surveys are designed to yield ~information or fishing pressure and fish , harvest.' By dividine a reservoir into several compartments and sampling each compartment, comparisons can be made among areas. Information gained from creel estimates include number of fishing trips to a reservoir, numbers and biomass of each s cies of fish harvested, harvest rates, and season-ality of fishing pressure and harvest.
- 162-1
- 1, v r-- w -- , - - - - - - - , . , ,a,-- n.~,-- , + - - -- .-_-,,,-,-a,_m ,-,~n,..en-,-,--- n--.,,,.
5.1 FISH EGGS AND LARVAE Preoperational monitoring to determine seasonal abundance of fish 7* eggs and larvae near SQN was conducted from 1973 through 1977. Sample gear and procedures employed during that period were previously described by TVA (1978b). Gear and methods utilized in 1979 and during operational (1980 through 1983) monitoring are described below. 5.1.1 Materials and Methods Field--Day and night larval fish samples were collected biweekly from March through August at three transects: (1) plant-TRM 484.8 adjacent to the plant intake, (2) diffuser-TRM 482.7 immediately downstream of the
~ diffuser, and (3) Dallas Bay-TRM 479.4 three miles downstream from the diffuser (figure 5-1). Six samples were collected biweekly at the plant trensect (TRM 484.8) including one full-stratum (i.e., bottom to surface) sample along each shoreline and two stratified (i.e.. bottom to mid-depth ,
and mid-depth to surface) samples at each of two main channel locetions. Five samples were taken at each of the two downstream transects: one full-stratum tow near the overbank (left overbank-Dallas Bay, right overbank-diffuser transect), and two stratified tows at two locations in the channel. For each sample a half-meter plankton net (500 pm mesh) equipped with a TSK flowmeter was towed upstream for ten minutes at one meter per second. In 1980, a sample station was added directly in front of the intake skimmer wall opening to estimate plant entrainment of fich eggs and
,_ la rva e. Six, four-minute tows were made with the half-meter net during both day and night. The net was towed through the 9.0-13.0 m stratum (at full pool) closely corresponding with the skimmer wall opening.
-163-
Laboratory--Methods of preserving and processing samples are those described for preoperational monitoring (TVA, 1978b). All larval fish were identified to the lowest level possible (e.g., family, genus, species), which for most taxa was a function of specimen size and develop-mental stage. t Data Analyses--Densities of fish eggs and larvae are expressed as numoers per 1,000 m for comparisons among transects and years. Relative abundance of _ eggs and larvae by taxon were calculated for each year. Estimated entrainment of fish eggs and larvae at SQN in 1980 through 1983 was calculated by the following method: densities of eggs and larvae transported past the plant were estimated for each sample period by averaging densities (all stations) of eggs and larvae from the plant tran-sect (TRM 484,8) and multiplying by the corresponding 24-hour flow past the
- plar.t . Intake-skimmer wall samples were averaged to provide an overall intake density for each sample period. Percentage of transported ichthyo- , -fauna entrained by the plant was estimated by family and for total eggs and larvae by sample period from the formula:
E= 00 D1 Qg r O r. 3 where Dg = mean' density (N/1000 m ) of ,gg, or larvae in intake samples; D# = mean density (N/1000 m ) of eggs or larvae in reservoir (plant transect); Qg = plant intake water demand (m / day); Q = reservoir flow (m / day). O
-164-
_ - - ._ _ . -. . . - -- .-- .- ~ - ..-_.. .- -. . - .- _ _. 4
~
F l Intake water demand was establish'ed from known rating (708 m / min each) of i
- ,. plant circulating water pumps. Number of. pumps operated during each sample
~~
period was recorded. Table 5-1 lists-24-hour reservoir (Q )r and intake
- *? '(Qg ) f1'ws o (m x 10 ) aind. hydraulic plank entrainment- (Q /Q ) for each
.y g
sample period in 1980 through 1983.
'A revised method of estimating numbers of eggs and' larvae trans-
-ported past the'p' lant was implemented in 1983 utilizing' weighting factors
. base ( on percentage'of total reservoir flow in various compartments at the plint transect. Velocity measuren'ents indicated zero or negligible flow in a the art:a where the left shoreline . samplewas collected, therefore, data
" ~
from this station were excluded from transport estimates for 1983. Flow in the main river channel was divided into that portion from surface to seven meters (39-percent)'and from seven meters' to bottom (27 percent) corre-sponding to strata sampled at these stations. Percentage of flow in these G . fe two. compartments was 38.8 and 27.1, respectively. Sample densities from
,. 'the channel strata were weighted by.these percentages to determine trans-port of eggs and larvae in these compartments. - The remaining flow compart-
, ment represents'overbank habitat and contains 34 percent of total river
' flow. Sample densities from the right 'overbank station were weighted by
- this percentage to estimate total egg and larval transport in all areas s
7 other than the n.ai., channel. This method of estimating transport more
- accurately utilfies sa.aple data from compartments containing known pro-portions of river flow. Entrainment estimates forL1981 and 1982 referenced in this report were not based on the weighting' method and,.-therefore, are not exactly comparable to 1983 estimtes. A taole (table 5.8) is provided to show these estimates based on the weighted method.
4 ^: - e f w a
-155-
~
F m =
-&-- r---.p py e - ----y p w. we-er-W-.-e-r-,- -mw--ywywtp we3 -w+ e-ye- -ge * -w-N--p-eyem a a. e*,w - m--- m o ew -s -
r--=-s--
l 5.1.2 Results and Discussica
-Table 5-2 lists dates, number of samples, and mean temperature, 1980 through 1983. Table 5-3 lists scientific and common names for each taxon of fish eggs and larvae collected near SQN from 1979 through 1983.
Abundance Estimates of Esas--A total of 13,270 fish eggs was collected in 550 tow-net samples near SQN in 1983 compared to 16,521 from
~
491 samples in 1982. Freshwater drum eggs again constituted over 99 percent of the total; therefore,'all fish eggs are considered freshwater drum eggs in this report. Period of occurrence for freshwater drum eggs in 1983 samples extended'from May 5 through the last sample period on August 22. The
~
greatest density of- 1,898/1,000 m (day and night samples averaged) was
~
recorded on June 1 at the skimmer wall. Densities of freshwater drum eggs were highest at the skimmer wall ~ during June, after which densities were highest at the diffuser transect from July through August (figure 5-2). Seasonal densities (average of all samples) were highest at the skimmer wall (397/1,000 m ),'followed by the diffuser transect (341), and were.much > lower at both the plant (106) and Dallas Bay (85) transects. Average seasonal ' density for all transects was 203.3/1,000 m3 , Except for deep' stratus samples collected at the skimmer wall, densities of freshwater drum eggs were highest in the deep-channel stratum and lowest in samplee near the shoreline (full-stratum). These differences were more pronounced in night than in day samples (figure 5-3, 5-4). Abundance Estimates of Fish Larvae--Total number of fish larvae collected in 1983 was 121,269 for an average of 220 larvae per sample (550 samples). Both total number collected in 1982 (87,453) and average per ! samp' (178) were lower than in 1983. Table 5-4 contains total numbers of n
-166- - e % - , - - - . .-. . --. -_ .. ._- ------,__-,--..----.-_.-.~:.%-
, . c. -
. s. .-
-5.. ) a % T , fish eggs.and larvae collected in 1983, percentage composition, and period i c.. L of occurrence by taxon.
- Two: specimens of golden-shiner (Notemiaonus crisoleucas), a
. species not.previ5usly collected lu larval sampling near SQN, were identi-
' fled in 1983 r.amples. ~ Several species wh,ich were previously collected infrequently ~and,in' low numbers wete absent from 1983 samples. These included: Pimephales spp. ; 'Pyloitictis' olivari #; Morone mississippiensis; and Lepomis macrochirus (larvaljluegill were probably collected but only
~
identified.to genus). , , mb Clupeids coeprised-74.1 percent.of the total larval catch in
. s
.t
-1983; nearly. identical to the figure of 74.9, percent in 1982. Freshwater
~
' drum larvae were second in' abundance in 19il3 comp' rising 10.3 percent of ,
+ on ,
. totalacatch, . up. from caly 2.9 percentiin 1982. sudfish larvae were third s
4 a . W at:8.5 percent,;a decrease from 13.0. percent in 1982 when they were second
~
. +
, 3
. in 4 bur.d ance . -Iarval Morone (3.7 percent) and cyprinids (1.3 percent) were a '
. +
- .- the[only other,ta a compricing percent or more 'of the total catch (table 5-4).
Average density for all larvae'in 1983 was highest (2,278/1,000 m3).
>at'th'e Dallaa Eiy: transect;followed by 2,094/1,000 m atthe. plant transect.
<.: u. ' T
' Average density for all skimmer wall' samples was 1,552/1,000 m3 and the
~
loweetav'erag'edensity(1,310[1,000 m 3- ) was:st the dif Nser transect (table 5-5). g
~
b 3 i
~
The average 1 density at the skimmer wall in 1983 (I',552/1,000 m ) was over
'3 times the density (405/1,000'm3) observed'in 1982. Freshw.*.er drum
'w . 9f . )
larvae comprised 46,4 percent of all larvae collected in skimmer wall
,; s s
~ samples, liut only 12.4,- 3.9, and 3.7 percent et the diffuser, plant, and
- ~
7 [ .y. Dallas Bay tranraects, respectively. Skimmer. wall samples have consistently _ contailld greates't densitie:s of drum larvae since 1980.- TJensities (log 10
~
Y , -167-s
.t s
' ' -- y . , . , , .g, __ p -- . , y 7,----. g -9 y.. -
of freshwater drum larvae by sample date for each transect and the skimmer wall are plotted on figure 5-5. Patterns of distribution for freshwater drum larvae by station and stratum for both day and night r amples are shown
- in figures 5-6 and 5-7. During both day and night, densities were typically higher in the skimmer wall samples, followed by densities in the deep-channel stratum, shallow-channel stratum, and shoreline'(full-stratum) samples, respectively. This is the same pattern observed for freshwater drum eggs.
Seasonal peak density for total larvae (10,425/1,000 m ) at the Dallas.3ay transect was observed on May 18, 1983 (table 5-6). The peak larval density of 5,752 occurred on the same date at the diffuser transect. Peak density at the plant transect of 8,361 was recorded a month later on June.15. At the skimmer wall, the peak density was 6,074 on June 28, coinciding with the peak abundance of freshwater drum larvae (figure 5-5).
~
3 The peak density of 10,425/1,000 m at the Dallas Bay transect was 94 percent clupeids. Freshwater drum larvae comprised 70 percent of the peak density at the skimmer wall transect approximately one month later. Estimated Hydraulic Entrainment--During thirteer. sample periods -- in 1983, average hydraulic entrainment (proportion of reservoir flow en-trained by SQN) ranged from 2.9 to 9.6 percent with a seasonal mean of 5.7 (table 5-1). This is ,1,ower than the seasonal means for both 1982 -(12.6 percent), and 1981 (13.4 percent) because of higher river flow in 1983. Estimated Entrainment of Fish Esas--Utilizing the weighting factors based on compartmental flow measured at the plant transect, esti-mated transport of freshwater drum eggs past SQN in 1983 was 1.9 x 10'. Based on densities at the skimmer wall and plant intake volume, 21.8 percent - of.the eggr. transported were entrained. This estimate is lower than in ,
-168-b
1982 when 41.3 percent were entrained, and equal to the 21.8 percent esti-
~*
mated in 1981. The previously recorded trend of higher densities of freshwater drum eggs at the skimmer wall station than at the adjacent plant transect-continued, and seasonal density was highest at the skimmer wall (398.2/ 1,000'm ) in 1983 instead of the diffuser transect (342.6) as reported for 1980 through 1982 (TVA 1983, table 5-5). Seasonal density at the diffuser transect in 1982 (967/1,000 m 3) was much higher than in 1983, however,
- densities'at the diffuser transect in 1983 remained higher than at the plant transect (106/1,000 m ), indicating significant spawning by fresh-f water drum between the plant and diffuser transects where eggs and larvae-would not be subjecteu to entrainment.
Estimated Entrainment of Fish Larvae--Total transport of fish 10 larvae past SQN during 1983 was estimated to be 2.1 x 10 . Estimated percentage entrainment was 7.5 percent (table'5-7), as estimated from
* . skimmer wall sample densities and plant cooling water demand. Estimated entrainment was only 2.2 percent in 1982 although hydraulic entrainment was
. higher (12.6 percent) than in 1983 (7.4 percent). Estimated percentage entrainment by family and sample period for fish eggs and larvae in 1983 is i
given in table 5-7. Highest percentage entrainment was again recorded for 1
- Sciaenidae (freshwater drum larvae) at 58.2 percent, over two times the estimste in 1982 (25.6 percent). Next highest taxa (except for unidentifi-
! able fish larvae--32.9 percent) were Hiodontidae (mooneye) at 32.5 percent (total of 17 collected), Ictaluridae (catfish) at 9.4 percent, and Percidae l .: (primarily yellow perch) at 7.9 percent. Entrainment of Cyprinidae (minnows and carp) paralleled that of total larvae at 7.5 percent. Clupeid entrain-ment was 4.2 percent, an increase from 1.5 percent in 1982.
-169-I l -
To assess the effect of weighting the transect sample densities
- with corresponding compartmental flow percentages, entrainment was also estimated without weighting factors and including data from the left shore- -
i line station of the plant transect. Table 5-8 compares entrainment estimates resulting from both methods for 1981 through 1983 for each family and for total eggs and ' larvae. For 1983, entrainment of freshwater drum eggs was estimated to be 22.6 percent by the old method, compared to 21.8 percent with the weighting factors and omitting data from the left shoreline station. Entrainment estimates for total larvae were 4.7 percent using the' old method compared to 7.5 percent using the weighting factors. In 1982,
- entrainment estimates of eggs would have increased to 46.8 from 41.4 percent using the weighting factors; estimated larval entrainment was unchanged at 2.3 and 2.2 percent,.respectively. In 1981, use of the weighting factors decreased estimated entrainment of freshwater drum eggs from 6.7 to 6.2 percent, while for total larvae the estimate increased from 2.3 to 2.6 percent.
5.1.3 _ Summary and Conclusion . As' recommended in the previous report on aquatic environmental. conditions at SQN (TVA, 1983), weighting factors were calculated based on percentage of river flow in various compartments to more accurately estimate
- tr'ansport of eggs and larvae. In 1983, estimated entrainment of freshwater drum eggs was 21.8 and 22.6 percent with and without weighting factors,-
respectively-(table 5-8). Entrainment of total _ larvae, however, increased to-7.5 percent with the weighting factors from 4.7 without. This increase is a result of omitting larval densities collected at the productive left shoreline station from calculation of numbers transported past SQN, thereby . reducing transport and increasing entrainment percentage. In addition, the
-170-4
weighting factor of'34.2 percent for the right shoreline station and overbank
;* ' area to the left of the channel (which normally contain greater larval densities than the channel area) further reduces transport and increases 1*
'entrainment estimates.
Entrainment of freshwater drum eggs in 1983 (21.8 pcreent) de-creasedifrom 46.8 percent in 1982. Total larval entrainment, however, increased from 2.3 percent in 1982 to 7.5 in 1983. Entrainment of fresh-water drum larvae more than doubled in 1983 to 58.2 percent from 28.5 percent in'1982. Percentage entrainment of larvae was higher in 1983 for all families (table 5-8) than observed in 1982, although seasonal hydraulic entrainment (7.4 percent) was lower. . The above comparisons utilize entrain-
-ment estimates calculated with weighting factors for 1982 and 1983.
Seasonal densities (table 5-5) of freshwater drum eggs were higher in 1983 than in 1982 (TVA 1983, table 5-5) at all but the diffuser transect. For total larvae, seasonal densities were higher in 1983 at all
.' but the plant transect. Only one taxon, Pomoxis (crappie) larvae, showed lower seasonal densities at all transects in 1983. Leposis (sunfish) larvae had lower seasonal densities in 1983 at all except the Dallas Bay transect. Pomoxis and Leposis larvae were the only two important i
. taxa-with decreased seasonal densities at the skimmer wall in 1983. As would be expected from the entrainment estimate of 58.2 percent, seasonal
! densities of freshwater drum larvae were higher at all transects than in 1982. Estimated seasonal entrainmenc of more than one-half of the !.. freshwater drum larvae passing SQN would indicate a significant impact to [ the population of this species in Chickamauga Reservoir. Seasonal densities I
-171-
,_, -.m....---__.___r.. , . - . _ , _ . _ _ _ _ , ,, m ._m.-
at both transects downstreem of the plant, however, also increased in 1983 (table 5-5). Seasonal density of freshwater drum larvae at the diffuser 3
- transect (163.6/1,000 m ) was more than five times greater than in 1982 3
(31.5/1,000 m ), and more than twice as high at the Dallas Bay transect 3 (84.3/1,000 m ) in 1983. This indicates continuing occurrence of sub-stantial densities of freshwater-drum larvae below SQN in spite of the unusually high estimated percentage entrainment. Even though seasonal density of freshwater drum larvae at the 3 diffuser transect (163.6/1,000 m ). was two times greater than the seasonal density at the' plant transect (31.8/1,000 m3 ), the estimate of 58.2 percent entrainment of those transported past SQN is reason for concern. Veri-fica'tion of the assumption that densities of larvae (and eggs) collected in front of the skimmer wall accurately represent those entrained into the plant is required. To that end, a pilot study will be conducted in 1984 to determine what modifications should be incorporated in 1985 to verify or
. reject.the assumption that drum eggs and larvae collected in front of the
. skimmer wall are representative of those entrained by SQN. -i f
O 9
-172-
- + . L .i; .,
= - ,. .,e ':; g; ='
- c. a. ~ .. g -
jg
^
e ,. < c ., .
+ ...,
k / V
@ J 27 1 .
, s
,f.
'j l i' e]'
a y . + t'. q d.> 0 Table 5-1. Reservoir. (Q ) and Intake (Q ) Flow Volumes3(m x10/ day)'atSegnoyah'NuclearPlantior- '
)!
Each Larval fish Sample Perikd in 1980 through:1983 :
- 1980 1981 .
1982 1983 Sample Period Q, Qg Qg /Q, ' Q, . Q, - Qg /Q, ' Qr Ni 01/Or ~ 9r - Ni - 01/9r' .
'1' .133 2.1' 1.6 15 . 4[9 ' 32.4 '159 ~3.8' 2.4 821 .4.9 '6.0 2 228 . 0.1 . 04 - 14" 4.9 34.1 -- 6.1 7.6-
-. 79 J72 3.0 ' 4.1 '
3 .91 0.2 0.2 20' 3.0 14.5 29 6.1 20.6 155 6.1- ' 3. 9 - 4 90 0.2 0.2 ;2. 0 8.6 4.9 - '32.9
'23 15 78 6.1 7.8 -
5 68 . 2.1- 3.1 15 3.0 19.5' 24 - 6'.1 25.3- 63 ~ 6.1 . 9.6' 6 77L 2.1 2.7 45. 3.d 6.6 32 ' 3.0 9.2 92 6.1- 6.6-
- d. 7 68 0.1 0.1 76 3.9 6.1 '11.1 3.0 55 112 6.1- 5.4 U'
18 68 2.1'- 3.1 55 3.0 5.3 56 6.1. 10.9 95 6.1 6.4 9 81 2.1 2.6 74 3.0 3.9 67 6.1 9.1 79 6.1 ' 7. 7 10 ' 83 2.1 2.5 46 4.9 10.6 73 ' 6.1 8.3 83 6.1 7.2 11 72 2.1 2.9 59 '4.9 8.3 106 6.1 5.7 100 3.0 3.0 12 57 3.1 5.5 73 6.1 ~ 8. 3 101 3.0 3.0-13 58 2.2 3.7- 94 3.0 3.1
. Seasonal Mean 90 - 1.6 2.2 40 3.7 13.4 64 15 . 6 12.6 93 5.1 5.7 J
A . _ - - = - . . = - _ - - - I
i Tcble 5-2. Sample Period, Dates, Number of Samples, and Mean Temperatures for Larval Fish Samples Collected Near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant 1980-1983 , Simple Number Mean Water Pariod Date Samples Temperature ( C) 1980 1 3/12/80 44 7.9 2 3/25/80 44 9.9 3 4/07/80 44 13.5 4- 4/21/80 44 15.1 5 5/07/80 44 17.8 6 5/20/80 44 22.4 7 6/03/80 44 23.4 8 6/18/80 44 27.4 9 6/30/80 44 28.5
-10 7/14/80 44 30.4 11 7/29/80 44 28.8 12 8/11/80 44 28.6 13 8/27/80 44 29.1 Total 572 1981 1 4/06/81 44 16.0 2 4/13/81 44 17.7 3 5/04/81 44 19.4 4 5/12/81 44 19.4 .
5 5/26/81 44 20.7 6 6/01/81 36 22.1 7 6/16/81 41 26.7 . 8 7/01/81 44 26.3 9 7/15/81 44 27.5 10 .7/29/81 44 28.4 11 8/27/81 43 27.8 Total 472 1982 1 3/18/82 22 12.5 2 3/31/82 44 13.5 3 4/14/82 44 15.1 4 4/28/82 44 16.9 5 5/12/82 44 21.3 6' 5/26/82 29 21.6 7 6/09/82 44 24.2 8 6/23/82 44 26.9 9 7/06/82 44 29.7 10 7/20/82 44 29.3 11 8/03/82 44 28.5 _ 12 8/17/82 _44 27.4 Total 491
-174-
, . ~ . ~ ,, -, _y. , - - - - , - - - - .
Table 5-2. (Continued)
- Sample Number Mean Water Period Date Samples Temperature ( C) 1983 1 3/09/83 44 14.4 2 3/22/83 44 11.9 3 4/06/83 44 12.5 4- 4/20/83 22 14.0 5- -5/05/83 44 16.7 6 5/18/83- 44 19.1 7 6/01/83 44 21.8 8 6/15/83 44 23.9 9 6/28/83 44 28.1 10 7/13/83 44 28.2 11 7/27/83 44 26.7 12 8/10/83 44 27.9 13 8/22/83 44 - 29.1 Total 550 6
a b ' e
-175-
Table 5-3. List of Scientific and Common Names for Fish Egg and Larval Taxa Collected in Chickamauga Reservoir Near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in 1979 through 1983 Taxon Common Name Eggs Unidentifiable fish eggs Fish eggs Cyprinus carpio eggs Carp eggs Aplodinotus arunniens eggs Freshwater drum eggs Larvae . , Unidentifiable fish larvae Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula Paddlefish Clupeidae Unidentifiable clupeids Unidentifiable herrings and shad Alosa chrysochloris Skipjack herring Dorosoma sp. Mixed shad Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Dorosoma petenense Threadfin shad Hiodontidae Hiodon teraisus Mooneye Cyprinidae Unidentifiable cyprinids Unidentifiable minnows and carps Cyprinus carpio Carp . Hybopsis storeriana Silver chub Notemisonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis sp. Unidentifiable shiners . Notropis atherinoides Emerald shiner Notropis buchanani Ghost shiner Notropis volucellus Mimic shiner Pimephales sp. Unidentifiable minnow Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow Pimephales vigilax Bullhead minnow Catostomidae Unidentifiable catostomids Unidentifiable suckers Ictiobinae Unidentifiable buffalo and carpsuckers Ictiobus sp. Unidentifiable buffalo Ictaturidae Ictalurus furcatus Blue catfish Ictalurus punctatus Channel catfish Pylodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Atherinidae Labidesthes siccuius, Brook silverside Perciethyidae . Morone sp. Unidentifiable temperate bass
-176-
Table 5-3. (Continued)
; Taxon Common Name Morone (not saxatilis) Unidentifiable temperate , bass (not striped bass)
Morone chrysops White bass Morone mississippiensis Yellow bass Centrarchidae Unidentifiable centrarchids Unidentifiable sunfish, crappie or black bass Leposis or Pomoxis Unidentifiable sunfish or crappie Leposis sp. Unidentifiable sunfish Leposis macrochirus Bluegill Leposis microlophus Redear sunfish Micropterus (not dolomieui) Black bass (not smallmouth bass) Pomo.xis sp. Unidentifiable crappie Pomoxis annularis White crappie Percidae Unidentifiable percid (not Unidentifiable perch (not Stizostedion sp.) Stizostedion) Unidentifiable darter Unidentifiable darter Perca flavescens Yellow perch Stizostedion sp. Unidentifiable sauger or walleye e' Stizostedion canadense Sauger Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum 3 Usually mutilated. c e
-177-
LT:bla 5-4. List of Taxa, Total Number Collected, and Period of Occurrence of Fish Eggs I and Larvae Collected at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, 1983 Total Percent Occurence by Sample Period , Taxon Collected Composition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . 1 l Unid:ntifiable fish eggs 56 0.42 + + + + + + Ap1tdinotus grunniens eggs 13,214 99.38 + + + + + + + + + 1 Total 13,270 100.00 - Ur.idIntifiable fish larvae 653 0.54 + + + + + + + + + Clupsidae 89,887 + + + + + + + + + + 74.1) Aleco chrysochloris ~3 T + Dorcroma sp. 1 T + Dor coma cepedianum 20 0.02 + + + Dor: coma petenense 375 0.31 + + + + + .Hird n tergisus 17 0.01 + + Cypricidae 1,432 1.18 + + + + + + + + + .Cyprinus carpio. 106 0.09 + + + + + + + N:temigonus crysoleucas 2 T + Nstr:pis sp. 239 0.20 + + + + + N ttspis atherinoides 31 0.03 + + + Nitr:pis volucellus 47 0.04 + + Ictitbinae 203 0.17 + + + + + .Ictitbus'sp. 1 T + Ictalurus furcatus 23 0.02 + + + Ictolurus punctatus 37 0.03 + + + +
- Labidssthes sicculus 11 0.01 + + +
Mor:n2 sp. 194 0.16 + + + + + + .Mor:n) chrysops 1 T + Mor:n2 (not saxatilis) 4,342 3.58 + + + + + + + * -Lepomis or Pomoxis 15 0.01 + + + Lepomis sp. . 10,370 8.55 + + + + + + + + + Micrrpterus (not dolomieui) 2 T + + Pomoxis sp. 734 0.61 + + + + + +
~Pomoxis annularis 1 T +
Parcidae 2 T. + Unid:ntifiable darter 2 T + + P;rco flavescens 52 0.04 + + + + 'Stizc:tedion canadense 3 -T + + + -Aplodinotus grunniens 12,463 10.28 + + + + + + + + Total 121,269 100.00
*f = Less than 0.01 percent composition 9
-178-
Table 5-5. Seasonal (Average) Densities (No./1,000 m ) for Dominant Taxa of Fish Larvae and Eggs Collected at Transects Near
-. Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, 1983 Transect Dallas Skimmer Taxon Bay Diffuser Plant Wall Shad (Clupeidae) 1,841.1 964.0 1,645.6 681.9 Sunfish-(Lepomis) 194.5 79.3 246.8 42.6 White, Yellow Bass (Morone) 82.2 53.6 77.2 57.2 Crappie (Pomotis) 16.8 9.3 11.76 3.3 Catfish (Ictalurus) 0.6 0.9 0.9 1.5 Freshwater drum larvae (A. arunniens) 84.3 163.6 81.8 719.5 Total larvae 2,278.5 1,310.5 2,095.0 1,552.2 Freshwater drum eggs 85.4 340.9 105.7 397.0
,o e
-179-
Table 5-6. Peak Larval Density, Sample Date and Period, and Mean Water Temperature Recorded for each Transect Sampled Near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, in 1980 through 1983 ,
- t Peak Mean .
Larval Sample Water Transect Density Date Period Temp.( C) 1980 Dallas Bay- 5,546 June 18 8 27.4 Diffuser 4,406 June 18 8 27.4-Plant 8,846 June 18 8 27.4 Skimmer wall, , 2,110 June 30 9 28.5 1981 Dallas Bay 3,961 June 16 7 26.7 Diffuser- 6,026 June 1 6 22.1 Plant 5,955 May 4 3 19.4 Skimmer wall 2,371 July 1 8 26.3 1982 Dallas Bay ~8,710 May 12 5 21.3 Diffuser 4,145 May 26 6 21.6 Plant 16,002 May 12 5 21.3 Skimmer Wall 1,347 June 9 7 24.2 1983
- Dallas Bay 10,425 May 18 6 19.1 Diffuser 5,752 May 18' 6 19.1 Plant 8,361 June 15 8 23.9 Skimmer Wall 6,074 June 28 9 28.1 s
Number per 1000 m . T Average of all stations and depths during day and night samples, s
# i D
-180-r e -_ y , , , _ _ , _ --_ ~ , . . . - _
c O . eb N 4 N N N en N N N e. N 4 M 40 4 4 4 w g > U.S N. en. O. M. e. N. C &4 e a N 4 N N 4 m. to M N eD M N N M M
.e.e en
{ ^' " 2. O M O O O N O O O a O M te .M a g = O. en. O. O. O. . m. O. O. O. O. e. I e o M C O O O O O O ~ O ~ m W 3 m O 00 in N O 4 O O O N O 4 N 4 @ A' e O. N. N. O. . O. O. O. N. O. er.t g O m N 4 O e0 - O O O 4 O N Pi 4 ** N N O
-3 c' O N 00 en O M O O O e O 'e t *
- m. e O. a. N. M. O. a. O. . O. O. en. O. N.
O N
- N O @ O O O N O @
>s W
g O .n M O O N O e O N O N C 00 40 80
> ew O. N. '
O. M. O. N. CO. O. a. 6 O N O N O in O - N O O in
" " 4 N
}
% O @ N en O O 4 eo @ O d e @ M" N.
g O. N. . co. O. O. m. ao. e. O. 80 0 N @ N O - e0. O e0 4 @ O N e 7 4 N == 40 o ee m Isa h O 4 N a O a O O e ao O M W 00 n A. tr.l en. N. a. O. @. O. O. e. in. O. M. e m e0 4 N O N O O N - O 4 se t N 00 N Cae "n
%e 6 O e GO 4 & O O O N e0 O 4 0 g W a0 *4 @ 4 @ 4 **
m C. M. m. O. . O. . 9 O O N a N e0 O 4. in O @ N O N re 4 N a b
& O en O N - O M O O 80 == 0 W Ae @
O. en. en. . * . O. M. O. O. M. in. O. M. m G O 4 @ M O
- O O M 4 O 4 e no O.
E g o O O O O O O O M e o O to in e6 4 O. O. O. N. O. O. O. O. O. O. 9 O O O @ O O O O N 4 O O C m 5 4
>M O O O O O O O O N O == 0 m e0 4 e O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. M. o. en. O.
E~ O O O O O O O O N O N O e in.
- N" M be N O O ' O O O O O O O O M O A M Q a . O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. N. O.
# e O O O O O O O O O O @ O C 3 es 3
4 Q O O O O O O O O O O O a N I gx O. O. O. C. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. - no ao O O O O O O O O O O O O a3 OO lal b a O O O O O O O O O O O O Ga
- es O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O.
4M O O O O O O O O O O O O e e0 Ce GH W G be a g
&@ e >
b et k A ne e 9 W W se b h. 9 g & A eE .e d
- we we g tee w.es
& O e he b & W sal toe ** e ** g &
D 40 D L M *S e et g & e 6 .m T 5
> we
%e .
t
- g 4 'J g >i = t
.= tee t 4 g we 9 4 4 m e -es se *3 ce 9 === 9 8 we & W @ T mn E a we J % e =* O M A M g n g C C C we O C W 3 W g 9 C 6 Eau G W t O we e m
- be ** O w T 4 9 &.
A 9 he o e W 9 W g 4 we we we 3 0 Q. W & to C b *
') g O W d P* we >t g W % % @ W te R M D U lC U U ** A U A in
-181-
Table 5-8. Seasonal- Percentage Entrainment of Fish Larvae and
-Eggs at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant 1981 Through 1983 Calculated With and Without Compartmental Flow Weighting Factors , -~
Without Weighting With Weighting Factors Factors Family 1981 1982 1983 1981 1982 1983 7 Sciaenidae eggs 6.7 41.4- 22.6 6.2 46.8 21.8 Unidentifiable fish larvae 7.4 7.7 36.7 10.5 11.5 32.9 Clupeidae 2.1 1.5 2.7 2.6 1.4 4.2
-Hiodontidae 4.0 0.0 52.2 3.3 0.0 32.5 Cyprinidae 4.3 4.2 5.9 3.8 3.7 7.5
'Catostomidae 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 4.6 Ictaluridae 8.4 7.7 9.1 9.8 6.8 9.4 Percichthyidae 1.7 2.7 4.8 2.4 2.7 5.1 Centrarchidae 1.0 1.8 1.1 1.1 2.7 3.4 Percidae 3.6 1.6 10.7 3.8 3.6 7.9 -
Scimenidae 5.5 25.6 57.8 5.1 28.5 58.2 Total ' la rvae 2.3 2.2 4.7 2.6 2.3 7.5 L
-182-
~ 3 l p so t t c en
. so ni
. at
.n ra
** Tl e
hR s i n Fi l t ac ve rs n an La t io r ct fT ea st o
" nS a a n rl Tl a on ii
~ nW t th at f lare c t ci da Pmes oW G m n L
., s ik ar gn S T no e r ii t m a
e wt c s oa e n9 u ht
/
f s i. f SS . n . i t a i D ren f r m ,f T L m il a y opl a vmP B ra eS r a a s s a l el e R al p l a uc D ad u
. 4 gin uv aih md a d.#.
any kI o c id q u hne
. CaS
;p m 1
t , , 5
- e r
u g
. ' i s F
.s e
c e 5y
APLODINOTUS GRUNNIENS EGGS 10,000 - / 's
/
j
,_,,,,,,,_-.,,\N ,g,,,,........ ,, ,
/ ~~_,~~~ _ y "a
/'e % \
100 - / o , s\s%
% p'p% N g o-
- N a
,a
/ 's'% s %s
/
%g' f 5 /
5 10 - ,'
, %'% s
/
a / 0 / 1 0= / w l
? o E
1- ,,/ 0-i- 5/5 5/18 6/1 6/15 6/28 7/13 7/27 8/10 8/22 SAMPLE DATE i DALL BAY TRANSECT ------- DIFFUSER TRANSECT
----- PLANT TRANSECT ---
SKIMMER WALL Figure 5-2. Densities of Freshwater Drum Eggs by Sample Date Collected at Three Transects and the Skimmer Wall Near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in 1983. l [
APLODINOTUS GRU'NNIENS EGGS 10,000_ 1,000_
- -%s N 8 ['s N
- o. N O
4',' p' -b.s,N.- - '
~
s s N f 4 ~ % s z 100- / .'~~.N ... N-T~~-'s' % N t
& /
s a / %- 5 2 s' R~ . ,/-
's s'A . . ~
Y h 10- p'
/
/
1-i- .., 5/5 5/18 6/1 6/15 6/28 7/13 7/27 8/10 8/22 i SAMPLE DATE CHANNEL DEEP STRATUM ------- SHORELINE FULL STRATUM CHANNEL SHALLOW STRATUM --- SKIMMER WALL Figure 5-3. Densities of Freshwater Drum Eggs by Sample Date Collected in Day Samples from Three Reservoir Strata (Three Transects Combined) and the Skimmer Wall at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in 1983. i
APLODINOTUS GRUNNIENS EGGS 10,000-
/~~~~ ~~~
^
1,000-
/ \
l "a 7 g / , ~~,,
- o. -
,g,----------.___~_~---$---------
l c ,.- -~~
-x_ N ,'
100- /,T'
/ \, %
s,/ m % a" K i . '\ l 5 m E i\ l e 10- /
' a ,
f ',\ i / , s
-----s'~ ~
i l
's.--------------------
5/5 5/18 6/1 6/15 6/28 7/13 7/27 8/10 8/22 SAMPLE DATE CHANNEL DEEP STRATUM ------- SHORELINE FULL STRATLH
----- CHANNEL SIIALLOW STRATUM --- SKIlt!ER WALL Figure 5-4. Densities of Freshwater Drum Eggs by Sample Date Collected in Night Samples from Three Reservoir Strata (Three Transects Combined) and the Skimmer Wall at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in 1983. . . . . . e
, , . , ,. e.
APLODINOTUS GRUNNIENS LARVAE 10,000 -
/ - 5,110/1,000 m3
- \
/
'/ \
\
_ \
"a / \
o 1,000 - / \ 8 - / / \
/ -
,' N s / N 5
5 jf
/ l/ -_
' ,' - N N
/ ^.- \
~~, %s , \
o / ,; s N 2 /,I / 's ~ \/
's
/j ,/
j 100 - \
// ,
, j
;;; 3 s
? ','- * * ', ,/ -
,,r/J s
__~ <
/
/
-l 10 - / 5/18 6/1 6/15 6/28 7/13 7/27 8/10 8/22 i SAMPLE DATE DALL BAY TRANSECT ~~~~~-- DIFFUSER TRANSECT
----- PLANT TRANSECT --- SKIMMER WALL
- Figure 5-5. Densities of Freshwater Drum Larvae by Sample Date Collected at Three Transects and the Skimmer Wall Near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in 1983.
APLODINOTUS GRUNNIENS 10,000 - l l l
/- ' ~ -~~~ m
/ \
m
^ N l
g 1,000 - / N i o / ,A N o s s l s
/ 's % %s s s/ N t
s m / ,- ' N f s
/ ._-- ,-< ~... ~,, ,~~..'s%. _
100_ . . . ,] -, g 3 , s
,e.
l a s **__ - ->s?s
~~
~
3 4V l ' ?'~ ', l , E y 8
/ ,
's, T $ 10- ,'
N,
,- ~, ~
^%
1- ,- .. . .. .. .,. .,. . 5/5 5/18 6/1 6/15 6/28 7/13 7/27 8/10 8/22 SAMPLE DATE l CHANNEL DEEP STRATUM ------- SHORELINE FULL STRATUM
----- CHANNEL SHALLOW STRATUM --- SKIMMER WALL Figure 5-6. Densities of Freshwater Drum Larvae by Sample Date Collected in Day Samples from Three Reservoir Strata (Three Transects Combined) and the Skimmer Wall at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in 1983.
' - - - , ' - - - - - . --- .. _, - ._ o APLODINOTUS GRUNNIENS 10,000-3
/r\- 7,890/1,000 m
/ \ -
/
/ \
\
E 1,000-E / \ e / N o N
/ fs N
/ e' , -
's 7 / < ' -% - ,
g. N , "'~~ N N S 100 - !',/,O'!, s- A'%'t',: - s N m
.S
,.-p / <R -
, u 'R s 5; % '
? a 5 10 - '
/
\'C T' - ,
1 1-5/5 .,.. 5/18 6/1 6/15 6/28 7/13 7/27 8/10 8/22 SAMPLE DATE CHANNEL DEEP STRATUM
------- SHORELINE FULL STRATUM
----- CHANNEL SHALLOW STRATUM --- SKIMMER WALL Figure 5-7. Densities of Freshwater Drum Larvae by Sample Date Collected in Night Samples from Three Reservoir Strata (Three Transects Combined) and the Skimmer Wall at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in 1983.
i' 5.2 JUVENILE AND ADULT FISH a 5.2.1 Impingement This section presents the results of a third year of fish impinge-ment monitoring at SQN. Results are compared with standing stocks of Chickamauga~ Reservoir, impingement estimates from previous years, and impinge-ment estimates from other plants. Fifty weekly samples were taken between January 3'and December 19, 1983. 4 Materials and Methods
- To start a sample at each pumping station (ERCW and CCW), the six CCW screens and four ERCW screens were rotated and sprayed simultaneously to remove all fish and debris. Screens were then left stationary for 24 hours.
To end th wample, each screen in use during the 24-hour period was indivi-
,. dually rotated and sprayed to remove impinged fish. Thesa fish were col-lected from the screen wash water as the water passed through a steel mesh basket at the end of the screen wash sluice pipe. Impinged fish were.identi-fled to species and separated into 25 mm length classes. Humber and total weight of fish in each length class were recorded and later entered into the computer. Estimates of monthly and annual total impingement were made by multiplying average number of fish impinged per sample by number of days in
- each month and year.
A ' number of measures were taken this year to increase our con-fidence in the data. These included: (1) improving conditions at the fish collection facility (a drainage ditch carrying screen wash water to the ., reservoir was excavated to prevented water from standing in the impingement
-190-
U collection facility), (2) improving screen wash and count scheduling com-munication with SQN personnel, and (3) implementing special counting proce-dures to compare numbers of impinged fish on the screen panel trays with ' number collected at the end of the very long screen wash sluice pipe. Numbers of impinged fish have been consistently and unexplainably low at SQN. The screen vs end-of pipe comparisons were done to learn if all impinged fish were reaching the fish collection facility. Results and Discussion Fif ty samples yielded only 2,049 fish,1,798 from the CCW screens and 251 from the ERCW screens (table 5-9). As mentioned in previous reports, e few fish impinged at the ERCW intake is not surprising. This intake con-3 tributes only 0.7 percent (0.5 m /s) of total pumping capacity. Further, it is a deep shoreline intake, whereas the CCW intake is situated at the end of a large embayment/ channel intake. Total estimated impingement of 15,000 fish in 1983 was down from 70,000 in 1981 and 41,000 in 1982 (table 5-10 and figure 5-8), although
- average number of CCW screens in operation during 1983 sampling was greater than in previous years (figure 5-8). For most species, numbers impinged were similar to previous years. Most species (26 of 31) were impinged at a rate of less than 1 fish per day. Gizzard shad, threadfin shad, bluegill, and freshwater drum were the species most impinged in 1983. However, none of these species was impinged in numbers sufficient to impact Chickamauga Reservoir populations. This conclusion is supported by estimates made of equivalent standing stock in Chickamauga Reservoir removed by impingement (table 5-11). These values ranged from < 0.01 percent for shad to .
0.01 percent for bluegill to 0.06 percent for freshwater drum. None nf the
-191-
species impinged is listed as threatened or endangered or of special concern 3 by the State of Tennessee or. the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Comparison counts between fish observed on the traveling screen panel ledges (as they emerged from the water during screen washing) and those collected in the end-of pipe basket were done for 10 weeks from mid-October to mid-December. Total number of fish counted on the screen panels was from 1.1 to 2.4 times higher than in the collection basket on 9 of 10 days. For all ten tests,- total number of fish collected at the end-of pipe ; facility was $35 fish compared to 758 observed on the traveling screen panels. _Thus, about 30 percent of the impinged fish were not accounted for in the collections. While the percentage of fish unaccounted for is large, ; addition of 30 percent more fish to total estimated numbers impinged in 1983 and previous years would still result in low numbers impinged and would not constitute an adverse impact. 4 14 -G
-192-
, q ,-p.- _. - _m- _ -_ _ _ .y - 3_,.,, -.- . m.- g
7' Q _
.- _ c-
. 'l
. ,,/ ,
-n . 'o . .
Ti:bli S-9. Numbers ,of Fish Impinged at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Between January 3,
- g. 198,3 :and December 19, 1983cin 50 Weekly Samples of 24-hour Duration '
@, A CCW ERCW Percentage Common Name Intake Intake Total Composition Lamprey .
0 5 5 0.2 , t ~ Unidentified'shed -- 25 0 25 1.2
,gw .
_ Skipjack herring _- 37 0 37 1.8
' M "
' Gizzard shad' 309 15 324 15.8
'Threadfin shad '
630- 12 642 31.3 $. 'Hooneye , 2 0 2 0.1 C Carp 1 0 1 0.0 4, Golden shiner . 2' O 2 0.1 Emerald shiner 3, 0 3 0.1 Himic shiner 2 0 2 0.1 Bluntnose minnow 5 0 5 0.2 a,- Bullhead minnow 33 0 33 1.6 k 'h Golden redhorse Blue catfish 18 1 0 2 1 20 0.0 1.0 Yellow bullhead 1 0 1 0.0
' Channel catfish ,53 0 53 2.6
. Flathead catfish .2 1 3 0.1 White bass 13 0 13 0.6
' Yellow bass 48 0 -48 2.3
% rmouth- 2 .3 5 0.2
,7
-s. Redbreast sunfish 1 0 1 0.0 Green sunfish 3 0 3' O.1 3 J31uegill 152 206 358 17.5 -
3 Longear sunfish I ~ ' ~ 10 s 1 0.0 Redear sunfish 10 0 10 0.5 Spotted bass 3 0 3 0.1 .. Largemouth bass 3 1 4 0.2
-White crappie ..- 19 . 0 19 0.9 Yellow perch 25 1 26 1.3
'Logperch ( ' O 2 2 0.1 Sauger 1 0 1 0.0 i Freshwater drum 39,3, 3 396 19.3 JTotal- 1,798 251 2,049
.; -, m ->
b '. \ Three~are actual numbers impinged and have not been increased by 30 percent.
', \
V, 1
- f. ,
\ ? ,'n ,
i s l' 6 t
; g e
w I 393 u
\
y y - - - - - . _.
-w %y ,a - - - . -~ r , . , .---w.
3 -,, - - . .,w .
Table 5-10 Estimated Total Impingement of Fishes at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Common Name 1981 1982 1983 Fish 0
- 7 0 Lamprey 0 0 37 Chestnut lamprey 29 0 0 Unidentified shad 0 0 183 Skipjack herring 73 149 270 Gizzard shad 453 9,967 2,365 Threadfin shed 56,582 15,829 4,687 Mooneye 37 60 15 Minnow, carp 0 7 0
. Carp 0 0 7 Silver chub 102 30 0 River chub 7 0 0
. Golden shiner- 153 15 15 Emerald shiner 22 7 22 Himic shiner 0 0 15 Bluntnose minnow 22 238 37 Bullhead minnow 110 350 241 Spotted sucker 7 0 0 Golden redhorse 0 0 7 Blue catfish 102 127 146 Black bullhead 0 7 0 Yellow bullhead 7 7 7
.- Channel catfish 387 179 387 Flathead catfish 58 97 22 Mosquitofish 7 0 0
., White bass 51 782 95 Yellow bass '212 . 1,862 350 Unidentified sunfish 0 37 0 Warmouth 153 45 37 Redbreast sunfish 51 97 7 Green sunfish 2,759 74 22 Bluegill 4,672 3,553 2,613 Longear sunfish 110 0 7 Redear sunfish 256 216 73 Spotted bass 117 670 22 Largemouth bass 44 67 29 White crappie 190 97 139 Yellow perch 445 387 190 Logperch 22 268 15 Saugar 22 7 7
, Freshwater drum 2,759 5,706 2,891 Total 70,022 40,944 14,960
.o q
-194-
. . 4 ;,
~ ,
T;ble 5-11. Estimated Percentage.of Stan ing Stock and Number of Hectares of
. Standing Stock Removed _from Chickamauga Reservoir by 12 Months
,Impinsement at Sequoyat Nucler.r Plant, 1983' e Percentage of No. of ha Standing Stock of Standing 1983 Mean - (Numbers) Stock (Numbers) *~
Standing Irspinged . x Removed by l Common Name Stock'(No./ha) Durin2 1933 Impinsement i
+
'4 Lamprey S 'O .
s Unidentified shad -0 . . Skipjaek; herring -- 18. 7 0.10 14 Gizzard shad 7 3,975.3' <0.01- <1 Threadsin shad- 8,838.3 <0.01 <1 Mxneye 0 . . C;ntral.stoneroller. 0.5 . . Corp. ,., 13.8 <0. 01. <1 Golden shiner .- 518.2 <0.01 <1 Emerald. shiner 1,037.3 <0.31 <1
-Mimic shiner , ,
- 0. . .
Bluntnose minnow 'f 0 . .
' Bullhead minnow '684.9 <0.01 <1 Golden redhorse 0.4 0.11 16 Blue catfish 0 . .
Y2110w bptthead- , 29.3 <0.01 <1 Channel. catfish , 11.2- ' 0.24 34 Flathead catfish ,
, io . 5 ' ' O.31 45
- White baso 1.5 x 0.45 65 .
Yallow bass 124.8 0.02 3
. W;rmouth 583.7 <0.01 <1 Redbr, east sunfish 183.2 <0.01 <1 .
Green sunfish /28.3 0.01 <1
~ Bluegill ,.
J 2,787.1 0.01 <1
. Longear sunfish ' 32.8 <0.01 -<1
<- R: dear sunfish'- 1,69'8.0 <0.01 - <1 Spotted bass- 159.0 <0.01 <1 Largemouth bass - 361.7- <0.01 -
<1
' White crappis -115.6L , 0.01 1
-Yallow perch- 105.1 0.01 2 Logperch 126.2 <0.01 <1 S:uger 0 .
Freshwater detun 312.4 0.06 9 o- . Denotes impinged species got collected in cove rotenone samples. L e
'195-M+6
-b u eg yw-- ---. - % - - --
41X10 3 L F 10,000 - - 9000 - b 8000 - b 2, 7000 - . g h6000 F z-Z 5000 - O 3 4000- - 2l w1 m L a ' g i <H 3000 - , es 3 -6ogum 4 5MO 2 2000 '4\ % V \/fs] / -
\so /
/
\\ /
r s' \ '
\#
4p
& y gl \N -
5 ,y w 1000- N g - 2gy 0 'i' 'l' ' ' ' ' '~ Olx M J F M AM J J A S O N D J F M A MJ J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O ND 1981 1982 1983 Figure 5-8. Estimated Total Number of Fish Impinged Each Month at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant ERCW and CCW Intake Pumping Stations and Mean Number of CCW Screens in Operation During Sample Days.
t 5.2.2 Gill Net Materials and Methods Preoperational gill net sampling at 3 stations was conducted quarterly-from 1971 through early 1978 (TVA, 1978b). Gill net sampling for operational monitoring began in Ap~ril 1980, and data collected through-October 1982 were included in the second annual operational monitoring report (TVA, 1983)'. This report incorporates data from preoperational sampling and operational sampling through October 1983. Dates of opera-tional. gill net sampling at each station are in table 5-12. _ Field Procedures--Ten gill nets were set perpendicular to the shoreline at each of three stations. Nets were set four consecutive nights in each quarter (total of 120 net nights per quarter) from April 1980 through October 1983. Each net (30.48 m x 2.44 m, 38 mm) was fished ap-proximately 24 hours before being retrieved. All nets were cleared of
, debris, aquatic macrophytes, etc., before being reset. Nets' clogged with debris were useful only for qualitative information (e.g., species pre-sence).
Sample 1 Areas--Station 1 (TRM 473.0) was located along the right shoreline of the reservoir in an overbank area approximately 18 km (11 mi) downstream of the plant discharge diffuser (figure 5-9). Water velocity is usually low in this area. Gently sloping clay-silt substrate was pre-dominant near the upstream end of the station with clay and rock in the downstream portion. Shoreline vegetation was composed primarily of trees
,. and shrubs along a steep slope. Relatively few aquatic plants were present 4
during preoperational studies; however, aquatic macrophyte infestation has -. - accome. rather heavy near= the water's edge since preoperational monitcring was conducted. Nets were set in depths of 2 to 5 m at this site.
-197-
- At station 2 (TRM 483.6) immediately downstream of the SQN diffuser, five gill nets were fished along the right bank on the channel side of a
- partially submerged island. This area was characterized by gently sloping clay-silt substrate, slow currents, and a few scattered stumps. Riparian vegetation along the upstreas portion of the island was shrubs, small trees, and grass. Emergent aquatic vegetation was the dominant cover near the downstream end. Depths.in this area ranged from 1.5 to 2.5 m. The remaining five gill net sites at station 2 were on the left bank. Shore-line in this area ranged from small rocky bluffs upstream to gently sloping
' overbank area downstream; substrate was predominantly smooth clay, although numerous rocks and submerged trees were present'near the upstream end.
Shoreline vegetation was primarily shrubs and small trees rooted in shallow water. Aquatic macrophytes were present near shore and appeared to have increased in density since preoperational monitoring was completed. Water velocity was relatively low near the lower end of the station but greater in the upstream portion. Nets were set at depths of.3 to 10 m. At station 3 (TRM 495.0), approximately 18 km (11 mi) upstream of - the SQN discharge,~ sample sites were between the right bank and a submerged island. The area was characterized by clay-silt substrate, slow current, and submerged stumps near the upstream end of the station. Small trees and shrubs were the primary riparian vegetation, and shoreline areas ranged from rock bluffs (deenstream) to a gently sloping bank at the upstream end of the. station. Nets were set at depths of 1 to 4.5 m. Data Analysis--Numbers _of each fish species caught per gill net night'(c/f), species percent composition and occurrence, seasonal abundance,
-and spatial and temporal relative abundance were determined. Important specien were determined according to the following criteria:
-198-
.u
- 1. Must occur in 50 percent or more of all operational monitoring samples, and
- 2. Must comprise at least 1 percent of the total number of fish collected.during operational monitoring.
Temporal Comparisons--Temporal trends from 1971 through 1983 were determined from a linear regression model with time as the independent
. variable and c/f as the dependent variable for each season. Twelve tests (4 quarters x 3 stations) were conducted for each species which qualified as important in operational gill net sampling.
Results and Discussion Species Occurrence--Operational monitoring gill net samples (1980 through 1983) contained a total of 39 fish species (10 families) plus one hybrid (table 5-13). All species collected in 1983 have been collected a during the first 3 years of operational monitoring. Nine species (chestnut lamprey, paddlefish, brown trout, river carpsucker, quillback, bigmouth buffalo, river redhorse, pumpkinseed, and smallmouth bass) collected during preoperational gill net sampling have not yet been collected in operational gill netting. Conversely, four species (goldfish, yellow bullhead, brown bullhead, and orangespotted sunfish) plus hybrid white bass x striped bass collected during operational saapling were not found in preoperational gill net samples. None of these differences in occurrence are thought to be re-lated to operation of SQN because all, except goldfish and hybrid white x !o. striped bass, were collected in very low numbers (i.e., comprise < 0.1 percent of total catch) and are considered incidental in the catch. Typically, number of species collected increases with increasing number of L
-199-
l l I sampleo. Both goldfish end hybrid white bzss x striped bass are introduced species; goldfish are sold as bait and hybrid white bass x striped bass have been stocked _by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency in some re- . se rvoirs . Species Composition--Gizzard shad and skipjack herring were the only species which comprised 10 percent or more of the total number of fish at stations 1 and 2 from spring 1980 through fall 1983 (table 5-14). At station 3,.only gizzard shad comprised 3 10 percent of the total catch. Results'from preoperational monitoring were similar, with only 1 other species (mooneye) comprising 3 10 percent of the preoperational catch at any station. As noted in previous reports, total catch over the entire period of operational monitoring was similar between stations 2 and 3, with catch 'at station 1 approximately one-third less than at either of the other stations (table 5-14). Species which were more abundant at stations 2 and 3 than at station 1 were: spotted gar, longnose gar, gizzard shad, mooneye, golden shiner, spotted sucker, channel catfish, warmouth, bluegill, , redear sunfish, yellow perch, and freshwater drum. Skipjack herring, white eass, hybrid white bass x striped bass, spotted bass, and white crappie were more abundant in samples from station I than from stations 2 or 3. At station 1, mean c/f was highest in fall quarters in each of the first 3 years of operational monitoring (table _5-15). However, summer quarter catches were highest in 1983 with fall quarter catches second highest. Winter quarter catches at station I were consistently lower than winter-catches at any.other station. Similar to station 1, station 2 c/f was also lowest in winter , (table 5-16). However, at station 2, fall quarter c/f was highest only in 1980, while in- 1981, 1982, and 1983, summer quarter c/f was greatest. ,
-200-
-:e
At station 3 in 1981, highest c/f occurred during winter quarter,
.. with lowest c/f in the fall. In 1982, spring quarter values were highest (table 5-17), and in 1983, fell quarter catches were highest. Most of the large catch during winter quarter 1981 is attributable to relatively large
- numbers of gizzard shad at station 3 (16.23 fish / net night) compared to stations 1 and 2 (0.33'and 0.07 fish / net night, respectively). A similar pattern was evident in winter 1982, whereas in 1983 gizzard shad catches were similar among stations.
During winter quarter 1983, total c/f increased from station 1 to station 3 (station 1 = 1.25 fish / net night, station 2 = 3.62 fish / net night, and station 3 = 4.86 fish / net night). Spring 1983 catches also revealed this pattern of increasing c/f from downstream to upstream (station 1 = 2.48 station, 2 = 8.92, and station 3 = 12.38). However, during the summer quarter sampling in 1983, station 2 catches (17.30 fish /
's net night) were higher than either station 1 (10.25 fish / net night) or
~ station 3 (10.71 fish / net night). Fall samples in 1983 showed the same pattern as samples in winter and spring (station 1 = 6.81 fish / net night,
~
station 2 = 10.76 fish / net night, and station 3 = 15.45 fish / net night). Important species--Fourteen fish species met the criteria for determination as important species during operational monitoring. Each important species is discussed below in terms of spatial comparisons, temporal trends, and preoperational versus operational differences in gill net catch. Skipjack herring--During fall quarters in operational monitoring, catches of skipjack herring at station 1 (downstream of SQN) were consis-
~
tently highest among the three stations (figure 5-10). No pattern was f l4 evident among stations during other quarters. During preoperational l
-201-
- -+,
monitoring (summer of 1973 through spring of 1977), highest catches were usually observed at station 2 (TVA, 1978b). Operational data to this point
~
did not. indicate this trend, however, as station 2 showed highest c/f in only 5 of 15 quarters of operational monitoring. Since 1971, skipjack herring catches have shown only one statisti-cally significant trend (table 5-18). Winter quarter catches at station 2
~ ~
have decreased through time-(table 5-19). Gizzard shad--High catches of gizzard shad occurred at station 3 in winters of 1981 and 1982, but not in winter 1983. Spring catches of this species were usually slightly lower at station 1 than at the other stations (figure 5-11). Highest summer quarter catches consistently occur-red at station 2-(immediately downstream of the diffuser), a pattern noted
~
inLthe preoperational report (TVA, 1978b). Operational results are similar to preoperational patterns, and there is no evidence of avoidance of the area most affected by SQN discharges. Linear regression analyses over the period 1971 through 1983 in-' dicated only one statistically significant trend (table 5-18). Fall' quarter - c/f values were increasing at station 3 (table 5-19). Because this trend occurred upstream of SQN only, it is unlikely related.to plant operation. Mooneye--During preoperational monitoring, c/f of mooneye was'
~
usually highest at station 3. Operational monitoring data do not provide similar results (figure 5-12). In operational monitoring, c/f of mooneye was usually highest at station 3 only during winter and spring quarters. Spring' quarter catches were consistently lower at station 1 than at the other stations. Operational monitoring summer quarter catches were usually highest at station 2 and. lowest at scation 1. Operational monitoring - 4 0 4
-202-o e r - m - w e m --~~
during fall-quarters revealed lowest catches at station 1 and highest
~. catches at station 2. Since operational monitoring began, no mooneye have been collected at station 1 during winter quarter.
Linear regression analyses revealed only one statistically signi-ficant trend for mooneye (table 5-18): summer quarter catches at station 3 decreased through time (tab'- 5-19). Since this trend occurred only up-stream of SQN, it was not a plant effect.
' Spotted Sucker--During operational monitoring, spotted sucker c/f valuesLfor all quarters were usually lower at st' tion a I than at other stations-(figure 5-13). Similar results were found during preoperational monitoring. Since operational monitoring began in spring 1980, this species has been collected at station 1 in only 3 of 15 quarters. Spring quarter
-catches have consistently been highest at station 3, and catches have been highest during 3 of the 4' summer quarters of operational sampling at this station. Fall' quarter c/f values were highest at station 3 in 1980; however,
.. in 1982 and 1983 no spotted sucker were collected in fall samples from this station. Winter quarter catches were highest at station 3 except in 1983'.
~ Linear regression analyses revealed no statistically significant trends at any_ station for any of the four seasons.
Blue' catfish--As during preoperational monitoring, blue catfish were frequently most abundant at station 2 (12 of 15 operational monitoring
. quarters) (figure 5-14).
Highest. catches of blue catfish were usually in spring or summer, and lowest catches were in winter. During winter quarters, this species was collected only at station 2.
- . Linear regression analyses revealed two statistically significant
. trends (table 5-18). Catches of blue catfish at station 2 were decreasing
- during winter and summer (table 5-19). /
-203-
--r----w --
r -ya: w --y,g9y ,, + -- - ,,-. - --
Channel catfish--Preoperational monitoring generally showed highest catches of this species during summer and lowest catches during the winter. __ Operational monitoring to date has shown peak catches to occur'in either spring,-summer, or fall with lowest catches occurring consistently during winter (figure 5-15). ~ Winter quarter catches during operational monitoring were usually highest at station 2. Summer quarter catches during operational monitoring were consistently . highest at station 3, and fall quarter catches were usually highest at station 2. Linear regression analyses showe'd summer quarter catch at station 2
- declined (statistically significant) through time (table 5-18). Table 5-19 reveals 1980 through 1983 catches at station 2 were approximately half
-those'of the first 3 years of preoperational monitoring. However, declines to current levels occurred by 1977, three years prior to fuel loading.
c Because~ channel catfish are very tolerant of warm temperatures, it is unlikely that this declining trend immediately downstream of the diffuser is related to operation'of'SQN, even during summer months. Additionally, winter quarter catches at station 1 indicated a statistically significant decline'.
' White bass--During preoperational monitoring, except for 3 periods of unusually high catches, c/f of white bass was low (generally less than 0.5 fish / net night), with no seasonalipattern of abunda'cen evident. Opera-tional monitoring fr3m 1980 through 1983 revealed similar results (figure 5-16), with onl, 5 catches over 0.5 fish / net night (each time during'either summer or fall quarters but occurring at various stations).
Operational monitoring summer quarter c/f values were usually highest at' station 2. 'Although winter' quarter catches of white bass are low at all stations, highest winter catches usually occurred at station 2. None of the linear regression analyses showed a statistically significant trend.
-204--
4
Yellow bass--Yellow bass was not identified as an important species
. . in preoperational gill net samples. During the period of operational monitoring, summer quarter c/f values were usually highest at station 1 (figure 5-17). During each of the three winter quarter samples in opera-t!onal monitoring, lowest catches occurred at station 1 and highest catches were at station 3 (figure 5-17).
m All of the twelve linear regression analyses revealed statisti-cally significant trends. Yellow bass catches were found to be increasing at every station during every quarter (tables 5-18 and 5-19). This reflects a general increase in yellow bass abundance in Chickamauga Reservoir. Bluegill--During preoperational monitoring c/f of bluegill was generally low at'all stations (< 0.6 fish per net night). Catches were often higher at station 3 than at other stations, and a general seasonal pattern occurred with highest c/f in spring or summer and lowest c/f in fall or winter. Figure 5-18 shows this seasonal patte"n still apparent T'.- during operational monitoring from 1980 through 1983. At station 3, c/f values were usually higher than at other stations during spring, summer, and winter. Fall quarter catches were highest at station 2 and winter quarter catches were consistently lowest at station 1. Ten of the twelve linear regression analyses showed statistically significant increasing trends (table 5-18). Spring, summer, and fall quarter catches of bluegill increased significantly at all stations (table 5-19), while winter quarter catches increased only at station 3 (table 5-19). These increases reflect a general increase in bluegill
- ,; abundance in Chickamauga. Increased bluegill abundance is most likely associated with establishment of aquatic macrophytes in the reservoir, l* rather than influence of SQN.
-205-L
Redear'sanfish--Redear sunfish were usually least abundant at station 1. . Spring, summer, and' fall c/f values in operational monitoring were consistently lowest at station 1 (figure 5-19). Further redear sunfish - have not been collected from station 1 during any of the fall quarters of operational monitoring. Winter quarter catches were highest at station 3 while spring and fall catches were usually highest at station 2. Seasonal abundance patterns showed consistently low catches during winter and rela-Lively high catches during the other three seasons. Only one linear regression analysis revealed a statistically
.significant trend (table 5-18). Spring quarter catches of redear sunfish at station I were declining (table 5-19).
. Spotted bass--During preoperational monitoring, c/f values were similar among stations and, with the exception of one quarter, were less than 0.4 fish per net night throughout the study. Operational monitoring r
results differed, with catch <a at station 3 usually lower than at either of
- the other two stations (figure 5-20). Further, c/f has exceeded 0.4 fish
- per net night at one or more stations during five of the 15. quarters of .
operational sampling. Summer and fall samples were usually highest at
" station 2.
Linear regression analyses revealed no statistically significant increasing or decreasing trends at any station during any season. White crappie--During preoperational monitoring, catches of white
. crappie were~ erratic with relatively low c/f values (generally less than
~
1.0 fish per net night).at=all stations. It was also noted that popula-- tions of white crappie appeared to decrease in Chickamauga Reservoir sin'ce 1971. Operational monitoring from 1980 through 1983 indicated that, with '
-206-
the exception of fall 1980, c/f of white crappie remained low (figure 5-21).
- ,. During spring quarters since operational monitoring began, catches of white crappie have usually been highest at station 2 and lowest at station 1.
'a- Summer and fall catches were often highest at station 1 and fall catches were usually lowest at station 3. Winter catches were usually lowest at station 3. Linear regression analyses revealed only 1 statistically signifi-cant trend (table 5-18). Fall quarter catches of white crappie have declined
.at station 3 (table 5-19).
Sauger--Sauger we 2 not included as an important species in pre-operational gill netting results. During operational monitoring, relative abundance of this species in spring, summer, and fall was similar among stations (figure 5-22). Winter quarter catches were usually highest at station 2, possibly indicating attraction to thermal discharge. No pattern of ' seasonal abundance was apparent. . Of the 12 linear regression analyses, 5 showed statistically significant trends (table 5-18). Summer quarter catches of sauger
-(table 5-18 and 5-19) increased at stations 1 and 2. Fall quarter catches also increased at stations 1 and 2 and spring quarter catches increased at
-station 1. Because these increases occurred both in the diffuser area and 18 km downstream of the plant, they are not thought to indicate attraction to thermal effluents. Conversely, neither do they indicate avoidance of elevated temperatures.
Freshwater drum--In preoperational monitoring this species was
. more abundant at stations 2 and 4 (Hiwassee River Mile 1.0) than at stations 1 and 3. The Hiwassee River station was not sampled during opera-3- tional monitoring. During operational monitoring, c/f values were usually
-207-
highest at~ station 2 in spring, fall, and winter quarters (figure 5-23). Summer quarter catches were usually highest at station 3. Spring, summer, and winter catches of freshwater drum were usually lowest at station 1. *
, Linear regression analyses revealed only 1 statistically signi-ficant trend (table 5-18). Fall quarter catches'at station 3 increased -through' time (table 5-19).
Summary and Conclusions Fifteen quarters of gill net sampling have been conducted since fuel load of. unit one. Results of these samples were compared with 28 quarters Lof preoperational monitoring conducted from 1971 through 1977. Of 39' fish' species and one hybrid collected during operational gill nettint, gizzard shad and skipjack herring were the most abundant species. Comparisons among stations during operational monitoring revealed
. total- catches ati stations 2 and 3 were similar, whereas catch at station 1 was approximately one-third lower than at stations 2 or 3. Species compos-ition at station.1 also differed from that at stations 2 and 3 with several .
game species most abundant at station'l. Catches of fourteen important' species were examined to determine abundance'among stations during each' season. Seasonal abundance was highly variable among stations, but the following' general trends were noted: three species (yellow bass, spotted bass, and white crappie) were most abundant at station 1 :in' summer and three (skipjack herring, spotted bass, and white crappie) most abundant. at this station in fall; catches of six species (gizzard shad, mooneye, spotted sucker, redear sunfish, white
/ crappie, and freshwater drum) in spring, four species (mooneye,ipotted .
sucker, redear sunfish, and freshwater drum) in summer, three species
-208-
_(mooneye, spotted sucker, and redear sunfish) in fall, and five species Es (mooneye, spotted sucker, yellow bass, bluegill, and freshwater drum) in winter were lower at station 1 than at other stations during the same seasons. None of the 14 important species were least abundant at station 2
-during any season. However, catches of four species (channel catfish, redear sunfish, white crappie, and freshwater drum) in spring, three species -(mooneye, blue catfish, and channel-catfish) in summer, six species (spotted sucker, blue catfish, channel catfish, bluegill, redear sunfish, and freshwater drum) in fall, and five species (blue catfish, channel catfish, white bass, sauger, and freshwater drum) in winter were higher at station 2 than at other stations during the same seasons.
At station 3, catches of two species (blue catfish, spotted bass) in spring, two' species-(blue catfish and spotted bass) in summer, two species (blue catfish and white crappie) in fall, and two species (spotted
. bass and white crappie) in winter were lower than at other stations during the same season. Catches of three species (mooneye, spotted sucker, and - redear sunfish) in spring, four species (spotted sucker, channel catfish, bluegill, and freshwater drum) in summer, and five species (mooneye, spotted sucker, yellow bass, bluegill, and redear sunfish) in winter were higher at station 3 than at other stations during these seasons.
Catches of 4 species (mooneye, spotted sucker, redear sunfish, and freshwater drum) were frequently (i.e., > 3 seasons) lowest at station 1 and catches of 2 species (blue catfish and spotted bass) were usually
. lowest at station 3. -Catches of 2 species (blue catfish and freshwater drum) were usually highest at station 2, and catches of 2 species (spotted sucker and bluegill) were usually highest at station 3.
-209-
Seasonal abundance patterns and relatise abundance of eight species (gizzard shad, spotted sucker, blue catfish, white bass, bluegill, redear sunfish, white crappie, and freshwater drum) were not appreciably different between the preoperational and operational monitoring periods. Skipjack herring were usually most abundant at station 2 (immediately downstream of the. diffuser)'in preoperational monitoring, whereas during operational monitoring this was seldom the case. In preoperational monitoring, mooneye showed a preference for station 3. However, in operational monitoring, highest mooneye abundances were at either station 2 or 3. During pre-operational monitoring, channel catfish abundance was lowest during winter quarters and highest during summer quarters. In operational sampling, winter quarter catches of channel catfish were still lowest, but peak catches occurred during any of the other three seasons. Yellow bass were not sufficiently abundant in preoperational gill net samples to be con-sidered an important species. Since 1977, abundance has increased through-out the reservoir, and these increases are reflected in operational gill net sampling. Preoperational catches of spotted bass were similar among
- stations, but c/f during operational monitoring was lower at station 3 than at either stations 1 or 2. Sauger were not identified as an important
- species in preoperational gill net sampling. Since that time, gill net catches of sauger have increased, particularly at stations 1 and 2.
Linear regr'ssion analyses performed on each important species detected no significant trends at any station during any of the four quarters for three species (spotted sucker, white bass, and spotted bass). Catches increased at one or more stations during one or more quarters for five species (gizzard shad, yellow bass, bluegill, sauger, and freshwater -
-210-
drum). Catches of yellow bass, bluegill, and sauger increased in several quarters at two or more-stations, perhaps indicating general population increases of these species in Chickamauga. Catches decreased at one or 1more stations during one or more~ quarters for six. species (skipjack herring, mooneye, blue catfish, channel catfish, redear sunfish, and white crappie). Only 2 species-(blue catfish and channel catfish) showed decreases at station 2 during summer. This was probably not a response to plant operation because these species are least likely to avoid high temperatures. Catches of 3. species (gizzard shad, mooneye, and white bass) were usually highest at. station 2 in summer samples. This preference by gizzard shad for station 2 was apparent during preoperational sampling and is not considered an effect of SQN. Both mooneye and white bass appear to be attracted to the area of the diffuser in summer. Winter abundance of five species (blue catfish, channel catfish, white bass, sauger, and freshwater drum) were usually highest at station 2.
, Since similar patterns were. observed for blue catfish, channel catfish, and white bass during preoperational monitoring, and because these species were not found to be increasing at station 2 during winter quarter, this does not appear to be attraction to thermal discharges. However, sauger appear to be attracted to station 2 (downstream of the diffuser) during winter, and this may be a response to SQN effluent.
Gill net samples during operational ronitoring to date have re-vealed few dif ferences from preoperational observations. Only two of the changes seen in gill netting results appear to be related to operation of ,,. SQN. Mooneye and white bass appear to be attracted to the area downstream of the diffuser during smnmer months.
-211-
, r ..-p . -- - , , , . - _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . , . - ,
i- , L Tg.ble 5-12. . Dates of Operational Gill Net Sampling near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Spring 1980 through Fall 1983
~
- T Quarter. Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Spring;1980 04/7-11/80 04/14-18/80 04/21-25/80 ,
Summer 1980 06/23-27/80 0'6/23-27/80 07/7-11/80 Fall 1980 09/22-26/80 09/29/80 to 10/6-10/80 10/03/80
! Winter 1981 01/12-16/81 01/26-30/81 01/26-30/81 Spring 1981' 04/6-10/81 04/13-17/81 04/20-24/81
' Summer 1981 07/6-10/81 07/6-10/81 07/20-24/81 -
Fall 1981 10/5-9/81 10/5-9/81 l'0/5-9/81 Winter 1982 02/1-5/82 02/1-5/82 02/1-5/82 Spring 1982 04/19-23/82 04/19-23/82 04/19-23/82 Summer 1982 07/19-23/82 07/19-23/82 07/19-23/82
. Fall 1982 10/18-22/82 10/18-22/82 10/18-22/82 Winter 1983 01/17-21/83 01/17-21/83- 01/17-21/83 .
Spring 1983. ~0 4/11-15/83 04/11-15/83 d4/11-15/83
- Summer 1983 07/18-22/83 07/18-22/83 07/18-22/83 Fall 1983 10/17-21/83' ~10/17-21/83 10/17-21/83 Tennessee River Mile fTRM) 473.0.
~
=iITRM 483.6.
-. TRM 495.0.
p . i
-212-l-
I .
i n . ~ Table 5-13. A List of Species Collected with Gill Nets During
. Operational Sampling in Chickamauga Reservoir near
- C-Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Spring 1980 through Fall 1983
?L
' Family Species Common Name Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus oculatus Spotted gar Lepisosteus osseus Longnose gar Lepisosteus platostomus Shortnose gar Unidentified Lepisosteus sp. Unidentified gar
. Clupeidae Alosa chrysochloris Skipjack herring Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Dorosoma petenense Threadfin shad Hiodontidae Hiodon tergisus Mooneye Cyprinidae Carassius auratus Goldfish Cyprinus carpio . Ca rp Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner
-Catostomidae -Catostomus commersoni White sucker Hypentelium nigricans Northern hog socker Ictiobus bubalus Smallmouth buffalo
- .. Minytrema melanops Spotted sucker Moxostoma erythrurum Golden redhorse
- ,1 Ictaluridae Ictalurus furcatus Blue ca'tfish Ictalurus melas Black bullhead Ictalurus natalis Yellow bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus Brown bullhead Ictalurus punctatus Channel catfish Pylodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Percichthyidae Morone chrysops .
White bass Morone mississippiensis Yellow bass Morone saxatilis Striped bass Hybrid.Morone (chrysops x Hybrid white x saxatilis) striped bass-Centrarchidae Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass Lepomis auritus Redbreast sunfish Lepomis gulosus Warmouth Leposis humilis Orangespotted sunfish Leposis macrochirus Bluegill
- .- Leposis negalotis Longear sunfish Leposis microlophus Redear sunfish Micropterus punctulatus Spotted bass Micropterus salmoides Largemouth bass Pomoxis annularis White crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Black crappie
-213-
, - , y, - - - _,-y
r. Tabic 5-13. (Continued)-' Family Species. Common Name Percidae Perca flavescens Yellow perch Stizostedion canadense Sauger , Stizostedion vitreum vitreum Walleye Sciaenidae~ Aplodinotus grunniens- Freshwater drum 5 e 0 4 e. s e s
-214- ,
l
Ttble 5-14. Tatal Numb:r, Parcz tega Composition, end P2rcentega Occurr nce fer Sp:cica cf Fieh C:lltettd' with Gill Nets at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Spring, 1980 through Fall 1983 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Species No. % Comp. % Occur. No. % Comp. % Occur. No. % Comp. % Occur. Gar 3 0.07 13.33 1 0.02 6.67 0 Spotted gar 0 14 0.22 46.67 8 0.12 26.67 Longnose gar 2 0.05 13.33 11- 0.18 33.33 7 0.11 20.00 Shortnose gar 0 0 1 0.02 6.67 Skipjack herring 962 22.69 100.00 633 10.10 100.00 458 6.88 93.33 Gizzard shad 1,840 .43.40 100.00 3,020 48.20 100.00 3,411 51.25 100.00 Threadfin shad 7 0.17 26.67 0 4 0.06 13.33 Mooneye 27 0.64 46.67 183 2.92 86.67 398 5.98 93.33 Goldfish 0 9 0.14 6.67 0 Ca rp 3 0.07 20.00 20 0.32 53.33 8 0.12 26.67 Golden shiner 1 0.02 6.67 20 0.32 53.33 38 0.57 53.33 White sucker 2 0.05 13.33 1 0.02 6.67 2 0.03 6.67 Northern hog sucker 0 0 2 0.03 13.33 Smallmouth buffalo 0 1 0.02 6.67 5 0.08 20.00 Spotted sucker 11 0.26 20.00 45 0.72 80.00 269 4.04 80.00 ; E Golden redhorse 4 0.09 13.33 4 0.06 26.67 19 0.29 53.33 G* Blue catfish 114 2.69- 66.67 482 7.69 93.33 38 0.57 46.67 ' Black bullhead 0 0 5 0.08 26.67 Yellow bullhead 0 0 14 0.21 33.33 Brown bullhead 0 0 5 0.08 13.33 Channel catfish 208 4.91 80.00 358 5.71 93.33 296 4.45 86.67 Flathead catfish 16 0.38 46.67 18 0.29 46.67 11 0.17 46.67 White bass 160 3.77 53.33 129 2.06 80.00 70 1.05 80.00 Yellow bass 202 4.76 93.33 273 4.36 93.33 364 5.47 93.33 Striped bass 4 0.09 20.00 2 0.03 13.33 1 0.02 6.67 Hybrid white x striped bass 20 'O.47 13.33 0 1 0.02 6.67 Rock bass 4 0.09 13.33 3 0.05 13.33 11 0.17 13.33 Warmouth 5 0.12 33.33 11 0.18 33.33 37 0.56 60.00 Redbreast sunfish 6 0.14 13.33 1 0.02 6.67 0 Orangespotted sunfish 0 1 0.02 6.67 0 Bluegill 186 4.39 86.67 237 3.78 93.33 463 6.96 100.00
r - _ . _ . . _
.Tcbla;5-14...(Continued)-
Station 1 ' Station 2 Station 3 No. .% Comp. % Occur. No. % Comp. % Occur. No. % Comp..% Occur. Species 0 1- 0.02 6.67' 1. 0.02 '6.67'
' Longear sunfish .
269' L4.04 100.00 16 ~ 0.38 '46.67 '222 3.54 86.67.. Redear sunfish 1.47- 80.00 29 0.44- 60.00 Spotted bass', 134- -3.16 93.33 92 21 0.50- 60.00 44' O.70 73.33 37 0.56- -66.67
.Largemouth bass- 1.05- 86.67.
White crappie '129 3.04 86.67 100- .1.60 - 93.33' -70 3 0.07- 6.67- 2 .- 0.03 13.33 3 0.05 20.00. Black: crappie- 40.00. 48: 0.72 40.00 Yellow perch 4 0.09 20.00 11- 0.18 58- 1.37 86.67 82 1.31- 93.33 62 0.93 80.00 Sauger. 6.67 0 3 0.05 13.33 3 0.05
' Walleye 2.82 93.33 Freshwater drum 88 2.08 93.33 231 3.69 -100.00 ~188
- 4,240 6,265 6,656 Total E
28 e 4 g g
; .- 4 t > MM Me OOM@NNOOOOONNCO@O 'OOOOmONOmOOOM M C.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.*.
ge O. O. N. 4. C. O. O. O. O. O. O. N. O. O. O. O. O.
%M #.
OONMOOOOOOOOOOOOO 0000000000000 @ Le , b 'MONWOMOOOComeOOmW w, M OOOOCmN@eOOMN -m
. O. O.@. N. O. O. O.O. O.O.O.M. M. O. N.4 0 O. O. O. O. 4. M. Q. Q. M. O. O. O. M. N.
@ C00mO000000000000 0000MO0000000
-, M O.
. M M
. a.
'.' U 3 "M *
^~
Me 8 8 2. R. 8 8 8 8 2 8 8 2. R. 8 8 2 8 8 3 8 8 8 3 8. ". 8 8 8 8 8 OOOMOOOOOOOOOOOOO bM 0000000000000 N
. O. m
.M.'
4 M k OOMMOOOOOOOOOOONO GM WM COOMmeWOOOOO@ m Me em O. O. O. @. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. N.
*M cm 00000000000000000 0000000000000 M E wM M 3 MM W 4
>A
- MN OO MA M@ C. o. wy M.
m M. O O. O O. M O.O O. O O. O O.O O.M M. M O. N M. m O. M O. M MOMMOO40mOOOWl N e ge . . O. O. O. O. M. O. @. O. O. O. O. M. N.tg %. W 2 WM CONmOOOOOOOOOOOOO C00000000000c1 m bO e6 MA GM
.C b 40NNC4COOOONN4Meo
-QO N OOOOco@OmOOMM N ee e 0. O. 4. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. N. N. O. N. @. O. O. O. O. O. M.O. @. O. M. O.O.M.N. M.
He m COMMOOOOOOOOQQOOO
'wM M M C000000000000 e MM C
dw-O k M ONMMOOOOOmmONemmo CONNNOMMMOONe @ w% GN MM we O. O.4.M. O. O.O. O. O. O. O.O.@.C. O. O. O- @ O.O.M. O.@. O. N. O. O. O.O.M.O. 4 u o km
%M OOONOQQOOOOOOOOMO C000000000000 @.
M b M w
& O.
4 > OW' b b WN Ce#O00000000000c0 -OOOOOOmeMOMOM O ee s ee O. O. O. .M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. M. O. O. N. O. M.
*U GO 00000000000000000 0000000000000 M U W. **
.6 3
- M g
- M e O D UM MM M@ 000000000000m@MmO @OOOmOmMOOOmm M g go - O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. @. O. O. @
en %M
- 4. C. O. G. M. O. O. O. N. O.O. M. N. ..
WM 00%MOOOOOOOOOONOO C000000000000 m w U M Uw GA M OO4M OOOOOOO@MMeMO OOOOOOOO4CM4M @
- AUmC-.
- m C. o. m. m. O. O. O.O. O. O.O. N.M. O. O.4 0 O. O.O. O.@. o.O.O. m. O. O.M.4 o.
4
-;e A O M
' OOMMOOOOOOOOMOOOO C000000000000 N M
e M W@ wg- .
~
M n h 4 CM OOmmoWOOOOmmeOMMC - OmOMcMmeMOOOO M 04' we M@ O. O.4. N. C. O. O. O. O. N. O. N. @. O. O. @. C. O.O. O. O.4 0 4 0 4.C.O.M.N. @
- % U m- &M OOMMOOOOOOOOOOOOO C000000000000 O.
Mw k M M
' A Q .~ %
e w - we k W OOMMOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOMMMOOOMO e EC g 4 WM 0000000000000 g ue . C. O. M. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. m. WM - WA O de
*M . 00000000000000000 'O000000000000 O
2 43 k C - i N e-M W-M MO 4CNc440COOOmWONNO OOOOmomomN4mm O wM gMe O. O. N. M. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. M. M. O. @. M. O. . C. O. O. O. M. O. @. o. @. M. O. M. N. O. OU n ne O0@4000000000000O OOOOOOOOM OOOO 4 3 e kM M bE M 1A4 w -- O 00MMMeOOOOOO4MO@O OOOONeeMMOO@M 4
- 4> e O. O. W. N. O. O. O. O. O.. O. O. N. m. M. O. O. O. C. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. M. M.
uO e C00@O000000000000 0000000000000 m t e 3 M e1 M Ub M
-b W -~ CO@eOOMOMMomMmOMM OCOOMemomOOOm O MM GO k o- wm - O. O. O. w. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. w. @. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. N. O. N.
W km C00*O000000000000 0000000000000 4 WE AM b e M 9 4 S k Qar W C C A g: g 3 k W A e 4 0 4 a & A m w W G
. EQ Mw 4 h a ww M % A e $
k 4 W W b ww e C e et W b W bT kTA D kM OAW W e@ # 3 * #AwwA T U; . b 4 & W 9 e Q t VA d M W W WW 9 m wW &&U e
- HwRA wM 3%w @ U wa MwA C MA %%M k
- U % eC AU eG% U mMAA aM 3Aa nnU G
< 8 6 &wd w m3 bW T WA 39 meAme 3 h k E & W
.* W & W M UTw b WT gM 44 T @ 4 4 WM T O U U M M M O d awT h C W CU se 3 09 ha t 3W k W E 3 b 3 4
-G S Weg 4 t G Gd W GA GO 4*w k 0 44w & WM O WA w M
A HM LN 6 C %%MMM U CM MM m M MMA E G GM HM UM Mn O M' OGww CMwA N Ok N OO mMw OM%OM 3 MRMN*M MAM U% % 3% O kw RM 3 gGehaO G MM G % G yM G N M H H MDMONEUQ MOMUb4MME MK3MEM JMMMA 4
-217-mL
MM MOONMOQONoot d e -ONMOOQO ON OOMOM gp km O. O. O. @. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. d m.0000000 O. M. O. M. N. O. O. OOOO@COOOOOC 00000000 0000000 k M OOOMNCOMMOC MNMOCOON M M 000N000 g e C. O. O. M. O. N. O. O. O. O. C M. O. M. M. O. O. O. O.
%@ m 0 4. O. M. O. . N. e t OOOOMOOOOOC 00000000 OMOMOOO u"
q@
@ M 4~
Qg Mk M cm NNOOOOOMOOO CONeomOC Ooodeme
^4 wm M kp C. O. O. M. N. O. C. O. N. O. O. 9 0 0. @. O. 0 0. m. O. e. O. W. . N. m. e . @. 3 hm C000wo00000 MO M DOONOOOO C000000 ew 4&
a W MO k me G P. OOO@N000MOOu OnNOOOO E7 9@ OOOn m gp O. O. O.4. c.O. O. O. M. O. O. O. 3 0. M. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. N.N" MM
. O. O.
k ** C000"O000000 4 M 3 000000 0000000
> C ww Mk-
& -N MOO @m@0mOOO4C 360004 GM OMOmeNe g "g @ p M. O. O. @. c. N. O. M. O. O. O. O. C. ' C. O. O. O. O.
n
- um O. M. o. 4. M. O. ".
. M k OOOO@OOOOOOOO 00000 0000000
$W C O d g k t bN to = MMO4N4COOOOMONs,.
0 0 0.@.4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0,0 00 O@meom4 gg
=
lae COONOOOOOOOOOMO 000 000 O. . O. M. O. O. 0000000 O g OM
*3 M M 4 QN OMM4MmMOMOOMO4M Om
- eE *@ -OmmeM ag kp M. M. O. M. N. 4. N. M. O. O. O. O. O. 4. f. o. O. @. O. O. G.
MA %
. N. O. M. D. O. M.
Y M" OOOONOOOOOOOOOM OOMOOOO 0000000 J* 4A U 9 k b c aO WN em COOM4NOOOOOOOMOOe4COOO COOOMOe y gy O. O. O. O.4. N.C.O. O. O.O. O.O. O. O.O. O. N. 0 0 0 0 0000000 b b *m 0000000000000000000000 MM 3 0000000 mM 0 4 UA "" @OOOMMO@OOOOMAMcAmOOOc oMOmOMO U W W "e@ m 0 0 0. N. M. O.O. O. O. O. O. M.O. N.M. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. N. O. m. O. O, m. by km OOOMDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 0000000 ed M e hp M e w OMOAMOOOOOOMONNe@ MOOOO OmO@MWW m e O. O. O. O. M.M.O. O. O. O. O.O. O. @. @. O. D. N. 0 0 0 0 Ab O. D. O. 4. M. O. 4 m M M OOO4M*OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO M 0000000 w k kN t M , kN O U C 4" % OOOONM OODOONMmOMO@ MOOf OMO NM@ w 3 A km O. O. O. O. N M. O. O. O. O. O. N. O. M.4. M. O. D O O. O. O. 0 4. G. D" N. 4 4 . a k m" 000MNOOOOOOOOAOOOOOOOO C000000 44 W Me W w h k k 2 0 g h* COOMNMOOOOOMOOMOMNOOOO 3 3 de OMOOOMM g y' 6 6 c ap we
- O. O. O. O. O. N. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O.C. O. O. O. N. O. C.
EM M3 C000000000000000000000 000000O m MW w MA MC MOO 4@40@COM@OM4Mm@MOOO
- de ON046MN O ep O.O. O. m. m.@.c. O. O. O. O. O. O. M.4 0. M. O. O. O.O. O. O. N. O. 4 4 0 4 W
k O 4 M 4* COONh*COOOOOO-MOOOOOOO 0000000 bE4 k O 44 e OMO4@eQMMOceO4WmOOOOOO O c o m ,0 0 0 uk e O. O. O. M. M. O. O. O. O. O. O.O. O. N.@. O.O. O. O. Q. Q. O.O M. O. 4. O. O. O. au 000"400000000000000000 g a gM " 0000000 A M t.gx 38 k 8 8 8 0 2 8 8 8. S. S. 8. A. 0. a. ". 8 8. A. 8 8 8 8 8283084 am
%n OOOOmOOOOOOOON 00000000 k W e 0000000 g a 3 4 O*
9 O Q
- e k M A W 4 4 m 4 0 w & 4e w 4 W Em Mw wk a sw w e le k 3 ew
- 4e T .e.9 4 a
W k%h* k 4 4 & 4 G kAA ODM& QW V4 mM 4 WW n Q 3 W G
'ww QwM 2
nam 4 & @ w N MwAA wMA 3%w nU n@ g e O M w e 4 us etwu 9 3 C 4&% e bwM e44 ed Of M 24W e A e2 3 hw T44 em4amM e 3 h 4 T M M WT 4 M W gD WM g4 T 4 eM ewM k M 4 0 0 4 % hw d T O W a t cW @ W m W w C bmetw G GM W G C4 W 0 3 4 tath stww McNegW 6 0 4 k e8 A i eMM O C**N ANOM CM %%-M e M &M G C aemd "M -m 3 D Gg e33 ct
- 4 Ow ng 6 MwaMe g l k ut oww e F I 40 CE* 0 04 OBEho*4M6&w 0 6 4 h MMOMOEQUQJMMUMUb3>MMM3C m O t hqe M4MMMJ
-218-
/W %, 'r :6?
E cy 7']e} . '.. (I 'V] i , ,
- ]a ,.
~
+ ~
r
? >
s
", +
, J i_u.
/.,
l', 4 44 Table'5 116.-:(Continued)' Samplina Quarter
' Spring : Summer; Fall :. Winter - Spring Summr - Fall, Winter Spring . Summer.. Fall Fall Species 1980- 1980 1980- 1981 1981 1981 1981 :1982' 1982 1982 1982 . Winter 1983 ' Spring1983- - ; Summer 1983- '1983 Black crappie 'O.00 - 0.'00 0. 03 ' ! 0.'00 0.00 ~0.'00 . 0.0d >0.00 L0.00 0.00 Yellow perch 'O.00 0.00 'O.00 0.03 : 0.03 ~0.00 0.10 0.00
'O.00 ~ 0.00 -- 0.02 '. : 0.00 - l 3.00 .
' O . 08 . 0.00 0.00 ". t0.03 0.02- 0.00 0.00, Sau8er ' -0.13 0.26 . 0.14 -0.30, 0.30? 0.21 0.13- 0.05 0.31. 0.17 0.07' '0.03 0. 00 ... 0.07; 0.10 Walleye .'O.00 0.00 0.00 -0.00 0.00e '0.00 .'O.00 0.00- 0.07 0.06 0.03. 0.00: 0.00 ' O.00 -
0.00 Freshwater drum . 0. 21 - 0.24 J ' O.ll' O.10 0.54- 'l.44 0.53 10.38 0.41 0.44~ -0.52- 0.05' O.25; 0.50 0.63 Totals 6.96 -10.12 '19.78 1.31 16.06 ~23.32 8.63. 1.54E 14.87 20.03 10.68 - 3.63 '17.30
. 8.92 10.76 L
Y '
e - p g.. r
~
i == r g
. . -- a. s. 8. :. 3 9. . 8. a. 8 8 8 8. . :. . 8 8. s. 8 2 8 8 8 8. a. n.
s hea r* OOONOOOOOOOOC0COOOOOOOO - OOOO s ,, c T o tei. i o ? e. u O v u O
, -8. 8 8 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8. ". 8 8 9 8 8 2 9 9 3 8 8 8 2. %.
- V:H , d .
e e" 00004000000000000000000 OOOM p 'h' 9 e< es s 'e QM 0 0'c.s o an o O O @ O O O no 0 4 en M O eo M O e o oON4 e. m e0 e ); v- we 000040 M. O. *. O. C. O. e* O. M. . O. m. o. en. O. O. eo. o. 0 0 4. N.
..]- g e* OOOONOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOONO OOON A
O. sn b. e WM - 0 0 O N N O @ O r* O O O en o O O O O O O N 4 O OONe 4 .J ee L' . ge O. O. O.. O. @. O. N. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. 0 0. m. *. O. 0 0 4. O. O. O. C. 4 1
. 0-
** 3
** OOOCOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOO OOOd
,.e E
M be e0 Wm
~
*e.4 e a0N OOO4mONNOOOOOOOOOM4M420 MONO
>. ge -O.O. O. N. @. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. w.O. M. N. O. O. O. O. **.
w b ea OOOONOOOOCOOOOOOOOCOMCO OOOO
' ac ea.
. b g b See L.
; e4 en N eo en O N O e C en en O O O O O en N O O O 4 O oc e* o o O O en -*
t as e O. O. O. @. en. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. @. O. **. M. O. O. O. O. . C 3 m OOONMOOO00000OCOOOOOOCO O O O a* dO M' t he
. >* 4
'ww' aC -
MO CN O O O O O O en en N O O O O en O N 00 C en O N O O OOOO oc w ap r cp- ne O. O. O. M. e. O. m. o. C. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. m. o. 0. e0 0 O. N. O. O. It E e*
.O.-*
a e6 M O O O O Oe OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO . O O O =* )- 4
' a .C --.
en w . w a WN M O O M M O @ C d O O M men O O O O O O M O O C e0 C e0 um es e0 4 Cm O. O. O e** en. O. N. O. N* O * *O*- O sn. o. O O.
- O. O. O. O. O. @. O. O O. O. m.
wa -a O C 0 0 00 O e* O C O C O C O C O O O O O O - O - OOOO T b 3 4$4 9 O u> .
- as O O O M M O O O O O O O O O O O M O e0 O en C M ' O O Men "h W be g.
-* eo
,* ep . e4. O. O. @. N. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. **. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. **. O. O.
O. O. O. O. b i
.e*
oe es b as .00OONOOOOC000OOOOOOOOOO OOOC
' O Gr.
- b c.
- 1. a 3 E. 8 8 8. ". 2 8 0 8 8 8 9 8.",.8 8 8 8 8. *n. "..$. 8 8.' 8 8 8. .
f- ?? U e W. ce COON 4COOOOOOOOOOOOmOOOO C O O rd W. +r 4. Q 4 E-s
'm4 e U et -
he
- C* O M O 00 O O en en M O M C en in en C M O eo en O a0 O O O en so
* -04 a'*
e ee< U h. eoe .. O.pe O. M. N. O. @. O. O. O. O. O. 90. O. O. O. O. O. Ns O. O. M. O. O. O. e .o ao. wc h in Em OOOO@COOC00OOOOOOOOOOOO OOOO r4asO-6 es we 6 h. h. - - F. 40 - 4 WW O O O M M O M O M O O O M e0 O O O O M O O O O OOMM hs ;5 W 00
~ d og . q7 ge - O. O. O. M. .N. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. ch. O.
O. O. O. en.
.' * ' *w4
- 2. u en3
**e* 00OO@OMOOOOONOOOOOOOOOO . OOOO J m ,ae " .c . . - - -
..d Q . es ed O ' O M o ao O O O O M O O en so ec O O O O eo M m M O O O eo M t' '
w Chee a0 y !a Q w' c gge 0 0 0. m. e. O. N. O. O. O. O. O. M. O. O. O. O. O. eo. O. O. O. O. O. O. . O. e4 de f4 ea ' O O O .-e M C M C C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OOOO
. ,. . m
_'. 4 e* s- 4 Ge - he 4 .m
*8 t, 8 8 8. ". N. 8 0 8 8 8. 8 8. $. 2 2 8 8 8. ". 2 9. ". 8. - 8 8 8 8
**t-4m M
* ' O O O C 4 C e* O O O C O O O C O O O ** O O O O OOOO 1
U U-3
>s E es P. ~
- 4. - 3w 8, ,8 8 8 8 8 8 2 8 8 8 8 8. R.8 2 8 8 8 3 8 9 8 8 8 8 8. .
t ** h Q -* O O O O O O O O O O O O ** O O O O O O O O O O OOOO in
'. ha o 3 e 7
- 6 he
! fn WO d .a8 ew
- g 4 44 V 4 4'
.4 ea G4 Q 3 5.* W T
... 1 E ad -
, he n.
- T en ee* be a T at es t1 g ha 3 e he g eT b g .a.e
. i s.s . en
. a 6 he nC t g en '
he g he T 4 % he e9 4 .es 0 4 0 .4 W is* & en W g
- l s, '"
C G O n en og es e .a. a
~ N ** '4 e6 44 , . u 3T=* 4 .en .4-*.e4-*4 -e e n4 Q G
' e* O ' a0 C es 4weu 4 4 4.4 m e *** e
- 3 e4 W en se 4 4' T se e W es 4 .C.* . - en 3 C 3 hM 34 3 9 en 4 3t se .c .*
en ' .-W Qi - T se O w T t*e e e as 0T 44 4 .-e se 4 T E e w in & O c4 hT h a & E& S& 3 t e 3 e T we 3-e.** W. ed d u. *Q. 4 1 9 e t G 4 m *a e .as O d a4 eO a ,* 6. 4 ee T .*.** eW* e.e & T W 4M u me ) d& W e.e we his e.e 4
..e* e.* et h N W G 6
- 4. O d O ** be O Cnhe a-8 O g e we a* b4 en u a *
4 4 tg 4 .e8 .N a4 0 g Oed O o AO em .3 -e** e 6e 4 e.e g e o h O g ed H ' In w M M C >= E O O .B F. ta Q M dQ >* ED U $ae s >. to E DG 3 G3
-. n
~
s, -220-
-s' :~
y py _ b
).i
., 3 j-
; b m
%. - .^
, f* f .f /yC.b
' [ . f #
7- . - f - i "7, %# ' - i; - d$-. _ .j t ,m.l i ' Y
,y /f c ' .y 3 3
F
'g -
' r^ -
.pr1
..s
.)% v3Y '
l jl
=_
(' d. ?
,ti. ... sQ- s ' ,
,3,~
4 ; ' m
; k, '
;. ^
,1
- )} - . , '
r t l$- 5
.*s ,1 l8 F1 a9 0550020805 020000000,3 4. ' 5:. .
i-
' 000O000O00 ' '
1\
'.,' g;,,7G. ,.,.J '; . t G'
. - /
r '- ' w3 e? y;' h
) 06 1
- 7 e8 0900500'006 0200000 7 1
m 9L 0~10 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 (0
- c. '
{s
/
S- ' f 1 - g' n 3' v 0 6 3 9 3' 08304
,8 i8 0-r9 p1 y 07121.40003 3 .
S
;01O0000000 2
+,12 ,
}7p (g', - 4 f%
s y [r< e3 g 01'38508008 6- _(- f s e i t. r9 4 i1: 0. 0go0000000
- 3. 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8. . ,*
/ - 4, 7 - - e7 W' xgs y.
re - e -
+ .
. . . j l2 343030070 .
..( 3,. 3<
l8 a9 0201000102 1 4 '
- w
; F1 C0000O0000 1
% ,,/ , 1 s
, .,, ,( g .
\' I es
~
k V r . . /' s v
. e2 06O2500001 . 3 m8 0 3. D.50100003
,.f e 9 n f'I g' '" r'a '
m9 u1 000A000001;" . 0 , 1
., :s S,. a J
Jj Q g n2
- m. "
030200
#/ % W00 9
, .' +
i8 r9
- 016 010 0', D. 0 4 .
3 , ]
.r' .~
r y- p1 6 cCO000000M's S 1
1
~
s~
'r
, 3,d EY;'0'0o1504005 e
4 1 . c. n As tA r,d'. d c 2,8 0 3 0 0 0 4. . _ 3
. P' n9 i1 W 00#. J7 p30000 3 1 .
.j,.
,y ,'< ,r 1 1 f f.
000000 9 y , 18[0800 s9 0021 01 . 9 . 0.hOy,#000OO
..g.; .
E1 .0 3 ? 3 h. ' -
,:(s > . , r' .
?..
7 3000 rt.O- D00420'0 4'_ e1 8 . a , m8 y9 [0 0,4 _
- 3. . .
0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2._. u1 0_ 41
, 2,e y S ;
y _ s
N (;/
4
?
,g fYg .Y ig~i 040019p 02 T~;0 3 8 5 5 0 4 % 8g 3 . 6 '
3
'u
- re p L} 0000O0Op90 : . /;
/
; a ,
q, . r S 1 1 m pf e
.b 7 #
. ,e
?L +'.t .
r r a e1 0Mj3% W '/ 3 a4g>
'.j,
}Q a 4~ 0 2 0 1 1. p3000 u t c5500-3 4.
$ f
_g
/,
s M1 0 0 0. 0, -0. 0r*j01,0 p0 g 2 Q '- 4 %J r n xr - 0533730401 y 1 1J 3 , 030.pW04
. 4 r 0 3 1 ., /
a
, i d'.
-_fd' S pMF a
,~
0,52.Ar00)00*1
- u. O g -
0 4- f r* u /.f 5 0 PF e0 0 0 / , y ,) mfS q s9 002 ..>l : 03 7
# 'y - ,"
, ?.
i1 g r i 0.M0OU00O00_303_ 0
/ ' J -
9 g? k my ' ,'
,0 0 0'0 L 3 0'5 0 3 l f
-.r.
)y inW 0.400100100 r9 0
2 kr ,' , . - e
,4 d - p1
$~
3000000000 4 l/ < 8
- & cnv -
.a
,r
) ty a, c } j
'i ( .!c . .
5 s7 _m u i. a f( r,' '^; j 4 . a, i f P~ f T'is-k~ sh li sbii1h haee s d r
, 7 i
pf s ppu r 1 c a e e '" e ur r. 5 hysubtunahpgp e r ks s ee del f'feekdryw ea, t l s a . i j s
.e.
l - eat get gt eeh gl s t o ,
.j Ta p.r . S S 2p5L%BYM.WF ,n dpa oriQ)'eaar
.b r ul e T . , ,
o.
- c. . ,
Y! vjIN
,j.
4 " - j.
}*
f 7-
/ 9 M **; ,
,3-9 rj., -
~ /.j
+t 4
+
*r /;;b1 ,
T V' .fp s I t , =
.sL s ,' [_.# g, -
,f- ,
, L.Ay;/ x' p<
, w(j yy
. j ,
/*
n ' "
m . . _ __- . _ _ _ . 4 , 4 i' c )
=
Table 5-18 Rzgrescian Analysis of Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Each Important Species by Sampling Quarter and Station, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1971-1983
,Spzcies Quarter Station Slope F-Value PR>F t
Skipjack herring Winter 2 -0.051 10.80 0.0094 y -Gizzard shad Fall 3 0.035 5.96 0.0347 Mo:neye Summer 3 -0.042 6.44 0.0295 Blun. catfish -Winter 2 -0.028 17.84 0.0022 . -Blue catfish Summer 3 -0.008 5.49 0.0412 Chtnnel catfish Winter 1 -0.006 17.45 0.0024 Chrnnel catfish S9mmer 2 -0.017 14.81 0.0032 Yellow bass Winter 1 0.020 5.51 0.0435 Yellow bass Spring 1 0.043 16.24 0.0024 Yellow bass. Summer 1 0.032 38.18 0.0001
._Yallow bass Fall 1 0.017 13.09 0.0047 Yellow bass. Winter 2 0.031 14.04 0.0046' Yellow-bass Spring 2 0.048 38.50 0.0001 Yallow bass Summer. 2 0.024 15.07 0.0030
, Yellow bass - Fall 2 0.014 17.32 0.0019 Yellow bass- Winter 3 -0.042 16.10 0.0031 Yallow bass Spring 3 0.044 30.23 0.0003
. Yellow bass Summer 3 0.031 17.82 0.0018 Yallow bass- Fall .3 0.024 11.47 0.0069
- Blu: gill. Spring 1 0.011 5.12 0.0500 Bluigill Summer 1 0.020 11.33 0.0083 Blu gill Fall 1 0.004 8.34 0.0179 .
Blurgill Spring- 2 0.016 10.85 0.0093 LBlurgill' Summer 2 0.023 16.43 0.0029 Blu: gill Fall 2 0.008 11.78 0.0075 - Bluigill Winter 3 0.021 5.92 0.0410
'Blutgill Spring 3 0.030 25.12 0.0007
. Bluegill; Summer 3 0.025 11.02 0.0089 Blurgill' Fall 3 0.003 5.34 0.0462
~RIdrar. sunfish . Spring 1 -0.003 9.49 0.0116 White crappie' Fall- 3 -0.012 6.46 0.0293
'S;uger: Spring -1 0.015 19.38 0.0013 Sluger- -Summer 1 0.015 8.85 0.0139 Sauger- Fall 1 0.020 2;.52 0.0337 S:uger Summer .2 -0.018 7.43 0.0213 Stuger- Fall 2 0.023. 15.06 0.0031 Frechwater drum Fall- 3 0.008 6.75 0.0266
*'.Station 1 - Tennessee River Mile (TRM) 473.0 Stetion 2 - TRM 483.6
'Ststion 3 - TRM 495.0 Prtbability of obtaining a value greater than F. Only those values a with a probability level of 0.05 or less are listed.
- -222-
c- l ,.
, s.
. P -
a-
~
.+y.r*^
~ Table 5-19.\ ' ean, Quarterly7 Catch per Gill Net Nigh6'(c/f) Values .
, for; Species! Showing Significant Trends, Sequoyal Nuclear
, ', s Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 197i-1983'
. . p ,
Specie,s ' ' ,
, Quarter; Statioa* Year c/f
- y a+-*
~
y ' Skipjack herring Vinter 2 , 1972 0.90
' Winter; _
2 1973 2.80
..1 p. W1.nter 2 .1974~ 3.41 _
-:U,-@ _ 1 Vinter - 2 1975 2.55-
~~
w Mint'e r ' ' ' _2 1976 2.05 s .c _
2 .1977 1 75 4
V' / .g'i.',
'.%}, ~.Winter' , Winter
. ' Wintdr _ . . '2 ~2 1978 1981-0.00 0.03 3 ~'
% . (Winter - -2 1982 0.13
-. .6.
- s s
*- ^T
. ,.Vi'.it e r ' '.i,'
2 1983 'O.46
- g. d N' s... ,
.A Gizzard shad ' " Fall 3 ~1971 2.15 '
~$-_V .. c I Fall ' 3 '
- 1972 3.65 t
s
~
' pail ,
~ .I -197.3 2.20 L. m
~
. ,-1
~
Tall
, .37 ~ . ' a1974 1.72' Fall 3 ' '1975 0.88 e
f Y Fall. 3 - _ '1976 1.50
,'" f5 JC ~ ' '
Fall 3 1977 1.28 3, , di~ - " .iFall,' . s 3 1979 2.84 . ;/~ . , ' ;%,'- *Falif _
, 3. 1980 3.90 . L~
r Fall x. 3 3 , 1981 2.23 C " 7 7 y..
.f Fall '3 , .1982 7.69
", Fall 3 1983 10.88 i m _m .
- m u ,Mooneye - Suns.er 3' 1971 4.57.
! Sti.. fr . O 3 s 1972 0.' 43 -
Suanner .' 3- 1973 , .4.72 Sussner ' s - 3 . 1974 4.60
'Q 2
,I Tu maer Summer / -3
- 3 -
1975 0.82
./ f w. - 3 ,
19'76 0.05
./ 2- Summera ,.m 3 1977 1.10 -
$_'- -w ' ' Summei .' 3 , 1979 1.10
( Sunumer 3 1980 1.13 j , . __
'"^
. Sununer ; 3. ~ 1981 0.82 r,/ , , Summer -3~ 1982 0.15
\
." < D' ;
< . Summer- , 3' 1983 0.08
- q L, , m ^ "
Blue catfish . Winter _ .2 1972 0.75
,/
WinteE' ^ . 2 1973 0.62
~w
, s. m / '
Winter' 2 1974 0.62 v f ,. _ Winter <- -2 1975 0.95
- f ' #;' / .<
Winter ~- 2 - 1976 1.08 Vinter 2 1977 0.68
< Winter ,
/, 2 1978 -0.12
/ a- ,
"Wint6r- -
2'- 1981 0.00
- e ,. 'N .
, # J! Winter ,2- 1982 0.03 y
e ', - Winter . 2i- 1983 0.03
, h &
.! ',- -223--
.)
( /
,e s
g ( "i j , p Q _o, , t . . >
, _ x y8 . I g
. Table 5-19. (Continued)
Species Quarter Station
- Year c/f Blue catfish ' Summer 3 1971 0.00 Summer 3 1972 0.32 Summer 3 1973- 0.20
- Summer -3 1974 0.34
_ Summer . 3 1975 0.12 Summer- 3 1976 0.08 Summer 3 1977 0.45 Summer 3 1979 0.02 Summer 3 1980 0.33 Summer 3 1981 0.06 Summer 3 1982 0.02 Summer 3 1983 0.00 Channelicatfish ' Winter 1 1972 0.'12 Winter 1 1973 0.12 Winter 1 1974 0.18 Winter 1 1975 0.05 Winter 1 1976 0.15 Winter- 1 1977 0.08 Winter 1 1978 0.00 Winter .1 1981 -0.00 Winter 1 1982 0.00 Winter 1- 1983 0.00 Channel catfish Summer 2 1971 1.45 - Summer 2 -1972 1.55 Summer 2 1973 1.25 JSummer 2 1974 0.72 . Summer 2 1975 0.50 Summer 2 1976 0.98 Summer 2 1977 0.58 Summer 2 1979 0.60 Summer- 2 -1980 0.61
. Summer 2 1981 0.82 Summer 2 1982 0.58
, Summer 2 1983 0.33 Yellow bass Winter -1 1972 0.03 Winter 1 1973 0.00
- c Winter 1 '1974 0.00 Winter 1 1975 0.c0 Winter 1 1976 0.00 Winter -1 1977 0.00 Winter 1 1978 0.03 Winter- 1 1981 0.00 Winter' 1 1982 0.05 ,
Winter 1 1983 0.17
-224-
~
Table 5-19. (Continued) Species Quarter ' Station
- Year c/f Yellow bass.
Spring 1 1971 0.00
~ Spring 1 1972 0.00 Spring 1 1973 0.00 Sp ring 1 1974 0.00
. Spring 1 1975 0.03 Spring 1 1976 0.03 Spring 1 1977 0.13 Spring 1 1980 0.13 Spring 1 1981 0.83 Spring 1 1982 1.98 Spring 1 1983 0.10 Yellow bass - Summer 1 1971 0.00 Summer 1 1972 0.00 Summer 1 1973 0.03 Summer 1 1974 0.00 Summer 1 1975 0.00 s Summer 1 1976 0.11 Summer 1 1977 0.43 Summer 1 1980 0.06.
Summer 1 1981 0.43 Summer 1 1982 0.65 .. Summer 1 1983- 0.45 Yellow bass- Fall 1 1971 0.00 , Fall 1 1972 0.00 Fall -1 1973 0.00 Fall 1 1974 0.00
-Fall 1 1975 0.03 Fall 1 1976 0.00 Fall 1 1977 0.03 Fall 1 1980 0.12 Fall 1 1981 0.05
" Fall 1 1982 0.03 Fall 1 1983 0.08
-Yellow bass Winter 2 1972 0.00 Winter- 2 1973 0.00 Winter 2 1974 0.05
' inter 2 1975 0.10 L Winter 2 1976 0.00 Winter 2 1977 0.25 Winter 2 1978 0.03
.- Winter 2 1981 0.07 Winter 2 1982 0.24 Winter 2 1983 0.32
-225-
. Table 5-19. (Continued)
Species Quarter Station
- Year c/f r6e -
. Yellow bass ' Spring 2 1971 0.00 Spring - 2 1972 0.00 Spring 2 1973 0.00 .
Spring 2 1974 0.00 Spring -2 1975 0.10 Spring 2 1976 0.15
,- Spring 2 1977 0.03 s Spring 2 1980 0.34
' Spring 2 1981 0.59 Spring 2 1982 1.64 Spc n2 2 1983 2.65 Yellow bass' Summer 2 1971 0.00 Summer 2 1972 0.00 Summer 2 1973 0.00 Summer 2 1974 0.03 Summer 2 1975 0.00 Summer 2 1976 0.00 Summer 2 1977 0.55
, Summer 2 1980 0.00 Summer 2 1981~ 0.23 Summer 2 1982 0.47 Summer 2. 1983 0.30 t f-
. Yellow bass Fall. 2 1971 0.00 -
Fall 2 1972 0.00 Fall 2 1973 0.00 Fall 2 1974 0.00 Fall 2 1975 0.03
' -Fall 2 1976 0.00 Fall 2 1977 0.03
' Fall ~.
2 1980 0.06 Fall 2 1981 0.08 i Fall 2 1982 0.07- ,- 'q' Fall 2 1983 0.03'
~
.~
.. ;p
- Yellow bass ~ Winter 3 1972 0.00
"' Winter 3 1973 0.00 7,
Winter 3 1974 ' 0.50 -
+
Winter 3- 1975 0.03 Winter 3 1976 0.30 Winter., 3 1977 0.58
" Winter- 3 1978 0.80
, Winter 3 1981 0.90
, t Winter i3' 1982 1.60 Winter 3' 1983 0.44 -
( e; k
, h
-226-E
\
=m
' Table 5-19. '(Continued)
Species Quarter. Station
- Year c/f Yellow bass Spring 3 1971 0.00 Spring 3 1972 0.00 Spring 3 1973 0.00 Spring 3 1974 0.03 Spring 3 1975 0.08 Spring' 3- 1976 0.08 Spring 3 1977 0.18 Spring 3 1980 0.35 Spring 3 1981 0.38 Spring 3 1982 0.80 Spring 3 1983 2.89
- Yellow bass Summer 3 1971 0.00 Summer 3 1972 0.03 Summer 3 1973 0.00 Summer 3 1974 0.00 Summer 3 1975 0.00 Summer 3 1976 0.00 Summer 3 1977 0.05 Summer 3 1980 0.28 Summer 3 1981 0.09 Summer 3 1982 0.31 Fir Summer 3 1983 0.34 Yellow bass' Fall 3 1971 0.00 Fall 3 1972 0.00 Fall- 3- 1973 0.00 Fall 3 1974 0.00 Fall 3 1975 0.00 Fall 3 1976 0.05 Fall 3 1977 0.25 Fall 3 1980 0.03 Fall 3 1981 0.00 Fall 3 1982 0.79 Fall 3 1983 0.40 Bluegill Spring 1 1971 0.15 Spring 1 1972 0.00 Spring 1 1973 0.05 Spring 1 1974 0.14 Spring 1 1975 0.00
< Spring 1 1976 0.05 Spring 1 1977 0.12
.' Spring 1 1979 0.05 Spring 1 1980 0.03 Spring 1 1981 0.45 Spring 1 1982 0.82 Spring 1 1983 0.20
-227-
1 Table 5-19. .(Continued) I
. Species Quarter Station
- Year c/f Bluegill Summer 1 1971 0.05 Summer 1 1972 0.10 Summer 1 1973 0.42 ,
Summer 1 1974 0.05 Summer 1 1975 0.02 Summer 1 1976 0.22 Summer 1 1977 0.60 Summer' 1 1979 0.08 Summer 1 1980 0.37 Summer 1 1981 0.69 Summer 1 1982 0.35 Summer 1 1983 1.40 Bluegill Fall 1 1971 0.00 Fall ~1 1972 0.00 Fall 1 1973 0.05 Fall 1 1974 0.00 Fall 1 1975 0.02
. Fall 1, 1976 0.00 Fall 1 1977 0.00 Fall 1 1979 0.00 Fall 1 1980 0.37 Fall 1 1981 0.69 Fall 1 11982 0.35 Fall 1 1983 0.05
- Bluegill Spring 2 1971 0.32 Spring 2 1972 0.52 -
Spring 2 1973 0.05 _ Spring 2 1974 a0.07 Spring. 2 1975 0.05 Spring '2 1976 0.15 Spring 2 1917 0.15 Spring -2 1979 0.05 Spring 2 1980 0.16 Spring 2 1981 0.43 Spring 2 1982 0.77 Spring 2 1983 0.90 Bluegill Summer 2 1971 0.11 Summer 2 1972 0.05 Summer 2 1973 0.28 Summer 2 1974 0.02 Summer 2 1975 0.05' Summer 2 1976 0.08 Summer 2 1977 0.28 . Summer 2 1979 0.00 Summer 2 1980 0.16 Summer 2 1981 0.59
- Summer 2 1982 0.86 Summer 2 1983 1.40
-228-4 .
f.
' Tab 1'e 5-19. (Continued)
Species Quarter Station
- Year c/f
, , Bluegill Fall 2 1971 0.08 Fall 2 1972 0.08 Fall 2 1973 0.08 Fall 2 1974 0.03 Li Fall 2 1975 0.00 Fall 2 1976 0.00 Fall 2 1977 0.02 Fall 2 1979 0.02 Fall 2 1980 0.22 Fall 2 1981 0.23 Fall 2 1982 0.18 Fall 2 1983 0.37 Bluegill Winter 3 1972 0.00 Winter 3 1973 0.08 Winter 3 1974 0.30 Winter 3 1975 0.00 Winter 3 1976 0.18 Winter 3 1977 0.78 Winter 3 1978 0.10 Winter 3 1981 0.53 Winter 3 1982 0.18 i* Winter 3 1983 1.49 Bluegill Spring 3 1971 0.00
- . Spring 3 1972 0.35 Spring .3 1973 0.22 Spring 3 1974 0.20 Spring 3 1975 0.18 Spring 3 1976 0.40 Spring 3 1977 0.18 Spring 3 1979 0.15 Spring. 3 1980 0.55 Spring 3 1981 0.88 Spring 3 1982 1.00 Spring 3 1983 2.24 Bluegill Summer 3 1971 0.50 Summer 3 1972 0.12 Summer 3 1973 0.38 Summer 3 1974 0.18 Summer 3 1975 0.45 Summer 3 1976 0.12
;. Summer 3 1977 0.32 Summer 3 1979 0.08 Summer 3 1980 0.30 Summer 3 1981 1.59 -
2* Summer 3 1982 1.15 Summer 3 1983 1.71
-229-
Table 5-19. (Continued)
. Species Quarter Station
- Year c/f Bluegill Fall 3 1971 0.08 Fall 3 1972 0.08
-Fall 3 1973 0.02 .
Fall 3 1974 0.02 Fall 3 1975 0.02 Fall. 3 1976 0.05 Fall 3 1977 0.05 Fall 3 1979 0.03 Fall 3 1980 0.13 Fall 3 1981 0.05 Fall 3 1982 0.10 Fall 3. 1983 0.22 Redear. sunfish Spring I' 1971 0.10 Spring 1 1972 0.15 Spring 1 1973 0.05 Spring 1 1974 0.03 Spring 1 1975 0.08 Sprint 1 1976 0.02 Spring .1 1977 0.08 Spring 1 1979 0.02 Spring 1 1980 0.05 Spring 1 1981 0.02 Spring 1 1982 0.00 ' Spring 1 1983 0.02 White crappie Fall- 3 1971 0.62 ' Fall -3 1972 0.68-Fall 3' 1973 0.15 Fall 3 1974 0.00 Fall 3 1975 0.08 Fall 3 1976 0.15 Fall 3 1977 0.22 Fall 3 1979 0.05 Fall. 3 1980 0.33 Fall -3 1981 0.00
~ Fall 3 1982 0.03 Fall 3 1983 0.00 Sauger Spring 1 1971 0.00 Spring 1 1972 0.00 Spring 1 1973~ 0.00 Spring 1 1974 0.05 Spring. 1 1975 0.03 Spring 1 1976 0.05 Spring 1- 1977 0.05
' Spring -1 1980 0.20 Spring 1 1981 0.10 Spring. 1 1982 0.12 ..
Spring 1 1983 0.08
-230-
Table 5-19. (Continued) Species - Quarter Station *- Year c/f _g- 'Sauger. Summer 1 1971 0.00 Summer 1 1972 0.03 Summer 1 1973 0.00 Summer 1 1974 0.00 Summer 1 1975 0.03 Summer 1 1976 0.08 Summer 1 1977 0.08 Summer 1 1980 0.06 Summer 1 1981 0.14 Summer 1 1982 0.15 Summer 1 1983- 0.08 Sauger Fall 1 1971 0.00 Fall 1 1972 0.00 Fall 1 1973 0.00 Fall 1 1974 0.08 Fall 1 1975 0.18 Fall 1 1976 0.18 Fall 1 1977 0.25 Fall 1 .1980 0.15 Fall 1 1981 0.18 Fall 1 1982 0.10
- =~ Fall 1 1983 0.00 Sauger. Summer 2 1971 0.00
,_. Summer 2 1972 0.00 Summer 2 1973 0.08 Summer 2 1974 0.05 Summer 2 1975 0.10 Summer 2 1976 0.18 Summer 2 1977 0.15 Summer 2 1980 0.26 Summer 2 1981 0.21 Summer 2 1982 0.17 Summer 2 1983 0.07 Sauger Fall 2 1971 0.05 Fat' 2 1972 0.03 Fall 2 1973 0.18 Fall 2 1974 0.19 Fall 2 1975 0.08 Fall 2 1976 0.43 Fall 2 1977 0.15
.-: Fall 2 1980 0.14 Fall 2 1981 0.13 Fall 2 1982 0.07 Fall 2 1983 0.10
-231-
Table 5-19. .(Continued) Species Quarter Station
- Year c/f Freshwater drum Fall 3 1971 0.02 Fall 3 1972 0.08 Fall 3 1973 0.05
- Fall- 3 1974 0.00 Fall 3 1975 0.08
. Fall- 3 1976 0.15 '
Fall 3 1977 0.28 i Fall 3 1979 0.00 Fall 3 1980 0.43 Fall 3 1981 0.10 Fall 3 1982 0.21 Fall 3 1983 0.35
- Station 1~- Tennesse River Mile (TRM) 473.0.
Station 2 - TRM 483.6. Station 3 - TRM 495.0.
~
2 O a e 4 O
-232-
3- N a Z U de S ST n f. a > m e o- a lag 00 z a E
.,J to d
a w i o ? B m E s.' 60
\ 3
~
9)-
, a mu M
eit
'I nk
< U.S EE
%.. . g tt s -,
38 3e i1 - a- O f I E h
- s 28- N b ~
6-
-233-
10
- STATION I STATION 2 STATION 3 -- --
> p
=
/ 't.4
! \'
Y I % ds - f\ I l \s. . 5 '
.lo '\ l E -
t, ,! i. $ g ./ \ ' l 'g ' i c4 - l \ i
\
s ,! \s ; i l \ * \ l .\ j l \ ! \ 'A~ l* ~ '
'\' \ ,- \ /
/N /\.\
/ t / \
1 s
,/ .- s. \
- s. s
/ N.
\
i i e
,/ \
i s g f'f'
,Jh './
/ '
1,d ~.,_l . h \ ,
, , , , , ~y ----- , ,
O , , , , 5 S S ,, F l W S ,g, S F l W S S F ll W 5 Fl SAMPLING QUMITER Figure 5-10. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Skipjack Herring (AJosa chrysochloris) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
- p ; f' q- _ , , ..~L
~~
'e' 3;[
^ 5
.]
18
- SWmON I - b STATION 2 /\
Sunn a - j
,\
h z '4 -
! i r I i.
m J
./-
\\
,l !
lo- != \ ./ \ / 4 d'
.g
~
!' \
\\ f
/ \ /
/
B ! ! \ A i
/ / \ /
u ~
- - / \ /s
\
/
/ 7N \ \ #s j -
,cA / \g*, / \'// o\' / 's i-' 'y .
'y x,-
/, \s...,./..- j' Ne 0 i i i , e e i e i i i i i i S S F W S S Fl W S ,, S F W S
,g l ,gg, l 1983 Fl SAbdPL1986 QUARTER Figure 5-11. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Gizzar'd Shad (Dorosoma cepedianum)
Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant-(Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
r 3.3 -
- STATION l SRTION 2 2.7 l\
= / i
~ - l \
Y / \ k.
-f 2.1 -
f 5 i \.\ U a: - ! w t ! t g 1.5 -
\
3 - l 't
\ r s
/
\
/
' I ./ "\
O.9- j \
.i \ .s .f I
i
\
/ \ / \
' \ / '
o.3-/
/
[N'N \ / \ 0.0 ,- 's, 'i ,'- , S
$~- -
F W 7 5 5 Fl
, i S F 8 W S gg l 1983 S S ;g F l W S iggi SMPLING QUARTER (Hiodon tergisus) Collected Figure 5-12. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Mooneye at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
e c .
., e, f.
2.25 -
- STATION I - .$ STATION 2 .!gj 9 S1ATION 3 \
x g 1.75 -
! i Y ! '\
d
~
! \
= ! i k I.25 -\ f I.
O E
- \
\.
! \
T' \ b \ ! t
\ l \\ " O.75 -
i j g
- i. .i xg
\ ! N /N
/ \.
O.25 - N'Ng / / 'N-g e%s % ---',.- -g e'#, g N.\ 0.00 i
---%, , _-, ,f e
\, , , __--Q,
, __ , 3. ,' -- - y , ,
S S F I W S , S F l W S S F l W S S Fi 1980 1 1981 I 1982 I 1983 I SAMPLING QUARTER Figure 5-13. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Spotted Sucker (Minytrema melanops) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
7 l- < 3.3 -
- STATION I STATION 2
~
~
2.7 - x
~
Y j 2,1 5
~
4 :h. f g 1,5 - c 8 - s
-g 10.s _ \ -
\ e N'
s -s ,/ ^s.&' O.3-O.0 s i
^#s&'
\, -
f O ", K
, "* #' , -----:---=-f',- ,
, = ,-' -- -;
W S g3S
' s,.
F Fl W S . ,g, S F W S S l S S ,, F l l SAMPLING QUARTER Figure 5-14. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Blue Catfish (Ictalurus furcatus) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.(Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
o .o' , o. e- vv. :o. ~G 3.3 - STATION I STATION 2
- $1AT10N 3 , , ,
2.7 - r 5 2 h 2.1 - d - i * . .l.5 -
/\
/ '
.f
/ '\,
g g
** ~
j
/ .s%,
/ '
,/ ^\\.\ j /'s.s-
. i /,
___/ kg 0.3 - K ;}' l
,j,-. /'%s'~~ s
'/
r ~~ ~~.- y
~
.., h 0.0 i i , . ' , . '
3 ',, ... ~ q S S 1980 yg W S 3 F W h F W 1981 l 1982 l 1963 g QUAft19% Figure 5-15. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Gnannel Catfish'(Ictalurus punctatus) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983). l
i l i 2.75 - STATION i / f STATION 2 l,t l N3 E' l\ i i
~ pt
> 5 a.e5-
=
t i t F ' l \ M t' d 1.75 -
,/
i
- i
/ i A r !
- s. I 1
? I C
1.25-1 I t 1
/
1\ f I / \-\ b - I t 5
\ -/ \
t 8
/ \
i' O.N- l I \ l \
'\ #
s \ / \ i 1
/
f' \\ ' i
/ ,
g i -f \ o.25- \ l 1
\
s' \
~~~
- s. g. N N. ._ _ ^,,,,',T, g ' > e;'l 0.00 ,- - - N-q __ _ m::.
i a -~~ ,_, ' , ' ' y y , 3 S F Iy S 5 h W 5 5 S 3 _ _ _ _s===u I iggg l 1982 l 1985 Fl" SAMPUNG QUARTER 1 Figure 5-16. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for White Bass (Norone chrysops) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
3.25 - 2.75 - L j{ i1 i\ 2.25 - i\
; \
? g I -
\
- sanow \
- srarion 2 Suma s 3 /-i i j i.7s -
si ! - u fi. / \
- o \ i \
I\ ,! \ 3 s .i i. e l ,\. I ' 4 a g 1.25 -
'f I \
i l'
\s j
I t, 5 j
\~
t j c -
\ '
!. i b ! \ \
'N '
go75 -
.i 'is ,,k 1 r I
.i N.
s kr / f'As
$ i N \ \
e i \ ' / x f / 's j l \. ' '
\.
's j o.25 - N.Nx /
/
/
/ N.
Ns N l \ g, y' \ Ns /
/ i . __. __
N 0.00 - ,
~~~- . x-l -
\~,.'Nwe !
l
/
,- \NNy 8
8 F W i S
. , , , b, ' , , ,
N 1960 l gg, S F W S l g S F W S S SAMPLING QUARTER l Fl Figure 5-17. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Yellow Bass (Morone mississippiensis) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
/
1.8 - f \
/ - \.\
j
\.
- S1ATION I
/.
j- \ H STATION 2 .O \
/\- j j STATION 3 \
E 1.4 -
,!'\. !
_l z
\
Q l \ / \
, y i
~
i \ l i \
\
= i .\ /\
i W g1.0-B / I
/ \
\
\ i l's'-) . \.
\
I. i i l l'
! 's \
is\ Y . '
/
\ llA \\ \ l
's i \ .i l \. .i ,!
b ./ .!,
\
\ ! l s
\
/ s \\
u o.6 w
/ / \-\ l l l s
\
.\. / \ lll' \
\~
! ! \
l / ! I
-R N / \~ /! \ \ 's l
- 0.2 -
/
N/
'l ,
\
\
\% /l l'
' 'x'N.l \.
% ~~~,---
'n's'
\'
/ N / t. N '
O.0 i i i N* i 8 e i , , , , , , , 8 8 l 1982 l 1983 l 1980 l 1981 SAMPLING QUARTER 2 Figure 5-18. Mean Quarterly Catch per-Gill Net Night for Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983). O 9 , 9
~
7 gJ . :, ; ~
- F ,o?
a so - 8.15-- l
-g l4. g:- 'Y -
t4o- / .i i \ 35- ,i \ I t.30- 5
. ,f I \
}
oss-X' l \ 0 80-l \
.l t o.se- samon i !
f.g g sumon a f \
/ g s1MRoM 3 / I
/ \
a45- \ ! I L w g .
/
i i \, i i
/ l \
f d e3s- /
\ i\ -j 8 9
\ s
't I \
g -l \/ s/
\
\ !\l
-l
! \ i 5 an V \ / gi c [
\ /
g .!
,/
\ /
Ioss_ '
\ l j
/~\, ~
y o.os-#N ,,, ..,,,,/ \ g aco , i [3 i . . . . . =-r' . . , i s s r l w s ,,s r l w s,s rl l w s,s rl sampuns ouwmn Figure 5-19. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Redear Sunfish (Lepomis microlophus) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
- n o p I.I - sumcN I S1NION 2
_ sum 0N 3 N i "'
/\ s
/ .\
- f. s y ar- 1 \
s ] \- i
! \
y I o a s t . g as - i' \
/ \ t w 'I s l'\
l \ t s
/
0.5 -
/ g / \ '
g t A
\ l \
s
\
/ \ \ / ' g 0.1 -
/
,' \\/ \ /
\
s /
/' '
r
\. ' /N .
="'_,,
/ s T - -.-%b. _,' _x 0.0 -[gs' , , , V , y ,-
W 5 S S F I W 5 5 F I W 5 5 F l 1983 5 Fi i 1900 I 1981 1 1962 I SAMPUNG QuMITER Figure 5-20. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Spotted Bass (Micropterus punctulatus) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring.1980 through Fall 1983).
^-
i.8 fi SMTION I li2 si
*' STATION 2 SMTION 3
- 94 1 g i,
;J I \
I \ h I.0 -
' \
4 5 'g !'%, =' a - I' ,
* ! \ '
/
\
" 0.6 -
$ \ j \
/ i i o
\ \
- 1 i / \
/ ~ .1 / \
N.
~
I \/ s\ g m r 3
%'k w g ~ ~ < ~~~.
# [
,,,,.<"'n'N.,
- 0.o , , , , , i y . . . . . . . i S S F l W 5 S F i W S S F i W S S Fl 1980 I 198I i 1982 1 1983 i SAMPLING QUARTER
~
Figure 5-21. Mean Quarterly Catch per. Gill Ne; Night for-White Crappie (Pomoxis annularis) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980-through Fall 1983).
-M i
f SIRT 'A 6 t MJ2 \ 0.35 - Swa s ,f s
- i \ .
I l' \
* ~
1 .\ t; . I- -\ z /\ l \ d 0.as I \ i i i
\
J
'* ! i i' \
r l' .i \ , E g 1 s
'- \ g Z ;E \ / \ .i \ / N .
h os E I \ j / s ms
/ \ i 's \ /\
'M i
/\\ i '
-j / \ '/ s v
/
\-s-
\x.
\ %I
/ r
/ s
\ -
.I /
/ \
\
s g%
\\t ;! ,/
\
./ \, .\.
\'i/
s r \
\ / \s \ ,f--
e,
\/ ss it ,/ s ,
0.os-si
\y /-
\
\ .
,s N.
j f s i
'N/
es
\ '
\ <
\' \, ,/
f- ~
\ j
\} , ' '
,s 'N N
\/ Y,' -
0.00 i e i i f . \s/- , 1 e S .___ F i W i S S F I W S S F i W S S Fi i S 1 1981 I 1982 I 1985 im i SAAAPLING QUARTER Figure 5-22. Mean Quarterly Catch per Gill Net Night for Sauger (Stizostedion canadense) Collected
-at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
= ,-
~ '
o . . ;g-
.i J:)
l 1.5-
- STATION 1 ----
STATION 2 y 1.3 - STATION 3 A-5 / l\\ E [_I h I.I d s l \
- / \ , 0.9 f g t -
I \ h !
\
Q' f 0.7 I l \
\ ^
8
/ \ / \
E O.S - ' j j \.
~
[ \ '\ f' \ 0.3-f
/ \
\ / 'N /
f i -
,./
,/N,N,
\ \g
N.s j
/ /__-qs? g . , ,. / / 's, 0.1 -
g Q \ ,,,,_j/ O.0 -i i i i i e i e i i i i i S S F lW S S .F W S S F W S- S gg, l , l 3 Fl SAtrLING QUARTER Figure 5-23. Mean Quarterly catch per Gill Net Night for Freshwater Drum (Aplodinotus grunniens) Collected at Three Stations in Chickamauga Reservoir near Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Spring 1980 through Fall 1983).
s 5.2.3 Cove Rotenone
! Materials and Methods
' Fish sampling with 'rotenone was initiated in Chickamauga Reservoir in 1947 to: determine standing stock (numbers /ha and kg/ha) of game, prey, and commercial fish species. Samples were taken at various locations, primarily.in coves, annually through 1959 (with the exception of 1948 and l1953). .In addition to standing stock information, these data provided species occurrence and composition information and characterized the over-
~
all fish community of the reservoir. Sampling was discontinued after 1959 but was' resumed in-1970 to collect preoperational data for monitoring possible impacts from operation of SQN. Rotenone sampling procedures were standardized for use in Tennessee Valley reservoirs after 1960 to include use of block nets and standard survey techniques. Prior to this, techniques varied from year to year and ei '
.from one reservoir to another. Sampling in Chickamauga Reservoir from 1947 s .through 1960 included: (1) use of varying techniques for determining . area , 'and volume of the sample site, (2) some samples conducted without the use of block nets, and (3) undescribed subsampling techniques. In additio'n to 21 cove samples, two samples were conducted in open water areas.
Field--Cove rotenone sampling since 1970 was designed to elimi-nate certain biases through establishment of criteria for sample sites and standardization of field techniques. ' Criteria for an acceptable rotenone
- site were: (1) surface area at least 0.4 ha; (2) depth not more than 7.5 m where block net is set; (3) location not adjacent to or within the same
.z , cove as housing developments, boat. docks, or other recreation areas; 4 ' (4) absence of streams or other sensitive habitats; and (5) easy access by
. -248-
g __
-y ,,
lI ' % s'. ' u q u} "
~
g ! l
. , , m.hp.
\ \ s
~
t ring operatio\ \ s.41Wonitofingfi*r1coveswer'esampledeachyearin
-' " ' boa, t )wU
> j "A ,!
j, Qt k Ch/ckaynuga Reservoih These'co es w qe-located'ad TRM 476.2, 473.0,
- w. . y;, ,
} N
" 495.0, 508,.0, and 524.)b (figure 5-2f'h Depript; ions of sample sites
;i ' ?g y ,
k (1947-19f21 t ,.e are in - table Sp{0. ,' s 34 ? s c .
.s 1.t (si.
y 1 - . . r roter.one samplingsinclude:
/.Standardzedfieldtechhiqtres\,fo,. s x s- ( ,___,
k %% es (1)'.sadp]ing when water tesiparature kis dO* C; (2)-accurate surveying of
-) . %. .a e -
t surface area with % t+.
- me day prior to etndit:ti{g. w-sample; (3) block net set on the af ternoon pri Ajgsampling; (4) scub{-diver check of block net to ~
s .
, s
" Le>
$ $f " ensure isolation of 'samplh areW[3) dgterirination of physical and chemical 9
g, U"g %s b
^pr5petties of the somple'a7 4, (O application of 'ratenm.e ,.to' attain a
'( % 7 4A s
t 's N 'p ,t Nw s 110'mg/ 'concentra ionN(I toxicant; , (7) p @ up'ot'all+ visible fish on two ( 4\ ~.N i eqif.gqv.t.ivegys;and:(8)specifiedaorl,!ng, counting, weighing,subsampling,
" (
h3. .c g
\'
+. ;
and' g dat,a' cording
%] procedures.
h N.<, g m ..'.
^"
,~
"" l %i s ,
h-},Phy'sicalpropertiesmeasurq$'*iere~autfacearee(,maximuendepth, g (i , PA , (% g _
" apd -
an ' depth (obtained thrh.gh a systeestic ser'i f depth s'o'undings).
,. + \ \ >
i N Hean depth, and ' surface area were hsed t(> determineihe v0ume of the cove ( ' u-
- and,th&by,theamountof'toxicantfahssarytoachie[agncentration
\V\ 6
^ ' of 1.0 ;pWi[' ,
(, 'N $$ 1 (Rotenonewasappliedwithappsangwheighted,perforatedhose
~ .
2 \ \{ \ to distribyte yeg,$pxf cynt (%+ evenly at' al depths. -Initially a curtain of s- -- y . ( (N rotenone was sphlfed adjacent to the block ndt to pnNerf, small, fish from { \ r escaping. 'Following this, rotencne was distributed.by perating the boat
.g. , . w\
in a zigzag pattertt'throughout the cove., Fi}is11y,pallowshorelineareas y%; w l~; , were surface sprayed with rotenone to ensure completescoverage pf the area, . tg
<Allvisiblefishwerepickeduptheday.9(.npplicatNnandaor.te'd1,yspecies. L e* g w A d
- y % s .~.
SmY1 fish (e.g. , Notropis sp.) were preiched\,in It'10. percent formalin -
'y -
_ , ?,, '\ e' .- ; . solution and returned to the laboratory Jur,. identification. Each ren.aining
.g . g .
\
.s ,,
k.\) s
..h, a-~
m i. ~249- A ( wz> s q s , .%
, o
.s s
ks a e c+ ..-r,f,. - . + , _ . . _ - , . . , _ . , ,_-
. . . .. _ _ _m . . . _ . _ - _. . .. . _ _ _ _
species was then sorted into groups by 25 mm length increments. Each size c ~ group was counted and the aggregate' weight recorded. Occasionally, some length groups-were so numerous that it was not practical to count each I" fish. In these cases a subsample of that length group was counted and d ~. weighed. Remainder of the size class was then weighed collectively and
. numbers estimated by the relationship:
Numbers in *,; Weight of _ Numbers in *, Weight of subsample subsample - remainder remainder In 1982 and 1983, a modified subsampling procedure was imple-
.mented to process large numbers of young centrarchids (Leposis sp.). Small centrarchids (< 76 mm total length) were separated from the remaining cove Lsample, and a 1 kg subsample was processed. Fish in the subsample were sorted'toJapecies, separated into,25-mm length groups, then counted and s weighed. . The . remainder of the cample was weighed collectively. Numbers of 0 each species and size groups were then determined by using a relationship
'similar to that described above. Fish collected the second day were pro-cessed'in the same way, except that' numbers only were recorded for each
' size class offesch species. Weights of second-day fish were calculated
.from length-weight relationships derived from first-day fish.
~
' Fish were' grouped into game,-commercial, and prey species and
~ classified as young, intermediate,'and' adults, based on total length
- (table 5-21).
Data Analyses--Standing stocks of each species were calculated by size class. Standing stocks of young, intermediate, and adult size classes
* 'of "important" species were analyzed using a linear regression model to determine statistically significant trends over the period 1970 through 1983. Important species were. determined by the following criteria:
.-250-
- _ l.. _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - . . . . _ _ , . , . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . -
g j- .a --*
- y. y y s s 's l'
( - .
'l ; . m.
m 1. i Must occur in. a?. . lust 50 percent of samples since 1970, and
) ,
.. ,t ,
I p' / .2 Must comprise'one-percent of either the total number or total
, r/ ..'
' ~
.(49 biomass' collected. *
-r,
.1 ff
[ , In' addition to species meeti.;tg the above criteria, certain species
~3 of, speciel interest were included for analysis because of their importance J
as /spart,o'r comunercial species. For each important species, Kruskal-Wallis
~, , r, ,
rank sums < analyses as modified by Dunn (Hollander and Wolfe, 1973) were used to determine significan'. stand og stock differences among three areas of Chickamauga Reservoir .or the preoperational period (1970-1979) and
- ,s, operational period (19801983). Areas of the reservoir were defined as:
; {^
(1) downstream area QTRM .471.0 to TRM 484.5), (2) middle area (TRM 484.5 to
/ !
TRM 500."0),cand (3) upstrearvarea.(TRM 500.0 to 529.9).
? ,
') .
.Results and Discussion In 1983, 38, species representing 12 families were collected in
.h '
coverotenonefsamplesinChickamaugaReservoir(table 5-22). All species , I collected in l'983 previously had occurred in cove rotenone samples for preoperational and operational monitoring in this reservoir (table 5-23). Numerically, bluegill was the most abundant species (33 percent), followed by redear sunfish (20 percent) and threadfin shad (17 pen ent). Although cizzard shad only co'aprised about 8 percent by number, they comprised 55 percent.of the total biomass sampled, whereas biomass of blue, gill, redear sunfish,-and threadfin shad was 7 percent, 4 percent, and 5 percent, respectively. Freshwater drum also made up about 7 percent.of total biomass, but this species only comprised 0.6 percent of the total number. .
-251-
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _e _ _ . _
i Standing stock of all young, intere.ediate, and harvestable size
+
classes of fish in Chi:kamauga Reservoir in 1983, determined by five cove rotenone samples, was 50,223 fish /ha with a biomass of 441 kg/ha (table 5-24). Young-of-year fish represented 93 percent of the standing stock by number and about 16 percent of the biomass, whereas harvestable size fish comprised 78 percent of the biomass, numerically this size class only was 5 percent of the standing stock. Forage species dominated biomass in 1983 (272 kg/ha; 62 percent; table 5-25). Game and commercial fish comprised 17 percent (76 kg/ha) and 21 percent (94 kg/ha) of the biomass, respectively. About 65 percent of the game fish population oy number were young of year, primarily bluegill and other sunfish. Young of year comprised 7= percent of the game fish
-biomass.
Temporal and Spatial Trends--Seventy-one species encompassing 15 families were collected in cove rotenone samples in Chickamauga Reservoir
- ,. Efrom 1970 through 1983 (table 5-23). Mean numbers per hectare by species
.and 1ccation are shown in appendix W, and mean biomass estimates are shown in appendix X. Bluegill was- the predominant species, comprising 41 percent of the total number of fish collected (appendix Y). Only three species (gizzard shad, bluegill, and freshwater drum) were present in all- cove samples from 1970 th' rough.1983 (appendix Z). Appendices AA and BB show annual' mean number and biomass, respectively, of each species collected in rotenone samples.
Numbers of young fish were highest in 1981, and biomass of harvest-
- .. able fish was highest in 1983 (table 5-24). Table 5-25 shows a general increase in numbers and biomass of game fish.from 1970 through 1983, with no distinct trend for either commercial or prey fish groups.
-252-w r-- -. .-,, - r ,
1
'Important Species--Nineteen species were classified as important in cove rotenone samples (table 5-26). Results of linear regression analyses ,, (table ~5-271 and numerical abundance and biomass of young, intermediate,
- and adult size classes of each species through time are discussed below.
~
Spatial differences among the three areas of the reservoir (tables 5-28 through 5-31) are also noted. Gizzard shad--Biomass of adialt gizzard shad increased substantially in 1983.(table 5-32). From 1970 through 1983, statistically significant increasing or decreasing trends were not found for either numbers or bio-mass of adult gtzraro ahad in Chickamauga Reservoir. However, biomass of young-of-year gizzard shad showed a significant increasing trend. In the Watts Bar Nuclear ' Plant (WBN) preoperational fisheries monitcring (1970-1979) (TVA, 1980) a statistically significant increasing trend was observed for tsumbers of adult gizzard shad. Results of linear regression analysis (table 5-27) can be considerably influenced by the most recent values for a given species, particularly if the species exhibits large year class vari-ability as is the case with gizzard shad. . Spatial distribution analyses of gizzard shad during preopera-tional monitoring (1970-1979) indicated greater numerical abundance in the upstress area of Chickamauga Reservoir than in either middle or downstream areas (table 5-28). Ne statistically significant differences in biomass were found among the three areas (table 5-29). Operational monitoring analyses (1980-1983) showed no significant spatial differences in numbers or biomass of gizzard shad (tables 5-30 and 5-31). Threadfin shad--Over the period 1970 through 1983, only numbers of young-of-year showed a significant decline (table 5-27). No significant - differences in numbers or biomass were found among the three areas of
-253-
Chickamauga Reservo'ir during either the preoperational or operational phase. Because no statistically significant trends were identified through
.1981, the linear regression analysis was influenced by the 1982 estimates (see discussion for gizzard shad). Estimated numbers of threadfin shad in 1983 were about 9,000/ha compared to about 370/ha in 1982 (table 5-33).
a Carp--Young-of-year carp increased (both numbers and biomass) in Chickamauga Reservoir (table 5-27) over the period of study (1970 through 1983), but no statistically significant trend was observed for numbers or biomass of intermediate or adult carp. In previous analyses (TVA, 1978b and 1980) no af gnificant trends were observed. However, in these reports it was noted tbst cove rotenone probably does not. adequately sample smaller size. classes of.this species. Young-of-yesr and intermediate carp are relatively uncommon ir cove rotenone samples (table 5-34), and statistically - significant incr. casing- or decreasing trends should be interpreted with caution.
- Biomass and numbers of carp were significantly higher in the upstream portion of Chickamauga 9eservoir (TRM 500 to TRM 529.9) than in 4
other areas during preoperational monitoring (tables 5-28 and 5-29). However, results of cove rotenone samples for operational monitoring indicate no significant differences for biomass or numbers of carp among the three 1. U , areas of the reservoir.
~
' Bullhead minnow--Bullhea'd minnow occurrence prior to 1971 was Japoradic but this cbservation may have bean due to misidentification of 7;- this species. Since 1971, stocks have been relatively high (table 5-35)
-3 ,
cf and have shown an increasing trend through time (table 5-27). No signi-
'ficant'ditierences in standing stocks were found among the three areas of the reservoir.
s
-254- # 1
I Smallmouth buffalo--Over the period 1970 through 1983, both numbers and biomass of intermediate and adult size classes of this species have declined significantly (table 5-27). However, total numbers (40/ha).
- of smallmouth buffalo increased in 1983 and were similar to levels observed
~
in 1971 and-1972 (table 5-36). No significant differences in standing stocks (numbers or biomass) of this species among the three areas of Chickamauga Reservoir have occurred under preoperational (1970-1979) or operational conditions (1980-1983) (tables 5-28 through 5-31). Spotted sucker--Biomass and numbers of adult spotted sucker increased significantly through 1982, but this trend for biomass was reversed in 1983 (table 5-27). Biomass and numbers of young of year also showed a significant decreasing trend. Spotted sucker was not identified in rotenone samples in Chickamauga Reservoir prior to 1959. As noted in a previous report (TVA, 1982) this species may be neariug the end of an expansion phase. A decrease in total bl.) mass since 1982 supports this observation (table 5-37). Since SQN operation began, significant differences in standing stocks of spotted sucker among-the three areas of the reservoir have not . j been noted, whereas in preoperational analyses, biomass of this species was
- significantly greater in the upper area than in the middle area (table 5-29).
I Channel catfish--Intermediate size channel catfish continued to s decrease (both numbers and biomass) through time, whereas biomass of adults continuedtoincreasetbroughtime(table 5-27). 'A declining trend was also noted for intermediate size channel catfish in previous reports (TVA, 1978b; 1980; and 1983). Total biocass of this species increased in 1983 (table 5-38). No significant differences were noted among the 3 reservoir areas during either preoperational (table 5-28) or operational monitoring . (table 5'-30) for SQN.
-255-
N Flathead catfish--No significant trend for biomass or numbers of
.; any size class of this species was determined (table 5-27). Although relatively low numbers were collected, numbers of this species were highest -~
in the middle area of the reservoir during preoperational monitoring (table 5-28). Operational monitoring numbers and biomass in the middle area were significantly greater than in the upper and downstream areas (table 5-30 and 5-31). Total biomass estimates for flathead catfish since 1970 have seldom exceeded 1.0 kg/ha (table 5-39). White bass--Numbers and biomass of adult white bass, although relatively low, showed a significant increasing trend (table 5-27). No significant stock differences were found among the three reservoir areas since operation began. However, during preoperational monitoring both numbers and biomass were significantly higher upstream than downstream. Total biomass estimates for this species have been consistently below l.0 kg/ha (table 5-40).
,. Yellow bass--All size classes of this species increased signi- ,
ficantly (both numbers and biomass) since 1971 when this species was first
~ ~
recorded in cove rotenone samples (table 5-27). Because yellow bass did
. not meet criteria for important species in SQN preoperational analyses, this trend was firsw documented in the WBN preoperational_ monitoring report (TVA, 1980). During preoperational monitoring and since operation began, no significant differences in the standing stock among the three reservoir
' areas were detected. Total' biomass for this species was highest (10 kg/ha) in 1981, and total numbers were highest in 1982 (table 5-41).
g Warmouth--All three size classes of this species increased sign-
-ificantly (both numbers and biomass) through time (teble 5-27). Warmouth
.: did not meet criteria for_"important species" status when SQN preopera-h
-256-
. . - . _ =. _
tional studies were analyzed (TVA, 1978b). When data were analyzed for the WBN preoperational report (1970-1979), . waroouth abundance'had increased to
~
mekt these criteria. ' Linear regression analyses for WBN preoperational
- monitoring-revealed that, with the exception of numbers of young warmouth,
- all size groups were increasing significantly. Numbers of young warmouth
. per hectare had increased but the trend was not statisticaliy significant.
No.significant differences in numbers or biomass were found among the three areas of - the- ressrvoir durIng preoperation or. operstion. For the past
~
4 - d ree years. total numbers have exceeded 100/ha (table 5-42). Bluegill--Numbers and biomass of young-of year of this species increased significantly through time (table 5-27). A significant increasing or' decreasing trend for other size' groups was not determined. However,
-estimated total biomass for this species increased about 8 kg/ha in 1983
. compared to 1982 (table 5-43). ~During the preoperational period for FQN (TVA,_1978b);only numbers of young bluegill exhibited a significant 6
(increasing) trend. I.Preoperational data analyses'for WBN (TVA, 1990) indicated numbers of all three size classes increased while biomass of only
!the' young-size cit.is showed'a similar trend. Based on recent results, it
~
-appears that' young-of-year bluegill in Chickamauga continue to increase.
lit remains to be seen if this trend will continue or if this merely re-presents a. fluctuation or cyclic phenomenon. As indicated in previous analyses-(TVA, 1983). an increase in aquatic vegetation in Chickamauga
. Reservoir has contributed to higher standing stochs of centrarchids, parti-cularly young-of-year. In contrast to the preoperational. period, sig-nificant differences were found among the 3 areas of the reservoir since Loperation began (tables 5-30 and 5-31).
~
Numbers and biomass were signi- * ' _ficantly less in the upper area (weeds less abundant) relative to the .,, downstream area.
-257-
- s. - __ %
a
. Longear sunfish--Neither numbers nor biomass of any size group was found to be increasing or decreasing. Previous analyses (TVA, 1978b and 1980)'showed increases for young and intermediate sizes, although adult numbers and biomass exhibited no trend. Both numbers and biomass of this species were significantly lower upstream than in either of the other two reservoir areas in both the operational and preoperational periods (tables 5-28 through 5-31). Previous analyses showed numbers and biomass were higher in the downstream area than in the upstream area. Total biomass was'less than 2 kg/ha for the 1981-1983 period (table 5-44).
Redearfsunfish--Total biomess for this species in 1983 was 18.kg/ha (table 5-45).- As in previous analyses, biomass and numbers of young redear
' sunfish showed a significant increasing trendf(table 5-27). Biomass and numbers'of. intermediate and numbers of adult size classes also showed a a , Esignificant increasing. trend. This general increasing trend is probably related to increased. aquatic macrophytes in Chickamauga Reservoir. No significant difference in standing stocks was found among the three areas.
of the reservoir for preoperational or operational' monitoring. r.
' Largemouth bass--Numbers of all 3 size classes of largemouth bass
, chowed an increasing trend;(table 5-27). Biomass of young-of-year and adult size, classes also increased significantly. No.significant difference in abundance among the, three areas of the reservoir was determined during preoperational monitoring, but under operational monitoring (1980-1983),
biomass has been significantly higher in the downstream area relative to
~
1x the upstream-area ~(table 5-31). Since 1978, total biomass of this species I's 1has~ exceeded 10 kg/ha (table'5-46). Increasing abundance of young and , intermediate largemouth-bass may be directly related to increases in young ^.. - 1 bluegill.and'other centrarchids.
- 2,5 8 -
,v w. --
e -- _ . s, e ~,--w - - ~ - - - ~
l l White. crappie--Neither increasing nor decreasing trends were
'found for-number or biomass of young.and adults of this species. Biomass
.of the intermediate size class continued to show a decreasing trend (table 5-27). Although data-analyses for.,the SQN preoperational report
~
-revealed declining. numbers and biomass of, adults (TVA, 1978b), more recent-analyses performed for the WBN preoperational report (TVA, 1980) showed
.neitherl increasing.norl decreasing trends. White crappie were significantly more abundant (both numbers and biomass) in the upstream area of Chickamauga Reservoir than in the middle and downstream areas during preoperation
-(tables 5-28 and 5-29). Since operational' monitoring began, the middle area has had the' highest numbers, significantly greater than the downstream area-(table 5-30). Stace'1970, total biomass of white crappie estimated by cove rotenone.sauries has not' exceeded 5 kg/ha (table 5-47).
SJuger--As in previous analyses, sauger sbowed neither increasing nop decreasing trends for any size class, although this species has not
, been collected in'rotenone samples'since 1979 (table 5-48). No significant-
, differences were found among the three areas of the reservoir during pre- ..
operation or _ operation. This species is seldom collected in coves. Yellow perch--Both numbers and biomass of intermediate and adult sizes of yellow parch showed increasing trends through time (table 5-27). Biomass of young-of-year is the only category not showing a significant
. increasing trend. This species. invaded Chickamauga Reservoir sometime i; is after'1959 and'first appeared in cove rotenone samples.in 1970. Adults were first collected in cove rotenone samples in 1978. At the time data analyses were performed for the SQN preoperational report (TVA, 1978b),
only young hadfbeen collected, and no trend could be determined. At the .; time' data analyses were performed'for WBN preoperational report (TVA,
-259-
l l 1 1980), intermediate and adult size classes had only been collected for two l en years, and linear ~ regression analyses showed increasing trends. Most recent results confirm that this species has become established in Chickamauga,
"*: and the-population is expanding, although totat biomass has not exceeded 4-kg/ha (table 5-49). During the operational and preoperati" al periods,
, " significantispatial differences in abundance of this species were determir. .J. During preoperation, biomass and numbers were higher in both the middle and downstreem areas than in the upstream area (tables 5-28, 5-29). Since , ' operation began, numbers in the middle area continue to be significantly higher than those upstream (table 5-30). Also, biomass in the middle area e is significantly greater.than in either the upstream or downstream area
~
(table 5-31).
'treshwater drum--Both numbers and biomass of young and inter-mediate size freshwater drum have decreased with time in Chickamauga Reservoir (table 5-27). DataLanalyses performed for the SQN.preoperational report
;r (TVA, 1978b) did not-reveal these trends; however, analyses for the WBN preoperational report (TVA, 1980) documented declining trends (both no./ha-
- and kg/ha) of young and intermediate size freshwater drum.
It was noted in section.5.1.2 of this report that entrainment percentage of. freshwater drum eggs and larvae at SQN exceeded hydraulic entrainment percentage. Whereas this.provides a possible explanation of declining stocks of young and intermediate. size. classes of this species, entrainment effect is not con-
' sidered likely because-(1) statistically.significant decreasing trends were first documented from data collected through 1979 (before unit 1 fuel load
,g at SQN)', and (2) substantial numbers. of freshwater drum eggs and larvae were present downstream of SQN diffusers where they are not subject to er entrainment. Even if declining stocks of young and intermediate size
-260-v r -n v - - - -w w - - - -y
m-H s classes are ' plant. related, effects to Chickamauga Reservoir would not necessarily be-considered adverse. 'Also, both numbers and biomass of
~
young-of-year and intermediate' size classes showed substantial increases in _1983.over other recent years. ' Declining stock levels have nat been recorded
- for the adult sizeiclass.of freshwater drum (table 5-50). In the pre-
_ operational _ period (1970-1979)-this1 species was found to be most abundant 4 1(both .numbersL and biomass) in-the ' upstream portion of Chickamauga (tables 5-28
, . and 5-29). Analyses of samples since operation began show that numbers of freshwater' drum are still highest.in the upstream area of the reservoir
.(table'5-30).
Summary and Conclusions Cove rotenone samples collected'in 1983 as part of operational J. . monitorin'g'for SQN were analyzed along'with those collected from 1970 t .through 1979 (preoperation)=and with those from 1980 and 1982 (operation). . A11' species (38)~ collected in 1983 previously had-occurred.in cove rotenone samples for preoperational or. operational monitoring in .this reservoir. Mean annual standing stock'of all size classes of fish in Chickamauga Reservoir-in.1983 was 50,223 fish /ha with a biomass of 441 kg/ha. .Numeri-cally, bluegill was.the most abundant species (33 percent), followed by
~
lreadear, sunfish (21 percent). However, gizzard shad comprised 55 percent of theLtotal standlig biomass, whereas biomass of bluegill was about 8 percent.
- 'Since'1978.there has been a general increase in numbers and'
. biomass of game fish but no apparent trend for commercial- or prey fish J
groups. Previous analyses-(1982) indicated.that the general increase in - 6
-261-
-n- - -- - .c _
5 game fish species, particularly centrarchids (e.g., bluegill, redear sunfish, fand largemouth bass), may be attributed to an increase in aquatic vegetation
~
4
~ in this reservoir. The second factor which probably influenced the variation
- A .in fish stocks during this period was two extremely cold winters in 1977-1978 and 1978-1979. For example, extensive winter kills of threadfin shad occurred. -However, in 1983 substantial increases in numbers and biomass of
' threadfin shad occurred.
Nineteen species were classified'as.important in cove rotenone samples. -Of.these, neither increasing nor decreasing trends (numbers or biomass) were found.for any size group of two species (longear sunfish and
- sauger). Increasing numbers and' / or biomass of at least one size class were found for ten ' species (carp, gizzard shad, channel catfish, white bass, H
. yellow bass, warmouth, bluegill, redear sunfish, largemouth bass, and yellow perch). Two species-(yellow bass and warmouth) increased in both
-; numbers and biomass of all three size groups. Adults of seven species 4_ (channel catfish, yellow bass, warmouth,' bluegill, redear sunfish, large-
- mouth bass, and yellow perr.h) were increasing either in numbers or biomass.
Decreasing stocks (both numbers and biomass) of one or more size classes of s Jf" five species (threadin-shad, smallmouth buffalo, spotted sucker, channel-a.. catfish,.and' freshwater drum) were determined.
- Comparison of present trends to those determined in preopera-tional data anlyses for SQN (TVA, 1978b) and WBN (TVA 1980) revealed that 1
(1) smallmouth buffalo, previously decreasing in cove rotenone samples, no
- longer- met . criteria for important= species; (2) three species (bullhead
. : minnow, yellow bass, and warmouth) which did not meet criteria for -impor-tant species consideration at the time of SQN preoperational analyses have
- (, increased'to_the
- point they now meet these criteria; (3) one species
-262-e p= y -- n,+p- , e--- --,. g- e- -en.-~ m s->~ , m ,-,- - ,
- y p m g- m-
(longear sunfich) which'ch:w2d increscos for at least ona size class in preoperational analyses no longer shows any trend, (4) of seven species which presently show increasing numbers or biomass of adults, two species . (channel catfish' and largemouth bass) showed no ' increasing trend 'for either adult numbers or biomass in preoperational analyses for SQN and/or WBN, and - (5) one_ species (white crappie) which showed declining adult numbers and biomass in preoperational data analyses for SQN no longer shows such a trend. Only declining stocks of young and intermediate size freshwater idrum might be related to operation of SQN. However, it was unlikely that entrainment of eggs and larvae was .the primary cause of declining stocks in l Chickamauga Reservoir since (1) declining trends were first documented prior to unit 1-fuel load and (2) substantial numbers of freshwater drum eggs and larvae were present downstream of the diffusers where they would not be subjected to entrainment. Also, habitat modification (primarily the
~
increase in aquatic vegetation),may affect the distribution of freshwater
~ -drum such that-occurrence in cove rotenone samples has changed. The abrupt ,
increase in numbers and biomass of the intermediate size class in 1983 (f rom coves without weeds), similar to levels six years ago, indicates that young-of year are not continually declining. 'Also, recruitment to adult stocks does not appear to be decreasing b'ecause the adult size class has not shown statistically signific t declines. Compariscas of abundance (numbers and biomass) of important species in three areas of Chickamauga Reservoir showed that the number of significant differences in abundance among the three areas has generally decreased since operation began. Numbers of eight species were signifi- ,
.cantly different among areas during preoperation. Since operation began,
-263-
e l l l numbers of five species were significantly different. In every case 1 I
- a. -abundance was higher, except for freshwater drum, in the downstream or l
. middle area than in the upstream area. Significant differences in biomass
.among areas were'noted for eight' species during preoperation (gizzard shad, carp, spotted sucker, white bass, longear sunfish, yellow perch, freshwater drum, and white crappie). Biomass of five species (flathead catfish, bluegill, longear sunfish, largemouth bass, and yellow perch) was signifi-cantly different since operation began. Biomass also was higher in the downstream or middle area than in the upstream area.
E. 'hl ,G.
-264-
~
Table 5-20. Characteristics of Rotenone Sites in Chickamauga Reservoir, 1947 through 1983 (Chickamauga Dam Located at TRM 471.0, and
'Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Located at TRM 484.5)
~
Surface iTennessee Area Mean Maximum Tempera-River Mile Date' (Hectares) Depth (m) Depth (m) ture (C ) 471.7[ 9/ 9/54 0.81 2.7 - 26.7 "472.8 10/12/49 0.61- - 6.1 22.2 472.8. 4/26/50 0.40 - 9.2 16.1 472.8 10/17/50 0.61 - 6.1 18.9 J472.8 10/16/51 0.61 - 6.1 18.9 475.0 5/ 8/47 0.81 2.4' 4.0 15.6
.475.0 5/24/50 0.81 2.4 -
22.2 475.0 6/21/50 0.81 1.8 - 27.3 475.0 7/26/50 0.81 2.4 - 27.8
~475.2 8/ 3/70 0.90 1.5 3.2 29.5 475.7 8/ 4/70 0.89 1.8 -
29.4 475.7 9/14/71 1.26 2.0 - 25.5 1475.7 9/19/72 1.26 2.0 - - 475.7' 9/18/73 1.26 - 6.4 24.8 475.7 9/16/74 1.26 2.0 4.6 25.0 _475.7- 9/16/75-- 1.33 2.0 6.1 23.5 475.7 9/14/76 0.93 1.9 4.9 23.5 476.2 9/ 1/77 0.49 1.1 1.9 28.1 476.2 8/22/78 0.29 0.7 1.5 28.5 476.2 8/21/79 0.74 1.2 2.8 28.5 476.2 8/19/80 0.65 0.7 2.2 30.0
.476.2, 9/ 1/81 0.75 1.1 2.8 27.5 -
476.2 8/31/82 0.42 0.8 1.4 2,.5 476.2- 8/30/83 0.42 .0.8 1.8 29.5 478.0. 9/11/56 1.81 2.3 4.0 23.3 - 478.0 9/10/57 1.21 1.9 4.3 25.5 478.0 8/ 5/70 0.45 1.7 - 28.6 478.0 9/16/71 0.97 0.5 - 26.7 478.0 .9/21/72 0.97 0.5 - 28.5 ' 478.0 9/20/73 0.97 - 4.0 23.7 478.0 9/18/74 0.97 0.5 1.8 25.0 478.0 9/18/75 0.97 1.4 4.3 23.6 478.0 9/16/76 0.56 1.2. 2.4 23.0 478.0 8/30/77 0.35 1.0 2.2 27.0 478.0 '8/24/78 0.58 0.9 2.2 30.0 478.0 8/23/79 0.43 1.2 2.5 28.5 478.0- 8/21/80 0.65 1.3 2.9 31.0 1
.478.0 9/ 3/81 0.61 1.3 2.8 27.5 :
1 478.0 9/ 2/82' O.43 1.0 2.3 28.0 478.0' 9/ 1/83 0.44 1.0 2.6 28.5 484,7 7/ 6/70 0.49 1.6 - 26.0 487.5 9/20/50 0.40 - 7.0 22.2 487.5. 9/ 7/54 0.81 - 5.5 27.8 -
-487.5. 9/12/57 0.93 2.5 6.4 25.6 l
-265-
.{E Table 5-20. (Continued)
{ *- . Surface Tennessee 1 Area' . Mean Maximum Tempera-River Mile Date- (Hectares) Depth (m) Depth (m) ture (C ) 9487'.5: 9/!9/58 1.05 2.6 6.7 25.6
- 487.5*: 9/11/58 0.40- 5.5 11.6 25.6 3487.5 8/27/59: 1.05 2.6 6.5 27.8
, ;. .489.6* 10/28/52' O.40 --
4.6 15.6 489.'6 , 10/29/52 0.41 - 3.7 12.2 489.6:. 10/28/52, 0.40 - 4.6 15.6 L s489.6y , 10/29/52 ;0.41 - 3.7 12.2 492.6L . L7/;7/70 0.28 1.4 - - 495.0~ .10/21/52 0.61 - - 14.4 495 ~. 0 ~ 7/10/70 0.61 1.3 - -
'495.0 ~ 9/23/71 0.93 1.4 -
24.4
^
- 495.0; 9/28/72 0.93 1.4 - -
+
z 495!0 9/27/73 0.93 - 4.0 24.6
=495.0 9/23/74 0.93 1.4 3.7 22.0
, :495.0 :9/23/75 .0.93- 1.4 3.7- 22.8
'495.0 9/21/76 0.47: 1.2 3.7 22.2
. 3-# t495.0; '9/13/77 0.39 l~. 8 5.2 23.4
- g y , 3495.0. 8/31/78. 0.46 1.3- .3.4- 29.7 i1
, - 1495.0 -9/ 5/79_ 0.52- 1.4 3.7 27.5 495.0 8/26/80 0.58: 1. 6 = 3.7 30.0
.495.0J .8/20/81- -0.46 1.2- 3.1 24.0-
+-i L495.0s -8/19/82 0.46 -- 1.4 -3.4 29.0-495 0 8/18/83 0.41: 1.2. 3.1 .28.5 9 . . 11.2 9 7/27/70' O.55 1. 2 , 3.4 25.3 J9/13/56' O.81 1.7- ~3.1
- .
- 2.5 21.7.
- 2.5 9
~
~ 7/28/70- 0. 9 6 .- '1.3 - 29.8 i.
- - 3.S 7/29/70: -0.69 -1.2 2;5 30.7
.505.4 .
7/14/70~ 10.18 1. 3 - ~- .27.5
^ f506.0 -7/13/70= 10.28 1.1: -
28.0 507.3~ 7/14/70 -0.27 1. 0 . 2.1- 27.3-508.0 9/20/71~ 'O.43' O.9- - 23.9 c508.0' . 9/27/72 ' -0.43- - -- -- 508.0 9/25/73 0.43 .- .2.0 24.9 508.0; 19/25/74~ :0.43 0.9 3.~ 1 -- 21. 0 - 508.0 9/25/75. 0.42 0.9 ~3.1- 22.3. 1508.0- 9/23/76; 0.43 0.9 2.0 ~ 22.2 l^ ~508.01 9/15/77' 0.43 0.9 '2.2 23.31 508.0 '8/29/78 0.57. -1.0- 1.8 30.5-c ?508.0 .8/23/79' 0.43 0.9 1.9 27.3
-508.0- -8/28/80 0.51- 0.9 1.7- 30.0-
'508.0 8/18/81-- 0.48 1.0 . l'. 9 - 27.0
- 508.0 8/17/82 .0.46 0.9- 1.8 27.0
,[ ..508.0 -8/16/83 0.40 0.8. 1.2 29.0' N - 524.6' 9/-8/76: 0.33 0.3 1.0 25.2
.524'.6 9/:7/77 0.33 0.5 1.2 26.6-
-524.6: 8/29/78 ~0.29 0.4 'O.6 -31.0:
Y 524.6 .8/21/79 0.38 0.6 1~. 2 30.0 a ^
. 266-L m
l Table 5-20. (Continued) Surface Tennessee. Area Mean Msximum Tempera - *
. River Mile Date' (Hectares) Depth (m) Depth (m) ture (C )
- 524.6- 9/ 3/80 0.48 0.4 0.8 27.0
.524.6 .9/ 9/81 0.32 0.2 0.5 -
524.6. 9/ 8/82 0.44 0.4 0.9' 26.5 524.6 9/ 8/83 0.43 0.4 0.8 26.5
}' Open water sample.
Hiwassee River Mile (confluence at TRM 500.0). r. e 4 e O -
-267-
.e 8,.
+ '. .. ... .. Tabl'e 5-21. , Size Classes
- of' Fish. Species 'in Rotenone Surveys on Chickamauga Reservoir, .1947-1983 Young Intermediate. Adult Species Millimeters (inches) Millimeters (inches) Millimeters (inches)
Game White bass Less than'150.( 5.9) 151-200 ( 5.9- 7.9) 201 ( 7.9) and over "
" "= 151-200 ( 5.9- 7.9) 201 ( 7.9) .""
Yellow bass 150 ( 5.9) " Striped bass "
"" 175 ( 6.9) 176-375 ( 6.9-14.8)- 376 (14.3) " "
Rock bass 75 ( 3.0) 76-125 (.3.0- 4.9) 126 ( 5.0) " " Bluegill " 75 ( 3.0). 76-125 ( 3.0- 4.9) 126 ( 5.0) " " Other sunfish 75 ( 3.0) 76-125 ( 3.0- 4.9) 126 ( 5.0) " " Smallmouth bass " " 100 ( 3.9) 101-200 ( 4.0- 7.9) 201 ( 7.9) " " Spottel bass- " " 100 ( 3.9) 101-200 ( 4.0- 7.9) 201 ( 7.9) " Largemouth bass " " 100 ( 3.9) 101-225 ( 4.0- 8.9) 226 ( 8.9) ". " "
. Crappie " "
75 ( 3.0) 76-175 ( 3.0- 6.9) 176 ( 6.9) " "
$ Sauger '"- "
200 ( 7.9) .201-275 ( 7.9-10.8) 276 (10.9) " "
? Walleye "
" 200 ( 7.9)' 201-275 ( 7.9-10.8) 276 (10.9)
Commercial Lamprey Less than 50 ( 2.0) 51-125-( 2.0- 4.9) 126 ( 5.0) and over Paddlefish " " 300 (11.8) 301-450 (11.9-17.7) 451 (17.8) "" " Gar 300 (11.8) 301-475 (11.9-18.7) 476 (18.7) " " Bowfin " 200 ( 7.9) 201-300 ( 7.9-11.8) 301 (11.9) " " Skipjack herring " " 150 ( 5.9) 151-275 ( 5.9-10.8) 276 (10.9) " " Mooneye 150 ( 5.9) 151-300 ( 5.9-11.8) 301 (11.9) " " Carp 200 ( 7.9) 201-300 ( 7.9-11.8) 301 (11.9) " " Goldfish " " 150 ( 5.9) 151-250 ( 5.9- 9.8) 251 ( 9.9) " " Buffalo 200 ( 7.9) 201-300 ( 7.9-11.8) 301 (11.9)
Ttile.5-21. (Continued) Intermediate Adult Young Millimeters (inches) Millimeters (inches) Species Millimeters (inches) Commercial (continued)
.176-250 ( 6.9- 9.8) _ 251 ( 9.9) and over Carpsucker Lets than 175 ( 6.9) 251 ( 9.9) ""
Redhorses 175 ('6.9) 176-250 ( 6.9- 9.8) 251 ( 9.f'; Other suckers 175'( 6.9) 176-250 ( 6.9- 9.8) " " 126-225 ( 5.0- 8.9) 226 ( 8.91 Blue catfish
"" 125 ( 4.9)' 226 ( 8.9)
Channel catfish 125 ( 4.9) 126-225 ( 5.0- 8.9) " " 100 ( 3.9) 101-175 ( 4.0- 6.9) 176 ( 6.9) " " Bu11 heads 276 (10.9) Flathead catfish 125 ( 4.9) 126-275 ( 5.0-10.8) " " 125 ( 4.9) 126-200 ( 5.0- 7.9). -201 ( 7.9) " " Freshwater drum " 176-300 ( 6.9-11.8) 301 (11.9). Grass pickerel 175 ( 6.9)
? Forage t
- 126 ( 5.0) and over Gizzard shad L'ess than 125 ( 4.9) .126 ( 5.0) " "
125 ( 4.9) Thraadfin shad 51- 75 ( 2.0- 3.0) 76 ( 3.0) Orangespotted sunfish 50 ( 2.0) Miscellaneous - prey species All sizes I
- The size class divisions are arbitrary but are based on knowledge of growth rates and information from creel census and commercial harvest records.
Shad are recorded as young or harv-stable; sizes of other forage fish, except orangespotted sunfish, were not differentiated.
Table.5-22. Species Composition of Cove Populations. Chickamauga Reservoir 1983, Determined by Rotenone Samples Percent of Percent of Species- Total Numbers Total Biomass Bluegill 33.69- 7.66 Redear sunfish 20.82 4.09
..Threadfin shad 17.60 5.36 Gizzard shad 7.92 54.91 Wacnouth 7.02 0.94 Redbreast sunfish 3.85 0.33 Emerald shiner 2.07 0.21
-Bullhead minnow 1.36 0.08 Golden shiner ~ 1.03 0.83 Largemouth bass 0.72 2.48 Freshwater drum .0.62 6.84 Brook silverside 0.50 0.05
-Spotfin shiner .0.32 0.04
; Spotted bass ~. 0.32 0.17 Green sunfish 0.31 0.g9 Mixed and unid minnows 0.29 T Logperch' O.25 0.15 Longear' sunfish 0.25 0.08 Yellow bass 0.25 0.89
' White crappie 0.23 0.09
, ,l Yellow perch 0.21 0.29
.Saa11 mouth buffalo. 0.08 1.45 Yellow bullhead 0.06 0.01
,,' Black bullhead 0.04- 0.21 Skipjack herring- 0.04- ,0.19 Carp- 0.03 6.71 Spotted gar: . 0.03 1.57
, : Spotted sucker. 0.02. 0.69
- Channel catfish-0.02 2.87
-Mnsquitofish 0.01 T Brown bullhead 0.01 . 0.44 '
-Blackspotted topminnow 0.01 T
, Longnose gar -
0.01 0.08'
, White bass' T 0.04 x; - Common shiner T T Shortnose. gar .
T' 0,11
' Flathead catfish- T T Central stoneroller -T. T Golden'redhorse T 0.02' a-100.00 100.00.
+.
.T = Less than 0.01 percert.
i s -270-
l Table 5-23. List'of Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples During Preoperational and Operational Fisheries Monitoring for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir,1970 through 1983 . j;
-Species Common Name Fish Group
-Icthyomyzon'castaneus . Chestnut Iamprey Comercial Polyodon spathula Paddlefish Consnercial Lepisosteus oculatus. Spotted gar Comunercial Lepisosteus osseus Longnose gar Consnercial
.Lepisosteus platostomus Shortnose gar Commercial Alosa chrysochloris Skipjack herring Commercial Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Forage Dorosoma petenense Threadfin shad Forage
- Dorosoma_sp. Unidentified shad Forage Mixed Dorosoma spp.. Mixed shad Forage
'Hiodon tergisus Mooneye Commercial Campostoma anomalum Stoneroller Forage Carassius auratus Goldfish Forage Cyprinus carpio- Carp Conmercial Hybopsis storeriana - Silver chub Forage Notemigonus crysoleucas -Golden shiner Forage Notropis atherinoides Emerald shiner Forage
_Notropis_ buchanani . Ghost shiner Forage Notropis chrysocephalus Striped shiner Forage Notropis cornutus- Common shiner Forage Notropis emiliae Pugnose minnow Forage Notropis galacturus Whitetail shiner Forage - Notropis spilopterus Spotfin shiner Forage Notropis volucellus__ Mimic shiner Forage Notropis whipplei Steelcolor shiner Forage - Notropis,sp. Unidentified shiner Forage
.Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow' Forage Pimephales vigilax . Bullhead minnow Forage Pimephales promelas ' Flathead minnow Forage Pimephales sp. Unidentified minnow Forage Cyprinidae Mixed'& unidentified minnows Forage Cyprinidae Minnow,' carp Forage Carpiodes carpio River carpsucker Conunercial Carpiodes cyprinus Qui 11back carpsucker Commercial Carpiodes sp. Unidentified carpsucker Commercial
.Catostomus commersoni White sucker Commercial Hypentelium nigricans Northern hogsucker Commercial Ictiobus bubalus_ Smallmouth buffalo Commercial Ictiobus cyprinellus Bigmouth buffalo Commercial Ictiobus niger Black buffalo Commercial Ictiobus sp. Unidentified buffalo Commercial Minytrema melanops Spotted sucker Commercial -
-271-
Table 5-23. (Continued) Species Common Name Fish Group l Moxostoma-carinatum River redhorse Commercial Moxostoma duquesnei Black redhorse Commercial Moxostoma erythrurum Golden redhorse Commercial Moxostoma macrolepidotum Shorthead redhorse Commercial Moxostoma sp. Unidentified redhorse Commercial Ictalurus furcatus. Blue catfish Commercial Ictalurus melas Black bullhead- Commercial Ictalurus natalis Yellow bullhead Commercial
.Ictalurus nebulosus Brown bullhead Commercial Ictalurus punctatus Channel catfish Commercial Pylodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Commercial Fundulus notatus Blackstripe topminnow Forage Fundulus olivaceus Blackspotted topainnow Forage
.Cyprinodontidae Killifish Forage
~ : Gambusia affinis .
Mosquitofish Forage Labidesthes sicculus- Brook silverside Forage
- Morone chrysops- White bass Game Morone.mississippiensis Yellow bass Game
.;Morone sp. Unidentified temperate bass Game Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass Game
'.Lepoets auritus Redbreast sunfish Game Leposis cyanellus Green sunfish Game Leposis aulosus Wa rmouth Game Leposis humilis. Orangespotted sunfish Forage Leposis macrochirus Bluegill Game Lepomis megalotis Longear. sunfish Game ILepomis microlophus' Redear sunfish Game Leposis,sp. Hybrid sunfish Game
-Leposis sp. Unidentified sunfish Game Micropterus'dolonieui Smallmouth bass Game Micropterus punctulatus Spotted bass Game Micropterus salmoides -Largemouth bass -Game
.Pomoxis annularis White crappie Game' Pomoxis nigromaculatus Black crappie ~ Game Etheostoma asprisene Mud darter Forage Etheostoma caeruleum Rainbow darter Forage
.Etheostoma kennicotti Stripetail darter Forage Etheostoma spectabile- Orangethroat darter Forage-Etheostoma.sp. Unidentified darter Forage Percidae- Unidentified darter Forage
-Perca flavescens- Yellow perch Game Percina caprodes Logperch -Forage Stizostedion canadense- Sauger ' Game Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum-Commercial
-272 1
Table 5-24. ' Number of Samples and Mean Annuul Stending Stock (no./hn rad ' kg/ha) ef all .Yeung, Intcreedicta,;
~
and Harvestable Size Fish Collected -in ' Cove Rotenone Samples ~from Chickamauga Reservoir,1970 through 1983 No. Young Intermediate Harvestable Total Samples Number kg Number kg Number kg- Number- -kg !' Year 12L 7,353 12.61- 534- 24.80 931 182.49 8,819. 219.91 1970 1971 4 7,018 17.27 724 97.95 863 168.04 8,604' 283.26 i 4 12,872 63.06 932 30.96 1,394 271'.21 15,199 365.23
.1972 13,092 72.52 955 36.44 1,572- 290.20 -15,619 399.16 1973 '4 .
l 4 9,737 34.23 673 21.98 1,263 194.91 11,673 251.13 1974 4 12,684 37.18 443- 14.94 1,364 187.09 14,491 239.21 1975 1 14,662 37.20. 1,179 26.39 1,400 ~ 272.84 17,241 336.43 4 1976 5 Cl t ' 5 '33,121 96.18 1,164 26.41 1,441- 223.97 35,981 346.56 1977 19,883 31.70 960 19.98 2,584 184.51 23,427 236.19 1978 5 5 17,973 22.91 1,375 27.41 2,872 209.04 22,220 259.36-1979 5 34,424 44.71 537 10.08 1,020 132.58 35,981 187.37 1980 5 53,515 66.21 1,590 34.14 2,278 327.68 57,383 428.03 1981 5 33,655 56.23 977 24.37 1,919 209.92 36,551 209.52 1982 5 46,500 70.74 1,209 26.60 2,513 344.07 50,223 441.41-1983 TOTAL 72
Table 5-25. Mean Annual Standing Stock (no./ha and kg/ha) of Game, Commercial, and Forage Fish Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples
- .. from Chickamauga Reservoir,1970 through 1983 Game Fish Commercial Fish Forage Fish Year Number Kg Number Kg Number Kg 1970 2,288.22 27.42 548.18 109.55 5,982.24 82.93 1971 2,778.21 41.27 421.52 165.43 5,404.62 76.57 1972 3,764.61 58.53 769.14 140.99 10,665.19 165.72 1973 4,427.42 59.13 979.55 158.12 10,212.52 181.92 1974 2,637.81' 33.32 .396.25 79.74 8,638.84 138.07
-1975 5,489.16 37.06 269.92 78.42. 8,731.57 123.73 1976 8,624.39 57.53 474.81 147.02 8,141.71 131.88 1977 22,477.22 72.79 443.34 94.65' 12,805.99 179.13
-1978 .18,340.44 57.57 228.17 52.31 4,859.39 126.30
~1979 18,590.09 69.87 281.76 92.03 3,347.66 97.46 7, 1980 33,026.90 80.19 225'13
. 66.67 2,728.00 40.51 1981 51,074.50 116.51 504.41 131.19 5,804.83 180.33 1982 24,734.60 67.60 451.40 57.10 -11,365.10 165.80 19831 33,984.30 75.70 486.70 93.60 15,751.60 272.00 h.
-274-
- Table 5-26. . List of Important Fish Species Collected in Cgve Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970-1983 I Frequency Percent Composition Percent Composition
. Species (%) (number) (biomass)
Gizzard shad 100.00 12.17 39.55 . Threadfin shad. -91.67 13.81 4.58 Carp 81.94 0.06 8.69 Bullhead minnow 66.67 2.09 0.17
-70.83 0.07 7.13
~
-Smallmouth buffalo Spotted sucker 90.28 0.16 2.52 Channel catfish 94.44 0.10 3.76 Flathead catfish i 72.22 0.02 0.23
. White bass i' 43.06 0.06 0.06 Yellow bass i .75.00' O.37 0.61 Warmouth 94.44 1.99 0.55
' Bluegill 100.00 36.04 9.02 .
Longear sunfish 72.22 1.48 0.67 Redear sunfish 97.22 6.70 2.87 Largemouth bass 98.61 1.58 3.23 Sauger 31.94 0.01 0.08 Freshwater drum 100.00 1.27 8.67
' Yellow perchi .79.17 0.34 0.38 White crappie i~ 97.22 0.33 0.80 Based on a total of 72 samples.
I Species of special interest. e
-275--
-- - -, w
Table 5-27. Linear Regression Analyses of numbers /ha and kg/ha of Each
. Size Group of Each Important Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga heservoir, 1970-1983
- t L.- Species Group Slope F-Value PR>F Gizzard shad YNG-WT. 0.03 4.01 0.0492 Threadfin shad YNG-NO. -0.06 5.27 0.0249
. Carp YNG-NO. 0.06 19.52 0.0001 Carp' YNG-WT. 0.01 6.54 0.0132 Smallmouth buffalo INT-NO. -0.05 13.95 0.0005 Smallmouth buffalo. INT-WT -0.05 9.49 0.0034 Smallhouth buffalo HAR-NO. -0.04 6.61 0.0132 Smallmouth buffalo HAR-WT. -0.04 4.52 0.0385 Spotted sucker YNG-NO. -0.06 7.64 0.0074 Spotted sucker YNG-WT. -0.01 5.43 0.0230 Spotted sucker HAR-WT. -0.04 10.57 0.0018 Channel catfish INT-NO. -0.08 45.78 0.0001 Channel catfish INT-WT. -0.02 34.74 0.0001 Channel catfish HAR-WT. 0.04 8.09 0.0059 White bass- .HAR-NO. 0.03 7.03 0.0125 White bass -HAR-WT. 0.01 6.53 0.0158 Yellow bass YNG-NO. 0.08 9.59 0.0031 Yellow bass YNG-WT. 0.02 10.39 0.0022 Yellow bass INT-NO. 0.07 13.45 0.0006 Yellow bass INT-WT. 0.03 13.73 0.0005 Yellow bass HAR-NO. 0.06 19.92 0.0001 Yellow bass HAR-WT. 0.02 18.04 0.0001 Warmouth- YNG-NO. 0.21 96.67 0.0001
- Wa rmouth
- YNG-WT. 0.04 45.14 0.0001-Wa rmouth . INT-NO. 0.05 14.70 0.0003
- Wa rmouth INT-WT. 0.02 21.10 0.0001 Wa rmouth HAR-NO. 0.07 31.20 0.0001 Wa rmouth HAR-WT. 0.02 24.54 0.0001 Bluegill. YNG-NO. 0.09 23.52 , 0.0001 Bluegill YNG-WT. 0.05 3.02 0.0001 Redear sunfish. YNG-NO. 0.22 93.61 0.0001 Redear sunfish YNG-WT. 0.06 41.75 0.0001 Redear sunfish INT-NO. 0.04 4.37 0.0404 Redear sunfish INT-WT. 0.02 6.53 0.0128 Redear sunfish HAR-NO. 0.03 9.72 0.0027 Largemouth bass YNG-NO. 0.04 4.61 0.0353 Largemouth bass YNG-WT. 0.03 21.34 0.0001 Largemouth bass . INT-NO. 0.04 7.69 0.0071 Largemouth bass HAR-NO. 0.03 7.84 0.0066 Largemouth bass HAR-WT. 0.02 6.05 0.0164 White crappie . INT-WT. -0.01 8.78 0.0042 Yellow perch 'YNG-NO. 0.07 6.98 0.0107 Yellow perch INT-NO. 0.07 13.23 0.0006 e
-276-
r-4- k i, c > '
! ( 7, 7c l
+ s- ,s w.
.:q ?
,s g .i
~.
,[Tchl'e5-27'.C-(Continued):( lx, N'- %,
-j _
4 y , Group- . jf j a 3r- Xaiu c,, _ , _ l'R> F_ -
,_ _ Siceies t
)y s. m 4.43 0.0399 Yallow perch t INT-W. ; '
- y.t .0.01
( '24.12 0.09 0.0001 Ysllow perch. Yd11cw perch ]3it.' i '"I@-NO. HAR-W. '
, g[ 0. 0', '
s 20.97 0.0001 *
' 0.0001-Freshwater drum DG-MO.' ** -0.13 '- 52.78
' Freshwater drum' ' YNG-W . - -0.02 22.73- 0.0001
- Freshwater drum (INT IND. -0.05N 17.56 0.0001- l Freshwater' drum- !) -INT-W.+ ' -0.04; 19.62' O.0001
- s' ( -
- s.
3
~
= YNG-NO. = Young (numbers /ha)'
~
YNG-W.s = Young (kg/ha)
~ INT-NO. = Intermediate (numbers /ha) INT-WJh- Intermediate (kg/ha)
HAR-NO. =~ Harvestable.(numbers /ha) HAR-Vr! e Harvestable (kg/ha) 3 \ t, A
"tProbability of._ obtaining a value >F.Only those .ivalties with a probability level of 0.05 or.less are listed. ' ~
1 D y. e> 1 % i 1 A e 0
-277-
~~
' ~ f, '. . g, . ,
3 M' h .. y
, p. y ~~s" Table-5-28. Kruskal-Wallis Rank. Sum -' Analyses : (as ' Modified by Dunn) for Numbers '(no./ha) gf' Important Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Three Areas of Chickamauga Reservoir ' Prior to Operation of SQN. (1970 through; 1979)
Chi-Square Prob. > ; Reservoir Areas. Showing' ' Mean of Ranks Species Value Chi-Square Significant Differences U M D Gizzard shad 12.17 0.0023 U-M U-D - 37.44 22.73 20.86
' Carp .
18.82 0.0001 U-M. U-D - 38.44 14.87 25.71 Flathead catfish 7.60 0.0224 U-M - M-D 23.78 35.53 22.12 White bass. .
'6.30 0.0429 -
U-D -
'32.94 28.00 20.52 Longear sunfish 31.87 0.0001 U-M U-D M-D 10.47 26.30 38.86 Yellow perch 17.00 0.0002 U-M U-D -
13.62 30.53 33.43 Freshwater drum 11.88 0.0026 U-M U-D - 37.19 23.60 20.43 White crappie. 15.82- 0.0004 U-M U-D - 38.81 23.26' 19.42 4 Re:;ervoir areas are defined as follows: Downstream (D) - TRM 471.0 to TRM 484.5; Mid:lle' (M) - TRM 484.5 to y TRM 500; Upstream (U) - TRM 500 to.TRM 529.9. i Probability of obtaining'value equal to or greater than chi-square. Only those species with a probability level of 0.05 or less are listed. Indicates relative abundance between areas.
g- , r , ~
--a ;- g ,
3 2 -- [ , u , p-
~
1 Table .5-29'. IKruskal-Wallis Rank Sum Analyses .(as Modified b'y .Dunn) for ' Biomass [(kg/ha) 'o[Impurtant SpeciW
~
~
y- , Collected'in; Cove Rotenone Samples from:Three Areas.of Chickamauga Reservoir . Prior to Operation. of 'SQN ;(1970 through- 1979) Chi-Square ! Prob. >~; Reservoir Areas Shawing-- MeanofRank'k s
= Species- Value' : Chi-Square - Significant Differences- U- M D Gizzard shad 7.67' .0.0215 U-M - -: 34.81' 20.27 24.62-38.16 16.67 24.641
. Carp '16.10- 0.0003 U-M U-D' -
Spotted sucker .7.72 0.0210 U-M -. '- 33.09.- 18.10. 27.~48 White bass- 9.67 0.0079 - U-D -
'34.81- 27.73 .19.28-Longear suntish 32.26 0.0001~ .U-M ,U-D M-D 10.66 ~25.63 '39.19 y Yellow perch 21.07 0.0001- U-M U-D .- 12.75' 28.33 35.67;
- Freshwater drum 13.55- 0.0011- -
'U-D -
36.94 '26.67 18.43; White crappie 13.61 -0.0011 U-M U-D . 37.68' 24.53- 19.38 Reservoir areas are defined as follows: Downstream (D) - TRM 471.0 to TRM'484.5; Middle (M)~- TRM 484.5 to' . TRM 500; Upstream (U) TRM.500 to,TRM 529.9. 4 . Probability of obtaining value equal- to or greater than chi-square. Only those' species with a probability level of 0.05 or less are listed. ..
+
+ Indicates relative abundance between areas.
W, f3 f.
} , 'l ..; %. m ,; ,
, J s ; . ,
i .~ iTable\5-30.' Kruskal-Wallis' Rank. Sum Analyses L (as ~Mocified by.Dunn) for Numbers y (no./ha)"gf Important Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Three Areas of Chickamauga Reservoir -During Operation of: SQN (1980 through 1983) . Chi-Square ' Prob. > -Reservoir Areas' Showing ' Mean of Ranks
. Species ' ,Value . .
Chi-Square i Significant Differences- U M 'D' Flathead catfish' 7.52 .O'.0233 U-M -
-M-D ~8.56 .17.75 8.81
. Bluegill .
.7.32 'O.0257 -
U-D - 6.12 13.00- 13.62 Longear sunfish- 10.83 0.0045-. U-M U-D - 5.19 13.38~ '14 38 Yellow perch 8.22- 0.0164 U-M - - 6.88 17.25 10.75 Freshwater drum- 7.72. 0.0210 U-M ' .- -- 14.50 4.75 9.38~ White crappie 7.81- 'O.0202 - - M-D 10.88 15.50 5.86 Reservoir areas are defined as follows: . Downstream (D) - TRM 471.0-to TRM 484.5; Middle (M).- TRM 484.5 to TRM SOO; Upstream (U) - TRM 500-to TRM 529.9. g' t ~ Probability of obtaining value equal to. or greater than chi-square. Only those species with a probability o Isvel of 0.05 or less are' listed. Indicates relative abundance.between areas.
;)
. Table 5-31'. ' Kruskal-Wallis Rank Sum Analyses -(as Modified by Dunn) for~ Biomass- (kg/ha) ~ ofImportant' Species -
Collected.in Cove Rotenone Samples from Three Areas:of Chickawauga~ Reservoir:: During' Operation of SQN (1980 throughl1983); Chi-Square ' Prob. >' Reservoir Areas Showing Mean of Ranks ' Species Value' Chi-Square ~Significant Differences ~ U ~M' 'D Flathead catfish 8.05 0.0178- U-M -- M-D. 8.44 '18.00 8 . 81.' Bluegil1 7.77 0.0206 - U-D~ - 6.12 11'.75 14.25' Longear sunfish 10.75 0.0046 U-M U-D -
'5.19 .14.12: 14.00 Largemouth bass 7.17 0.0278' -
-U-D -
6.38 11.25 -14.25-Yellow perch -11.21- 0.0037 U-M - M-D 6.38' 18.50- 10,62-Reservoir areas are defined as follows: . Downstream (D) - TRM 471.0 to TRM 484.5; Middle (M).- TRM 484'.5 to TRM 500; Upstream (U) - TRM 500 to TRM 529.9. 4 I robability P of obtaining value equal to or greater than chi-square. Only those species with a probability oo level of 0.05 or less are listed. Indicates relative abundance between areas.
#
- e
- a e
p:,, r
; . ,j :F '~
9-
.: fv ,
. s .1
- t. < , ~
4
; c ..
/1 Table 5-32. Numbers.a EiomassT (kg)!.Per hiectare of Each; Size Group:.of Gizzard Shad in. Cove' L Rotenone . Samples ,' Chick =Aauga; Reservoir, j 1970-1983 -
- ~ . .
Young'of Year Intermediate Adult Total-Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass _ Numbers - Biomass Numbers. Eiomass 1970 ,1,129.74 '2.24 0.00- 0.00 '645.34- "75.49- 1,775.08' 77573 ze 1971 329.03 2.27 0.00 0.00 561.91' '65.51 890.94 ' 67.78 1972 0.52 0.01' O.00 0.00 836.35 119.52' '836.87- '119.53 1973; 0.65I' O.01 0.00 .'0.00 1,034.97- _127.41 1,035.63 127.42
- 19% ' 5.23 - 0.07 0.00 0.00 912.33 107.61. 917.56 107.69 1975 '109.44 1.44 -0.00 ~ 0.00' ,946:20 90.71 .1,055.64 92.15 1976 1,140.28 9.83- 'O.00- 0.00 844.93 105.62 ,1,985.21 115.45 1977 8,624.47 44.57 0.00 0.00 928.02 112.60 9,552.49 157.17 1978 1,894.39 .7.74 0'.00 0.00 2,177.57 115.17 4,071.96 '122.92 1979 54.15 0.68, 0.00 0.00 2,315.5S. 92.12 2,369.73. 92.80 1980- 953.30 2.63 0.00 0.00. 503.02 34.73 'l',456.32 37.36 1981 507.50- 1.73 0.00 0.00 1,484.11 164.41 1,991.61 166.14 g 1982 7,913.77- 20.23 :0.00 0.00 1,530.03 140.19' 9,442.*,0 160.42-y 1983 1,994.09. 9.93 0.00 0.00 -1,981.22 232.46 3,975.31 242.39 No intermediate size' class considered.
A
.1
w, g,2m -
;-E s" s f *~ g q ; . pg o r - gm
, Myg., .
~ . ;;.
, & ?M ~
. <14 1 ~;
s.- A~ e 4 i
, , '. 'y O'
^
. I ....4 :? ,.;]. .. ' . S ;
- Table 5-33. ' Numbers' and Biorna,s.< -(kg) Per .Hectats of Ecch .Siza Grcup.cf Thestdfin Shad ;iCCov2
' I "^ '
'.E, Rotenone Samples', Chickamauga' Reservoir,c 1970-1982; -
^
s ~
~
., ~[ -
Young of Year Intermedirce ' 'AdultW ~ Total Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass ' Numbers Eiomass-Y,'
.1970 2,732.68 2.94 0.00 'O.00 0.31 0.01L 2,732.99' 2.95 1971 .3,351.72 7.19. 0.00 .U.00 0.00. . 0.00 3,351.72.- 7.19 .y 1972 8,094.18'. 41.72 0.00 -0.00- 52.33' 1.46' 8,146.51 43.181 .
1973 7,248.00 50.51- 0.00 0.00 ~6.21 0.20 7,254.21 50.72f" 1974 6,916.67- 28.02 0.00~ -0.00- >3'10
. 0.13 6,919.78- 128'.16-1975 -3',906.97- 23.05' 0.00 .0.00. 122.96 . 4.07 4,029.94. '27.12 1976 3,401.95 11.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.001 3,401.95~ 11.75 1977 1,566.42 17.31 'O.00 ,0.00 0.00- . 0.00 ~ 1,566.42' 17.31' 1978 -53.10 '0.34' O.00 0.00 0.00. 0.00. 153.10 0.34 1979 363.60 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.47. 0.01' -364.06 0.81 1980 448.09. 0.79 0.00. 0.00 .0.00 0.00 448.09 0.79.
1981 3,294.25 8.29 0.00- 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,294.25; 8.29' N 1982 368.97 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.43 .0.03' 1370.40' -1.03
$ :0.00 23.67
~
'1983 8,838.26 23.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,838.26 e
No incernediate size class considered. ,
* . *- e
- e e
-- ~ ;, ;g G; i .
- y. e
. Table 5-34. , Numbers and Biomass (kg) Per Hectarefof Each Size Group of Ccrp in' Cove Rotenone Samples, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970-1983' Young of Year Intermediate ~ Adult' Total Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass' Numbers Biomass L1970. 0.84' O.00 0.15 0.06 4.77 7.04- 5.77 7.09 1971 0.00' O.00 0.20 0.05 27.46 ~53.85 27.66 53.89 1972 0.00- 0.00 0.00~ 0.00 14.66 31.59 14.66 31.59 1973 0.00 0.00' O.00- 0.00 21.49 48.42 21.49 48.42 1974 0.00 0.00 -0.52 .0.09 8.28 20.18 8.79 20.27
'1975 , 0.00 ' O.00 0.00 0.00 12.65 28.93 12.65 28.93 1976 0.00- 0.00 0.22 0.05 22.16 46.72 22.37 46.77 1977- .0.00 0.00 0.00' O.00 .14.26' 31.39 14.26- 31.39 1978 2.09 0.11 2.16 0.31 '5.21 14.43 9.46 14.86 1979 0.54' O.01 .0.00 0.00 16.93 38.02 17.47 38.04 1980 4.21 0.13 0.31 0.04 7.98 24.01 12.49 24.18 1981 34.52 2.02 3.79 0.61 4.04 11.94 42.35 14.57
-1982 7.02 0.14 0.48 'O.12 4.92 8.91 12.41 9.16
, 1983 0.98 0.01 0.00 0.00 12.81 29.61 13.78 29.62 t
y . e - g - g, 77
, , y,7.
- ~ :
, ;4
. . .~ .
..y '
Q
~
- Tabl'e' 5-35. ; Numbers 'and !.. Biomass E(kg) Per Hectare of Each Size JGroup ofl Bullhead ^ Minnow in Cova : ' 1
.% 4 zRotenone Samples,JChickamauga: Reservoir, 1971-1983 3- ^
~ *: * .-
Young of: Year- Intermediate ~ Adult: Total
- Numbers '- -
Biomass- Numbers >-Biomass . Numbers Biomass Numbers ' Biomass"
.1971 l'05
. - 0.00- 0.00- 'O.001 .0.00: 0.007. E1 .05 ~O.00 ' '
1972~ '72.67- 0.15: 0.00: ~0.00 0.00 t
- 0.00 72.67- . ( 0.15 '-
1973 0.65- 0.00' O.00' O.00- 0. 00 ' - ~ 0. 00 T. :0.65 0.00
, 1974' 734.76- 'O.81 0.00 0.00- 0.00 10. 00 -.: 734.76; 0281 1975 '3,397.45 '3.72 . 0.00 .0.00 0.00 ,0.001 3,397.45~ 3.721 1976 1,974.17- 1.75 0.00 .-0.00 0.00 0.00 1,974217" 1;75 ,
.J' 1977 418.03- 0.67' O.00 0.00 0.00. 0.00- ' 418.03' 10.67-148.19 ?O.14 0.00- 0.00- 0. 00 .. -0.00 148.191 0;14 1978 1979. 118.98 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 . 118.98n .0.09' 1980 65.01 .0.09. 0.00' O.00 0.001 0.00 65.01- 0.09 1981 20.46 0.01 0.00 'O 00 0.00 0.00- 20.46 ' O . 01 -
1982 554.76 0.41 0.00 :0.00 0.00. 0.00- 554.76 '0.41
- 1983 684.88 -0.34' O.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00. 648.88 0.34 y ;All mir. nows = grouped'in young-of-year size class.
O g 9- g g I
p- .. o , .
,: q- ...-
E
,oTable 5-36.
Numbers-and Biomass (kg)-Per Hectare of Each Size Group lof Smallmouth Buffalo in Cove
.Rotenone Samples, Chickamauga Reservoir,. 1970-1983
~
Young of Year ' ' Intermediate Adult- Total Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass 1970 1.96 0.01 3.04 0.75 23.28 34.87 28.28 35'.64-1971 0.58 0.02' 36.05 71.13' O.00 0.00 36.63 71.15. 1972 8.68 0.64 2.53 0.98 26.48 41.51 37.69 43.14 1973 1.74~ 0.15 1.39 0.40' 21.21 40.84 24.34 41.39 1974 0.00 0.00. 0.00 0.00 6.40 12.52 6.40 12.52 1975 1.79 0.15 0.78 0.16 6.39 18~86
. 8.96 19.17 1976 ~0.61 0.01 0.00 0.00 12.41 28.93 13.02 28.94 1977 -2.33 .0.16 1.82 0.72 7.49 9.93 11.64 '10.82 1978 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ~0.35 1.84 0.35 .1.84 1979 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.31 4.57 '3.31 4.57' 1980 0.31- 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.67 3.35' 1.97 3.35 1981 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.15 1.58 2.75 2.01' 2.90 1982 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.17 6.85 10.83 7.31 11.00 h 1983 36.77 0.81 0.00 0.00 3.30 5.59 40.07 6.41 i
k-
7-
-Table 5-37. Numbers and Biomass (kg) Per Hectare 'of Each Size Group of Spott:d Sucker 12.CLn Rotenone Samples,'Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970-1983' _
-Young of Year . Intermediate- Adult- Total .
Numbers Biomass Numbers- Biomass Numbers- Biomass Numbers Biomass
.'1970 18.02 0.10' O.68 -
.T 0.47 -0.23 19.17 0.40 '
1971 21.16 0.30 0.00 0.00 8.76 2.76 29.92 3.06 1972 38.06 O.81 2.00 0.32 19.79' 6.68 59.85. ,7.82 1973 162;46 3.28 7.13 1.08 17.56 '5.95 187.14 10.32 1974 23.71 0.36 26.16 3.54 39.10 12.07- 88.97 .16.96 1975 10.71. 0.17 10.98 1.41' 19.72 8.84 41.42 10.42 1976 15.29' O.28 3.15 0.51, 35.12 17.17 53.55 17.96 1977 18.19 0.30 2.84 0.37 '23.23 11.41 44.26 12.08 1978 .6.23 0.09 5.25 0.64 14.85 7.48 26.33' 8.21 1979 8.99 0.07 6.05 0.80 11.20 5.73 .26.23 6'.60 'i 1980 '3.09 0.02 0.31 0.05 10.61 7.24' 14.01 7.31 1981 .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.47 9.34 12.47- 9.34 1982 0.43 0.02 0.43 0.03 5.83 3.45 6.70 3.50 1983 5.37 0.01 3.90 0.46 2.82 2.58 12.09 3.05 h 7
-e ,
- 4
- 4
5- ,g. ' ' - 3; g-s --4. Table 5-38. ' Numbers and Biomass' (kg) Per Hectare of. Each Size : Group of . Channel Catfish in Lum - Rotenone Samples', Chickamauga Reservoir,- 1970-1983: Young.of Year- Intermediate ' Adult Total Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass- Numbers Biomass
-1970 3.27 0'.02 10.10 0.62 5.71' 2.35 19.07' '2.98 1971 0.99 0.01 12.73 0.86 ~20.19 9.89 33.91. 10.76 1972 1.05 0.01' 12.32. 0.79 23.20 7.33 36.57 .8.12 1973 1.23 0.01 12.07 0.71 '29.68 9.64- .42.98 10.36 1974 0.52 0.01 3.21 0.19- 8.41. 3.92 12.14' 4.12' 1975' -1.03 0.01 2.39 0.11 10.27 4.13 13.69 4.25 1976 1.63 0.00 6.26- . 0.32. 17.67 12.11 25.56 12.43 1977 2.75 0.02 4.55 0.27 12.14 7.12 19.44 7.40 1978. 1.38 0.00 0.35 0.01 13.45 4.17 15.18- 4.18 1979 1.05 0.01 1.40 0.04 22.35 14.19 24.80 14.24 1980 2.90 ~0.01 0.42 0.02 11.34 7.70 14.65 7.73 1981 6.41 0.06 4.17 0.12 67.02' 59.00 77.60 59.17 1982 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.03 6.21 5.98 7.12 6.01 h .1983 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.22 12.69 11.22 12.69- ?
6 _ _
~--=- ja.. .. .=
.g-g: gg
.y 7
' ~
i,
~
M ,
, . .d . . .- , . e
- Table 5-39. c Numbers: and ' Biomass : (kg) c Per: Hectare '. of Each Size . Group ' of 14at'tead ' Catfish 'in CovQ Rotenone Samples, Chickamauga_. Reservoir,; 1970-1983:
~
Young'of' Year
> Intermediate. Adult." ' ' Notal '
Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass' - Numbers- Biomass
,1970' 3.51 0.01 0.43 0.07 1.36 0.51 ~ 5.30 :0.60 1971- 2.89 0.01' .1.92- 0.32- 0.47 'O.20' ~ 5. 27 .. 0.53
'1972 0.7a 0.00 1.06 .0.08 '1.65 0.98 3.49- 1.06.
1973 - 1. 03 - 0.01 0.77 0.13' 4.10- 2.12' 5.91 .2.26: 1974 -0.00 0.00 0.74 0.08 2.40 1.23' 3.14 1.31 1975- .0.77- -0.00 1.57 .0.24 0.86 0.36 3.20 0.60 1976 :1.21' .0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.50 .0.81 '2.70 'O.81. 1977 -3.51 0.01 0.98 0.12 '1.21: -0.70' 5.70 0.83
- 1978 -1.12 0.00 1.74 'O.18 '1.22 0.40 4.08 ' 0.58 -
1979 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.12 -1.12 0.43~ 1.89 0.55 1980 0'.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 0.34 ; 0. 00 - i 1981 20.00 0.14 1.23 .0.12 0.00 0.00 21.23. 0.26 1982' O.87 0.00' O.00 0.00 0.87 0.63 1.74 0.63 1983 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.49 'O.01 h 0 I i i i
.. a , ..
~ '
- e- f.
a Table 5-40. : Numbers ~ and Bio.aass -(kg)- Per Hectare. of Each Size Group of White Bass in Cove
- Rotenone Samples, Chickamauga ' Reservoir, 1970-1983
_ ~;ung of Year Intermediate Adult Total ~ Nuabers Biomass" Numbers Biomass -Numbers -Biomass Numbers Biossass 1970 :47.30 0.20. 0.12 'O.01 0.00 'O.00 '47.42 0.21-1971 4.07 0.08. 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0. 00 - 4.07 0.08-1972 3.30 .0.06 0.27 0.02 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.08 1973 13.96 0.15~ 1.33 0.07 1.12 0.22 16.42 0.44 1974 .2.61 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.16- 3.46 0.20 1975 0.00 .0.00 0.00- 0.00 0.27 0.06 0.27 0.06
- 1976 3.86 .0.08 1.40 0.10 ~0.47 0.06 5.72 0.24 1977 35.48 0.38 2.79 0.1 F, 0.00 0.00 38.27- 0.54 1978. 11.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.03 0.03 1979 3.16 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.16 0.05 1980 11.25 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.25 0.05 1982 1.43 'O.03 0.48 0.03 0.48 0.08 2.38 0.14 1983 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.46 0.18 1.46 0.18
?' ,
e i
q _
=-
- 3. t ; '
g ..
~
? Tab 1'e 5-41': . Numbers and -Biomass :(kg) Per Hectare . of Each Size Group of Yellow) Bass in' Cove ; '.:
- Rotenone Samples,; Chickamauga Reservoir,:l1971-1983 Young of Year ~ ' Intermediate- Adult Total Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass ~ Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass 1971-- .0.91 ,0.00 0.27 0.02 0.00- 0.00' ?1.18 0.02 1972 21.90 .0.15' O.26 0.02 0.54' O.06 L22.70 'O.23 1973 16.65 'O.19- 4.65' O.28 0.00 0.00. .21.30 0.47 1974 ~6.63 -0.11- 1.92 0.-14 0.00' O.00~ 8.55- 'O.251 1975' 19.37. 0.33 12.01 0.95- 2.01 0.26 33.39 1.54.
1976 48.09 10.19' 8.76. 0.59 3.82 0.47 60.67 1.26 1977 238'.76 ~0.94 6.52- 0.56 2.62 0.30 247.91' -1.80 1978 106.99 0.29 5.90 0.45 2.70' 0'33
. 115.59 -1.06 3.84 :0.05 0.38- 0.03 0.38 0.04 4.61- 'O.13
.1979 1980 121.22 0.48~ 5.46 0.50- 1.18 -0.15 127.85- 1.13 187.95' .4.29 69.19 4.56 10.23 1.26 l267.37' 10.11 1981 1982 232.81 1.15 37.20 2.94 6.04. 0.77 276.05 '4.86 95.83 0.80 16.34- 1.46 12.62- 1.68 124.79 ' 3.94 .
1983 0$ Y
;y-- q - - -
.e s .;
;[
Table 5-42. Numbers and-Biomass l(kg)-Per Hectare'of Each Siz Group of Warmouth in Cove
'Rotenone Samples,_Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970-1983 Young of Year' Intermedia'te -Adult Total Numbers Biomass' Numbers Biomass ~ Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass 1970 :7.18 0.03- 4.44- 0.11 2.30 0.17 13.92 0.30.
1971 37.62- 0.09 10.65 0.23 0.00. 0.00 48.27 0.32 1972 39.04- ~0.13 14.26 '0.38 1.88 0.15 55.18 0.66 1973 195.94 1.09 9.40 0.25 8.17 0. 65 .- 213.51 2.00 1974 8.92 0.02 3.79 0.07 0.98 0.07 13.68 0.16-1975 - 38.28 0.06 .4.67 -0.08 2.82 0.27 45.77- 0.41 1976 54.55 0.07 '12.34 0.26 5.68 0.41 0.74 72.57 1977 233.55 0.41 9.93 0.15 6.12- 0.46 249.60 1.02
-1978- '313.63 0;31 26.19 0.54 9.05 0.79 348.87 1.64 1979 844.05 0.95 34.19 0.65 '18.29 1.55 896.53 3.15 1980 -1,282.81 1.67 13.77 0.32 '7.42 0.64 .1,304.00' 2.64 1981 1,690.82 2.15 56.63 1.12' 32.43 2.21 _1,779.88 5.48 1982 1,402.57- 1.59 45.06 0.77 10.92 0.76 1,458.55 3.12 4 1983 3,463.73 2.50 53.73 0.84 9.38 0.79 3,526.84 4.13 8
w.
,7 Table 5;-431 ' Numbers ind Biomass - (k'g) ' Par Hectara cf Ercli' Siza Grrup cf Blu2 gill. in' Cova -
~
Rotenone Sas; 'es, Chickamauga Reservoir,"1970-1983 - y
.g,.
Young of Year Intermediate- ' Adult- ' Total
' Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass- ' Numbers- Biomass- Numbers Biomass.
1970 1,243.26 2.46L 193.31 5.27. -70.03 5.28 - 1,506.60' 113.01-
.1971 '1,669.92' 3.18 345.20 *E8.84 . 94.88' 6.68: '2,110.00'. '18.70 1972 : 2,296~.39 10.96 495.25 9.53 171;22, 11.80.- 2,962.87 .32.30 1973- .2,214.82 5.97 :374.95- '7.81 1186.17 !12.~13; 2,775.94- 25.91--
1974 1,447.34 1.77: 296.85 4.90 105.55 ~ 5.68 1,849.74 12.36' 1975 4,073.41- 4.83 -237.89 4.18 L108.32 5.96 4,419.62 '14.977
- 1976 5,812.86 6.67 -674.71 -10.08 186.81 11.33 6,674.38 28.09i 1977 18,963.39 20.64 519.75 7.96 185.11 11.21 '19,668.26 '39.81' 1978 ~15,302.81 15.89 552.57 7.87 119.50 17.06 15,974.88 30.82 1979 13,121.79 11.47 953.28 13.59 213.18 12.11 14,288.25 37.16' 1980' 26,776.07 27.42 257.12. 4.01 231.351 16.66 27,264.54 48.08 1981 12,800.94 7.49 979.89 15.16 277.70 19.30~ 14,058.54 41.94 1982 .10,772.44 12.91 497.85 6.96 94.39 5.91 ~11,364.68 -25.79 4 '1983 ~16,134.86 16.37 663.92 9.47- 118.91 7.97 16,917.69. 33.81-U.> .
e u
- o;; .e.. .;. e a.
1e . s.
< ~
.. Table 5-44. Numbers and Biomass ..(kg) Per Hectare of. Ea'ch Size Group of Longear Sunfish in' Cove
.Rotenone Samples,.Chickamauga-Reservoir, 1970-1983 Young of Year' ' Intermediate Adult' Tot'al Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass- Numbers Biomass -Numbers Biomass 1970' 47.16 0.32 24.34 0.58 2.71 0.17' 74.21 1.07 1971 126.30 0.51- 57.59 1.45. 2.48 0.08 186.37l 2.03 1972 171.57 0.63 76.93 1.46 5.84 'O.51; 254.34- 2.60
-1973~ 312.19 0.79 59.20 1.20. '3.29 0.20' 374.69 2.19 L1974 321.73 0.47 73.49 1.19 3.70 0.17 398.92 1.84 1975- 488.19 0.75 .-48.23 0.86. 0.64 0.04 ~537.07 1.65
-1976 867.52 1.46 188.92 2.84 4.73 0.23- 1,061.16 4.53 1977 ~393.78 0.94 -194.22 2.92 1.96. 0.09 589.96 3.95 1978l 191.00 0.28' '75.90 'I.18 7.42 0.33 -274.31 1.79 1979 1,013.24 1.06 112.07 1.72 5.14 0.25- 1,130.451 3.03 1980 324.67 0.53 35.93 0.67 8.80 0.42 369.40 1.62
-1981 18.59 0.08 64.02 1.06 9.15 0.51 91.75 1.65 1982- 41.71 .0.16 44.42 0.75 3.59 0.20 89.72 1.12 4 1983' 115.44 -0.13 8.29 0.12 2.30 0.11 126.03 0.36 i
~
a'
~
g y; ..s-- -
"~~ .pT m* m 7 7- ..<-
c- --
.s + ,.
> >; w 3
- Table 15-45. - Numbers cad, Bionats ,(kg) Per Hecthre cf E2ch Siza!Grsup cf R;detr, Sunfich"in Covej 9'
^. Rotenone Samples,-Chickamauga Reservoi ,'- 1970-1983-Young of Year Intermediate: .' Adult" ? Total-Numbers Biomass " Numbers ' Biomass Numbers Biomass' Numbers- Biomass
-1970 -9.09 < 0.02' 15.23 'O.40- 16,655 1.69 540.97i: 2.11- ~
1971' 80.79-. 0.25 :25.28' O.65 :33.08 ' 4. 52 ". 139'.14: .:5 ~.' 42 =
-1972 46.02 0.26 .40.65 '1.14 62.42- - 6.90 '149.09 18.30 ~
'1973- 1614'.75 13.6 36.64 : 0.89 43.59 '5.35 x694.98 9.88 ; '
1974' 66.12 (0.19 62.88- '1.39 61.86 6. 80 .. _190.86 . 8.37,
-1975 160.80 0.53 17.09 0.40 62.77' . 6.86, 240.66? -7.79' 1976 187.48 0.53 .62.79 1.46' 93.81 9.28- 344.09 11.28 ~
1977 851.95 '3.03 49.23 1.10 .77.90' 8.60. 979.08- '12.734 1978 361.20 0.53 31.23 0.60 72.46 6.41. 464.89- 7.54' 1,160.45- 7.95
~
1979 .1,017.73 1.26 - 92.27 2.13 50.~44 4.57 1980 2,650.56 ; 4.17 - 9.33 0.21 52.48' . 5.90 2,712.38 10.29 1981 10,762.80' 7.20 40.38 .0.87 62.62 5.51 10,865.80- 13.58-1982~ '4,012.28 :5.85 .118.54 ;1.59' .35.41 2.63 4,166.23 '10.06'
/, ,1983 -10,137.85 5.94 .210.69 3.95 109.94. 8.16 10,458.48 .18.05' M
h -$
. Table 5-46. . Numbers and Biomass (kg)' Per Hectare of Each Size Group of Largemouth Bass' in Cove Rotenone Samples, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970-1983 l
Yount of.. Year ' Intermediate ' Adult- Total Numbers Biomass Numbers Biossass ' Numbers Biomass' Numbers Biomass 1970 263.10 0.69 22.41 2.05 9.58 2.89 295.09' 5.63' !. 1971 64.88 0.35 35.72 1.89 '20.59 6.67 121.20' 8.90 1972 21.16 0.17- 60.90 4.08 14.62 4.94 96.68 9;18 1973 66.45 0.43 69.09 4.86 26.93 6.71 162.46 12.01 1974 27.57 0.11- 20.43 1.73 19.07 '4.91 ' 67.08 6.76
-1975 65.56 0.23 23.82 'I.68 17.35 6.32 106.74 8.23 1976 38.80 0.19 34.59 1.36 13.53 '5.86, 86.92 7,41 1977 251.89 1.07 130.99 3.77 16.76 399.64 3.92 8.76 1978 506.83 1.91 '54.77 1.82 19.98 4.96 581.58 8.69 1979 784.76 2.25 27.21 2.00 22.44 7.40 834.42 11.65 1980 863.78 3.82 101.05 1.78 12.01 5.47 976.84 11.08
.1981 468.11 2.98 219.40 5.76 28.02 8.13 715.53 16.87 1982 321.76 1.08' 91.40 5.62 29.53 6.18 442.69 12.88 4 1983 259.60 'l.37 71.27 2.67 30.79 6.91 361.67 10.95-8
..ms #
r- ., .
- ~
ycy --
, o. c
+
m
; 'i;; .
.7
~
Table 5-47. - Numbers and. Biomass (kg) Per Hectare of Each Size ' Group of. White Crappiejin Cove; ' Rotenone' Samples, Chickama'uga Reservoir,- 1970-1983;- -, Young of . Year . . Intermediate ~ Adult'- - Total: Year ' Numbers Weight' Numbers Weight' Numbers' Weight- ~ Numbers Weight' _ r 1970 3 89.00 0.11 28.51- 1.19 20.68 '3.09' .138.18' '
- 4:39" 1971 7.90 0.05 -13.69 :1.04 17.95 --3.14 39.54 -4.23' 1972 . '29. 80 -- 0.10 13.33 0.48 12.55 2.52 .55.68' '3.11' 1973- -24.31 0.07 '15.29 0.69- .16.39 2.94 -55.90- 3.70-
. 1974 0.60 'O.00 2.14. 0.07 ': 7.15 1.15 9.88 1.22' 1975 1.13' O.00 4.31 0.27 7.80 1.07 13.25.- '1.35 1976 26.53z '0.06 14.70 0.24 7.65 ,1.252 48.88; '1.55' 1977 66.00 0.18 16.16 0.18 ~8.59' 1.20' -90.75' 1.56
.1978 116.93 0.27 26.24~ 0.98 12.34 1.46- L155.50' -2.71 1979 57.10 0.12 26.41 0.59. 28.16 2.87' 111.67 3.58 1980 9.31 '0.02 8.42' .0.09 12.86~ 1.74 30.59 1.85 1981 10.43 0.02 '14.13 0.15 5.59 0.99 '30.16' 1.17-4 1982. 118.97. 0.21 4.57 0.05 3.25 0.60 L126.79 0.86
- 1983 99.81 0.22 15.32 .0.14 0.49 0.04 .115.62 0.40 i .
m M @ N 00 @ C0 00 4 M O O O O rn i= > N. r e. e0. N. N. N. N. N. N. O. O. O. O. OOOOOOOOOOOOO W
.c e O. M CQ
'C N
- y- y
- M O W - -
O' b k .to M O O N @ M e0 @ O O O O
'M W
,c N. @. 4. an. @. M. @. 4. co. o. o. o. O.
- W E O ed W N - M @ c=* M COOO
'> J O E O
~
'.ce4 ik (n M @ O @ M 00 O 4 00 C O O O M
y .N. 0 4. "*. O. N. O. M. C. O. O. O. O.
.g.
00 OOOOOOOOOOOOO
~
n M et
. tJ3 M $Q 3
W- g O 4l m W ' to 5 @ to m @ O Cs N O O O O E W O .D N N. to. co. . M. O. @. 4 O. O. O. O. e -
'k O $ OONOOMCCOOOOO 3
0 2 W
.N
,4 U3 m ONmNMCMO4OOOO W
.g c ' O. O. O. O. N. O. O. M. .M C. O. O. O.
u M CCOOOOOOCOOOO 4' - 4 553 M - **4 *P4 00 9 GQ W@ O e-4
- g. m - -
- W O '.' W W O M CO @ @ O M moOOOO kN- M W
* *'- .ge g ,o O. C0. to. N. 4 0 4. W. 4 0. C. C. O.
'Mc4- M A .OOOOM COOMCOOO s u. 5 W *
- E .k 4
,-- .ko y p As M M C M M N N Oto O O O O O O
-@ k e
.nm. n o. O. M. O. O. O. N. O. O. O. O. O. O.
' 40 W - W OOOOOOOOOOOOO
- M $3f.' >e v e 4 48 00
- I4 40 O to D e- Oc e4
$g C k O4M@NONOOOOOO 5 W
.,4 o - O LO. N. M. N. O.to. O. O. O. O. O. O.
M. >e O O N ** O O @ O O O O O O c4 .u.
."O O M
-CU M
m tn 64 - W
-WM
. 1.
E f/3 5 .- '$ 4
.4-
.40
.,'.. G
' ' 'N- - O N M 4 in @ N 00 m O ed N M
.O ~ NNNNNNNNN 00000000 t N @@@@@@@@@@@@@
e e-4 r e M pH e 4 c=4 M c=4 M c=4 M c 4 .-4 0
-298-
t
< . . ; M
, . ,,-[*
I *' p
,Tcble 5-49.
Numbera tnd Bioma:a (kg), Phr ,Hectr.ra cf Ecch Siba Group' cf '.Y211ow ' Perch ih Cove y i -Rotenone' Samples, Chickamauga Reservoi , 1970-1983: ,,. Young of. Year' Intermediate ^ Adult Total' Numbers ' Biomass' Numbers Biomass- Numbers' Biomass : Numbers Biomass 11.81 0.04' 4.92 0.04 0.21' .0.01' 16.94 'O.10 1970 1971 0.00 ~ 0.00 28.77- 0.29 , 4. 26 - 0.28 .33.03L 0.57' 1972 0.00 0.00 26.89'- '. 0. 30 5.37 .0.27. ~32.25: 'O.57z 0.00. 0.00 7.68 0.09 15.73 0.76' .23.41' :0.85' 1973. 1974 0.00 0.00 2.08- 0.03- 6.22' 0.41 8.307 0 . 44 .. .,
.1975 :0.27 0.00 3.18 .0.03 0.91 0.06' '4.36- ' O . 09 .
1976 0.00 0.00 ~28.35 -0.28- 3.84- .' O . 21 32.19.- 0.49- - 42.99 0.11 89.64 -0.54 15.01 0. 61.: 147.65 .1.25 1977 195.38 0.50 96.60 0.56. ~36.33 1.67 328.31 2.72 1978 0.38 0.00 26.80 0.19 43.06 2.'11 70.25 2.31-1979 1980 95.~ 76 - 0.26- 65.24- 0.38- 31.77 2.39 j l92.76 3.03 39.05 0.12 56.11 -0.36 25.35 ~1.17 '120.50 1.64 1981 1982 ;26.96 0.06 18.87 0.11 19.30 1.11 65.12 ~1.28 49.27 0.13 33.27_ 0.20 22.59 0.97 105.14- 1.30 4 1983
$. ..a
_g , 45 L, 'p'- ,I. S '- e Table 5-50. ' Numbers and Biomass (kg) Per Hectare of Each Size Group of Freshwater Drum in Cove Rotenone Samples, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970-1983-Young of Year Intermediate Adult Total' Numbers Biomass ~ Numbers Biomass- Numbers Biomass Numbers Biomass 1970 ?.09.45 0.76' 211.63 12.38- 96.91 16.34 417.99 29.48-1971 72.45 0.93 139.24 8.21 58.07 8.40 '269.77- 17.54 1972 305.07 -3.72 153.91 9.71 127.07 25.45 586.05 .38.88' 1973 228.57 1.87 307.13 15.63 125.75~ 21.71.- 651.45 .39.21 1974 27.10 0.21 165.60 7.68 62.02 10.33 254.72 18.22-1975 33.86 0.29 68.26 3.96 37.15 s8.09 139.26 12.35 1976 77.81- 0.52 125.65' 7.08 119.88 19.32 323.34 26.92 1977 ~62.65 0.60 116.64 6.73 127.61 ~ 17.95- 306.90 25.28
- 1978 0.34 0.00 73.93 4.46 82.26' -11.23 156.54 15.70 1979 5.87 0.06 68.65 4.15 '100.96 13.30 175.47 17.51 1980 2.76 0.02 '27.73 1.74 116.01 15.76 146.50 17.51 1981 6.31 0.04 57.13. 3.52 247.53 18.22 310.97 -41.78 1982 1.39 0.02 68.89 3.96 152.82 70.98 223.10 24.96 0 1983 50.62 0.36 95.04 5.61 166.78 24.21 '312.44 30.18 E.
- __- _ - . ~.
'*ikk,L
' ~*~
g -= 95
, - a
, CNetaanaues # meleer Ptest m A.
.* .. / ,
S . . . O cove ao'""o"" S'""'" "' Figure 5 24 Location of Cove Rotenone Sample Sites in Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 through 1983.
w i 5.2.4 Creel q Haterials and Methods s
- This survey procedure was formulated by Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) and TVA following closely a design prepared for l'
Tennessee by Dr. D. W. Hayne of the Institute of Statistics at Raleigh, North Carolina. Collection of field data and data processing were per-formed by TVA and TWRA. Thisysurvey was of the roving clerk uneven probability type, with day, work area, and time of day randcoly selected. Workdays were drawn,
.with replacement, until enough days had been selected to fill out the prescribed five-day, weekly work load for the clerk; a record was kept of Jthe number of times each weekday was drawn. After the workdays for a week
, . had been selected,. the work area and time for each day were chosen. .The
;.b reservoir was divided:into areas just large enough to be covered by boat in
~
j1 one work period. Each day was divided into two periods, from sunrise until noon. and from noon until sunset. ' Af ter the _ time of day had been selected, a . time for: instantaneous counts was chosen at random from all quarter hour
. segments in the work period. At this preselected time, the clerk counted
;the: number of persons fishing in the work area. During the rest of the work day, the clerk collected information on the number of each species of fish. caught, the weights of individual fish, hours fished, and related data from each-fishing party interviewed. Fishing success was established from the, interviews, and estimates of fishing pressure were made from the counts g; of fishermen; total catch was estimated as the product of success and pressure.
-302-
-j ,p a ,
r#- ' 1 A ' separate estimate lof the weekly fishing pressure -in fisherman
? hoursi(P) was made : for each work period by use of the following formula:
H -p . axe-
-b x d.x e where:
=a =. work > area count; b.= probability of' drawing this work area;
- c.=' number of hours in work period; d =_ probability of drawing thir work day; e =-probability of drawing this work time (a.m. or p.m.).
' Probabilities-for work days, areas, and times were assigned using
?information on fishing pressure provided by TVA personnel with previous knowledge of fisherman activity. Each day's estimate of weekly pressure (was weighted by the number'of times that particular day was drawn in setting
;up the original sampling schedule and used to calculate a mean (P) for the week. .
Estimated weekly harvest (number) of each species was the average Leatch per hour of that- species from the clerk's total interviews for the week multiplied by mean pressure (P). The weekly harvest of a particular
' species multiplied by its average weight in the creel provided the weekly t .
l- ; weight of each' species caught. Total number and weight of all . fish caught
'each' week were summations of estimates for individual species. Total number;of fishing trips was derived from the, average length of completed 1 fishing trips in hours divided into the total estimated fisherman hours.
Supplemental fisherman interviews were made one (1) day per week [ ,; in the immediate vicinity of SQN. Annual data summaries represent data 9 -
-303-U- _. _ . __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ . _
s %
, collections in a creel year, beginning July 1 ~each year and ending June 30 4 :of the following year.
Results and Discussion. Creel information contained in this section represents three years of
' operational data collection. Summary data from these surveys are compared to 'those derived from the SQN preoperational creel surveys conducted f rom 1972 through.1976 (TVA 1978b) and three years of interim sampling prior to initiation of operational sampling in 1980 (TVA 1983).
' Creel information collected during the period July 1977 to June 1983 shows 24 species of game' fish have been consistently harvested by anglers.
Of these, nine have been shown to be important (i.e. , comprising at least one percent of the total biomass or numbers harvested each year). 4 Numbers--A' total of 297,500 fish were harvested by anglers in the ,e~
~1982 creel year (July '~1982 through June 1983). This was a 17 percent
- g4 , increase from 1981 (table 5-51). Comparatively there was a 25 percent 1se between 1980 and 1981 creel years. The average annual catch in the
- interim period (1977-1979) was 255,173 fish with an' expected variation of-24 percent among the years. The six-year preoperational average was 175,645 fish (cv = 54). The three-year operational average (1980-1982) was 296,045 fish with variation of 14 percent among years.
The four dominant species in the 1982 creel year were white bass, white crappie, bluegill, and largemouth bass. White crappie catch was
- quite depressed from 1980 and 1981 levels. Species showing noteworthy
- p ' increases in numbers caught in 1982 were spotted bass, white bass, large-
. mouth bass, blue catfish, and yellow perch.
-304-
Biomass--Estimated total biomass of game fish harvested was 1 i . 132,598.kg in 1982.~ The'three-year operational average was 102,276 kg
, (cv =i26), while the'six year preoperational average was 68,575 kg (cv = 26).
White bass was the biggest contributor in 1982 with 20.0 percent (t ab'le .5-52) . Biomass of white bass exceeded that of white crappie (the
'laigest: contributor the previous year) by 45.5 percent. Over the three
' operational years, largemouth bass and blue catfish were the next highest blomass harvests with 18.6 and 17.2 percent respectively. From 1981 and
= 1982 there were substantial increases in biomass harvested for white bass,
,largemouth bass, blue catfish, and channel catfish, compared to the previous
.two operational survey years. White crappie biomass harvest was substantially depressed.
' Harvest Rates--Number of fish harvested per hour of fishing ranged;from 0.58 fish in 1979 and 1981 to 1.18 fish in 1978 (table 5-53).
._ The' operational' period average was 0.70 fish /hr (cv = 22), compared to the ,
' interim period average of 0.86. fish /hr (cv = 35) and the preoperational
. period : average of 0.75 fish /hr -(cv =- 22). Biomass of fish harvested showed a .similar pattern with a low of 0.20 kg/hr in 1981 and a high of 0.31 kg/hr-
- in 1978'. The 1980-82 average was 0.23 kg/hr (cv = 19) compared to the Linterim average of 0.25 kg/hr (cv = 20), and the six-year preoperational aver' age of 0.22 (cv ='43). Harvest rates per unit of water surface in a.
7g - Chickamauga Reservoir (summer pool) showed a three year operational average
.of 18.77 fish /ha (cv = 14)'and 6.49 kg/ha (cv = 25) compared to the three-year-interim study averages of 16.18 fish /ha (cv = 24) and 4.94 kg/ha (cv = 12). Averages for the preoperational period were 16.30 (cv = 18) and 4.74 (ev'= 30), respectively. .
e
/
-305-i;
Number and biomass of-fish per hour of fishing were 0.65 fish /hr and 0.28 kg/hr,'respectively in 1982; 0.58 fish /hr and 0.20 kg/hr in 1981, and 0.87 fish /hr and 0.21 kg/hr in 1980. Number and biomass of fish harvested per unit surface area in 1980 exceeded the estimates from interim surveys,
~
'but dropped in 1981 to 16.06 fish /ha and 5.21 kg/ha (table 5-53). These estimates are within one standard deviation of the seven year averages calculated from preoperational study data. In 1982, however, the harvest rates were 18.86 fish /ha and 8.38 kg/ha. The 1982 biomass yield per hectare
'was the highest observed to date.
Fishing Pressure--Fishing pressure during three years of oper- 1
, ational monitoring fo141 owed the expected seasonal pattern in which angler activity is lowest in the colder months and highest in spring (table 5-54).
The three year operational fishing pressure average was 469,865 hours. Since 1977, the lowest annual pressure observed was 289,066 hours in 1977 and the highest, 491,171 hours in 1981. The six year preoperational average
*- was 336,897 hours'(cv = 30) with a 12-month low of 216,868 hours in 1974 and a high of 463,855 in 1975. Fishing pressure over three operational years averaged 469,865 hours (cv = 4) per year. This is 3 percent higher than the 454,741 hours estimated for 1982.
Yield--Average fish sizes (kg/ fish) and harvest rates (number caught per hour fished) for a three-year period are shown in table 5-55. These are comparisons of data from nuclear plant and reservoir-wide surveys. Analysis of this information did not reveal consistent monthly or seasonal patterns in any individual data set. Over the three-year period the average 6 size fish in the reservoir survey exceeded the size of fish taken in the plant area 76 percent of the time. Percentages for individual years are: 90 percent in 1980, 58 percent in 1981, and 83 percent in 1982.
-306-
i
~ Harvest rates from the reservoir wide survey exceeded those of the plant area by ' 44 percent .over the three-year period. On an annual basis, reservoir rates exceeded plant area rates as follows: 33 percent in 1980, 41 percent in 1981, and 58 percent in 1982.
Summary and Conclusions-In general white crappie is the primary contributor to the creel on Chickamauga Reservoir; bluegill, white bass, channel catfish, largemouth bass,.and sauger provide most of the remainder of both number and biomass of fish harvested. The top three or four species combined in any given
-year contribute more than 60 percent to the creel.
Although harvest estimates of individual species and total fishing
. pressure vary 'from year to year as shown in' tables 5-51 through 5-54, the overall fishery appears reasonably stable. The only noteworthy findings were that catfish biomats exceeded white crappie biomass in 1976 and 1977 .
and that biomass of white bass harvest exceeded that of white crappie in
~
~
1978'and 1982. Blue' catfish was the second largest biomass contributor in 1982.- White crappie harvest was very , low compared to the previous five
; years. These variations are not unexpected given the proven cyclic nature -of fish populations.
The 8.38 kg/ha' yield for 1982 is high because average size of fish caught,-0.473 kg (1.041 lbs.)' increased. This is attributable to higher'than noomal harvests of blue catfish, striped bass, and largemouth bass, and larger than usual sizes of channel catfish and sauger. The average size fish caught in the reservoir-wide survey exceeded a the average size of fish' caught in the plant area 76 percent of the time.
-307-
Harvest rate -(number / hour) in ' the plant area . exceeded the reservoir-wide Mi rates 56 percent of-the time. This indicates that fish caught in the plant area generally are of smaller size than those caught in other areas and does not inply that large fish are avoiding the plant area. Composition of sport fish harvested from Chickamauga Reservoir in the preoperational and interim periods shows that variation can be expected from year to year. Comparison of the 1980, 1981, and 1982 creel estimates to those of the previous eleven years do not indicate any detrimental effect of SQN on sport fish harvest.
.o
' ~ b o O' t 9
-308-l'
Table 5-51. Estimated Numbers Harvested by Anglers, July 1,1980 Through June 30, 1983, Chickamauga Reservoir, Tennessee Number Species, 1980 1981 1982 White crappie 215.764 136,069 50,729 , Bluegill. 29,520 25,547 40,920 White bass 16,562 26,556 61,571 Channel catfish 25,051. 8,391 22,811
,- Drum- 1,529 1,221 4,806 -
Largemouth bass 18,850 29,09,4 46,562 Paddlefish - - 71 Blue catfishi 8,924 3,928' 33,796 Redear sunfish 3,788 291 656 Spotted bass. 265 597. 1,787 - Smallmouth bass 265 1,494 1,659 Black'erappie 3,204 4,502 3,731 Sauger .9,115 3,054 3,406 Other sunfish ' 341 9,364 9,240 Yellow perch. 1,771 1,208 10,645 Yellow bass 57 1,141 3,448 Flathead catfish 861 303 503 Rock bass - 77 179 Bullhead - - - Carp - 98 - Walleye 591 - 109 Smallmouth buffalo - - 109 Striped bass 508 303 833 : Hooneye - - - Total 337,392 253,248 297,500 -
-309-
L I Table 5-52. fEstimated Biomass Harvested by Anglers, q July 1, 1980 Through June 30, 1983, Chickamauga Reservoir, Tennessee r Biomass (kg)
., Species 1980 1981 1982
.W hite crappie 36,765 28,874 14,551 Bluegill- 2,817 3,129 4,632 White bans 7,299 9,452 26,691
-Channel catfish 16,891 6,255 20,765 Drum ~ 862 471 3,023 Largemouth bass 10,780 17,326 22,738 Paddlefish - -
1,329 Blue catfish 6,656 6,352 24,695 Redear sunfish 480 56 121 Spotted bass 175 310 708 Smallmouth bass 107 1,123 756 Black crappie 669 1,271 1,731 Sauger 3,320 1,635 2,111 Other sunfish 108 1,751 1,125 Yellow perch 402 352 1,755 Yellow bass 10 130 509 Flathead catfish 2,073 543 212 Rock bass - 25 52 Bullhead - - - Carp - 405 -
. Walleye 310 -
94 Smallmouth buffalo - - 199 Striped bass 2,815 2,694 4,801 Mooneye - - - Total 92,539 82,170- 132,598 5 4
-310-G- . --- - - >
~
Table 5-53. Harvest Rates of Sport Fish, July 1,1980 Through June 30, , 1983, Chickamauga Reservoir,. Tennessee Harvest per hour of fishina Harvest per hectare
- Year ~ Number Biomass (ka) Number Biomass (ka) .
1980 0.87 0.21 21.39 5.87 1981 0.58 0.20 16.06 5.21 1982 0.65 0.28 18.83 8.38 4 1
# i w#
b' Di 4.
-311-E
m q. Table 5-54. -Fishing Pressure (Hours) by Months, July 1, 1980 Through June 30, 1983, Chickamauga Reservoir, Tennessee Month 1980 1981 1982
' July 37,513 53,846 59,005 August 47,852 52,011 44,051 September 36,831 35,918 50,920 T' October 47,776 29,688 28,179
. November 19,847 13,069 21,817 December 19,424 10,084 7,724 January - 11,212 5,535 11,518 February 18,868 8,820 28,287 March 35,025 . 60,322 48,897 April 71,207 81,896 28,244 May 67,011 64,134 47,161
, June 51,117 75,848 78,938 Total' 463,683 4'91,171 454,741 9-D.
e
-312-u--__-_--_-___________-_-_____-_-_________--
Table '5-55. ' Average Fish Size and Harvest Rates from Monthly Creel Summaries for the Nuclear Plant Survey Area and Chickamauga Reservoir, Jaunary 1, 1980 Through December 31, 1982
~
Average Mass (kg/ fish) Number Per Hour Year Month Plant Area Rese rvoir Plant Area Reservoir 1980 January - 0.313 - 0.817 , February - 0.380 - 0.694 March. 0.231 0.250 0.220 0.414 April' O.168 0.508 0.973 0.386
'May 0.349 0.475 0.441 0.447
. June 0.087 0.351 1.221 0.283 July 0.155 0.115 0.868 0.335 August- 0.251 0.331 0.839 0.254 September 0.271 0.282 0.722 0.373 October 0.156 0.538 0.656 1.098 November 0.110 0.201 1.398 1.613 December 0.164 0.226 1.368 1.159 1981 . Ja nua ry 0.128 0.386 0.664 0.294 February '
0.150 0.146 3.367 1.393
. March' O.119 0.278 1.667 1.239 April 0.291- 0.259 0.893 1.045 May 0.411 0.458 1.034 0.717 June 0.428 0.274 0.984 0.212
-July 1.077 0.385 0.384 0.457 August 0.381- 0.447 0.877 0.358 September 0.316 0.246 0.748 0.497 October 0.954 0.379 0.432 0.878
- November 0 0.383 0 0.646 December 0 0.445 0 0.865 1982 January 0: 0.381 '
0 0.543 Feb rua ry 0 0.252 0 0.698 March 0 0.332 0 0.712 April 0.206 0.318 0.615 0.777' May 0.370 0.385 0.428 0.569 June 0.740 0.309 0.370 0.345 July 0.261 0.27% 0.250 0.719 August 0.334 0.609 0.433 0.322 September 0.306 0.639 0.488 0.315 October 0.429 0.463 0.767 0.311 November 0.359 0.461 0.659 0.462
. December 0.755 0.295 0.600 0.744 o
e'
-313--
t' l k
6.0 Conclusions SQN operat ion was near normal maximum capacity during l'sH3
- g (allowing 1for refueling). Both $ nits operated near capacity throughout the spring. From mid-July through September Unit 2 was shutdown for refueling and modifications. 'The plant operated at 50-67 percent capacity from October through December.
Near maximum plant operation in 1983 created greater potential for-plant-induced effects than in previous years of operational monitoring. Several differences among stations and/or years were app'arent from aquatic samples.in 1983. Some of these were thought to be related to operation of. SQN; others were thought to be related to other factors. Important obser-vations and differences are presented below a' sng with conc 1psions regarding their relationship to SQN operations.
- 1. Water quality monitoring included both monthly plant intake / discharge e
sampling and quarterly reservoir sampling. Discharge water quality was comparabic to that of the intake during sample periods in 1983 suggesting operation of SQN had little effect on the chemical composition of water withdrawn and discharged back to Chickamauga Reservoir. Likewise, data from reservoir stations upstream and downstream of SQN indicate no adverse alteration of water quality in Chickamauga Reservoir due to operation of SQN. 6 2. Spatial differences (among stations) occurred during several sample periods for both phyto- and zooplantkon. Most differences were, con-
*~
- sidered inconsequential because they were slight or the type which could not have been induced by plant operations (e.g., increases in
-314-k.__________________
-phytcplankten densities at a station only a few hundred yards down-stream of the diffusers). However, differences which occurred during
~
the spring sample period of 1983 and other years of operational moni-toring have been substantial. The eaisting monitoring program is not adequate to separate the relative contribution of SQN operations from other physical factors in causing these changes. Operational moni-toring data collected to date indicate SQN has had little influence on phytoplankton and zooplankton during winter, summer, and fall.
' Temporal dif ferences (i.e. , among preoperational and operational periods) have~also occurred. Preoperational data indicate a progressive trend toward greater plankton productivity which continued into the first year of operational monitoring (1981). Conditions during the second and third years of operational monitoring (1982 and 1983) are similar to those wh'ich existed during the first few years of preoperational 9
' monitoring, indicating these fluctuations were probably unrelated to
-operation of SQN. .
- 3. Two types of benthic macroinvertebrate studies were conducted quarterlyt,-
reservoir community studies and bioaccumulation of metals in mollusks. Reservoir community studies have showh the dependence of benthos on substrate composition. Similar substrate composition was not always sampled at upstream and downstream stations. However, when comparable s habitats were sampled, similar macroinvertebrate communities existed at all stations, indicating absence of impact from SQN operation during 1 b 1983. . Temporal comparisons of reservoir communities indicate changes cl l
- j. 'over time were not associated with operation of SQN (i.e., at the up-
-315- ^ - -
stream station) pr were indicative of improved conditions. Both spatial and temporal evaluations indicate absence of adverse impacts of SQN upon near-field and far-field macroinvertebrate communities. o Studies of metals concentrated in mollusk tissues upstream and down-stream of SQN in February, May, September, and November 1983 provided inconsistent results. That is, some species had greater concentrations of selected metals at the downstream station, while other species had greater concentrations of the same metal, or other metals, at the upstream location. 'Results were also inconsistent among sampling Idates. These studies, based upon seasonal comparisons, failed to identify any SQN induced changes in metals uptake by the mollusks. However, comparisons of. upstream and downstream concentrations of tissue metals fo'11owing a full' year's exposure indicated SQN may have increased iron and zine in one of the three test organisms. 6, 4
- 4. ' . Fish populations of Chickamauga Reservoir might have been affected by SQN water intake (impingement or entrainment) and components of the discharge-(e.g., elevated water temperature). Monitoring data to date have demonstrated impingement mortality.is very low and unlikely to -
have an adverse impact on reservoir fish populations. The only apparent effect of SQN cooling water discharge on fish was attraction of mooneye
.and white bass to the area downstream from the diffuser during summer.
This attraction does not constitute an adverse impact, however, as it would probably result only in a slight increase in sport fishing exploi-tation of white bass. o"
-316-
- c. ,
[ - Entrainmert.of fish eggs and larvae appeared to have . little potzntial t.
- j. ifor af fecting l reservoir populations, except for f reshwater drum.
~
! Entraining 'an estimated 58 percent of drum larvae passing SQN in 1983 : f'
.would indicate a significant. impact to that population in Chickamauga
, Rese rvoi r. Decreasing stocks of young-of-year and intermediate drum in cove samples support this conclusion. However, other observations and i- [ data describing the freshwater drum population dispute this conclusion.
.These are:
- 1. (Thg . trend of declining young and intermediate drum started before SQN
. began' operating.
- 2. Adult drum stocks'show no decreasing trend to date.
- 3. . Drum egg and larva 1Ldens'ities were high downstream from SQN.
- 4. Stocks of young and intermediate drum increased during .1983 in the cove (rotenone sampling) without aquat'ic macrophytes.
LResolution of the contradictory findings regarding effect of SQN + operation on-freshwater drum cannot be achieved by the current operational monitoring program. Additional sampling is required to determine validity of entrainment estimates. To that end, a pilot sutdy will be conducted in
'1984 to determine what modifications should be incorporated in 1985 to
~
verify or reject ~ the . assumption that drum eggs and larvae collected in front of the skimmerf wall are representative of those entrainment by SQN. Standard egg and larval sampling methods will be supplemented in 1983 on
~
two or three sample dates with samples inside the. intake basin. e
-317-
m
- ~ ~* .
p REFERENCES
<Ahlstrom, E.'H. 1940. "A Revision of the Rotatorian Genus Brachionus and Platyias with Descriptions of One New Species and Two New V,arieties."
... Bull. Amer. Museum of Natural History. 77:143-184.
- oA Ahlstrom', E2.H. L1943. ."A Revision of the Rotatorian Genus Keratella with
~
Descriptions of Three New Species and Five New Varieties." Bull. Amer.
- Museum of Natural History. -88:411-454.
Allen, W. R. -.1914. "The Food and Feeding Habitats of Freshwater Mussels." Biological Bulletin, 27:3, 21 pp. Berner, L. 1950. Mayflies of Florida, volume IV, No. 4, Biological Series, University of Florida Press, 267 pp.
' Brinkhurst, R. O. and B.G.M. Jamieson. 1971. Aquatic Oligochaeta of the World. rUniversity of Toronto Press, Toronto, 860 pp.
- Brooks , J. L. 1957. "The Systematics of the North American Daphnia."
-Memoirs of the Connecticut Academy of Arts & Sciences, Vol. XIII, Nov.
" 1957 . Yale University Press.
Burks, B.:D. '1953. Ephemeroptera of Illinois, vol. 26, Article 1, Bulletin
..of Illinois Natural History Survey, Authority of State of Illinois, 216 pp.
~ Clark, L.- R., P. W.' Geier, R. D. Hughes, and R.' F. Morris. 1967. The Ecolony of Insect Populations in Theory and Practice. Metheum and au Cultd, London,'pp. 57-146.
Cocke,'E. C. 1967. The Myxophyceae of North Carolin1 Edwards Brothers, Inc. , Ann Arbor, Michigan, p. 206.
. Cook, E. F. 1956. The Nearctic Chaoborinae (Diptera: Culicidae), Technical Bulletin 218, University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station, 102 pp.
Cummings, K. W. 1975. "Macroinvertebrates." In: River Ecology, Edited by B. A. Whitten, University of California Press, pp. 170-181. Curry,'L. L. ,1961. A Key for the Larval Forms of Aquatic Midges
.(Tendipedidae: Diptera) Found in Michigan. Report No. 1, Atomic j
. Energy Commission Contract (11-1)-350 and National Institutes of Health Contract, RG-6429, 160 pp.
Davies, R. W. 1971. "A Key to the Freshwater Hirudinoidae of Canada."' 0F JJ. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada, 28(4):543-552.
~Deevey, E. 5. and G. B. Deevey, 1971. "The American Species of Eubosmina Seligo (Crustacea, Cladocera)." Limnol. and Ocean. 16(2):201-218.
w
-318-A
r-2 0 s REFERENCES (Continued) Desikachar'y, T. V. 1959. Cyanophyts.. Indian Council of Agricultural - Research', New Delhi, India.
~
Drotet,'F. 1973. Revision of the Nostocaceae With Cylindrical Trichoses. Hafner Press, New York, p. 292. Drouet, F. and W. A. Daily. <1973. Revision of the Myxophyceae. (Facsimile of 1956' Edition) Hafner-Press, New York, p. 222. Dycus, D.:L. and'D. C. Wade. 1977. "A Quantitative-Qualitative Zooplankton
. Sampling Method." J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 52(1):2-5.
~
Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. " National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations." .CFR, Title 40, Part 141, Vol. 40, No. 248. Environmenta1' Protection Agency. 1976. " Quality Criteria for Water." EPA-440/9-76-023. Environmental Protection Agcncy. :1977. " Proposed National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations." CFR, Title 40, Part 143, Vol. 42, No. 62.
. Forest, H..S. 1954. Handbook of Algae: With Special Reference to Tennessee and the Southeastern United States. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee, p. 467.
Frazier, J. M. 1976. "The Dynamics of Metals in the American Oyster, 5
'Crassostrea virginica. II. Environmental Effects. Chesapeake Sci.,
17:188-187. .
'Goulden,(C. E.
1968. "The Systematics and Evolution of the Moinidae." Trans. Amer.1 Philosophical Soc. 58(6):1-101. Harring, H. K. and F. J. Myers. 1926. "The Rotifera Fauna of Wisconsin
'III. A Revision of the Genera Lecane and Monostyla." Trans.
Wisconsin Acad. of Sci. 22:315-423. Hollander, M. and D. A. Wolfe. 1973. Nonparametric Statistical Methods. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 503.pp. Hustedt, F. 1930. Die Susswasser-Flora Mitteleuropas, Heft 10:
'Bacillariophyta (Diatomeae). .Verlag Von Gustav Fischer, Jena,-p. 466.
Jeffrey, S..W' and G. F. Humphrey. 1975. "New Spectrophotometric Equations for Determining Chlorophylls a, b, c,- and c in Higher Plants, Algae 2 and Natural Phytoplankton." Biochem. Physiol. Pflanzen, Bd. 167, S. 191-194. , Johansen,.0. A. 1934-37. Aquatic Diptera, Parts I-IV. Thomsen, L. C. 1937. Aquatic Diptera, Part V, University of Ithaca, NY combined as Five Parts by Entomological Reprint Specialists,. Calif., 1969. -
-319-L.
b u e. (-<9 14 . REFERENCES (Continued) Lord, D. A., W. G. Breck, and R. C. Wheeler. 1975. " Trace Elements in Molluscs'in the Kingston Basin." Water Quality Parameters. . ASTM Special Tech.. Pub. 573, pp. 95-111. A
~Lorensen,-LC. : J. - - 1967. Determination of Chlorophyll and Pheopisments:
Spectrophotometric Equations. Limnol. Oceanoar. 12(2):343-346.
~ MacArthur,-R. H. 1957. "On the Relative Abundance of Bird Species" Proc. Nat.-Acad. Sci.,' Washington, 43:293-295.
' Manly, R.'and W. D. George. .1977. "The Occurrence of Some Heavy Metals in Populations of the Freshwater Mussel Anodonta anatina (L.) from the River Thanes." Environ. Pollut. Vol. 14, pp. 139-154.
Mason,.W. T. 1968. An Introduction to the Identification of Chironomid La rvae. Division of Pollution Surveillance, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Department of the Interior, Cincinnati, Ohio, 89 pp. McCa!.n, J. C. 1975. " Fouling Community Changes Induced by the Thermal Discharge of a Hawaiian Power Plant." Environ. Pollut. 9:63-83. -
, Meyer, R. L. 1971. "A Study of Phytoplankton Dynamics in Lake Fayetteville as a Means of Assessing Water Quality." Arkansas Water Res. Center,
'7 , Publ. 10. Morrison, P. F. 1967. Multivariate Statistical Methods. McGraw-Hill on Book Company, New York. Needham, J. G. , J. R. Traver, and Yin-Chi Hsu. 1935. The Biolony of Mayflies, with a Systematic Account of North American Species. Needham, G. N. and M. J. W e stfall. 1955. Dranonflies of North America. University of California Press, Berkeley, 615 pp. Patrick, R. and C. W. Reimer. 1966. The Diatoms of the United States ~
. Exclusive of Alaska and Hawalit Volume I: Fraallariaceae, _Eunctiaceae, Achnanthaceae. Naviculaceae. Monographs of the Academy of Natural Science of Philadelphia, No. 13, p. 688.
Patten, B. C. .1962. " Species Diversity in Net Phytoplankton of Raritan
. Bay." J. Mar. Research. 20:57-75.
Pennak, W. Robert. 1953. Freshwater Invertebrates of the United States. Ronald Press Co., New York, 769 pp. a:
- Phillips, D. J. H. 1977. "The Use of Biological Indicator Organisms to Monitor Trace Metal Pollution in Marine and Estuarine Environments--
A review." Environ. Pollut., 13:281-318. o. Pielou, E. C. 1975. Ecoloaical Diversity. Wiley, New York. 165 pp.
-320-R ___-._ _ __ ____________ J
i REFERENCES (Continued) ! Poppe, W. L. 1976. " Interrelationships Between Physiochemical and Biological Parameters with Special Emphasis on Annual Phytoplankton Succession in ~j Lake Fayetteville, Arkansas." 1AWRRC. Thesis and Dissertation Series. L
. Report No. 2, pp. 130.
.Poppe, W. L., D. J. Bruggink, and J. F. Plache. 1980. " Eutrophication Analysis of Cherokee Reservoir." Knoxville, Tennessee. Tennessec Valley Authority, Office of Natural Resources Division of Air and ,
Water Resources. WR-50-25-80.01. l Roback, S. S. 1963. "The Genus Xenochironomus (Diptera; Tendipedidae) Kief fer, Taxonomy and Immature Stages." Trans. Am. Ent. Soc., 88:235-250. N- Prescott, G. W. 1962. Alsae of the Western Great Lakes Area. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa, p. 977. Prescott, G. W. 1964. -The Freshwater Algae. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa, p. 272. Ross, H. H. 1944. Trichoptera of_ illinois, vol. 23. Authority of State of Illinois Natural History Survey Division, 326 pp. ! Ruttner Kolisko, A. 1974. Plankton Rotifern Biology t _and_Taxonney. Die Minnennewasser, Supplement: Rotatoria, Rand XXVI/l, E. Schweizerbarts' Verlagshuchhandlung (Nagele u. Obermiller), Stuttgart, p. 146. Saunders, G. W.g4F. B. Trama, and R. W. Bauchmann. 1962. " Evaluation of a Hodified C Technique for Estimation of Photosynthesis in large Lakes." Great Lakes Research Division, Publ. No. 8.
- Smith, G. H. 1933. The_ Freshwater Algae of the United States. McGraw-Hill book Company, Inc., New York, p. 716. 4
-Snedecor, G. W. and W. G. Cochran. 1968. Statistical Methods. The towa State University Press. Ames, Iowa.
Sokal, R. R. and F. J. Rohlf. 1969. Bidmetry. W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, p. 776. , Steele, R. G. D. aad J. H. Torrie. 1960. Principles _and Procedures of Statistles. ficaraw-Hill, pp. 112-115. , l Tennessee Department of Public Health. 1978. " Water Qualliy Management Plan for the Lower Tennessee River Basin." Nashville, Tennessee Division of Water Quality Control. Tennessee Department of Public Health. 1982. " General Water Quality e Criteria for the I)efinition and Control of Pollution in the Waters of Tennesnec." Nashville, Tennessect Division of Water Quality Control.
-321-i Y-
REFERENCES (Continued) Tennessee Valley Authority. 1978a. " Status of the Nonfisheries Biological Communities and Water Quality in Chickamauga and Nickajack Reservoirs Before Operation of the Saquoyah Nuclear Plant, 1971-1977." Chattanooga, Tennessee: Division of Environmental Planning, Water Quality and Ecology Branch. Tennessee Valley Authority. 1978b. "Preoperational Fisheries Report for the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant." Norris, Tennessee: Division of Forestry, Fisheries, and Wildlife Development, Fisheries and Waterfowl Resources Branch. Tennessee Valley Authority. 1980. " Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Preoperational Fisheries Honitoring Report, 1977-1979." Norris, Tennessee: Division of Water Resources, Fisheries and Aquatic Ecology Branch. Tennessee Valley Authority. 1982. " Aquatic Environmental Conditions in Chickamauga Reservoir During Operation of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, First Annual Report (1980 and 1981)." Knoxville, Tennessee: Division of Water Resources. TVA/0NR/WRF-82/4(a). Tennessee Valley Authority. 1983. " Aquatic Environmental Conditions in Chickamauga Reservoir During Operation of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Second Annual Report (1982)." Knoxville, Tennessee Division of Air and Water Resources, TVA/0KR/WRF-83/12(a), o Tennessee Valley Authority. Draft. " Fort Loudon Reservoir Water Quality." Office of Natural Resources. Division of Air and Water Resourecs. Water Quality firanch. Expected to be ilnalized in 1984. Tiffany, L. fl. and H. E. Britton. 1971. The Algae of Illinois. (Facsimile of 1952 Edition), llafner Publishing Company, New York, p. 407. Usinger, R. L. 1971. Aquatic Insects of California with Keys to North American Genera and California Species. University of California P;can. Herkeley, 508 pp. Voight H. 1956. H o_t_ a t o r i a . Borntraeger, Berlin, p. 508. Walker, E. H. 1953. The Odonata of_ Canada and Alaska, vol. 1. University of Toronto Press, 292 pp. Walker, E. H. 1958. The Odonata of Canada and Alaska, vol. 11. University of Toronto Press, 318 pp. Wade, D. C. 1984. Thesis in preparation to be submitted to graduate [] faculty at University of North Alabama, Florence, Alabama. Ward,11. B. and G. C. Whipple. 1959. Freshwater Diology. 2nd Edition, W. T. Edmondson (cd.), John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 1248.
-322-
.________-______-____-_____s
(_,-_-_-__.___ _ 1 I f I i. 1 REFERENCES (Continued) , N i f Weber, C. I., ed. 1973'.- Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for , Measuring _ the Quality of Surface Waters and Ef fluents. U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency. EPA-670/4-73-001. (- Whitford, L. ,A. and G. J. Schumacher, 1969. A Manual of the Freshwater , [ Algae 'in North Carolina. North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station Tech. Bull. No. 188, p. 313.
*/ar, J. 11. 1974. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice-liall, Inc., New Jersey, p. 620, 9
6t
*9 9
h
-323-E:
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Office of Natural Resources and Economic Development Division of Air and Water Res'ources AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR DURING OPERATION OF SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, THIRD ANNUAL REPORT (1983) s Appendices June 1984
3 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Office of Natural Resources and Economic Development Division of Air and Water Resources ))- AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR DURING OPERATION OF SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, THIRD ANNUAL REPORT (1983) Report Coordinator Donald L. Dycus Authors
-Russ T. Brown
. David J. Bruggink f.
Johnny P. Buchanan Donald L. Dycus Alphonso 0. Smith C. Thomas Swor David A. Tomljanovich Donald C. Wade William B. Wrenn Contributors Ralph N. Brown Haywood R. Gwinner Charles E. Mulkey Sylvia A. Murray Wayne L. Poppe Knoxville, Tennessee June 1984 TVS/0NR/WRF-04/5(b)
l y LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page I-~ A . Analytical Methods for Chemical Parameters, Operational
, , ; Water Quality Monitoring - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant . . . . . . 1 B . Average for Each Water Quality Parameter (By Stations Quarters Combined) for Periods of 1971-1978 Pre-operational Monitoring, 1980-1982 Operational Monitoring, and 1983 Operational Monitoring, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . 5 C Average for Each Water Quality Parameter (By Station for Each Quarter) for Periods of 1971-1978 Preoperational Monitoring, 1980-1982 Operational Monitoring, and 1983 operational Monitoring, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . .. . ... . . . . . . . . 9 D Water Quality Data Collected Concomitantly with Benthic Macroinvertebrate and Plankton Samples, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir in 1983 . ... . . . . . . . . 18 E Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Condenser Cooling Water Intake and Diffuser Water Quality Data, 1983 . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 36 F . Analytical Methods for Chemical Parameters, Intake, and Effluent Monitoring, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . 38 G Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, and Coefficient of Variation of Cell Densities for Each Algal Genus in Phytoplankton Samoles Collected During Operational Monitoring (1983). Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 N Mean Phytoplankton Densities (No. x 100/L) at Each Sample Station (Depths Combined) During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . 94 I Individual Sample Totals, Means, Standard Deviations, and t
Coefficients of Variation for Total Phytoplankton and Group Cell Densities (No./L) During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . 98 J Chlorophyll a Concentrations, Paeophytin a Concentrations, and Phaeophytin Index Values at Each Sample Location During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 i
LIST OF APPENDICES i (Continued) Appendix 7 Page K Carbon Assimilation Rates at Each Sample Location,
' Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 L Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, and Coefficient of Variation or Organism Densities for Each Zooplankton Taxon During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . 111 M Mean Zooplankton Densities-(No./m ) at Each Station During Operational Monitoring (1983), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 N Total Macroinvertebrates for Replicate Samples and Calculations for Totals and Individual Taxa, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir in 1983 . . . . . . . 128 0 Hexamenia (No./m ) Collected in .the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring, 1971 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 P Chironomidae-(No./m ) Collected in the Vicinity.of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During Preoperational and Operational r
Monitoring, 1971 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Q Oligochaeta (No./m ) Collected in the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During Preoperational and Operational
. Monito ring , 1971 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 R Corbicula Manilenses (No./m ) Collected in the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, During
-Preoperational and Operational Monitoring, 1971 Through 1983 . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 S Total Benthic Macroinvertebrates (No./m ) Collected in the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During Preoperational and Operational Monitoring 1971 Through 1983 . . . . . . . 200-T Mean Macroinvertebrate Densities of Total and Dominant Taxa, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1971 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 U Metals Data from Mollusks (While Body. Soft Tissue)
. Utilized'in Determining Bioaccumulation in the Vicinity of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 11
e -
]
LIST OF APPENDICES (Continued) ). .
- p. Appendix Page V List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes impinged at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant During the Period May 1980 Through December 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 230
.W Mean Number /ha of Each Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983, Number of Samples at Each Location in Parenthesis . . . 232 X Mean Biomass (kg/ha) of Each Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 236 Y Percentage Composition (Based on Mean Number /ha) of Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir,1970 through 1983 . . . . . . . . ..... . . . 740 1
2 Percentage Occurrence (Frequency) of Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 244 AA Mean Annual Number Per Hectare of Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . 248 BB Mean Biomass (kg/ha) of Each Fish Species Collected in Cove Rotenone Samples from Chickamauga Reservoir, 1970 Through 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . 252 5 til
3 APPENDIX A ANALYTICAL METil0DS FOR CllEMICAL PARAMETERS, OPERATIONAL WATER QUALITY MONITORING - SEQUOYAll NUCLEAR PLANT 1 ! l
Appendia A. Analytical MetFods for Chemical Parameters Operational Water Quality Monitoring - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant STOKET Detection
, 9 Parameter Code Number Method and Reference Preservation Techniques Limits Alkalinity, total 00410 Potentiometric Titration None (field titration) 1 ag/L og/L as CACO TVA NR CPS-FO-NRE-42.1 3
Alkalinity, OC415 Potenticeetric Titration None (field titration) 1adL pheno 1phtha1ean. TVA NR OPS-FO-%3E-42.I ag/L as CACO 3 Carbon, total Cf480 Oxidation-Infrared 1+4 H,50,, 4 C 0.2 mg/L organic, ag/L TV1 %3S-LB-AP-30.502.1 1 mL/8 oz. Chlorid , ag/L C0940 Auto Ferricyanide 4C 1 ag/L TVA NRS-LB-AP-30.320.1 0C095 bheatstone Bridge or None (in situ) 10 pahos/cm Ccedactance,spegific pahos/cm at 25 C Equivalent TVA NR OPS-FO-NRE-42.3
# 01042 Atomic Absorption, Direct 1+1 HNO 10 pg/L Capper, pg/l 3 Method 2 mLf8 oz.
l TVA KRS-LB-AP-30.223.1 I ren, t o t a l , pg/ L 01045 Atomac Absorpti m , Direct 1+1 HNO 3 Method 2 mL/8 oz. TVA NRS-LB-AP-30.241.1 M.anganese, total, CIC55 Atomic Absorption 1+1 HNO 10 pgR 3 pgfL TVA h35-LB-AP-30.248 1 2 mL/8 or. Matrogen, aumenia, OC610 Auto Colorimetrac Phenate 1+4 H,504 , 4 C 0.01 mg/L mg/L TVA ERS-LB-AP-30.356.1 1 mL/8 oz. I t _ _
2 - 1 s b e a i, c - tt L l L i L ci / / / em s a s g l p
/
g L L
/
ti a m p m / g L eL a g D 1 1 1 1 m m / g 0 0 0 t 0 1 o m 0 0 0 0 N 0 1 0 1 - s , e . m y y e l l i n e t e t h c a a i i , e d d T C e e C
*C m m s
e 4 *4 m m *4 i i i .. .. r , . - t a Oo 4z Oo 4z e n oen 4z . vr S ui u 0o d S,S t m t i m 5 d e E/ E/ i r i r 5/ s L L set set L e 4 m 4+ m 4+ m C C r + ae ae * * *C P 11 11 l D l D 11 4 4 4 c - i r t t 9 l a e c e hi m e c n s4 e an do 2 i4 r 8 2 1 i r 1 1 - e i6 l m 0 t2 2 0 4 D 9 1 r e t5 c3 em ja 6 i4 4 6 7 4 f u 3 T- - 3 1 . 2 3 k E n e d0 s 0 r 0 0 o 0 R e3 S-ee em 3 oM M- 3 3 i 3 0 3 d n P ri P
- /-
dO cO P P
- t p P cP f n A nF A A-a mA a-iF r- cA r iA aS S
i- e- o r-d mL dnn2 eee1 eP tS eP rB iB s E tS - o tL rL b L eL . d- t gg- dG mO e- t - Ad- m-ht aS aooS o e mS eS oS iS r t I e CM l rr uttM cii tM c r tM c iM r o iM n v chR itis me iM d b eA l nnA eA eA l A aA oMA rA W a W lV lV oV rV t V uV . C aT T ET ET CT GT A T TT
,r e
b 0 5 0 0 6 3 9 5 e n 3 6 0 6 0 3 0 4 6 C 2 4 6 3 9 9
)
NE Se 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 C 0 0 0 d d o i c . e C s . b m u d' a . m l p e r) - i v t s t . . l ld n e c d o i i o r e t i e s i l C aL m v s o ( t r/ a l i 1 s . e t g s o d a L m a so r s s td L fg A r a. e a s oe t v /g o a ,e , d s u ,lo o m a P ata e t r , c , i o esL , e d n sr st eL e/ nL e/ m a hL p/ msI da g m u t a e p ei t m rs t a as ya . sg om ada s( i d f l p i a w H h e o e A N N O p P S S S i . ,
' j ..^ $% Pr([ 0 , < . Appendix A. '(Continued).
s<
4 .- ., Detection ; J). 3 .' STORET; .3; j D.p, f /. Pa rameter Code' Number Method and Reference 7 Preservation Techniques Limits
~. .
A s g,i'o , , In situ 0.1 C s, . 'Tempe'rature, C 00010 Thermistor, Thermometer
; Zinc, pg/L- 01092. . Atomic Absorption, Direct 1+1 HNO O pg/L 3'
Method 1 mL/8 oz M N,/'b
'.TVA NRS-LE-AP-30.297.I STORZT is the acronym for EPA'.s data storage and retrieval system in which all TVA water quality: data are.
entered. , 9 Reference abbreviations refer to the,following: TVA NRS - Laboratory Branch Quality Manual, 1980, Tennessee j
Valley Authority; TVA NR OPS = F'ield' Operations NRE Procedures Manual, Volume.1, 1983, Tennessee Valley
' Authority; EPA = Methods for. Chemical Analysic of Water and Wastes, 1980, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
, , -l, i
~, , =
s > ,
) R f
k , r' i
~
l . _ _ . A _p
a. 1 i: )- q APPENDIX B AVERAGE FOR EACH WATER QUALITY PARAMETER (BY STATION QUARTERS COMBINED) FOR PERIODS OF 1971-1978 PREOPERATIONAL MONITORING, 1980-1982 OPERATIONAL' MONITORING, AND 1983 OPERATIONAL MONITORING, SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR I' -
.]
,1 s
n 5
-1
-p\
- d A
Appendix B. Average for Each Water Quality Parameter (By Station Quarters Combined) for Periods of 1971-1978 Preoperational Monitoring, 1980-1982 Operational Monitoring and 1983 Operational Monitoring, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. Chickamauga Reservoir 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period ,_ 1983 Operational Pa ramete r N Mean S.D. Min Max N Mean S.D. Min Max N Nean S.D. Min Max Tennessee River Mile 478.19 Temperature ('C) 211 16.2 7. 2.4 27.8 '72 16, 6.6 4.7 28.5 32 17.2 - 7.3 6, 26.7 Conductivity (puhos/cm) 130 167. 17. 140. 220. 72 184. 19. 160. 220. 32 .170. 32. 130. 210. Dissolved Oxygen (ms/L) 210 8.7' 2.2 5. 13.4 69 8.6 2.5 4.6 13.2 32 8.6 2.3 5.2 12.4 pH (standard units)- 135 7.3 0.4 6.3 8.8 72 7.6 0.4 6.9 8.4 32 7.3 0.2 . 7. 7.5 Alkalinity (eg/L) 42 49.6 5.9 38. 61. 58 56.7 7.5 33. 68. 28 52.7 9.7 36. 64. Organic N (og/L) 36 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.17 33 0.17- 0.13 0.06 0.84 16 0.23 0.14 0.06 0.55 Ammonia N (ag/L)- 36 0.064 0.056 0.01 0.34' 40 0.076 0.119 0.01 0.76 20 0.06 0.065 0.01 0.30 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 36 0.33 0.12 0.15L 0.55 37 0.31 0.13 0.15 0.85 16 0.27 0.11 0.18 .0.47 Dissolved Phosphate (og/L) 0 . . . . 34 0.026 0.043 0.01 0,22 16 0.015 0.009 0.01 0.04 Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 36 2.06 0.46 1.2 2.9 38 4.77 3.48 2.2 19. 16 3.4 1.2 2.3 7.5 Sodium (ag/L) 0 . . 18 - 7.8 1.8 ' 4.5 10.6 8 6.1 2. 4.5 9.2 Chloride (eg/L) 0 . . . . 16 9.4 ' 2.1 - 6. 12. 8 7.6 2.2 6. II. Sulfate (ag/L) 0 . . . . 18 16.9 1.9 14. ~20. 8 13.1 2.3 9. 15. gp Copper (pg/L) 11 12.7 6.5 10. 30. 18 20.4 21. 1. 70. 8 11.3 7.9 5. 30. Iron (pg/L) 11 437. 124. 260. 690. 18 308. 230. 50. 870. 8 269. 125. 120. 520. Manganese (pg/L) 7 70. 12.9 50. 90. 18 54.2 21.6 20. -110. 8 66.6 25.3 40. 100. Zine (pg/L) 11 37.2 21. 10. 80. 18 11.7 6.8 5. 30. 8 86.5 207.6 5. 600. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 0 . . . . 18 100.1 14.5 70. 120. 8 92.5 10.4 80. 100. Tennessee River Mile 483.40 Temperature (*C) 215 16.3 6.9 24. 26.4 78' 16.6 6.7 4.7 27.5 33 17.4 ~t 5.5 27. Conductivity (pahos/rm) 133 167. 18. 140. 220. 78 184. 20. 150. 220. 33 170. 3. 130, 210. Dissolved Oxygen (eg/L) 214 8.6 2.2 5.1 13.4 78 8.1 2.6 4.3 13.4 33 8.7 2.1 5.3 12.2 pH (standard units) 133 7.2 0.6 5. 8.8 78 7.5 0.5 6.7 9. 33 7.3 0.2 7.1 7.9 Alkalinity (og/L) 49 49.1 5.9 - 36. 58. 62 57.7 6.4 47. 64. 22 49.7 8.4 38. 59. Organic N (mg/L) 49 0.11 0.08 0.01 0.52 33 0.15 0.07 0.05 0.42 16 0.19 0.11 0.04 0.45 t
- 6 -
y- 7 v-
-]7 i
, Appendix B. .(Continued) 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Parameter N~ Mean S.D.t Min Max N Mean S.D. -Min Max N Mean S.D. 'Mia- Max Ammonia N (ag/L) 49 0.102 0.195 0.01' 1.30 40 < 0.061 0.053 0.01 0.30 20 ' 0.049. 0.029 0.01 0.10 .
Nitrate-Nitrite N (ms/L) 49 0.36' O.19 'O.21 1.50 43 0.30 0.13 0.16 0.91' 16 0.26 0.10 0.18 -0.44 Dissolved Phosphate (mg/L) 25 0.017 0.012 .0.01- 0.06 40 0.016- 0.008 0.01 0.04 16 0.012 0.004 0.01 0.02. Total Organic Carbon (ag/L)- 49 2.26' 0.97 1.1 7.2 38 4.09 2.96 1.3 16. 16 3.02 0.69 2.2 '4.9 Sodina (mg/L) . 25 5.8 1.7 3.7 9.1 24 7.6 1.6 4.4 10.6 -8 6.2 2.1 4.5 9.5 Chloride (mg/L) 25 - ' 7. 2. 4. '12. 22- 9.5 - 1.7 6. .12. 9 8.3 2.1 6. 11. Sulfate (ag/L)- 25, 14. 2.9 9. 13.- 23 .17. 2.7- 8. ' 20. 9 13.3 2. 10. 15. Copper (p /L) 25 24.4 13.6 10. _ 50. 18 18.7 21.5 1. 70. 8. 10. 4.6 5. 20. Iron (pg/L)- . 25 490. 410. 150. 2200. '24 258. . 183. ' 50. 830. 8 214. . 117. 90. 380. Manganese (pg/L) 25 69.6 30.8 '30. 170. 18 59.7 14.5 40. 90. 8 59.5' 18.2 40. 89. Zine (p:/L) . 25 27.2 29.7 10. 160. 18 24.6 39.1 5. 50, 8 50.3 101.3 5. 300. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 25 87.6 10.1 60. 110. 23 106.2 12.3 80. 120. 9 98.9 18.3 70. 130. Tennessee River Mile 484.10
' ma ,
Temperature (*C) 197 16.2 6.9 ' 2.5 - 26.5 61 16.6' 7.1 4.8 28.5 28 18.2- 7.3 5.7 28.5 Conductivity (puhos/ca) 135 180. '34. 130, 250. 61 189. 20. 150. 220. 26 171. 30. 130. . 210. Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 197 8.5' 2.2 4.7 13.4 .61 8.6 2.7 3.6 13.4 28 8.4 2.2 4.7 12.4 pH (standard units) 135 7.2 0.4 6.1- 7.8 - 61 7.5 0.3 7. 8.3 26 7.3 0.3 6.9 '7.9 Alkalinity (og/L) 41 50.6 5.8 38. 61. 34 56.9 6.9 47. 68. 13 49.3 8.9 39. 60. Organic N (mg/L) 45 0.12 0.06 0.01 0.39 8 0.17 0.07 0.09 0.28 0 . . Ammonia N (ag/L) 45 0.064 0.033 0.01 0.19' 18 0.095- 0.136 0.01 0.62 7 0.046 0.024 0.01 0.08 Nitrate-Nitrite N (eg/L) 45 0.38 0.24 0.17 1.80 10 0.25 0.04 0.18 0.31 0 . . . Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 45' O.02 0.026 0.01 0.17 2 0.01 0.000 0.01 0.01 0 . . . Total Organic Carbon (eg/L) 39 2.6 2.1 1. 14. 14 3.7- 1.6 2.3 8.9 0 . . . Sodium (ag/L) 45 5.3 1.4 3. 9.1 18 8. 1.7 4.8 10.5 7 6.5 2.1 4.6 9.6 Chloride (ag/L) 45 6.6- 1.8 4. 12. 18 9.8 1.9 6. 12. 7 8.3 2. 6. 11. Sulfate (mg/L) 45 12.5 3.4 4, 18. 18 17. 1.6 14. 19. 7 13.1 2.2 10. 15. Copper (pg/L) 52- 33.1- 50. 10. 290. 18 17.1 18.9 1. 60. 7 10.4 3.8 5. 14
a -- H-i-?j
- - ~ -
7
;y n
s t
?
': 4 . A i
'l 4
' Appendix B.' (Continued) 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational
* , Max.
' Parameter _ji Mean S.D.t . Min - Ma x - N Mean S.D. Min' ~ Max N -Mean S.D. - Mia Iron.(ps/L) 52 510J 330. 80. 2100. '18- 316. .263. 70. 940. 7 331. 321. , 1100.
1000. 'l Manganese (pg/L) ' 49 70. 31.2 30. .180. 18 63. 29.9 10. 140. .7~ 62.4 18.6 36. 97. Zine (pg/L) 52 39.6 30. 10. 150. 18 18. 20.9 5. .95. 7 ~24.3 - 29.'4 5. ' 80, i Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 37. 87.3 14.7 60. '120. .18 102, 13.6 70. 130. 7 91.4 - 14.6 ' 70. 110. Tennessee River Mile 490.07 ' Temperature (*C) '156 16.5 6.9 ' 2 .1 -26.5 68 15.6 6.5 4.8 26. 30 ' 16.5 7.1 5.4 25.6 Conductivitt (puhos/cm) 93 170. 17. 140. 220. 60 - 189. 18. ISO. 220. . 30 172. 29. 140. 210. Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 156 '8.5' 2.3 . 4.5 13.4 68 8.5 2.8 3.8 13.8 30 8.4 2.4 4.8 12.2. pH (standard units) 97- 7.1 0.5 5. 8. 68 7.6 - 0.4 7. 8.8- 30 7.4 0.2 7.1 7.6 Alkalinity (ag/L) 41 .51.7 6. 33. 60. 52 57.5 7.1 41. 67. 19 50.7 8.9 40. . 60. Organic N (ag/L) 36 0.1 0.06 0.01 0.33 33 0.16 0.07 0.05 0.38 16 - 0.19 0.07 0.06- .0.27 Ammonia N (ag/L) 36 0.079 0.079 0.01 0.45 38 - 0.064 0.036 0.01 0.14 19 0.054 0.03 0.02 0.13 - Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 36 0.36 0.10 0.23 0.59 37 0.34 0.15 0.22 0.96 16 - 0.29 0.12. 0.19 0.54 Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 0- . . . 34 0.016 0.009 0.01 0.04. 16 0.016 0.01 0.01 .0.03 Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 36 2.21 0.90 1.2 - 6. 2 37 3.93 1.90 1.9 10. 16 3.16 0.68 2. 4.4 Sodium (ag/L) 0 . . . 13 8. 1.6 4.5 10.8 7 .. 6.2 2.1. 3.4 9. Chloride (mg/L) 0 . . . 10 9.5 2. 6. 12. 7 7.7 1.8 6. 10. Sulfate (ag/L) 0 . . . 11 17. 1.6 15. 20. 7 13.3 2. 10. 15. Copper (pg/L) 11 13.6 8.1- 10. 30, 13 16.1 19.7 1. 60. 7 12, 5.7 6. 20. Iron (pg/L) 11 485. 103. 340. 660. 13 225. 154. 80. 610. 7 64: 1221. 50. 3400. Manganese (pg/L) 7 71.4 18.6 50, 100. 13 62.8 34.3 20. 146. 7 96.3 92. 39. 300. Zinc (pg/L) 11 43.6 33.2 20. 130. 13 15.5 20.2 5. 80. 7 12.9 9.1 5. 30. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 0 , 11 101.6 16.8 62. 120. 7 102.9 18.9 80. 130. Number of Measurements. Standard Deviation. A - A
5
^<
f APPENDIX C AVERAGE FOR EACH WATER QUALITY PARAMETER (BY STATION.FOR EACH QUARTER) FOR PERIODS OF 1971-1978 PREOPERATIONAL MONITORING, 1980-1982 OPERATIONAL MONITORING, AND 1983 OPERATIONAL MONITORING, SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT,-CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR
.7 s
i S e _m
APPENDIX C. FE8RUARY
SUMMARY
STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 478.19 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational 1971-78 Preoperational Period N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max Pa rameter N Mean S.D Min Max 6.6 1.9 4.7 8.9 8 6.1 0.1 6. 6.2 Temperature (*C) 48 5.7 2.4 2.4 8.5 16 130, 130.
- 12. 160. 190. 16 164. 5. 160. 170. 8 130. 0.0 Conductivity (pahos/ca) 33 171.
0.9 10.6 13.2 8 12.2 0.09 12.1 12.4 Dissolved Oxygen (ag/L) 47 12. 1. 10.5 13.4 16 12.3 8.8 7.8 8.4 8 7.5 0.0 7.5 7.5 pH (standard units) 34 7.6 0.5 6.8 16 8.2 0.2 52.
- 47. 56. 52.6 6.1 34. 58. 7 51.1 0.38 51.
Alkalinity (ag/L) 10 50.5 3.3 12 0.29 0.11 0.19 0.43 0.10 0.02 0.08 0.14 4 0.17 0.05 0.13 0.23 4 Organic N (ag/L) 9 0.062 0.055 0.01 0.15 5 0.032 0.005 0.03 0.04 Ammonia N (ag/L) > 0.073 0.036 0.02 0.12 8 0.47 0.54 0.40 0.08 0.32 0.48 4 0.45 0.02 0.43 Nitrate-Nitrite N (sg/L) 9 0.47 0.06 0.38 8 0.014 0.01 0.04 8 0.02 0.012 0.01 0.04 4 0.02 Dissolved Phosp'ite (ag/L) 0 . . . . 3.2 19. 4 4.08 2.30 2.5 7.5 Total Organic Carbon (eg/L) 9 1.88 0.21 1.7 2.3 8 6.85 5.51 4 6.9 2.7 4.5 9.2 2 4.7 0.0 4.7 4.7 Sodium (ag/L) 0 . .
- 6. 6.
4 8.5 2.9 6. II. 2 6. 0.0 Chloride (ag/L) 0 . . .
- 20. 2 14. 0.0 14. 14.
Sulfate (ag/L) 0 4 18.1 2.1 16. 9.9 8. 30. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Copper (pg/L) 2 15. 7.1 10. 20. 4 17.3 258. 280. 870. 2 215. 64. 170. 260. Iron (pg/L) 2 530. 99. 460. 600. 4 633. 40. 4 59. 17.2 40 78. 2 40. '0.0 40. Manganese (pg/L) 1 70. 70. 70. 30.
- 60. 4 15.3 6.2 10. 22. 2 25. 7.1 20.
Zinc (pg/L) 2 50. 14.1 40. 80. 100. 4 90.5 8.3 80. 100. 2 90. 14.1 Dissolved Residue (eg/L) 0 . . . APPEN01X C. lI8RUARY
SUMMARY
STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 483.40 he O 1983 Operational 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max Parameter N Mean S.D Min Max N 6.3 1.7 4.7 9. 8 6.6 0.7 5.5 7. Temperature ('C) 47 5.6 2.4 2.4 8.5 16 130. 130. 190. 16 163. 14. 150. 180. 8 130. 0.0 Conductivity (pahos/ca) 32 168. 15. 150. 11.6 12.2 13.4 16 12.1 1.2 10.4 13.4 8 12. 0.2 Dissolved Oxygen (ag/L) 47 11.9 1.1 10. 7.4 7.5 1.2 5. 8.8 16 8.2 0.4 7.7 9. 8 7.5 0.0 PK (standard units) 32 7. 49. 52.
- 58. 52.8 1.3 50. 54. 7 50.7 1.1 Alkalinity (mg/L) 12 50.2 5. 45. 13 0.21 0.05 0.17 0.28 0.09 0.04 0.03 0.15 4 0.16 0.06 0.10 0.22 4 Organic N (eg/L) 12 0.098 0.01 0.30 5 0.034 0.015 0.02 0.06 Ammonia N (eg/L) 12 0.10 0.106 0.02 0.41 8 0.076 0.40 0.08 0.31 0.49 4 0.43 0.01 0.43 0.44 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 12 0.46 0.05 0.39 0.52 8 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 8 0.021 0.012 0.01 0.04 4 0.012 Dissolved Phosphate (mg/L) 6 0.018 0.013 2.2 2.6 0.32 1.6 2.8 8 6. 4.69 3.1 16. 4 2.4 0.16 Total Organic Carbon (mg/L) 12 1.89 4.9 0.1 4.8 4.9 5.1 1.1 3.8 6.4 4 6.9 2.7 4.4 9.3 2 Sodium (ag/L) 6
- 6. 11. 7. 0.0 7. 7.
Chloride (ag/L) 6 6.7 1.1 6. 8. 4 8.5 2.9 2 16, 19. 2 14. 0.0 14. 14. Sulfate (eg/L) 6 13.7 2.6 12. 17. 4 17.5 1.3 9.8 3. 20. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Copper (pg/L) 6 25. 16.4 10. 50. 4 11.5 180. 830. 2 230. 71. 180. 280. 6 670. 202. 420. 880. 4 503. 340. Iron (pg/L)
- 50. 74. 2 40. 0.0 40. 40.
Manganese (pg/L) 6 71.7 24. 50. 110. 4 63. 10.4 4 12. 2.4 10. 15. 2 25, 7.1 20, 30. Zine (pg/L) 6 26.7 18.6 10. 50. 90. 130.
- 90. 4 88.3 7.1 80. 97. 2 110. 28.3 Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 6 85. 5.5 80.
- n
- APPENDIX C. ' FEBRUARY
SUMMARY
STATISTICS FOR QUARTIRLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 484.10 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Parameter, N Mean S.D Min -Max N- Mean S.D . . Min Max N Meani S.D Min ' Max
~
Temperature (*C) ~ 44 5.8 2.5 2.5 8.7 13. 6.8 f.9 4.8 8.5 5 5.7 0.0 5.7 5.8
. Conductivity (pmhos/ca) 32 '163. 18. 130. 190. 13' 170. 20. 150. '190. 5 130. 0.0 130. 130.
Dissolved Oxygen (og/T.) 44 12., 1.2 '10. 13.4 13 12.1 1.1 10.6 13.4 5- 12.3 0.1 12.2 12.44 pH (standard units) 33 7.1 0.6 6.1 7.8 13 8. 0.3 7.6 - 8.3 5 7.5 0.0 7.5- 7.5 Alkalinity (ag/L) 12 50.3 . 4.3 42. 58. 9 51.8 1.4 49. 53, 3 49.3 0.6 ~ 49. 50. Organic N (ag/L) 11 0.12 0.04 0.16 'O . . . . 0 . . . . Ammonia N (og/L) 11 0.068 -0.031 . 0.04 0.03 0.13 4 0.060 0.045 0.01 0.12 1. 0.050 . 0.05 0.J5 Nitrate-Nitrite N (og/L) 11 0.62 0.40 . 0.42 1.80 2 0.31 0.0 0.31 0.31 0 . . . . Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 11 0.038 0.047 .0.01 0.17 0 . . . . 0 . . . Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 9 2.13 0.28 1.9 2.7 4 5.03 2.61 3.4 8.9 0 . . . . Sodium (og/L) 11 4.6 1.1 3. 6.4 4 7.1 2.6 4.8 9.5 1 5.2 . 5.2 5.2 Chloride (ag/L) 11 6. 1.5 4 9. 4 8.8 2.6 6. 11. I 7. . 7. 7. Sulfate (ag/L) 11 13.5 2.8 10. 18. 4 17.8 1.5 16. 19. I 14. . 14. 14. Copper (pg/L) 12 ' 18.3 9.4 10. 40. 4 14.3 13.1 2. 30. I 10. . 10. 10. Iron (pg/L) 12 623. 222. 270. '990. 4 580. 398. 230. 940. 1 310. . 310. 310. Manganese (pg/L) 11 79.1 26.3 60. 150. 4 88. 34.8 68. 140. I 60. . 60. 60. Zine (pg/L) 12. 46.7 41.6 ~ 10. 150. 4 15.5 7.6 10. 26. 1. 80. . 80. 80. Dissolved Residue (eg/L) 9 83.3 10. 70. 100. 4 86.5 11.4 70. 96. I 80. . 80. 80. APPENDIX C. E BRUARY
SUMMARY
STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 490.47 p 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Parameter N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max Temperature (*C) 33 5.8 2.6 2.1 8.8 14 6.5 1.8 4.8 8.5 7 5.5 0.0 5.4 5.5 Conductivity (puhos/ca) 22 174. 11. 160. 190. 14 167. 18. 150. 190. 7 140. 0.0 140. 140. Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 33 12. 1.2 10.2 13.4 14' 12.4 1.3 10.4 13.8 7 12.1 0.1 12. 12.2 pH (standard units) 23 6.9 1. 5. 8. 14 8.2 0.4 7.7 8.8 7 7.6 0.0 7.6 7.6 Alkalinity (og/L) 10 52.5 7.9- 33. 60. 11 55.4 1.6 53. 58. 6 53.8 2.6 49. 56. Organic N (ag/L) 9 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.12 '4 0.11 0.02 0.09 0.13 4 0.23 0.01 0.21 0.24 Ammonia N (ag/L) 9 0.129 0.138 0.02 0.45 8 0.054 0.042 0.01 0.13 4 0.057 0.049 0.03 0.13 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 9 0.51 0.07 0.43 0.59 8 0.41 0.11 0.31 0.52 4 0.49 0.03 0.47 0.54 Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 0 . . . . 8 0.02 0.011 0.01 0.03 4 0.017 0.01 0.01 0.03 Total Organic Carbon (eg/L) 9 2.06 0.54 1.2 3.3. 8 3.94 0.57 3.3 5. 4 2.95 1.01 2.2 4.4 Sodium (og/L) 0 . . . . 2 6.9 3.4 4.5 9.3 1 5.1 5.1 5.1 Chloride (og/L) 0 . . . 2 8. 2.8 6. 10. I 6. 6. 6. Sulfate (ag/L) 0 . . .. . 2 17.5 2.1 16. 19. I 14. 14. 14. Copper (pg/L) 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. 2 16. 19.8 2. 30. I 10. . 10. 10. Iron (pg/L) 2- 525. 35. 500. 550. 2 375. 332. 140. 610. 1 50. . 50. 50. Manganese (pg/L) 1 50. . 50. 50. 2 58. 11.3 50. 66. 1 40. . 40. 40. Zinc (pg/L) 2 25, 7.1 20. 30. 2 13. 4.2 10. 16. I 20. . 20. 20. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 0 . . . . 2 98. 2.8 96. 100. I 130. . 130. 130.
4
~
oAPPENDIX C. MAY SIMIARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 478.19 y 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82' Operational Period - 1983 Operational. Parameter N- Mean S.D ! Min Max N Mean S.D ' Min Max- .N Mesa- S.D ' Min Max Temperature (*C) 54 17.8 1.2 16. 21.3 -16 19. 1.2 ,16.6 20.5 8 19.7- 0.4 19. 20.5' Conductivity (puhos/cm) 34 153. 12. 140. - 170. . . 16 - 184. . 5. 180. 190. 8 150. ,0.0 150. 150. Dissolved 0xygen (og/L) 54 8.3 0.7 6.6 10.1 16 8.1 1, 6.1 . 9.7 L 8 7.8 0.2 7.7 8.2 - pH (standard units) 35 7.2 ~0.1~ 7. 7.5 16 7.2 0.2 _ 6.9 - 7.5 8 7. 0.0 - 7. 7. Alkalinity (og/L) 10 50.2- 7.8 42. 61. ' 13 50.1 7.3 . 33. 58. 7- 37.9 1.1 36. -39. Organic N (ag/L) 9 0.11 'O.04 0.05 0.17 8 0.20- 0.26 : 0. 06 .- 0.84 4. 0.28 0.23 0.09 , 0.55 Ammonia N (ag/L) 0.06 0.025 0.03 0.10 9 0.157 0.233 0.02 0.76- 5 0.096 0.009 0.09. 0.11 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 9 0.33 0.07 0.23- 0.38 8 0.27 0.02 0.22 ,0.29 4 0.25~. 0.02 0.23- 0.27 Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 0 . . . . 8 0.042 0.072 - 0.01 0.22- 4 0.010 0.0' O.01 0.01 Total Organic Carbon (og/L) 9 1.98 0.49 1.2' 2.6 9 4.96 ' 2.86' 2.5 9.8 4- '3.23 0.59 2.9 4.1 Sodium (ag/L)- O. 4 7.5 - 5.3 - 9.1 2 4.6 0.1 4.5 4.6
. . . 1.. ~ 6.
Chloride (eg/L) 0 . . . . 3- 9.3 2.1 7. 11. 2 6. 0.0 6. Sulfate (ag/L) 0 . . . . 4 16. 1.4 14. 11. 2 9.5 0.7' 9. 10. Copper (pg/L) 3 16.7 11.5 10. 30. 4 13. 14.4 1. 30. 2 20. 14.1 10. 30. Iron (pg/L) 3 397. 96. 310. 500, 4. 205. 77. 128. 302. 2 425. 134. 330. 520. Manganese (pg/L) 2' 55. 7.1 50. 60. 4 32. 11.8- 20. 44, 2 70. 18.4 57. ' 83. Zine (pg/L) 3- 40. 17.3 20. 50. 4 7.5 - 2.9 5. 10. 2. 305. 417.2- 10. 600. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 0 . . . . 4 102.5 5. 100. 110. 2 80. 0.0 80. 80.
> ~
APPENDIX C. MAY
SUMMARY
STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 483.40 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Pa rameter N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max Temperature (*C). 56 17,6 1.1 16. 21.1 16 19.6 1.3 17. 21. 8 20. 0.8 18.8 20.8 Conductivity (pahos/cm) 36 157. 9. 140, 170. 16 182. 3. 180. 185. 8 150. 0.0 150. 150. Dissolved Oxygen (ag/L) 56 8.3 0.7 6.8 10. 16 7.8 0.7 7. 8.9 8 8.2 0.6 7.7 9.6 0.1 7.3 6.9 0.2 6.7 7.2 8 7.1 0.0 7.1 7.2 pH (standard units) 36 7.2 7. 16 40. Alkalinity (og/L) 12 49. 5.4 41. 57. 13 50.8 2.9 47. 55. 7 38.7 0.8 38. Organic N (ag/L) 12 0.12 0.09 0.01 0.37 8 0.10 0.04 0.06 0.15 4 0.24 0.15 0.12 0.45 Ammonia N (ag/L) 12 0.069 0.038 0.03 0.18 9 0.071 0.031 0.01 0.10 5 0.088 0.008 0.08 0.10 Nitrate-Nitrite N (mg/L) 12 0.45 0.34 0.24 1.50 8 0.30 0.04 0.28 0.39 4 0.24 0.0 0.24 0.24 0.008 0.01 0.03 0.017 0.009 0.01 0.03 4 0.012 0.005 0.01 0.02 , Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 6 0.013 8 3.5 Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 12 2.02 0.89. 1.1 4. 9 4.8 2.63 2.6 9.8 4 3.28 0.17 3.1 f Sodium (ag/L) 6 4.3 0.7 3.7 5.1 4 7.7 1.5 6.2 9.3 2 4.7 0.2 4.5 4.8 ( Chloride (og/L) 6 5.3 0.5 5. 6. 3 9.7 2.1 8. 12. 2 6. 0.0 6. 6. i Sulfate (ag/L) 6 12. 1.9 9. 14. 4 16.5 1.3 15. 18. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. 13.3 10, 40. 4 19. 13.9 1. 30. 2 15. 7.1 10. 20.
.* Copper (pg/L) 6 21.7 380.
2200. 4 244. 8. 240. 255, 2 375. 7. 370. Iron (pg/L) 6 675. 754. 200.
- 57. 62.
Manganese (pg/L) 6 85. 49.7 40. 170. 4 45. 7.1 40. 55. 2 59.5 3.5 6 23.3 5.2 20. 30. 4 32.5 51.7 5. 110. 2 160. 198. 20. 300. Zine (pg/L)
- 90. 4 102.5 15. 90. 120. 2 75. 7.1 70. 80.
Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 6 86.7' 5.2 do.
+ .w _ _ _ _ _ . - _ - _ _ _
APPENDIX C. MAY SINtARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 484.10 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Parameter N Mean S.D Min Max. N Mean S.D. Min Max Mean S.D - Min Max N.
. Temperature (*C) 51 17.2' 2. 13.1~ 21.2 13 18.8 2. 15.2 21. 7 18.7 0.4 18.5 19.5-Conductivity (puhos/cm)- 35 200. 52. .140. 250. 13 - 188. 5. 180. 195. . 7 0.0 150. 150.,
Dissolved oxygen (ms/L). 51 8.1 0.8 6.6 10.2 13 9.4 1.I' 7.4 10.6_ 7 ~ 150. 8.4 0.5 8. 9.3 pH (standard units) . 33 7.2 0.1. 6.9 . 7.4 . 13 7.3 0.2 7. 7.6 - 7 7. 0.1 6.9 7.1 Alkalinity (mg/L) 10 50. .5.9- , 43. 61. 6 48.8 2.3 47. 53. 5 39.6' 0.5- 39. 40. Organic N (ag/L). 12 0.12 0.04 0.07 0.17 2 0.14 0.06 0.09 0.16- 0 . . . . Ammonia N (ag/L) 12 0.073 0.02 0.04 0.11 4 0.225 0.264 0.07 0.62 2- 0.075 0.007 0.07. -0.08 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 12 0.34 0.05 0.25 -0.40 2 0.27 0.0 0.27 0.27 0 . . . . Dissolved Phosphate (as/L) 12 0.014 0.005 0.01 0.02 0 . . . . 0 . . . . Total Organic carbon (og/L) .10 3.70 3.87 1. 14. 4 3.05 0.79. 2.3 4.1 0 . . . . Sodium (ag/L) 12 4.5 0.9 3.7 6.4 4. 8.1 1.5 6.7 9.6 2 4.7 0.1 ~ 4.6 4.8 Chloride (ag/L) 12 5.2 0.4 5. 6. 4 10.8- 1.5 9. 12. 2 '6.5 0.7 6. 7. Sulfate (ag/L) 12 .10.6 2.7 5. 14. 4. 16.3 1.5 15. 18. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Copper (pg/L) 14 55. 88.8 10. 290. 4 10.5 11. 1. 20. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Iron (pg/L) 14. '441. 160. 230. 810. 4 158. 79. 70. 251. 2 710. 410. 420. 1000. Manganese (pg/L) 13 '54.6 15.1 30. 80. 4 35. 19.9 10. 52. 2 55, 2.8 53. 57. Zine (pg/L) 14 46.4 25.6 10, 80. '4 15.3 14. 5. 36. 2 13. 28.3 10. 50. Dissolved Residue (mg/L) 10 77. 10.6 60. 90. 4 110. 8.2 100. 120. 2 75. 7.1 70. 80. p APPENDIX C. MAY
SUMMARY
STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 490.47 u 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Pa rameter N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Mat N Mean S.D Min Max Temperature ('C) 41 17.8 1.2 16.4 21.3 16 18.2 1.8 15. 21. 8 17.9 0.2 17.6 16. Conductivity (puhos/ca) 25 154. 8. 140. 160. 16 183. 4. 180. 190. 8 150. 0.0 150. 150. Dissolved oxygen (ag/L) 41 8.2 0.7 6.4 9.4 16 8.8 1.9 5.3 11.4 8 8.5 0.3 8.1 9.1 PH (standard units) 26 7.2 0.2 6.9 7.6 16 7.6 0.5 7. 8.2 8 7.3 0.1 7.2 7.3 Alkalinity (ag/L) 10 50.4 5.5 43. 57. 11 49.6 3.7 46. 55. 7 40. 0.0 40. 40. Organic N (ag/L) 9 0.13 0.09 0.04 0.33 8 0.15 0.04 0.11 0.24 4 0.21 0.07 0.12 0.27 Ammonia N (ag/L) 9 0.092 0.041 0.06 0.17 8 0.049 0.022 0.01 0.08 5 0.08 0.0 0.08 0.09 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 9 0,35 0.08 0.24 0.41 8 0.27 0.05 0.22 0.37 4 0.24 0.0 0.24 0.24 Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 0 . . . . 8 0.016 0.011 0.01 0.04 4 0.02 0.0 0.02 0.02 Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 9 1.88 0.81 1.2 3.3 8 4.06 0.60 2.9 4.8 4 3.57 0.4 3.1 4. Sodium (ag/L) 0 . . . . 3 8.4 1.2 7. 9.3 2 4.1 1.01 3.4 4.8 Chloride (mg/L) 0 . . . . 2 11. 1.4 10. 12. 2 6. 0.0 6. 6. Sulfate (ag/L) 0 . . . . 3 17.7 -2.1 16. 20. 2 10.5 0.7 10. II. Copper (pg/L) 3 16.7 11.5 10. 30. 3 4. 5.2 1. 10. 2 20. 0.0 20. 20. Iron (p:/L) 3 433. 153. 340. 610. 3 157. 81. 80. 242. 2 1895. 2128. 390. 3400. Manganese (pg/L) 2 55. 7.1 50. 60. 3 40.3 24.8 20. 68. 2 189. 157. 78. 300. Zine (pg/L) 3 66.7 55.1 30. 130. 3 6.7 , 2.9 5. 10. 2 20. 14.1 10. 30. Dissalved Residue (ag/L) 0 . . . . 3 106.7 15.3 90. 120. 2 80. 0.0 80. 80.
r-
- e 7 y , ,; ,
, s, ;
,. rs . ,
n .
. /- ( '.2 s. ,
~x
' APPENDIX C. AUGUST SIEglARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 478.19.- W I ,
19711 78 Preoperational Period ,1980-82 Operational Period. :1983 operational
, Parameter. N' .Mean S.D Min Max N~ Mean - S.D Min. Max N- Nean , ' S.D . Mia j ; Nex t.
. Temperature (*C)". 54 .25. 1.1 23.2 -L27.8 16 ' 25.1, I' .7- 22.5 28 5- .8 ' 26.1 " ! 0.5 25.6 26.7'
!210.
1 Conductivity (pubos/ce): 30 ( 176. - 24.7 150. '220. 16 195. ~ . 5.2 '190. 200. . 8 : 210. - 0.0 210. Dissolved Oxygen (ag/L) 54 6.31 0.9 5.. -8.2 16 5.9 0.7 - 4.6:. ' 6.9 - 8 '6. 0.7- 5.2 6.9 pN (standard units) 31 '- 7.1: .; 0.4 6.3 . 8. 16- .. 7.3 'O.1, 7.2 , 7.5 8- 7.3' O.2 .7.1- 7.5 j ' Alkalinity (ms/L). 11 -49.6 . 7.6 l38. 56. - 13 65.9 : 1.3 . 64. . 68.- 7 61.9 _ 2, 58. . ' 64, Organie N-(ag/L)^ ,9 .0.12 0.03, .0.07- ' O.16 "8- 0.21 0.04 , 0.15- .0.27 4 < 0.23 - 0.04 . 0.18 - 2 0.25 ? j Ammonia N.(ms/L) 21 0.042 0.033 0.01: 0.12 -9 0.013 0.010 0.01. ~0.04 5' 0.070 ' O.129 0.01- 0.30 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) . 9 0.24 -0.12 ~ ' O.153 - 0.55 . .8 0.21 0.06' .'0.15 0.27 4 10.21 0.01- 0.20 0.22 -
- 0.01:
Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 0 . . . . . 5' O.016 -0.009' 0.01 0.03 -4 0.010 ' O.0 > ;0.01-Tota 10rganic Carbon (as/L) 9 2.4;. 0.34 ' 1. 9 2.9 -8 3.9 2.3 2.9 - 9.6 4 '3.3811'0.88 2.3 4.1
~
Sodium (ms/L) .0 ; .
. . . 4 7.5 1 1.1 6.4. 8.7- 2. '6. ' O.1 5.9? 6.
- 0 4- 9.5 1.7 8. 11.' 2' ' 7.5 0.71 ' 7. 8.
j Chloride (as/L) . . . .
- 2. 0.0 14.
j Sulfate (mg/L) 0 . . . . 4. '16.2 0.5 16. 17.' 14 14
- Copper (pg/L) 3 .10. .'O.0 10. 10. 4 37.8 37.4 1. 70. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10.
' Iron (p /L) 3. 343. ' 76. 260. 410. 4 290. 150. 142. '460. 2 270. 85. 210 330.
. Manganese (pg/L). '2' .70. 0.0 70. 70. 4: '68. .30.5: 37. :110. 2 70. 42.4 40. 100.
Zinc (p /L) 3 40. 34.6 ~ 20. 80. 4 15.8 11.5 5. 30. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. 0.0
- 5. 110. 120, 100. 100. '100,
! Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 0 . . . . 4 -112.5. 2 i h APPENDIX C. , AUGUST SifflARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 483.40 j p. ! e . i 1971-78 Preoperational Period. 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Parameter N Mean Min Max- N- Mean S.D ~ Min Max- N Mean - S.D Min Max S.D.. Temperature (*C) 57 24.7 1. 23. 26.4 16 25.1 2. 22.9 27.5. 8 26.2 0.5 25.5' 27. ! 200. 210 0.0 '210. 210.
- Conductivity (puhos/ce) 31 178.7 27.8 150.0 220. 16' 190. 10. 180. '8 Dissolved Oxygen (ag/L)~ 56 6.2 . 0. 8 5.1
- 7.8 16 5.2 0.8 4.3 6.4 '8 6.5 1.1 5.3 8.
- l. 0.1- 7.2 7.4 8 7.4 ' O.2 7.2 7.9 l pH (standard units) 31 7.2 0.4 6.6 8.1 16 7.3 l Alkalinity (ag/L) 12 49.3 8.1 36. 57. 13 66.5 1.5 65. 69. 0 . . . .
Organic N (ag/L) 12 0.11 0.03 -0.04 0.14 8 0.23 0.09 0.15 0.42 4 0.25 . 0.02 .0.23 0.28 l 0.034 0.019 0.01 0.08 9 0.011 0.003 0.01 0.02 5 0.030 0.029 0.01, 0.08 Ammonia N (ms/L) 12 l i Nitrate-Nitrite N (mg/L) 12 0.26 0.04 0.21 0.30 8 0.31- 0.25 0.17 0.91 4 0.21 . 0.02 0.19 0.23 0.004 0.01 0.02 0.012 0.005 0.01 0.02 4 0.010 0.0 0.01 0.01-Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 6- 0.012 5 4.9 - f Tota 10rganic Carbon (og/L) . 12 2.75 1.5 1. 8 - 7. 2 . '8 3.08 0.41 2.6 3.8 . 4 3.63 1.05 2.5 Sodium (mg/L) 6- 6.9 1.2- 6, 9. 4 7.8 1.5 6.5 9.5 2 6. 0.0 6. 6. Chloride (eg/L) 6 6.3 1. 4 - 4. 8. 4 9.5 1.7 8. 11. 2. 8. 0.0 . 8. 8. 2.9 10. 17. '4 15.5 5.2 8. 19. 2 13.5 0.71 13. 14. Sulfate (ag/L) 6 13.7-Copper (pg/L) 6 25. 10.5 lo. 40. 4- 35.5 39.8 1. 70. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Iron (pg/L) 6- 328. 152. 150. 540. 4 275. 99. 152. 360. 2 140. 71. 90. 190. 26.4' . :30. 90. 4 73.8- 11. 66. 90. 2 65.5 33.2 42. 89. Manganese (pg/L). 6 58.3 10. 8.2 30. 4 17.5 14.4 5. 30. 2- 10. 0.0 10. Zine (pg/L) 6 ~16.7 10. 0.0 100 100. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 6 81.7 11.7 60. 90. 4' 110. 0.0- 110. 110. 2 100.
- - m .
- p ,.
_ w - S # 4 ty
*/
'w
~
APPsNDIX C.- AUGUST SIN 91ARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TEM 484.100 .
^
1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period '1983 Operat'ional'
' Parameter N 'Mean S.D. .Mia . Max N Mesa S.D Mia- Max .N- - Mean . . S.D . Min f Max Tegerature (*C) 53 24.8. '
. t.11 - 23. 26.5- 15 ; 26.41 1.2 25.- 28.5 9y 26.3 25. 28.5 Conductivity (pmbos/ca) 34 181. 13. _160. 200. 15 '200. ' O.0 200. 200. !7 207. ~
"3.1.5 . 203. 210.
Dissolved oxygen (eg/?.)- 53 ' 6. 2 0.9 4.7 7.9 15 5.3 1.1 3.6- 6.8 9 6.4- ~1.5'- 4.7 8.1
.pH (standard units)
' 33 : 7.2 0.2. 6.9 - . 7.7 15- . 7.3 - 0.2 - 7. 7.6 7 '7.5 0.9 7.1 7.9
'Alkalialty (as/L) ' 11- - 52.3 ' 7.8 ' 38. . 61. '10 65.9- 1. 65. 68. .0 . . . .
' Organic N (ag/L) 12 0.11 . 0.05 0.01 0.19 0.21 0.06 0.16 0.25 - 0- . . . .
Amunonia N (eg/L) . . 12 0.051 0.049 0.01 0.19 4' O.02 0.014' O.01 0.04 2 ' O.02 - 0.014 0.01~ 0.03 Nittste-Nitrite N (eg/L)' ' 12 ' 0.30 0.05 'O.21 0.38 2 0.21 0.04 0.18 0.24 0 . . . Dissolved Phosphate (ms/L) '12 0.011 0.003 ~ 0.01- : 0.02 0 . . . . 0 . . . . Total Organic carbon (ms/L) 10: 2.01 0.4 1.5 3. 2u 2.75 0.07 2.7 2.8 0 .. . . . Sodium (ag/L) -12. 5.7 - 0.8 4.7 - 7.3 4' 7.3 0.9 6.4 . 8.1 2 6. .0.1 5.9 . 6.
-Chloride (ag/L) : 12 6.7 . 0.8 6. 8. 4 9. 1.2 8. 10. 2. - 8. 0.0 ' 8. 8.
Sulfate (eg/L) ' 12 12.3 - 3. . 8. . 18. 4 17.3 1.5 16. 19. .2 14. 0.0 14. 14. Copper (p:/L) 14 28.6' <21.4 10.' 70. 4. 31.3 33.2 1. 60. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Iron (p /L) . 14 437. 327. : 80. 1400. 4, 384. 214. 130. '647.- 2 195. 134.- 100. 290. . Manganese (pg/L) 13 77.7 44.6 -30, 180. 4 76.8 31.4 41. 106. 2- 66.5 43.1 ' 36. 9 7.' Zine (p:/L) 14 28.6 15.6; 10. 70. -4 35. 40.6 5. 95. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Dissolved Residue (eg/L) 10 90. 9.4 - 80. 100. 4 115. ~ 10. 110. 130. 2 105. 7.1 100. 110. APPENDIX C. AUGUST SLR91ARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 490.47 en en 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Parameter N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max Temperature (*C) 41 25.1' 1.1 22.6 . 26.5 - 16 24.3 1.7 22.5 26. 8 25.2 0.3 25.1 25.6 Conductivity (pmbos/ca) 22 . 184. '24. 160. 220. 16 195. 5. 190. 200. 8 210. 0.0 210, 210. Dissolved Oxygen (eg/L) 41 6. 1. 4.5 7.8 16 4.7 0.6 3.8 6. 8 5.5 0.7 4.8 6.5 pH (standard units) 23 7. 0.3 6.4 7.4 16 7.2 0.1 7. 7.3 8 7.2 0.1 7.I 7.3 Alkalinity (ms/L) 11' 52.7- 6.8 42. 59. 12 66.4 0.9 65. 67. 0 . . . . Organic N (ag/L) 9 0.11 0.03 0.07 0.17 8' O.19- 0.05 0.12 0.25 4 0.23 0.01 0.22 0.24
.4mmonia N (mg/L) 9 0.03- 0.017 0.01 0.05 9 0.05 0.036 0.01 0.13 5 0.032 0.013 0.02 0.05 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 9- 0.30 0.01 0.28 0.32 8 0.28 0.06 0.22 0.38 4 0.26 0.02 0.24 0.28 Dissolved Phosphate (eg/L) 0 . . . . 5- 0.016 0.009 0.01 0.03 4 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.01 Total Organic carbon (ms/L) ' 9 2.52 -1.45 1.5 6.2 8 4.15 2.61 2.6 9.6 4 3.4 0.47 2.9 3.8 Sodinan (eg/L) O~ . . . . 4 7.3 1. 6.5 8.7 2 6. 0.0 6. 6.
' Chloride (mg/L) 0 . . . . 4- 9.3 1.5 8. 11. 2 8. 0.0 8. 8.
Sulfate (ag/L) 0: . , . . . 4' 16.5 1.3 15. 18. 2 - 14. 0.0 14. 14. Copper (pg/L) 3 16.7 11.5 10. 30. 4' 28.3 31.2 1. 60. 2 10. 0.0 10, 10. Iron (p /L) 3 457. 75. 380. 530. 4 258. 160. 118, 410. 2 175. 92. 110. 240. Manganese (pg/L)- 2 80. - 0.0 80. 80. 4 90.8 49.9 47. . 146. 2 66. 38.2 39. 93. Zine (pg/L) 3 56.7 15.3 40. 70. 4. 12.5- 8.7 5. 20. 2- 10. 0.0 10. 10. Dissolved RetIdue (eg/L)- 0 . . . . 4 95.5 25.6 62. 120. 2 100. 0.0 100. 100.
~ .
'i 1
e 4 APPENDIX C. h0VEMBER S1991ARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 478.19 - , 1971-78 Preoperational Period- 1980-82. Operational Period- :1983 Operational Mean S.D Min Max N. Mean S.D . . Min- Max 'N :Mean S.D Min Max - Parameter. N 15.1- 1.5 13.3 ~ :17.6 ~ 24, 14.4 .1.5 12.4 16.5' 8 16.7 0.1 .16.5 16.8
. Temperature (*C) 55 -191.
33 , 169. - 25. . 160. . 220. 1. 188. Conductivity (pahos/ca) 7. 160.. 180. 24 190. .8f 190. . .. 8.7 7.4 11.6 21 1.7 6.2 - 11.4 8. 8.4- 0.1 8.3 8.5 Dissolved Oxygen (ag/L) 55 1. 2 , 8.1' 7.4'- 7.5
- pH (standard units) 35 7.4 . -0.2, 6.8. 7.9' 24 7.6 0.1 7.5 7.7 3 7.4- 0.1 - -
Alkalinity (mg/L)' 11 48.3 4.2 45.' 55. 20 - : 57.6 . 3.5' 51. .
- 62. 7- 60. 0.6 . 59. 61.
0.10 0.07 0.13 . ' 13 ' 0.12 0.04 'O.07 0.20 4. 0.11 0.05 0.06 .0.16 Organic N (ag/L). 9 .0.03 'O.10 0.0441 .0.015 0.03 0.07 Ammonia N (ag/L) 0.082' O.098 0.02 0.34 14- 0.072 0.012 0.05 5 .~ 0.22 0.35' 0.34 0.17 . 0.22 0.85 4 0.18 0.0 0.18 - 0.18-Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 9' O.28 0.06 13 0.008 0.01 0.03 Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 0 ... .. . . 13 0.025 0.041 0.01 0.16 4 0.02-1.99- 0.58 1.30 2.80 13 3.89 2.60 2.20 9.70. 4 <2.78 .0.22 2.60 3.10 Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 9-9.2 0.1 . 9.1 9.2 Sodium (og/L) 0 . . . . 6 8.9 1.3 - 7.5 10.6 2 Chloride (mg/L) 0: . . . . 5- 10.2 2. 8. 12. 2 11. 0.0 11. 11. Sulfate (mg/L) 0 . . . . 6 117.2 - .2.5 14. 20. 2 15. 0.0 15. 15. 0.0 10. ' 10. 6 16. 12.6 1. 30. 2 5. . 0.0 5. 5. Copper (pg/L) 3 . 10. 165. 64. 120. . 210. Iron (pg/L) . 31 510. 159. 390. 690. 6. 174. 94. 50. 310. 2
- 90. 6 : 56.5 . 13.8 40. 70. 2 86.5 9.2 80. 93.
Manganese (p /L) 2 85. .7.1 80'.
- 5. 7.
11.5 10. '30. 6 9.5 2.3 -5. 12. 2 . 6. 1.4 Zinc (pg/L) 3 23.3 - 110. 100. 0.0 100. -100. Dissolved Residue (ag/L)- 0 . . . . 6 96.7 20.7 70. 2-APPENDIX C. NOVEMBER SUfflARY STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 483.40 Da e 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational Min. Esx Mean S.D Min Max- N Mean S.D Min -Max Parameter N Mean S.D N 15.2 1.4 13.3 17.4 24 14.4 1.7 12.1 16.6 9 17. 0.3 16.7 17.3 Temperature.(*C) 55 9- 187. 185. 189. Conductivity (puhos/ca) 34 164. '9. 140. 170. 24 190. 25. 160. 220. 2. 24 8.1 1.5 6.2 9.9 9 8.2 . 0.1 8.1 8.3 Dissolved Oxygen (ag/L) 55 8.6 1.2 7.2 11.7 7.4 0.3 6.3 7.6 24 7.6 0.0 7.5 7.6 9 7.4 0.1 7.3 pH (standard units) 34 7.3 58. 59. 13 48.2 5.3 39. 55. 17 58.3 3.7 52. 63. 8 58.4 0.5 Alkalinity (og/L) 0.03 0.04 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.52 13 0.13 0.04 0.05 0.18 4 0.07 Organic N (ag/L) 13 0.11 0.046 0.009 0.04 0.06
' Ammonia N (ag/L) 13 'O.198 0.35 0.03 1.30 14 0.079 0.019 0.05 5 0.36 0.28 0.06 0.23 0.45 4 0.18 0.0 0.18 0.18 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ms/L) 13 0.28 0.05 0.22 13 0.01 0.06 0.015 0.007 0.01 0.03 4 0.015 0.006 0.01 _0.02 I Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L)- 7 0.023 0.018 13 2.40 3.10 2.36 0.66 1.60 4.20 13- 3.04 2.19 1.30 9.90 4 2.78 .0.29 I Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 13 10.6 9.5 0.1 - 9.4 9.5 Sodium (ag/L) 7 6.9 1.8 4.9 9.1 6 8.9 1.1 7.6 2
- 10. 1.9 8. '12. 3 11. 0.0 11. ' 11.
Chloride (ag/L) 7 9.3 1.8 7. 12. 5
- 17. 3. 14. 20. 3 15. 0.0 15. 15.
Sulfate (ag/L) 7 16.4 2.4 12. 18. 5 0.0 5. 5.
'25.7 16.2 10.' 50. 6 12.0 11.3 1. 30. 2 5.
Copper (pg/L) 7 260. 2 110. 14. . 100. 120. Iron (pg/L) 7 317. 134. 200. 510. 6 146. 91. 50. j
- 58. 14.3 40. 70. 2 73. 0.0 73. 73.
Manganese (pg/L) 7 64.3 16.2 40. 90. 6, 7. 6 32.3 57.7 5. 150. 2 6. 1.4 5. Zine (F4/L) 7 40. 53.2 10. 160. 120. 106. 5.5 100. 110. 3 106.7 11.5 100. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 7 95.7 11.3 80. 110. 5 i l
4 APPENDIX C. NOVEMBER SIP 9tARY STATISTICS FOR QUAn?':LT WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 484.10 1971-78 Preoperational Period- -1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operational
. Parameter N 'Mean S.D Min ~ Max N Mean . S.D . Min Max. N Mean S.D Min Max Temperature (*C)- 49 15.3 1.4 12.7 18. 20 14.3 1.5 12.5 16.4 7' .16.3 0.2 16.1 16.5<
Conductivity (puhos/ca) '34 176. 24. 140. 220. 20 193. 26. 150. 220. 7 186. 2. . 184. 188. Dissolved 0xygen (ag/L) 49 8.1 0.6 7.2 - 9.3 .20 8.2 1.5 6.2 - 10.6 7 8.1 0.1 ,8. 8.2 pH (standard units) 36 7.3 0.2 6.8 7.5 20- 7.5 0.1 7.4 7.6 7 7.4 0.I' 7.3 7.5-Alkalinity (mg/L) 8 49.5 4.8 ' 44 59. 9 57.4 3.4 53. 61. 5 59. 0.7 58. 60. Organic N (ag/L) 10 0.13 0.10 0.04 0.39 4 0.17 . 0.08 0.11 0.28 0 . . . .
-Ammonia N (ag/L) 10 0.063 0.021. 0.04 0.10 6 0.082 0.016 0.07 0.11 2 'O.04 0.0 'O.04 0.04 Nitrate-Nitrite N (og/L) 10 0.27 0.06 0.17 0.35 4 0.23 0.01 0.22 0.24 0 . . . .
Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 10 0.018 0.012 0.01 0.05 2 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.01 0 . . . . Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 10 2.37 0.89 1.4 4.6 - 4 3.40 0.70 2.8 4.4 0 .. . . . Sodium (ag/L) 10 6.6 1.8 3.4 9.1 6 9. 1.3 7.4 10.5 2 9.5 0.1 9.4 - 9.6 Chloride (ag/L) 10 8.9 2. 7. 12, 6 -10.3 1.9 8. 12. 2 11. 0.0 11. 11. Sulfate (ag/L) 10 14.2 4.4 4. 18. 6 16.8 2. 14. 19. 2- 15. 0.0 15. 15. Copper (p /L) 12 27.5 27. 10. 100. 6 14. 12.9 1. 30. 2 11.5 9.2 5. 18. Iron (p:/L) 12 563. 519. 220. 2100. 6 199. .116. 100. 380. 2 100. 0.0 100. 100. Manganese (p /L) 12 70. 28. 50. 150. 6 55.8 11.9 40. 70. 2 67. 4.2 64. 70. Zine (pg/L) 12 37.5 33.1 10. 110. 6 10.2 5.3 5, 20. 2 5. 0.0 5. 5. Dissolved Residue (eg/L) 8 101.3 18.1 80. 120. 6 98.3 7.5 90. 110. 2 100. 0.0 100. 100. APPENDIX C. NOVEMBER
SUMMARY
STATISTICS FOR QUARTERLY WATER QUALITY DATA - TRM 490.47
$ 1971-78 Preoperational Period 1980-82 Operational Period 1983 Operatior.al Parameter N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max N Mean S.D Min Max Temperature (*C) 41 15.2 1.5 13.5 17.5 22 - 13.2 1.8 11.4 15.8 7 16.2 0.1 16.2 16.3 Conductivity (puhos/cm) 24 172. 6. 160. 180. 14 $09. 10. 200. 220. 7 186. 1. 185. 187.
Dissolved Oxygen (eg/L) 41 8.7 0.9 7.4 10.7 22 8.5 0.8 7.9 10.4 7 7.8 0.1 7.7 7.9 pH (standard units) 25 7.4 0.1 7.2 7.5 22 7.6 0.1 7.3 7.8 7 7.5 0.0 7.4 7.5 Alkalinity (ag/L) 10 50.9 3.5 46. 56. 18 57.8 6.3 41. 65. 6 60. 0.0 60. 60. Organic N (ag/L) 9 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.24 13 0.17 0.10 0.05 0.38 4 0.08 0.2 0.06 0.10 Ammonia N (ag/L) 9 0.064 0.019 0.04 0.09 13 0.091 0.026 0.05 0.14 5 0.044 0.006 0.04 0.05 Nitrate-Nitrite N (ag/L) 9 0.3 0.06 0.23 0.36 13 0.37 0.21 0.22 0.96 4 0.19 0.0 0.19 0.19 Dissolved Phosphate (ag/L) 0 . . . . 13 0.014 0.007 0.01 0.03 4 0.015 0.006 0.01 0.02 Total Organic Carbon (ag/L) 9 2.40 0.41 1.6 2.8 13 3.70 2.51 1.0 10. 4 2.7 0.48 2. 3.1 Sodium (ag/L) 0 . . . . 4 9. 1.4 7.3 10.8 2 9. 0.0 9. 9. Chloride (ag/L) 0 . . . . 2 10. 2.8 8. 12. 2 10. 0.0 10. 10. Sulfate (ag/L) 0 . . . 2 16.5 2.1 15. 18. 2 15. 0.0 15. 15. Copper (pg/L) 3 10. 0.0 10. 10. 4 13. 8.7 2. 20. 2 7. 1.4 6. 8. Iron (pg/L) 3 537. 110. 660. 4 167. 44. 120. 208. 2 150. 14. 140. 160. Manganese (pg/L) 2 90. 14.1 _ 450.80. 100. 4 54.2 9.6 40, 60. 2' 62. 0.0 62. 62. Zine (pg/L) 3 20. 0.0 20. 20. 4 26.3 35.9 5. 80. 2 5. 0.0 5. 5. Dissolved Residue (ag/L) 0 . . . . 2 110. 0.0 110. 110. 2 115, 7.1 110. 120.
ri . - a -'VN g
. 4 l
. 1 s
. a-
' f r
a APPENDIX D ~ <. WATER QUALITY DATA COLLECTED CONCOMITANTLY WITH , l BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE AND PLANKTON SAMPLES,
.SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR-
- IN 1983 ' 1.' , a 1 i n. a t w m N I , t )i s , 1 18 i. 1' 1
., , _ , _ , --, .-,____,_.,-.-_m..,_._._..____m.,,,__,,____ _ . ~ , _ . . . . . - , _,_m.,. . , _ - . . - , - _ , , , , , m,,,,-.__
J Appendix D. . W;ter Quality Data Colla: tad Concomitantly With Benthic Macroinvertebrate and Pfankton Samples, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Chickamauga Reservoir in 1983 p. BENTHIC
- 7. : DEPTH TEMP. D.O. COND. pH DATE : STATION LOC (m) (DEG C) (mg/L) umhos/cm) (s.u.)
I 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 0.3 7. 0 11.2 195 8.1 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 1.0 7.0 11.2 190 7.9 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 2.0 6.8 11.4 190 7.9 07FEBD3 TRM478.2 74 3.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.8 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 4.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.8 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 5.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.8 07FEB83' TRM478.2 74 6.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.8 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 7.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.8
- 07FEB83. TRM478.2 74 8.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.8 07FEB83' TRM478.2 74 9.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.8
- 07FEB83. TRM478.2 74 10.0 6.5 11.4 190 7. 7 p 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 11.0 6.5 11.4 190 7.7 07FEB83 -TRM478.2 74 12.0 6.5 11.3 190 7.7 07FEB83- TRM478.2 74 13.0 6.5 11.3 190- 7.7 07FLB83 TRM478.2 74 14.0 6.5 11.1 190 7.7
.* 07FEB83 TRM478.2 74 15.0 6.5 11.2 190 7.6 L ..
07FEB83 TRM483.4 99 0.3 7.5 12.1 195 8.2 07FEB83 TRM483.'4 99 1.0 7.5 12.1 190 8.0 j 07FEB83 TRM483.4 99 2.0 7.5 12.0 190 7.9 ! ~ 07FEB83 TRM483.4 99 3.0 7.0 11.9 190 7.9 I- 07FEB83 ~TRM483.4 99 4.0 7.2 11.8 190 7.9 07FEBB3 TRM483.4 99 5.0 7.0 11.6 190 7.8
- 07FEB83 TRM483.4 99 6.0 7.0 11.4 190 7.8
.O7FEB83 TRM483.4 99 7.0 7.0 11.6 190 7.8 07FEB83~ TRM483.4 99 8.0 7. 0 11.4 190 7.8 07FEB83. TRM483.4 99 9.0 6.7 11.3 190 7.8 07FEB83 TRM483.4 99 10.'O 6.5 11.3 190 7.7 07FEB83 'TRM483.4 99 11.0 6.5 11.1 190. 7.7
' 07FEB83 TRM483.4 99 12.0 6.2 11.2 190 7.7 e
! - 08FEBG3 TRM490.5 75 0.3 6.9 12.2 195 8.1 [ 08FEB83 ..TRM490. 5 75 1.0 7.0 12.2 195 8.1 L OOFEB83 TRM490.5 75 2. 0 6.5 11.8 190 8.0 08FEB83 TPM490.5 75 3.0 6.5 11.4 190 8.0 08FEB83 'TRM490.5 75 4.0 6.5 11.6 190 8.0
.08FEB83 TRM490.5 '75 5.0 6.5 11.2 190 8.0
- 08FEB83 TRM490.5 75 6.0 6.5 11.2 190- 8.0 08FEBB3 TRM490.5 75 -
7.0 6.5 11.2 190 8.0 08FEB83 TRM490.5' 75 8.0 6.5 11.2 190 -8.0 08FEB83 TRM490.5' 75 9.0 6.5 11.2 190 8.0 t l' 19 - l I e i ..
APPENDIX D.-(continued) BENTillC
% DEPTH TEMP. D.O. COND. pH e DATE STATION LOC (m) (DEG'C) (mg/L) umhos/cm) (s.u.)
05MAYB3 TRM478.2 74 0.3 17.6 9.6 160 7.5 05MAY83 TRM478.2 74 1.0 17.3 9.1 160 7.5 05MAYB3 ETRM478.2 74 2.0 17.2 9.0 160 7.5 05MAY83 TRM478.2 7 <4 . 3.0 17.2 9.0 160 7.4 05MAY83 .TRM478.2 74 4.0 17.2 9.0 160 7.4 05MAY83 =TRM478.2 74 5.0 17.1 9.0 160 7.4 05MAYB3 TRM478.2 74 6.0 17.0 B.9- 160 7.3
.. 05MAY83 TRM478.2 74 7.0 17.0 8.8 160 7.3
.05MAYB3 TRM478.2 74 8.0 17.0 8.9 160 7.3 05MAYB3 TRM478.2 74 9.0 16.9 8.8 160 7.3 05MAYB3 TRM478.2 74- 10.0 16.9 8.8 160 7.3
-05MAY83 TRM478.2 74 11.0 16.9 8.8 160 7.2 05MAYB3 TRM478.2 74. 12.0 16.8 8.8 160 7.2 05MAY83 TRM478.2 74 13.0 16.8 8.8 160 7.2 05MAYB3 TRM478.'2 74 14.0 16.8 8.8 160 7.2
'OSMAY83 - 'TRM483.4 99 0.3 18.4 8.2 170 7.1 05MAY83 TRM483.4 99 1.0 18.3 8.3 170 7.0 05MAY83 TRM483.4 99 2.0 17.9 8.3 160 7.0 05MAYB3 TRM483.4- 99 3.0 17.7 8.3 160 7.0 05MAY83 TRM483.4 99' 4.0 17.1 8.2 160 7.0 11MAYB3 TRM490.5 85 0.3 18.0 9.5 150 7.8 11MAY83 TRM490.5 85 1.0 17.5 9.2 150 7.8 11MAYB3 TRM490.5 85 2.0 17.5 9.2 150- 7.7
- 11MAY83 TRM490.5 85 3.0 16.7 8.8 150 7.6
-11MAY83 TRM490.5 85 ' 4. 0 16.6 8.7 140 7.5 11MAYB3 TRM490.5 85 '5.O- 16.4 8.6 140 7.5 111MAY83 .TRM490.5 85 6.0 -16.4 8.5 140 7.4 11MAY83 TRM490.5 85 7.0 16.4 8.6 140 7.4 11MAYB3'-TRM490.5 85 8.0 16.3 8.6 140 7.4 11MAYB3 TRM490.5 85 9.0 16.3 8.6 140 7.4 11MAYB3 TRM490.5' 85 10.0 16.3 8.6 140 7.3 11MAY83 TRM490. 5~. 85 11.0 16.3. 8.6 140 7.3 h 20 l
I i-
APPENDIX D. (continued) BENTHIC
- 7. DEPTH TEMP. D.O. COND. pH DATE STATION LOC (m) (DEG C) (mg/L) umhos/cm) (s.u.)
29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 0.3 27.8 9.1 159 7.8 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 1.0 27.5 8.3 161 7.7 29AUG83 TRM478.2- 74 2.0 27.4 7.6 161 7.6 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 3.0 27.2 7.1 161 7.4 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 4.0 27.2 6.9 161 7.4 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 5.0 27.2 6.9 161 7.3 29AUG83' TRM478.2 74 6.0 27.1 6.6 161 7.3 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 7.0 27.1 6.5 160 7.3 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 8.0 27.1 6.2 161 7.2 29AUGB3 TRM478.2 74 9.0 27.0 6.0 160 7.1 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 10.0 27.0 5.6 160 7.1 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 11.0 26.9 5.4 160 7.1 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 12.0 26.8 5.3 160 7.0 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 13.0 26.8 5.0 160 7.0 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 14.0 26.7 4.0 160 6.9 29AUG83 TRM478.2 74 15.0 26.7 4.7 160 6.9 29AUG83 TRM482.6 95 0.3 27.9 7.1 164 7.1 29AUG83 TRM482.6 95 1.0 27.8 6.8 163 7.1 29AUG83 TRM482.6 95 2.0 27.8 6.8 163 7.0 29AUG83 TRM482.6 95 3.0 27.5 6.4 163 7.0 29AUG83 TRM482.6 95 4.0 27.4 6.3 162 7.0 29AUG83 TRM482.6' 95 5.0 27.1 6.1 162 7.0 29AUG83 TRM482.6 95 6.0 26.9 5.9 162 7.0 29AUG83 TRM483.4 99 0.3 28.0 6.9 165 7.9 29AUG83 TRM483.4 99 1.0 27.7 6.6 165 7.6 29AUG83 TRM483.4 99 2.0 27.5 6.6 165 7.5 29AUG83 TRM483.4 99 3.0 27.2 6.7 164 7.4 29AUG83 TRM483.4 99. 4.0 27.1 6.7 164 7.3 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 0.3 26.8 d.4 166 7. 3 29AUG83 TRM490.5 C5 1.0 26.8 6.2 166 7.2 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 2.0 26.6 5.9 166 7.2 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 3.0 26.3 5.7 166 7.2 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 4.0 26.2 5.2 165 7.1 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 5.0 26.1 5.0 165 7.1 29AUG83 .TRM490.5 05 6.0 26.0 4.8 164 7.1 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 7.0 26.0 4.8 164 7.0 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 0.0 26.1 4.7 164 7.0 29AUG83 'TRM490.5 OS 9.0 26.1 4. 7 164 7.0 29AUG83 TRM490.5 85 10.0 26.1 4.7 164 7.0 i 21
Appendix D. (Continued) BENTHIC
% DEPTH TEMP. D.O. COND. pH DATE STATION LOC (m) (DEG C) (mg/L) umhos/cm) (s.u.)
09NOV83 THM478.2 '74 0.3 16.9 8.1 185 7.1 09NOVB3 TRM478.2. 74 1.0 16.9 8.0 185 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 2.0 16.8 8.0 184 7.1 < 09NOVB3 TRM478.2 74 3.0 16.8 8.1 184 7.1 09NOVB3 TRM478.2 74 4.0 16.8 8.0 184 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 5.0 16.8 8.0 183 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 6.0 16.8 8 .' O 183 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 7.0 16.8 8.0 183 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 8.0 16.8 7.9 182 7.2 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 9.0 16.8 7.9 182 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 10.0 16.8 7.9 181 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 11.0 16.7 0.0 181 7.1 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 12.0 16.7 8.0 180 7.2 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 13.0 16.7 8.0 179 7.2
, 09NOVB3 TRM478.2 74 14.0 16.7 7.9 179 7.3 09NOV83 TRM478.2 74 15.0 16.7 7.9 179 7.3 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 0.3 17.6 7.8 184 6.9 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 1.0 17.4 7.9 133 6.9 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 2.0 17.0 7.9 183 6.9 09NOVB3 TRM482.6- 15 3.0 16.7 7.9 182 7.0 09NOVB3 TRM482.6 15 4.0 16.5 7.6 181 7.0 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 5.0 16.4 7.8 181 7.0 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 6.0 16.4 7.8 181 7.0 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 7.0 16.3 7.8 179 7.0 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 8.0. 16.2. 7.8 180 7.0 09NOVB3 TRM482.6 15 9.0 16.2 7.8 179 7.0 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 10.0 16.2 7.8 179 7.0 09NOV83 TRM482.6 15 11.0 16.2 7.7 179 7.0 09NOV83 TRM483.4 99 0.3 18.2 7.7 182 6.6 09NOV83 TRM483.4 99 1.0 17.7 7.6 182 6.6 09NOV83 TRM483.4 99 2.0 17.5 7.7 182 6.7 09NOV83 TRM483.4 99 3.0 16.8 7.6 182 6.7 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 0.3 17.6 7.3 183 7.4 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 1.0 16.7 7.3 182 7.4 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 2.0 16.4 7.0 183 7.3 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 3.0 16.4 6.8 182 7.3 09NOVB3 TRM490.3 85 4.0 16.3 6.8 182 7.2 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 5.0 16.3 6.8 181 7.2 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 6.0 16.3 6.9 181 7.2 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 7.0 16.3 6.9 101 7.1 09NOV83 TRM490.5 85 8.0 16.3 6.9 180 7.1 22
~ ~
ev, PLMG3DN 1
- TEinF30EC 4 ALLEY AUTHORITY - D AT A' SERWICE3 snaNcq [$Uff > JI$
f . ( ITAT Ich ' - *F 53 . 4 CHIO44"AUGA,RE$CRWOIR 7ENNES$CE R!vC4 463 40 030'3 00002 C011C 30:31' 09094 3 Cc93' . C03a3 '00400 03415 03431 00675 . 33613 I CCF'd 4SA*PL9: =1TE4 I/4CCT L? CNDUCivv vsa mpto: uo ed ' PHEN-aH- T ALK ' ors N 443+4w4-
& F#0* T EMP ' R E M NI:46 FIELO 3:FT4 LFIN ALK FIELO 'l N T JT AL' CATE 7Pi F E! T RT sana C! NT PERCENT 41C 4 0Pn c 4ETE95 MG/L MS/L. MG/L ',
SU M G/L MG/L-63;207 1314 17 2 3? 215 112 F 1 -17 7. 6F.; 1 50 0.3 12.23 7.50 0' 52 0.21 2.G3 (
- 43. 215 112e 3 17 7.? 14 0 1 50 1.? 12 2D- F. 5 3 0 51 0.17 :.03 c33215 113. s 17 T.G 133 15 12.30 7.50 13.215 1132 ;3 17 '6.*- 1.4 10 30 12 10 7 50 G 52 0.28 0.C2 'f r 3". 215 l' 3+ 16 17. c.9 c.2 13" 53 12 23 7.50 3 51 0.19 7.03 a 3: 215 113 F 26 17 69 130 93 12.;3 7.50 e 50-P 33215 1142 39 17 ".5 133 - 12 0 11 60 7.53 0 49 C. 6 i e3.215 114 5 ' 49 17 5.5 1 30 15.3 11 90 7.40 0 50 03:535 122: 17 9 3 a 517 112 - 1 17 23.4 150 'C.3 9.60 7 10 0' 40 1.25 0 19 i e 3. 517 11 3 3 17 ~ 20.* 150 1.1 1 .73 F.10 0 38 3.12 ? . .' 9 e 3 51 F ' 1131 5 1F 2C.6 lic 15 3.23 F.10 23;517 1133 10 1F. 20.5 153 33 '?.10 F.1 C 0 3 '1 0 14 a.10 4 63;517 1133 16 IF 20.? 15n 5.3 4. 3 T.11 0 39 0 45 0.59 432 51 F 11 35 26 li 19.5 150 8.3 7.33 7.10 0 39 E30517 1131 99 17 16.4 l'0 12.1- 7.70 f.10 3 38 3.09 8 e 3. 51 F 1139 +4 17 13.4 150 15 3 7.30 .7.23 0 39
-e3 9 C4 1351 1 17 27.3- 210 0.5 4.03 7.*! D.28 9.*1 33,s;4 1353 5 17 26 6 210 1.1 F. 73 7.50 C .2 5 ?.cl i U e3Cs;4 135* 5 1F 2t.5 213 1.5 7.10 F. 5 ?
83;o;4 1;55 . 1F 26 5 213 3.! 6.43 f. 50 : .2 3 0.01 83;8 4 1357 15 IF 26.2 210 - 5.: 5.13 7. 3 C C .2 3 *? . ? 3 R 3L 3 04 IJ5' 26 li 25.9 21G 80 5 63 F.20 E31sc4 110' a 17 2*.7 210 12.0 5.50 F. 2 7 0 02 63; e t
- 1101 +4 17 '25.5 21C 15.? 5.33 7.2C e 3'. 0 29 142. 1F c 3. e 2 9 1921 17 E311;E IJ4: 1 IF 17 3 les C.3 4.3C '.*C 3 59 01C '.34 6311Ce 1:42 5 17 17.3 189 1.5 ?.23 F.3? O 58 C .0 6 f .16 E 3110 e 1:45 5 li 17.2 1-44 15 t.20 F.30 1311Ce 1944 ;0 li 17 0 161 37 3 23 7. 3 f C 58 C .: 4 0.04 H311Ce 1342 16 17 16.9 IF7 5.C B.2C 7.40 C 58 3.17 G.15 631106 1343 26 17 16.7 1EF B.3 a.23 T.47 0 58 83110 h 135', 59 1F 16.7 136 12.3 9.11 F.* C 59 * .04 asiloe 1351 54 1 73 16.7 146 12 3 3 13 T.90 0 59 6311 C E 1152 +5 li 17.0 1"5 15.0 9 10 F. 4 0 0 59
#51166 1137 17 -
431108 1101 17 gi
PIANETON , TENNESSEE CALLEY AUTH04IT Y - 3 AT C' SCf.VI;ES K AICH ' N< d * @@*-Zi@ -
- (:
STAT Ich - 4F 5334 - CHIC <AMAUGA RE SE R V OIR TENNESSEE #1vC4 483.4C 30013 '00D31 00094 3e093 00330- 00400 00415 -03431 00605 00613 il
,000:3~ 30032 ORG N 'N43+NH4 .
D EP' H .H3A9PLOO. 44 T ER INCGT LT_ CNOUCTvY v3tPPLOO DO Di PHEN 3H- .T ALK TEPD REPP11G FIELD DEPTH LPIN ALK FIELD N. N TOTAL E FRJP .', F E;T RT 3ANK PERCENT 9 I C P 0 MH O METE 45. M G/L SU -MG/L M G/L . M 3 /L - M S/L - CATE' TIME C E NT (: c3'247 22 22 16 23 33 33 4 33- 33 33 33: N LPiE 4 59 0.45 c.13 M A a IMu.4 +9 2 T.0 67.3. 210 15 3 12.20 7.90 0 5.5 3.2 130 0.3 5.33 7.1G 7. 39 ~ 3.24 S .31 M ! r. I.10 9 1 635 575.1 . ' f E. b - 5637 195.2 297.50 242.50 0 1093. 3.37 0.99 SLP 0 55769 0.75 0.16-sup $J. 21417 11647.7 4915.C 494239 2325 4 264s.97 1783.13 21.6 1 73 5.9 9.71 7.35 3 50 -3.19 ' ! .0 5 MEAn 19 l '. 4 3.cc 5S.4 980 6 966 27 2 4.45 0.54 3 TO 0.01 WARIANCE 249 0.33 F.1 31 3 31 5.2 2.11 3.19 'O 9 0.10 STC.3EW. IT 2 0.33 3.01 1.2 15.7 5 0.9 3.3T 3.03 0 S TO.EA A. 3 17 54.54 57.69 COEF WA; $9 4c.9 144.7 .la 96.2 24.23 2 55 3 167 h.47 T.35 ' 3 49 0 16 0.34 LOG MEA 4 11 15 5 91 3 3-1 9 3110 E 33665 3G633 C;929 30943 03a45 01342 01045 01055 01092 30013 20633 M41GNESE ZINC L NO2 6NO3 PHOS-DIS T 31G C SaDIUM C4 L ORI DE $ULFATE C3P=E4- IRON 7 E P* d ZN, TOT Na, TOT T OT A L SO4-TOT C'J , T O T FC,70' 1N 9-TOTAL C UG/L PG/L P MG/L_ M3/L MG/L M3/L UG/L U3/L UG/L CATE TI M; FE T M3/L L 83;215 1121 1 0 43 c.;1 2.4 2.2 4.?0 7.3 14 11< 133 40 20 3 0.94 C .~ 2 003:215 112- 1." 1 2.4 t db e 3:215 1132 13 C.43 630215 113* 16 0 43 7.1 26 4 . 9C 7.3 14 10 290 40 30 i3.215 114* 59 ' 63.517 112- 1 4.24 J .C 2 3.5 3.1 4 .80 63 13- IS 3 T0 57 20 832517 1153 3 C.24 C .* 1 20517 1133 10 0 24 C.~.1 1.2 i ' 63,517 1135 16 .24 C . '1 3. 3 4 .50 6.9 13 27 360 62 33C c3:517 11 3, 39 e 3: e : 4 1 51 1 0.2d '.'! 4.3 c .1 < 4.9 s.03 E. 13 10< 93 42 10< t ! 43;o;* 1355 3 ?.14 ! E30sC4 1:55 10 7 2C 0 11 < 31 e33904 1;iT is L.23 371< 2 5-39 10C l 630904 110; 39 6 00 8.3 14 13< 193 C d3110 e 1:4' 1 01 0 72 3.1 l 11 0 15 5< 120 73 7 l E 311 G e 1342 3 01s 0.32 26 3.*3 ( e3al;E 1;4+ 13 3 12 3.11 24 a 3110 s 1 :4i 16 0.19 0.91 2.6 i 1.40 11 3 15 5< 130 F3 SC u3110e 14 5' 39 15 ( 231106 1J51 34 11.C _ m
w _ PLMGCON I
. TENNCoSEE VALLE r' AUT HORIT Y - 3aT A SERVI:ES 3R49:H QMf ' ,JJ .
( CTATIch - 4T 5304. CHICK AM AUG A 'RESER v0 ZR TENNESSEE RIVER 483 4'c 30C'3 30630 33656 316C C0929 23942 .. C1945 C1342 31C45 01055 -01092 ( DEP?d- c432 6NO3 PHOS-DIS T ORG C S00:UP C1L ORIJ E . SULFATE CJPPET . I409 gaN3NESE ZINC N-TOTAL C' NA,TGT' T CTAL SJ4-TOT' CJ, TOT ~ FE TOT 1N ZN, TOT
.CATE. TIMC ~FECT' 9 6/L MG/L P MG/L M3/L 13/L MG/L US/L UG/L US/L UG/L i 8 3r. 2 0 7
( NLPtEd 33 16 16 16 - 9 9 9 3 6 8 3 MAEIMUM CA 3.44 0 22 4.9 3 54 11.3 15 20 310 99 300 M I t. iMU M 1 0.la 0.C l < 2.2 4 . 5C 6.3 13 SC 90 40 5< I SLM 635 4.25 0 23 49.3 49 90 75 3 12D 30- 476 l il o 40 2 SUP 3J. 214P7 1 21 0.9 C 153 0 34C .95 661 0 1632 950 463700 33636 91974 MEAb 19 0 26 3.?1 3.3 6.24 8.3 13 12 60 - f-214 50 WARIA4CC 239 0.31 0.;1 0.5 4.24 4.5 4 21 13598 331- 10253 STO.Div.' 17 1.10 0.s r 0.7 2.06 2.1 2 5 117 18 101 STD.E*R. 3 3.05 0.00 C.2 0. F3 07 1 2 41 6 36 CCEF dA4 $3 3 3. 44 35.76 23.0 33.02 25 5 15 46 55 31 232 LOG MiA's 11 *.25 C .C 1 3.C 5.99 81 13 9 136 57 la e311Ge t 00023 32211 32212 32214 32212 7L333 7:322 81203 802:4 41236 40239 DEP'4 O dL S P HYL CMLRP1YL C1LDPiVL DHEOPHTh 9ESIDUE PFSIDUE TOT SED TCT SE3 TOT SED TOT SED i
- a UG/L 0 C A DIS S-1 M TOT WOL SIEVE SIEWE SIE WE SIEVE DATE TIME FEET CJR RECT 3 UG/L UG/L UGrL : M1/L' PER0ENT z<.052M" XC.125MM EC.533M9 5<2.01MM 47 56 5 69.6 99.9 130.0
$ m3:2 e 3;21537 1121519 7 1 3.34 3.2 0.3 C . 22 83.215 112e 3 2.94 0.19 0.0 3.43 40 e 32 215 1132 . 10 3.C T 0.O M G.1 :.21 934215 1134 16 2 30 01 0.2 C .e4 e 30 215 114 ? 19 130 t d 3: 5 C S 1227 4.3 63.5 F7.8 73.6 100.7 'o3C517 112- 1 3.20 P.5 0.9 1.e4 c 3: 517 113: 3 ~3 20 0.5 10 2 22- 53 (
E23517 1133 10 2 44 0.5 0.7 2.11 63;517 1135 16 3.34 C.5 0.o 2.36 3 3J 517 1134 59 73- ( 832604 1351 1 10.o* 1 1- 12 1 66 83,sG4 1353 3 11 34 1.3 11 1 74 10? e3;sG+ 1355 13 3.41 10 1.C 1 23 i 63J e 0 4 135F 16 7.4o 1.3 12 1. 6a 43C b C 4 113; 39 10) e3C829 142? 3.2 46 8 58.3 99 3 130 0 t E3C625 1421 2.6 34.1 4 T. 3 99.4 100 0 53110 b 1343 1 1 47 01M 01 C.47M 631108 1342 3 2.Je 0.2P 0.2" 3.79M 131 i e3110 8 1944 13 1 74 C.1 01 C.06M 831106 1046 ;6 1.4F 0.1 M C.19 0.06M 631100 105: 34 120 ' b 311 C e 10 51 59 100 d 3110 e 1103 26 33.7 43.2 1*0 0 100.0 631106 1101 3.0 39.3 50.9 130.0 100.0 L ( m
e- :q PLMNTON ' 3
, u .. .
TEENESSEE VALLEY AUTH07.!TY , DATA SERVI:ES.HRAZCH. D:MNkk$ 1 a.4fd , 4 . STATION - 47 53 4 CHI K AMAUGA RESERVOIR TEN 4ESSEE RIVE 4 483.40 .
.000'3 32211 32212 32214 32218 7C333 7:322 93203 . 80204 S2206.. .,'.80238 - -
DEPTH CHL RPHTL CHLPP9YL CHL4PHYL PHEOPHTN 4ES IDuE RESIDUE- T3T SED TOT SE3 . TOT SE3 TOT SED A UG/L e -C 'A 'DISO-13 70T v3L OIEVE. SIEVE SI!vE . . SIEVE CATE TIMI FECT, C JH HE CT3 UG/L U G /L . uG/L :. MS/L PE RC E N T s<.~6294- t<.125M9 E<.50399 5 <2.Di MM - '(
$3020 7 (
huPEER 33 16 16 16 16 9 6 6 6- 6 6 MARImuM +9 11 39 13 12 2 58- 130- 4.7 63.5 F T. 8 ' 130.'O 100.0 MINIMUM 1 1.4F C.0 0.0 J.06 7C 26. 33.7 43 2 - 98.9 100.0 SUM 633 70.22 7.9 9.0 14.43. 89; 23.5 274.8 347.0 597.3 600.0 Sum 3J. 21477 466.25 6.4 92 32.62 *373? 73.8 131F5.0 20994.2 51458.2 60000 0 MEen 19 4.39 95 06 1 15 99 3.4 45.8 57.8 99.6 100.0 WARIANCC 249 10.54 C.2 02 J.76 335- 3.4 114 3 132.3 0.2 0.0 S TD.3 EV. 17- 3.25 0.5 0.5 0.of 19 G.9 13.A 13 5 3.5 0.3 S TO . E 4 9. 3 0. 31 01 01 L.22 G 3.4 4.4 5.5 0.2 0.0 COEF v44 $9 73.9F 93.3 90.4 FS.64 19 25.3- 23.5 23.3 0.5 0.0 LOG MCAN 'll 3 55 ~ C.3 ' 03 C .70 47 3.3 44.9 ' 56 6. 19 6 100.S 631106 i 0 M e ( l l 4 l - c . , _,
r,
= m.e *mr . =.- *- *e s .- v b' ,,,, ., q -
, , ,. , j j
. - t ty V
= ,
.h^
us
; . !).
16 h e e . y 9o*J IM N 8D v4 - 89 e e > e ,e N N c o N e.ec , 8 ** T
- J ' r* O n n c5 r3 cm i %D F k % e o e o e e e es o eem e e o o, o, o, o e ee n, 1
8 nfMQ-Z
** ** ** et r* es es e, n es c. r< e, n c g c h- 22
.l'.
t es c. Pe r3 o o es P e neF4 P9 n e e4 es e p* e N co e I M m ee e e e am 9 e 4 ri c ( ee a m e er= , % e4 e 8 e it Q so n
.9 nJJJ N 9o4W% en 8 e-o tn 0 . b eL E 6
L l .v 4eTJ e* *e e o o e' s 2 c, e c.- c e , r*(,e o c c o o c e v i t e4 e e' J ,e f. e e . enurm I OOWNE D T' tL. l LJ l.. g-e 9 ), .T
- 47 9 e 8m n es ei o es n o o es es es o o n o e e r o O .4 es e s c= n es P ** + e rs n e o o o e ce n o es e n es o <e. me naoc,ec,sa <@cmn U' 8eT 3 a 4e4es o e m e o o e Neee i; e e e e o e e o e o e e e e e e o e e e e e e e f . at i o n. ' to h e. P. N
- N p. * > P 4 e p.e p. p* p.e
. > p. > w % p. p. pm N
- e e o e e o e o e e h f u N P* ce c en M N l- G Io eo
!^ @ l 8 e4 e.e, as 0 I.' W o4 [' 4t o.e w $- eI o - es vs ei o es o e o o et es u o es es o n em ti es n es u o c+ es o e. o se si si N c @ es ans 4 ce z e I a_. .3 m ens N e e m 3. O e4 e.e e , s' es tr- n N gu en- Lh P= N rd N ee *
- e
- s ce r%# e A N e.e P'
- N e M t.
l- E E 1 Pi o % e e e e e e e e e e o e eP=e wo f* ee e**eeoee**e o e o ea e o ee e j[ inA
' 44
- 16 W 4o E . N** N es Nee N et Nce 3*etit 4,m & u J P O e e e t tr.<a3gocces,4 sv e e C. GE e N u *D lu we m es N i
sur 9 d%e ce d e.a 0 N [ k -D [ t *E M e ' [ ^'O e 0 O-U ; emo kg 4 05 JZg
-n Ps o c o o es a c o c o n on o sn e c es c> o o n o c o c o u m o m N e s os e m N r.
.$ e e e e e e e e e e e e e e o e e e e e e e e e o e e e N e e e e e e e e e e W D o CL > W o e4 e4 e 4 o ce ce e e N e o e4 e4 N P1 e P N e o e4 ee e w N e e o te @ p M e o so N 0~ W' 19 8oF0> e4 ** +4 *4 m's +4 ** *e N fr$
f >= M $ 8J *C W f J e4 P1 - oe' ink 1 MOE e4
- . af ' 29 :n p n ee r We O 3 ' >t0i Oer 3 se t.
o n ta o o o c., o o o c:, o o O m
. g ' M si M M P7 e e @ @ M m C es c C.> pS o o o m 'o e 8* *O e e so o o so N e4 O' o @ P= 0%
I et
$ o' 6OOO e4 ee og e4 e4 og e4 e4 e4 og e4 e4 N N N c ** e4 e4 m 'O P e O} V1- N e484 O trl ** f"4 en we #
'E N N N N e4 og og e4 e4 e4 ee r4 e4 e ce c4 T' e4 l
>= *4 0 s* 3 a M eJ
;W ' CS T I to 0 e C.B~:eO en.J
.N- U m J. K O UAF
*E . ut l D 4/t u-WD j f tJ . ot 5 cm y
' + N >= b 96 trl es @ e e m W W cs ci e e e o es o e O e N N N ** '** O P6 ** e4 N T M e W' M e .4 pa n y e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e N e e e e e o e e e en sa a cm W t e e m o o e e es e w to s m e e ro so eri o ari he in g w w e e w w r o es e a: N p.e e4 es w ,
#4 4A 9 O k 4.A W re e4 ee e4 e.ie e.e e o N N N N N N N N N e.e .4 e4 e4 e4 ee *e N sie F1 e4 up PP ee
\
-tJ ' 3 6 o or > (3 eN I
# at I T r.
E & e e4 J tol - 4 1 6 W 9 19 ut 9{s cs
- e. Ns**7J O ;C .
t 4 4 se 4 4 4 @ s0 4 a %D r0 4 & sD %D so D D & Od D 'D sD 4 4 ~c . 4 eD D 4 4 + 4 @ 4 4 @ @ 4 4 4 4 mD sD %D 4 'O sa 'a sD + 4 .n t e U I o e er 4 !- 0 0 F 66 T' i f Od
-l 4A et >
0 .T er - ,, t r -t t i ' 989T--> . e.e en e =9 a ee m tri e se J6 @ e.g M @ h O e @ T en (b D at: 50 e4 e ** Pm 'S + *1 $4 e O S. os e4 N re N ers * .4 ee 'a t @ e4 #9 O. si N 'O 4 Ne -% e4 t') ee m 0 o (L e@ N l'i D O tal . 14) th e
' no 9 f3 O **
c- 9 P1 0
@8 P* t 4 e is. e e e= n art es N um e in w e a @ p. m T . e4 es e ,w - e4 m e @
- W e e fr 2" t Y O O @ o 8'9 o e o o FK * ( B > E *t *t 3 0 H 88 s'.'4 en e4S 9eao oe P1e mem e P1
- P3 e of e e eN eN.4NN N NN N NNN N *s 33 79 al e p 03 ce es NN esP'o e- e.4 ee **
e e4 .4e4e4e4eee4s e4 e4 et e4 e4 e4 =4 s=e e4 4 e4 4 e4 e4 e4 e4 et e4 WE E M d t.8
*E er D C318 'E
, y g -. LM ** ** 4 8 e *4
- O $. . @ @ @ d O P*PmPmP*P*P*PS e e e e e e e e 4 4, gp =EJ T A .L' -4s @ E #E E L K ef E C3 Q W J @
o.e 0 .. e4 e4 e.e c4 e4 e4 e4 e4 ed e4 e4 *4 o J s2 o O c. O C
- G
- e n f5 n C3 t a o .
re J d ** 3 Jan 4 > Pe u O o
> $~ la.t
. N N N N N c c c @ c @ d 'O art eri 'O FJ rst T ei L e4 e'd e4 e ** e4 ** N 2 Y T M go r > s/g est u J 4 4l g- y p ci o e s a o > e i o c e rs c , *_ ? s** , t a ej cp o e o e4 ** e4 es e4 e4 **
et .. fi P) P) 8FD P1 F) F) PS 90 pi PS 87 89 Pi P) P8 P1 PT 80 F"I M W1 M PI p1 FI FI PI 80 M i, Mp u a .9 ru as
- M 4 W 457 V 'O *a8 N '47 3 'de W @ 3WW D T' W D G *t* '8 .0 40 27 b
' Ih PulET004 A TEh8eECSEE WALLEY CUTHORITV. - DATA SE2CICE3 SRANCk- pf ii O.C[M '
S TAT !6h - 475306 CHICEAMAUGA RE SE RVO IR TEN 4ESSEE h!WER 484.15 S3003 30929 30943 C C 945 01042 11045 C1055- C1392 70330' 'O DEPT 9 S3CIUM CHLORIDE SULFATE. C0PDER T ROM p4AGNESI ' ZINC ' RES:DuE MA, TOT TOTAL S04-T3T- CU TCT F E. TOT - MN' ZM TOT C IS S-l e3 CITE ' TIME FE;T *G/L M G /L MG/L' 'D3/L J G/L UG /L ' UG/L C MJ/L .i
'432215 1255 3 5.21 7.0 14 13 < 31 3 60 - de 30 631511 1102 3 4.d0 F. 0 10 10< 423 53 10< 70- (
630517 1107 39 e.63 60 10 10 1033 57 50 . SC e 30 $ 0 4 1936 3 . 5.90 e.3 14 10< 133 36 10<. 130 C3; $C 4 1942 39 6.00 -60 14. 10 < 241 97 10< 110 ( 831108 1220 3 9.6C '11 0 ~15. la til -64 5< 100 431106 1226 59 3 43 11 0 15 5< 100 73 5< 100 t 63:215 hum cE1 23 7- F F F 7 7 7 7 MAAIMuM 46 4.6C 11 0 15 18 10?: 97 -10 110 ( MIh1MLM 1 4.6G 60 10 5< 100 36 5< 70 SUN 424 45.57 Se.0 92 73 '2320 437 L FC 640 sue 52. 145is 322.SF 504.0 1236 949 1326603 29359 9250 Sa800 6 MEAh 17 6.53 .3 13 13 331 62 24 91 v4RIA.CE 255 4. 4 F 3.9 5 15 132941 346 954 214 STD.3Ed. 16 2.11 2.0 2 4 321 19 29 15 ( STD.E94 3 0.aJ 0.7 1- 1 121 7 11 6-CCEF WA4 *6 32.53 23 4 17 37 97 30 120 16 Ld6 MC A 4 9 6.24 .1 13 10 233 6 14 90 ( e 311 Cs a 43 e ( d 9 ( _ _ . _ . .- n i
9 g 4:. ' t 0 e 9 f5 f J me W4 89 *e * #$ G e e e@ l e4 Y of J e4 o to e1 e>*- es es e' NN sMr "a e
- e e e.
e es -
- v. p,ee,e Ne, N, t c' >=r eIne os p9 esee83
*
- 83 @
a @ F e= % e e ee eo ee e e e e e o e o ee e h' l tv e O 4.9 n et s i r, es a n r- 4 i es e . e- e- e 3e e eo, ece e. e *e o e e, yae ne
,es,,c e' t et e't > F e e 4 6 'P irt
- % RE I
$ In ee M e4 Nk f* O eN MN @ me Oe 0s ."9 J NN NN e4 N NN NN NN sa >= @ O e Oh se > N IA Pm 9@ % e e 0 e e o ee eer me ei e4 N r n @ pe e rs es @ e4 e u @ p 49 ee e o e o e e oe e e e e o e o e r7 o O t? c3 O 4 45 O e*
0 C5 W F t' C1 o L. ta ta n n M es r- se s- n es u 9 O sn e g 6 0 9 4 ed e# 89 eft to $8 O CJ enOOu oeue e em e 46 ' n e af* @ ee eeee# re et f* es en W9 m ee On F N P* rs
$e<O i
6 in 8 @ s4 @ M 4 e d Nenf* pe @ 4 es .J _s A PN 9 r, es W % ** l M ** @ 6 >= th E I 0 @ T ,,J ri n n et u 83 es n c4 o et St O n ea s.a 41 o es as n ta u ta es o es as e o e ee es .a .e l e %
$ ri '.* F 'S l
0' aW' th .A 4
'l 8
7 6 43 e u H E14, o e ca a.= c' a s L* !* o t- #9 ri u e ei n t . e. , . ra o c . e i c e. r' r e e4 a 89 at e @ no 48 9 cs @ 4 4 @ @ sr 4 89 M M e6 N ed N N M W1 N N ee e4 ee s.4 F 3 e e e e ee e O e e @ @ @ in
- 4 M 0% to m a ,e e., e ye es teee.OT ti Pm**P*********
ee e ee o e e e o e e e ee
>=>b********"hhh********se, e o e e oe o e e e o e e e ee k p. e. e. m. p. p. p. p. e k. e.e t . s , c. N >
($ $ f3 NN
. erg g y N sil e4
%8 0 eo e ce $O f4 e'% O n e"t D O el 8'% n f4 O f1 fs O O re ei a O O es es
*a) $ es .J r3 et et re me F e e4 e4 h e e M W9 ** 10 em N N e_r n?' 'Tl F e ra et n n n a rmesesete 4 @ N e s0 N 3 $ y) t9 % e e e e e e e
'T' e e d, e eT e eeeeeoeeeee ft 76
- esi >= #* P=
e o e e e o e P4 N Ws 1 @ e'
- e e 05 n 4.1 $ es O e86 NNNNNNN ?+ e *P F T O so *0 O @ e e e oe e e e9 + ee e M^
't'
*=P********=** N e as @ e e N sn em eg' 0o R e4 ** e4 e4 e4 e4 e4 e4 @@ N N f%f
'Q 9 N
De 0 er P* 9 rs ee u
,.e.
at O en en a @ si c. c e s a m te em es n r4 as o. sa ce tv, e e e n a e e e t' ei r ee e s es r* eri r= es es k @ eri e4 en @ e .e t - m a T er e e e e e e e o e e e e e e e o e e e e e e o e e e o e o e me e e e e e o ee o P ss 4 e- ka es M e4 m er >= F* O M ** so @ P= es ** u ed ee M e > 0+ e4 e se se F3 @ p* e e4sa e N e N ri o e4 N p= # 4 e ad> ** M ene NO e4 W
>= $ sat et 6.t 01 es fD ** st i M Cl F aK ' 61 >
0 m T M
- e. er e n= 6 3 0e* T n u 8'S es o en f1 o a oesn oaso oesa(acsesesa as ta en o r4 to att aps @ *e o sie k8 $ e 9* R. eeeeee# @ #8 @ @ If I tit en it' e4 e4 e4 e4 e4 e4 ee se @ E ea, p.s' as en an,@ t@3 en og e W si em 4 N es en and $ u O Q Q e4 ene e4 ed et ce we e4 e4 e4 e4 ee se e4 M N N N N N N N N e4 e4 ed og og ed og N e4 et # e4 11 ee
> M e += 3 .J rr @ ,e ha M 0 u *14.s u ee d laJ 0 2 *4 64 e
.A F f tew 3 es PW D W 4
> 0 >*
LA . es.4 @ >= pG a e e4 @ s3 e4 49 m en 'n >= g4 Ifl na en 2P e e e e e sso M W 8 @ ri
' e e e e e e e ee e N t3 o M ** 5 ei C3 L9"1 aP'*u las @N @
ip as gpe4 @Ne,@ es #5 W1a@N N pe e W O OOUKW ift @ e4
# D 8 2 kJ Let e9 U OC D be s G.
W W 9 " p VI 0 LJ 9 W G es @ @ tA no art e e @ @ 90rseE D tsf5 4If'e f4** O u o 8*emNNNN r3 iJt e 89 e @ ** ee M *e @ t e4 rit ft >- e o e e e e e e e e e e e e e o e o e e e e e e e e e e e e n e e e eo e e e o et i e w a. ei- @ensito @ @vi h h h e3 e et n F @ @ in u s e w* @ in er e # e ir e 4 @@ a .o4 se ci > ,4 p1 e
~ L9 $ (J > tad be e,e e4 e4 e4 ee se M M N N N N N N N N e4 es ce e4 e4 ed e4 N gm e ce vi e me O l p e1 >= u e 90
.e 9
- a 6 et t
< l at I #9 H I N *i F %f O T . e s J 79 d' eief9 e esffl @v' iS O Wi e are t @+t eft o @e 410mes@ <e
@ IN @ r, g ** @@ T @ Id* @ @ IS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if,t d @ @ @ @
.ti e es 'r e 't '** si a'i r e ec e 4 u- e og 4 g U ' ' e.s $ E 88 u u 4 ft
)y e . as t9 ee >=
T W 9mT > e4 sm O em .8 eri n e4 e tr4 es @ W9 re @ *e sa tS et a eme3 @ n @ e4 N @ # N e4 N N P
$ e to e.f ,4 e4 N o* e. e4 *) em est e4 4 N o9 m ev e @ rt ee.44 8%
As Ne og om ^t @ ee se ,, c
$ q Gb 4ad e @* e4 0 es tJ ts. M
@ 9 f4 Q
.*O N0
@0 mm g
& y k3 efi en Lfi*S f *s .4 N .3 ee 88% e 4* *.eM f 9 18 4 f% e e ce .4 EP4 @ MA * ** : e4 lal e eWI
$ E F3 ffi ei FD SPD e e e @ 889 #1 En ei 8% F9 e e GlitaO' O9F#ee f 3P4USE3 N N 9 88'6 88't #18N W9 e @ @ FT e UDW44 0 $ e, e #4 N N me N ** N re a '9 ea e.1 f t '? c1 f* 194 63 r* *
- O O ** E9 @ @ *
- es e4 e4 e4 ee e4 e4 as 9' *3 "5 1 T ttJ g D le8 to e4 e4 ye end og ee .4 ee ed of e4 e4 es e4 *4 ed ed u e4 e4 e4 ed ee 94 e4 se e4 ** e4 ee e4 e4 me e4 ed e4 LeJ F F 8.4 *f f) eeJ %
( I 13 e4 64 ef ** e e tb g3 $ 49 O @ $$ @ d'% 19 @ e4 Pa PE Ph PD PD f* Ph I* e e e e e e e # 09 %I' E I ed e1 4# 95 W 8 E N # a. & e' .J es se .3 .3 e.s-teea p.3 4. O.
** $ u ** e4 8'se4 e4 ee ** e4 ee ** e4 es e4 es ce ** Le 47 63 f' u 8J 6e u N N e# ca sa enee o a u se p nna uoe@ S to 4 6.3 N, r- e sN '89 44 ee4e se e4 *4 e4 se
- e4 N p t T to vt t D et64 0 .Jee
,a >= -
eiNn Ni e4
- c,4 NN@@
e.m,* s 3@ @@@ m.3 o e Ifl
, e@ s @* .3'e' % P .^.
, Jfeet 1"e<>n
- 8 * >< t e ce .4 * .4 4 e # **
De 86 FI P1 F) PI F% Sui PS W) F% F% W1 W189 F# 88% PI F4 P9 ff) P% 8% #9 F' 9 P1 W% FI FI M P1889 Wi 'I F1 FD 8% 89 #%
*1 Q 3 is ste 913 g o et, e e tu its D iU iw e see 4 3 et U U esp & Q s' 1 e' W u e '87
- D@ 4) #8 e9 29
FTJKTM h TEM 4ESSEE WALLEY. AUTN34ITY - 327G SEC~I E3 3aagCQ ' M Sp aV;j k STAF IC4 - *F5265 CHICE ANAUSA RESER WOI A TEM 4ESSEE AlvE4 493.47 00603 ' C 36 50 00666 OCESC C0929 50943 03945 31342 01045 01455 01592 32211 ( DE PTH 4026433 PW35-3IS T ORG C SODTup C4LC41DE SULF A TE CSPPER IR34 MA964ESE ZIMC CMLRPWfL 4-fetal C % A ,T OT YOTAL S34-73T Ca,737 FF,737 14 24, TOT A US /L CATE Time F EZF MG/L MS/L P P G /L MG/L 9 G/L M3/L UG/L - UG/. UC /L UG/L C344ECT3 Q or:215 1233 1 0.47 C .3 3 4.4 3.6 c33215 1235 3 C.54 c .01 2.9 5 13 c.3- 14 10< 55 43 20 . 2 . 45 t 43C215 1233 10 C.4. C .31 22 3.23 C3:215 124 J 16 3.44 C .0 2 23 3.34 032517 1331 1 3.24 0 .' 2 4.D 3 . 34 83:517 1333 3 9.2* f .! 2 3.8 4 .40 63 11 20 390 74 33 3.07 d23517 133= to C.2* c .7 2 31 2 94 C3 517 1333 16 c.24 .72 34 2.67 C3:517 1343 56 3.40 6.1 1* 2* 34'.3 3:3 10< C37 804 C95- 1 0.24 C.'1< 2.9 2 43 C3?&&4 114; 3 c.24 C .01 < 21 6.CC 8.* 14 17< 11C 39 10< 4.54 C3G oG 4 1:02 13 0.26 C.21< 3.* 3.63 C3C6C4 12C6 16 1.29 8 .21 < 3.8 2.54 C3; 9 C 4 1Jae 16 6.C; f.3 14 1CC 243 93 10< 1 4311C F 113; 1 0 19 0 01 26 1 3* C 3113 4 1131 5 C.19 0.; 2 2.9 9.c 3 10 3 15 6 160 62 SC 1 74 C311Ce 1135 .3 0.19 0 .01 3.1 1.47 a C311Ge 113F a6 C.19 0.42 2.3 1.&? 8:1108 1141 24 4.00 10.3 15 9 14U 62 5< t 4 3.2 0e Nu" pet 53 16 16 16 7 7 7 F 7 7 7 16 MamIwJ9 36 6.5* c .* 3 ' 4.4 +." 10.3 15 23 34 C 313 33 4 54 ' MIh1PU9 1 0 17 C . ;14 20 3.40 6.0 IC 6< 5 39 5C 1 34 gf SLM 422 4. F1 C .25 59.5 43.30 54.3 93 94 4470 674 90 44.17
$Up S3. d f26 1 51 C .0 0 166 3 294 61 436.0 1259 1219 11'295:0 115542 1653 135.4s t M[84 14 4 29 f."2 3. 2 6 19 7.7 13 12 641 96 13 2 76 W A A & sCE 132 0.31 C.3 0 0.5 4 . 46 3.2 4 32 1491561 5441 92 .F9 STO.0Cw. 11 7.12 C .31 C.7 2 11 1.9 2 6 1221 92 9 ~ . 99 t S TC .r aR . 2 1.03 0 ." 3 C.2 7 . d3 07 1 2 462 35 3 .22 CCEF e44 2 41 90 43 2F 21 5 34 15 23.3 15 47 1*C 95 73 32.15 L 3= 104 4 9 c.2F 3.c 1 3.1 5.e4 7.5 11 11 235 F5 11 2 .61 L 63116 t I r k
! t I
FIAlstTON ( TEh4EESEC VALLET AUTHJ4!Y Y - 3470 SECCI ES $C21*4 A ECO '. ^ 7 ' ST:TIch - 475225 ( CatcE A*4uG A RESERv0!# 7E%4ESSEE rib;R 491 4 T 338:3 32212 32214 32219 713;c F*322 97233 i;2:4 S*2:6 93239 BC071 ( DEPT H CML*Pwft C1L4FdfL PHECPWT4 # E SID UE 4E0IDu! TJT GED T1T 3CJ TCT SED - TST SES Ynagse o C A D155-18 0 T3T WOL S I!vE 31 EVE SIEvi SIEVE SECCHI CATI .!al FEET u s/L U G#L un #L C #4/L *I*Cr4f' s<.362R9 E<.12
- 44 *C.5C7M4 SC2.3299 9ETE93 (
C 322
- 6 1535 _
6.4 97.5 97 3 130 0 133.5 e3c215 1233 1 C .J g 3.4 0.53- 1.53 ( c3:215 12 35 3 C.14 e.2 1 59 1 54 E3001* 123i 10 C.1 C.2 0.329 e3;215 1243 16 C.29 31 0 21 ( d3:511 175: . C.2 79.1 93.4. 99.7 130 3 c3' 517 1231 1 C.5 1.? 1.50 03a51F 1333 3 3.6 13 2 54 63 ( GD4 51 F 1 J 33 ;S 4.s f.* 2.20 C3:517 133 s 16 @.4 c.9 2.10 C37517 13 43 5. '3 i C3.sC 4 95- 1 C.* 17 * . 54 t!!OC4 11:2 5 3., 1.* 2 1C IC c300: 4 1J22 IJ G.3 0.9 1 92 ( C349** 13;9 16 2.7 :.9 1.4a C306:4 1933 56 1C* C3:C29 152' 61 F9 7 93.9 1CS.C 130.0 ( C3:5 2% 1521 6.9 99.4 95.5 1TC.J 120.3 5311:e 113; 1 S.25 *!
. *.25 e211CF 1135 3 S.29 30* :.614 112 4 eC11:e 113% 13 S.2 06 ?.sF e511C6 1137 16 3.2* f.1* J.64 4311;s 1141 24 12C i e 01146 11*: 6.6 42.9 17.7 1;;.0 1 0.3 M e311Ji 1151 73 89.4 17.7 136.0 130.J
( o3.2te
=LPiE' 53 1. 16 16 F ' 4 s 6 6 1 cas!*L' 56 C.? 1.* !.54 133 7.* 45.4 19.5 lad.: 173.3 8 9141* J 4 1 e." a.* .22 de 61 79.1 33.4 99.7 130.3 50* 4?2 6.3 9.1 2 4.2 F F20 39.2 5?s.1 5FP.4 5*9.F 6)C.?
$wm 32 9 F56 3.F F.6 63.*F 7 2CC 256.7 431e5 1 55FF9 9 5-944 1 6;33 0 .0 4 CEAA 14 C.4 0.6 1.52 103 65 St.F 96.4 1*J.3 130 3 C181a.Cf 132 31 02 1.s1 3*F t.1 22 1 4.d 0.3 3.0 l STO.)fd. 11 0.5 0.* 1 35 19 3.4 4.7 2.? G.1 0.3 4 S TL .E* 4 2 C .1 C.1 3.34 7 0.2 1.4 *
.* 3.1 3.3 OCl* dal 92 F3.1 68.6 es.F3 13 5.3 5.6 2.3 31 3.3 LCG *E A 4 9 C.3 C.4 0.90 1C1 6.5 **.6 76.4 100 !?0.0 t 4311 e t
l t (
m (
,PLMCGVN
-fl N.,$-M Q .
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY - 3aT A SERVI;E3 3 RANCH 5
'l STATIch - 975332 CH10K4 P AUG A RE SERwCIR T FNNESSEE RIVER 474.19 00635 30610 ( -4 30095 03330 ?S43D 00415 03431 03033 CC302 00010 OC031 00094 30 PH P HE N-P H- T ALK ORG N M43 + 4 +4- $
DEPTH ,HSA MPL30 WATER INCDT LT ONDUCTVY WS A MPLO: LFIN ALK F IEL O , JN t ' N T 271y, 5 FROM T E MP REMNING FIELO 3EP'H MG/L f ,M9/L/\ / ! ' HICRO*H0 4?TERS MG/L SU M3/L - MG/t{
' C AT E TI4; FEuf RT 9&NK C E NT PERCENT Yf*
if
' b,; 'p f
(
.)
at
~, ,
- 74 C 51 0.23 0.33 I a 3023 7 1117 ,
74.0 0.5 12.'43 ,/7 50 3 33 d33215 IJ27 1 74 6.3 1 30 10 23 f45 c rf 51 0 19 . 4 s3 215 1;2s J 74 62 21 0 130 -1 3
- 7. 5 0 < >j T,,- 1g 130 15 12 13 - t 0.13 W / 't =
E3121* 103: ,5 ft, 36 2 30* 12 20 f. 50 f - *0 -d 51 0.43 " 330215 1332 11\ <74 ! 6.'. ' 1.7 1 50 - ;# !" 0 52 9.29 0 04
'
- 6.1 <,/ ' D.2 '150 / -33 s k
12.13 7.50 J 16 74 0 51 83'.215 1134 74 61' + 1 30
'8 3 12 23 /7.50 51 2.33 e3:215 1037 26 6.1 133. 12 5 12 10 f 7.50 0 .
\ 5 e30215 Act 39 . 74 0 51
# 51 133 14.3 12 23 7.50 '
74
' e3;215 13 42 +5 #
i 2 74
/, 'O 39 0.38 3.10 63;SC5 1115 ISC 03 d.20 7.??
63.517 1233 1 74 23.5 7.93 7.30 0 37 0 39 ' 3.09 -' 3 74 19.8 .,, 150 , 1.3 s
, ' B 31517 12 32 150 15 7.'0 7.?'
833517 1233 5 74 .19 6 - 30 7.71 7.30 0 33 0.39 , J .1' # f '
--c 74 15.5 1*C 36 0.55. f .<* 9 631517 1235 10 -7.73 7.00 0 74 19.5 15C g 5.3 39 i __
63:517 1237 16 , 18.3 7 73, 7.79 3 150 ( J.?9 i
' 63)517 1235 26 74 19. '/:
7 7.73 7.00 C, 38 a f 14 74 4 ". 4 15r ;12.0 39 43;511 1242 ( 150 -j *14.3 7.70 F.00 7 0.?! d 3' 517 12 41 46 74 49.4
- 6 93 7.50 0 64 7 25 . . .
26.7 < 210 D.3 f 63 0.25 3 41 T4 0 hE8C4 1147 83;o04 1149 1 3 74 26.5 i , 210 10 6 70 '7.50
- 7.43 _.
1 I \; - e3;sc4 115; 5 8 74 ;26.5 , <5 213 ' < 15 6 63 0 61 0.25 f.H - 2 l 210 3.? 6 53 .. 7.40 ' 74 26.4 - - G2 0 18 ?.72 63 sw4 1152 .3 210 5.0 7470 ' 7.20 0 J 63's04 1154 16 74 25.3 / 8.C 5 40 ?.21 0 62 s~ 74 2".7 t, ' 210 63 ? .3C
.23:304 1152 lu 2$.6 210 12.3 5.33 7.13 3 '
=
59 74 7.~10 3 59 ([ o% e 0 4 1154 74 25.6 210 14.3 5.23
**~
e 3:3 04 115" 46 8 3~. d 25 123- 74 , n
' 74 63 '0.16 0.04 j
E33625 1209 191 03 5 4C 7.53 C 331106 094' 1 74 16.4 0 63 0 .* 3 ?.3*[ 191 1.! 4 30 f.41 ' - e 3110 e C 15: 5 F4 16 1 ~;15 3.53 '. 4 2 .' f -
,5 74 16.4 111 59 0 .C 6 0.C 4 E31106 0951 191 3.3 , a.50 7.40 0 c.?3 e311Ce 095; 10 74 16.9 c 50 '
O.15 _ 74 16.9 192 5.3 4.33 7.4c
'53 s
! e 3110 8 39 54 .6 8.C 3 30 7.4? *3( 74 16 7 199 3' 61 C.77 < j e3110e C956 26 12.C 4.40 7.50 ' 59 74 16.6 149 0' 60 e3110E 0954 las 14.3 3.50 7.5? - 83113o 100 +6 74 16.5 74 j 6 3114 E 1005 m 74 231106 1C3a I
?
r-
y .. m '
'l
' TECNCSSEC VI. LLEY ' AUTa3tIf y - 3 AT A SE4WI;ES 3 ratch D A"i %;r.
STAT ION - 4753J2 . CHICK AM AuG A RLSERW3Ia TEN 4ESSEE >IVER 478 19
~J2023 '50302' 30013' E30031 .' 0 3 C 99 :;093' 3*3:3 -G;43C -32415 33431 100635- '30613 7 OEP'H HS A MPLOO - d4TER 'INCCT LT CNOUCTWY v34=PLO: 30- ^39 PHEN *H- T ALK 04G N N4 3 + M14 -
X FRJM: -TEPP .REMAING~ FIELO DEPTH LSIN ALK" FIELD N
- CATE T!9CE
~N TCT4L .
F EE T ' .RT. DANK . CENT PERCENT MIC30Pdd '4ETE13 MG/L~ SU 'MG/L MG/. " HG rL MG/L - I 830207 . I MLPEt 4 32 32 4 32 _ 32 32 32 . 28 29 16 - 22
,MtsMIMU9 46 26.7 f4.C. 213 14 3 :12.43 F. 5" ~ D 64 0.55 C .33 DINIMu9 l' 6.0 0.2 130 C.3 5.23 7. ! J 0 36. 0.16 . . 01 8
$UM 5!4 54d.9- 96.9 S440 'l79 2 2 75.73 233.25 'O 1976 3 63 1 21 SLP 3J. '13816 1106E.3 5919.9 955410 1F65.4 254P. 71 1711.07 0 93358 1.10 2 15 MEA h 18 17.2' 24 2 , 1 70 ' 5. 6 9.62 7.31 0 53 0.23 7.06 i WARI4NCE 253 54.0 1190.8' '1G33 24.6 5.34 2.05 5 95 0.32 ?.33 STJ.3EV. -16. 7.3 34 5 32 53 2 31 7 21 0 10- 0 14 C.06 ~
STD. ERR. 3 1.3 17.3 6 0.9 3.41 1.04 0 2 0.33 3.31 ( COEF WA4 49 42.3 142.5 19 #9.5 26.11- 2.92 3 18 59.74: 137.75 - LOG 9EAw -13 15.1 4.S 157- 31 4.33 7.31 3 52 0.19 '.34 t 311 C e ' C 30;3 ' a3633 33666 3:690 '33929 30943 0'945 C1342 21345 01355 0129.2 32211 3EP'M NO2ENO3 Pd3S-310 T OPG C SODIUM 04LO4IDE SULFA?E CoppCR IRON MANGNESE ZINC OHLRPHYL ( N-T CT AL C Na, TOT TCT&L- $34-TOT Cu e TOT FE, TOT 44 -24, TOT A U3/L CATL TI*C FECT MG/L M& /L P M G /L 4G/L 4 G/L MG/L' UG/L UG/L US/L U G /L C3R9ECT) ( 6 50215 I J 2 F 1- 0.43 C .? 1 2.5 - 4.27 63:215 132s 3 0.47 0 .21 7.5 4 72 6.7 14 17< 170 40 30 2.!3 83:215 1332 10 0 45 0 02 31 2.94 i e 3: 215 133+ to 0.44 c.34 ~ 32 2.47 g 832 215 10 4 ^. 19 4 . 73 6.0 14 1:< 253 43 20 g 83-517 1233 1 C.25 0.11 4.1 3.34 ( e 3t S 17 12 32 3 3 23 0.? ! 29 4 63 60 12- 30 336 57 n!3 9.? e3.517 1235 10 ;.2? G .21 '2.9 2 6F
?3 517 1237 16 0.29 3.01 3.0 2.94 i e 3: 517 1242 Ji 4.50 6.? 7 1:< 520 43 13<
e 3t d O4 1191 1 3 20 0 01 < 41 7.74 F 3; 3C 4 '1141 3 0.21 0.01< 41 5 .53 14 8.0 10< 33c 40 13< 4 41 4 e3 9 04 115? 10 c.21 0.01 < 3.0 3.29 3396C4 11 54 16 0.22 0 .? t < 2.3 5. ' d 8 3L o3 4 1156 34 S.03 70 14 10< 21D 100 10< t 831108 0943 1 3.1d 0.03 2.7 1.47
#3110 F C 353 3 C.14 C .? 2 2.6 ?.10 11 7 15 5< 123 se 7 2.47 3 311 C t c a52 10 0 16 0 32 2.7 2.2T t E3113 e 0 754 16 3 13 0 01 3.1 2 43 8311Ce C)S4 39 9.20 11.3 15 SC 210 93 5<
t t ( j
- r-- _
3
> +
PLANKTON :p ,k TEENESSEE WALLEY CUTHORITY - DATA SERVICES,3R4NCHL MN,f hk4iTQ$2]b.
' .O STATIch - 4753J2 CHICK A MAU G A RESERVOIR TEN 4ESSEE RIVET 479.19 _
000?3' ., 00630 00666 00600 03929 00943 03945 01342 01045 . 01055' 01092 32211' M DEPTH . 4 32 SN03 FnOS-31SL T ORG'C SOCIUM' C1LORIDE' . SULFATE C)PPER IRON' MANG4ESE. . ZI NC ' . CHLRPHfL: N-T C TA L C N A TCT - TOTAL ~$34-TOT CU ,T OT FE, TOT MN ZNeTOT A UG/L caTE TIME FE:7 .1G/L "J/L P MG/L' MG/L MG/L M3/L UG/L US/L UG/L' UG/L 'COR9 ECTO ( 433237 . ( NLPEE9 12 16 16 le- 8 B' %. 9 8 8' S- 16 maximum 46 C.47 1 34 7.5 3 2C '11 3 15 '30 520 100' 60 0 ' 9.41 MINIMUM l' O.19 _ 0 .31 < 2.3 4.50 ' 6.7 9 5< 120' 40 5<. 1.07 ( SLP 5 44 4.34 0 24 *3.3' 4s .70 61 0 1C'S 90 -2150 533 692 64.16 ! SLP SG. 14316 1.35 0.23 2C3.9 323 55 499.* 1415 1953 697330 39997 361674- 329.94 MEAh IS 0.27
- 91 3.4 6.09 7.6 13 11- 269 67 8700 .4.00 (
v aR I A NCL 223 0.31 c .' J 1.* 3 . 91 4.9 5 63 15641 .639 43117 4.89 S TO .0E V. 16 3 11 0 31 12 1 98 22 2 4 125 25 20 8 2 21' S T D .ET R . 3 0 03 0.00 0.3 3 .70 C.9 1 3 94 9. 73 7.55 -( COEF JA4 99' 40.32 59.63 36.8 32.47 28.9 17 73 47 33 240 55.20 LOG M;AN 10 3 25 0.91 3.2 - 5.84 7.4 - 13 10 246 62 is 3.56 ( 431102 30C:3 32212 32214 32216 -70300 FC322 83233 3*204 93236 93239 03078 Cn64PHYL CHLRFHYR P H E C PtiT14 RESIDLE RESIDUE T)T SE3 T1T SED TCT SED TOT SED TRAhSP -4 J E PT H d C A DISS-18C T3T WOL SIEVE SIEVE SIEv! SIEVE SECCHI CATL TIMc F EC T U 6/L U G /L U G/L MG/L 3E4 CENT SC.362M4 XC.125MM %<.53:M9 X<2.03M9 Mr.T ER S ( , 630207 1117 8.3 95.8 17.5 99.6 110.0 i 330215 1721 1 C.1 C.5 c.264 . 1.30 3 32 02 0 47 60 ( e 0215 102' 93]21" 1:32 10 01 0 .4 '.62 Co e 30215 1334 16 0.2 0.3 1.34
* $3 215 104: 59 100 (
830505 1115 8.3 a7.4 99.0 99.8 10 0.3 630517 123, 1 02 10 1 99 630517 1232 3 0.6 0.S 2.16 AC ( 23?517 123i 13 0.5 C.9 2.d9 933517 1231 16 35 C.* 2 30 9 32 517 12 4 ~> H fc { e 3.n 0 4 1141 1 J.9 1.1 1.51 1 63:804 1143 3 12 12 0 94 103 1 63c 30 4 1152 10 10 10 1 63 ( 830dc4 1154 16 1.0 1.0 2.12 P 3C 6 0 4 1156 39 107 i d 308 22 120s 8.7 9e.5 98 2 130 0 110 0 53J825 1204 8.0 16.6 98 1 99.R 110 0 d 3110 e 0 941 1 05 9.7 0.47 ( I 831108 395? 3 0 .1 0.1 0.T21 103 l 8311 C e 0952 13 0.51 " .3 M 1 24F l 83110e C954 16 0 31 0.5p 3 914 ' 831106 0954 39 100 e 31106 1305 9.5 85.5 47.3 99.3 130.0 4 311 L e 100s 8.? 96.4 di.4 1J0 0- 130 0 _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ 1
o' _: .~ - s.; .= j ('- PIANKTON , TE;3ESSEE W A. LEY ( AUTH3;!f v. - Ja 6 A SCOVI;ES $% ANC9
'tt ? N
'.11N ,I( 1
' - . ST AT IGh - 475332 CHICEAFAUGA RTSERVOIP- ' TEt#4ESSEE ' AIWER 47a.19 ' 30003' 32214 32218 72300- 77322 1902:3 . 8:234 89236 ' 3:238 - '03078: 'O
'OEP71' .C1L 32212 9 P dY ' J C1L a PdV L PHECP4TN AESIDUE ' RESIDUI Taf' SED. 71T STO TCT SE3 TOT.SE3 TRAh3P 5 DIS 3-163.'T3; VOL
.C' .4" SIEVE SIEV SIEWE SICVE. SECCHI' CATE. .T I ME - F EIT .uG/L. U G /L .- -CG/L' c0. MG/L SE3 CENT .tC.562M4 : 1<.125M4 3<.50 ; M9 ' EC2.0$ R9 9ET ER S '- (
-(32237 ~
I' NLPiE4 12 12 . 16 '16 e 6 6 6 6 6 1 RAXI909 45 1.2 't.2 2.94 .100. 9.7. 47.4' 99.C 100.0 133.0 4thlMUM , 1 . C .: 0.1 ?.26 40 93 95.5 97.3 +9. 3 - 120.5 ( SUM Ss* 9.4 10.9 21 52 743 **5 . 574 2 588.6 596 4 .633 0
'S6P Sd. 13916 6.4 92 31.37 - 692CC' 4
- 9.5 55723 2 5F737.4 546a4 9 600?O.0 M Eia is J.i .0.7 1 34 93 83 96 4 98.1 99.T 100.0 (
UARIANCE 2w3 3.1 0.1 .3.60 107 0.1 ?.4 3.4 0.1 0.3 STD.OEv. 16 .0.4 C.3- ?.TT- 10 02 f.F 3.7 03 00 S TD .E t R. 3 -0.1 C.1 0.19 4 0.1 3.3 0.3 01 0.3- ( COEF Wal 49 57.1 53.3 57.15 11 29 0.7 ').7 G.3 00 LOG ME41 13 0.+ 0.6 1 11 52 8.3 *64 99 1' 99 7 130.0 e 3110 e
- I 1
( N 84 ( t t ( l n (
W APPENDIX E SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT CONDENSER COOLING WATER INTAKE AND DIFFUSER WATER QUALITY DATA, 1983 36 4
, " .. K' ;]
y7, ,
+
Appendid E. . Sequoyih Nuclasr Plaat Conde:mor, Cooling W1 tar I7take and Diffuser Wat4r Quality'. Data [1983 ' Total- . Total Suspended Settleable Dissolved.- Total. Ammonia- Total Total. Total- Total- 011 and-Labora- C1 Na 304'. Solids- Solids Solids ' Solids N Cu Fe . No . Za . Grease tory- . Month.-(as/L) (es/L) .(ag/L); ;(ag/L). '(mL/L) . (ag/L). -(es/L)' (as/L).. -(as/L) .(ag/L)' (as/L)'_ (as/L)' (as/L) Coedesser Coolina Water Istake Data S(pl . Jam - -5.60 3.70 16.00' '6.70 <0.100 ' 180.0 190.0 0.160 - ,0.040 0.340' O.050 =0.100 ~<5 8435 'Feb 5.50 6.80 12.00- 3.50- .<0.100: 63.0. 66.0 0.090 0.110 - 1.200 0.160 0.130~ 14 SQN : Nor . 5.70 6.00- -16.00 .2.20 <0.100 68.0 71.0- 0.090 0.100 'O.200 0.017- 0.024 : <5
.3(35 ,Apr 4.29 6.00. 12.90 _ 6.20 t 87.0 -- 93.2~ 0.085 0.100 - 0.200 .0.017 0.024 - <5 '
IA Apr 19.00 6.40 14.00 4.00- ._t "100.0- - 0.050 0.060 'O.500 0.070 0.060 <5 SQII , May 5.71 9.43 10.42 5.56 <0.100- 55.4 t 'O.112- . <0.020 0.490 <0.020-- <0.020- <5 LB -May 6.00 5.60 9.00 .6.00 :<0.100 70.0 t- 0.030' O.010- .0.310 0.043- <0.010 <5: SQN Jun 3.70- 2.60 210.40 6.90 -- - t ' -- 0.002 0.055- - . <5 LB .Jun 4.00 3.70 9.00 - 6.00 L<0.100 70.0 t 0.060 <0.010 0.460 0.049- <0.010 <5 IA Jul 7.00 5.10 -12.00 4.00- <0.001 100.0' -:. 0.005 <0.010 0.200: 0.070 <0.010 . <5 LB Aug 8.00 6.00- 13.00 8.00 1 <0.100 110.0 110.0- 0.040 <0.005 J.340 0.100 0.015 <5 LB Sep ' 8.00 - 9.60 13.00 3.00 (0.100 100.0 110.0 0.040 -0.160- 0.056 0.015 <0.005 <5 LB Oct 11.00 8.70 14.00 4.00 <0.100 100.0 110.0- 0.030 0.006- 0.220 0.091 <0.005 <5
' LB - Nov 10.00 8.90 15.00 4.00 -<0.100" 100.0 -120.0 0.050 0.015 0.210 0.115 0.007. <5 LB Dec 10.00 8.20 14.00 5.00 <0.100 80.0 100.0 0.070 <0.005 0.580 0.053 0.008 <5 Diffuser Discharme Data es g SQIl Jan 5.60 3.70 '15.00 3.60 0.100' ,180.0 190.0 0.090 <0.010 0.230 0.050 <0.100 <5 SQII Feb 6.50 6.80 - 14.00 3.50 <0.100 80.0 83.0 0.070- 0.057 0.088 <0.020 0.020 <5 Sq11 Nor' 5.00 6.00 15.00 14.00 '<0.100 59.0 72.0 0.090 0.100 0.300 0.015 0.031 (5 SQN Apr . 3.51 6.00 12.30 13.40. t 81.4 94.8 0.085 0.100 0.300~ 0.015 0.031 <5 LB Apr -18.00 5.90 16.00 9.00 t 110.0 -
0.040 0.060 0.350 0.060 0.020 6 SQN May 6.40 9.80 12.20L 5.86 <0.100 85.6 t 0.121 0.020 0.150 0.020 <0.020 <5 LB May .4.00 5.50 18.00 5.00 <0.100 80.0 t 0.050 0.010 0.460 -0.039 <0.010 <5 SQN Jun 4.20 2.60 13.20 7.20 - ' t - 0.006 0.055 -' -
<5 LB Jun 4.00 3.70 10.00 8.00 <0.100 70.0 t 0.050 <0.010 0.450 0.056 <0.010 <5 LB Jul 7.00 5.20 12.00 4.00 <0.001 100.0 -
0.005 <0.010 0.260 0.084 <0.010 <5 LB Aug -8.00 6.10 14.00 '8.00 <0.100 .110.0 110.0 0.030 0.005 0.290 0.110 0.015 <5 LB Sep 8.00 6.80 13.00 3.00 <0.100 - -110.0 110.0 0.050 0.012 0.220 0.050 <0.005 <5 LB Oct 11.00 8.60 15.00 7.00 <0.100 110.0 120.0 0.030 0.021 0.320 0.097 0.006 <5 LB Nov 11.00 8.90 14.00 .2.00 <0.100 100.0 120.0 0.040 0.025 0.150 0.090 0.011 <5 LB Dec 10.00 8.40 14.00 4.00 <0.100 100.0 80.0 0.060' O.009 0.550 0.049 0.008 <5 Essential Baw Coolina Water Intake Data SqN Jan 5.70 - 3.70 ' 8.00 4.60 <0.100 230.0 230.0 0.160 <0.0005 0.180' O.040 <0.100 <5 SQIf Feb 5.50 6.40 12.00 -1.50 <0.100 74.0 76.0 0.030 0.510 0.088 0.040 0.250 <5 SQN Mar 5.00 8.00 16.00 3.60 . <0.100 71.0 '74.0 0.085 <0.020 0.100 0.020 <0.020 <5 S(pi indicates analysis by SQN Chemical Laboratory. LB indicates analysis by Laboratory Branch Laborstory of the Division of Services and Field Operations. 9 , These samples were collected but were inadvertently discarded before analyses could be performed.
7 C l l APPENDIX F ANALYTICAL METHODS FOR CifEMICAL PARAMETERS, INTAKE AND EFFLUENT MONITORING, SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT e 38
~
T' -7j -- J
~
Append'ix F. Analytical Methods for Chemical Parameters,1 Intake and Effluent Additional Monitoring Sequoyah Nuclear. Plant '
, . Detection Method and Reference
-Parameter Preservation Techniques Limits Chloride, og/L Specific Ion Electrode, Ion Chromatography Cool to 4 C 0.20 mg/L
- TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-7B,30 Copper, total, pg/L' Atomic Absorption 0.5 mL KNO /100 mL sample 50 pg/L 3
'TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-16 Iron, total, pg/L Atomic Absorption 0.5 mL HNO /100 mL sample. 100 pg/L 3
TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-16 Manganese, total, pg/L Atomic Absorption 0.5 mL KNO /100 mL sample 100 mg/L 3 TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-16 Nitrogen, ammonia, ag/L Specific lon Electrode N/A 0.2 mg/L
- TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-2B (s
N' Dissolved solids, ag/L Gravimetric N/A 1 mg/L TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-25B Suspended solids, ag/L Gravimetric N/A 1 mg/L TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-25A Total solids, og/L Gravinetric N/A 1 mg/L TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-25B Settleable solids, ag/L Imhoff Cone N/A 1 mL/L TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-25C Sodium, ag/L Atomic Absorption 0.5 mL HNO /100 mL sample 0.10 mg/L 3 TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-16
_ . - ~ , ,, _.
, .( [
# \ i 5 I
4
, - a. . < ,
, .,, ( ;~ m
, a
.d _ ,
~
Appendix F. .(Cpntinued)' + . Detectica. Preservation Tec hi Parameter -Method and Reference ~ n ques
- Limits-I Sulfate, og/L Turbidimetric,
.lon Chromatography .
Cool to.4 C di ag/L,.0.2'mg/L , 1 TVA Nuc Pr.DPM N79E2-36DL Zinc, pg/L Atomic Absorption d.5 mL HNO 00 d samp}e (100 pg/L 3 < TVA Nuc Pr DPM N79E2-16 TVA Nuc ;Pr- DPM--Division 'of Nuclear' Power, Division Procedures - Reference abbreviation refers to the following:1 Manual, 1979, Tennessee Valley Authority. 4 4 O i i i t
-------____.___________..fL _ _ _ _ _ , , _ , _
E p.- r-APPENDIX G MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, RANGE, AND
-COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION OF CELL DENSITIES FOR EACH ALGAL GENUS IN PHYTOPLANKTON SAMPLES
. COLLECTED DURING OPERATIONAL MONITORING (1983),
-SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, CHICKAMAUGA RESERVOIR O
O b 41
32 3.~ ' . SEGUOYAH PHYTOPLANKTON C"LCULATIONS - .FEmRUARY 1983 - NOVEMBER l'.83 - g. STATISTICS FOR IN01V10UAL TAMA - 4 UMBER / LITER 7, ;
.- (
.......................-...--. RIVER =TEhNESSEE Riv_ MILE =478.2 SAM _ LOC =AO QTRR=FEB83 DEPTH:0.3 ------------------------------ e%
. TAMON GROUP N- MEAN STD ~~ Mig p s. X SUM SYDEAR. CV *( SNKISTRODESMUS CHLOROPHYTA 2 .9525- 4990.1 6350 12700 19C50 3175.0 47.140 - C4LDRELLA CHLOa0PHYTA 2 -55563 2245.1 53975 57150 111125 1587.5 4 041 =
'(
CHLOROPHYTA 2 3175 4490.1 0 E353 6350 3175.0. 141.421 ELAMATOTHEIX -- GOLENWINT4 CHLOROPHYTA 2 25400 13470.4 15875 34925 50600 9525.0 53.833
- PTEROSONAS CHLOROPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 3175 .3175 -1587 5- 141.421 *(
ASTERICNELLA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 127C0 1796C.5 0 . 25400 25400 12700.0 141.421 *
- DIAT0aA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 3175 3175 1587.5 141.421 *
. DINOBRYON CHRY10PHYTA 2 11113 6735.2 6353 15875 22225 4762.5 60.609- =(
- GOMPHONEMA CH9YsotHYTA 2 3175 4490.1 0 635C 6350 3175.0 '141.421 20.203 .-
MELOSIPS CHRYSOPHYT4 2 155575 31430.9 133353 177800 311150 22225.0 = - NIT 2SCHIA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 15R6 2245.1 1C1603 0 3175 120650 3175 222250 1587.5 9525.0 141.421 12.122
-(
=
STEPHANOCISCUS CH9YSOPHYTA 2 111125 13470.4 SYNE 0RA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 4763 2245.1 3175 635C 9525 1587.5 47 140
4 - CHR00MONAS CRYPTOPHYTA 2 7938 11225.3 0 15P75 15875 7937.5 141.421 =( 254003
~
228600 35921.0 233F00 457200 25400.0 15.713 . , OffYLLATi4TA CYANCPHYTA- 2 3175 . GLENODINIUM PYRROPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 3175 1587.5 141.421 .
*l m._ .
O
.___f s
.(
.- - - .._ #.-a
= , .
- - - - - - - - - '(
.d 6
.(
w .
.(
- . ~ ..
* =
.(
ua-
._ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ n
j
- - c e a
[ ! -- ( o SECUOYAH PHYTOPL A~' M T 0' C A LCUL A TI'NS ~~~ . FEPRUA.Y 1.83 - _VELBEL 19 3 . ( ST ATISTICS FOR IN01v100AL TAMA - NUPOER/ LITER . o e (
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RIVER = TENNESSEE RIV_ MILE =478.2 SAM _ LOC =AO QTRR=FEB83 DEPTH =1 ------------~~~----------------
tax 0N GROUP N MEAN STD MIN max SUM STDERR CV .( ANKISTR03ESMUS CHLORCFHYTA 2 3175 C.0 3175 3175 6350 0.0 0.000 CHLAMYDOPONAS CHLOROPHYTA 2 3175 449C.1 C 6350 6353 3175.0 141.421 .( CHLORELLA CHLOROPHYTA 2 46038 6735.2 41275 59800 92075 4762 5 14.630
- GOLEhdINIA CHLOR 0PHYTA 2 14288 2245.1 12703 15875 28575 1587.5 15.713 -
#1CRACTINIUM CHLOROPHYTA 2 6350 898G.3 3 12700 12700 6350.0 141.421 .(
POLVE0*IOPSIS CHLOROPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 3175 3175 1587.5 141 421 . PTE90MONAs CHLoc0PHYTa 2 7938 2245.1 6350 9525 15875 1587.5 28.284 - SCENEDESFUS CHLOEOFHYTA 2 635C 8980.3 0 12700 12700 6350.0 141.421 .(
+
ACHNANTHES CHRYSOPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 5175 3175 1587.5 141.421 - o ASTER!0NELLA CHRYSOPHYT4 2 11113 15715.4 C 22225 22225 11112.5 141.421 = 3IATOMA CH9YSOPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 3175 3175 1587.5 141.421 r (
- DINOBRYCN CHRYSOPHYTA 2 11113 15715.4 C 22225 22225 11112.5 141.421 =
*ELOSIPA CHRYSCPHYTA 2 134938 24695.7 117475 152400 269875 17462.5 18.302 .
NITZSCH!s CHRYSOPHYTA~ 2 1588 2245 1 0 3175 3175 1587.5 141.421 . (' R613
. ST f fM A N061 SCTis CHYiSOFHYTA f 15715.4 6353C 85725 149225 11112.5 21.063 . -- ~~
SYNE 0RA ~ CHRYSOPHYTA 2 7938 2245.1 6350 9525 15675 1587.5 28.284 - t
- ~ ~~- Ch4BDHONAT CRVPTOFHYTA 2 7 9Td-- 2245.1 6350 9525 15875 1587.5 28.284 .
( o C'YPTOMONAS CRYPTOPHYTA 2 158R 2245.1 S 3175 3175 1587.5 141.421 .
.-- . ETETCE170NIA CYANOPHYTA 2 24130C 89802.6 17 78'0 C 309800 482600 63500.0 37.216 .
_ _.W EUGLENA EUGLENOPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 L175 3175 1587.5 141.421 . (
-- C MCDIN1UF- FY 3 0NY T A - 2 317 F'- 44E1 - C 6f5 0 6350 3175.0 141.421 - ~ ,
z S
. g
=
m o ( e _ . . --- - - - - - . ~ . - . - . -. - --- -. .- o .
. .. . - . - - . - - ~ . . . . - . - . .
- a. w
- - - . - - - . . . . --. .m. ~
o .l O , o o _ _ - - _ -( O 'k
; j& 'p' 7 A
(:
'Y
. SEQUOYAH PMYTOPlahWT04 C[(CULATIONS FEB.U.RY 1 hoYEz.BER 1923 ,
.. (
. STATISTICS FOR 1401VIOUAL TAXA - 4 UMBER / LITER =
i .(,
.~ ................-. -........... aIVER= TENNESSEE
. RIV MILE =478.2 SAP _ LOC =AO OTRR=FEB93 DEPTH 3 ------------------------------- y
. TAIO% GROUP N FEAN STO PIN MAX SUM STOERR CV (
I AYRISTRO7ESFUS CHLORCPhYTA 2 a525 0.0 9525 9525 19050 0.0 0.000 .
- CHLA4YDO*0NA! CHLCROPHYTA 2 6350 C.C 6353 6350' 12700 01 0 0.000 =(,
. CHLO4ELLA CHLCROFHYTA 2 36513 2245.1 34925 38100 73025 1587.5 6 149
- 2 11113 6735.2 6350 15875 22225 4762.5 60.609 '.
60LE4KINIA CHLOROPHYTA
+ PTEROMCNAS CHLOGOPHYTA 2 3175 4490.1 0 6350 6350 3175.0 141.421 .(:
=
SCE4EDES"US CHLCa0 PHYT 4 2 6350 89 8 C_. 3 0 12700 12700 6550.0 ' 141.421
-~~ SCH40ECE4In CHLCEOPHYT4 2 1588 2245.1 3 3175 3175 1587.5 -141 421
- ACH4ANTHES CHRYSOPHYTA 2 4763 2245.1 3175 6350 9525 1587.5 47.140 * (;
- ASTER 10NELLA CHR Y.Ci n V T A 2 28575 4490.1 25430 31750 57150 3175.0 15.713 =
. CYMBELLA CHRYSOPHYT4 2 1588 2245.1 0 3115 3175 1587.5 141.421 *
- DINOBRYO4 CHRYSOPHYTA 2 31753 1796C.5 19050 4445G 63500 12700.0 56.569 *t.
. MELOSIRA CHRYSOPHYT4 2 134938 2245.1 133350 136525 269875 1587.5 1.664 .
hAvlCULA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 3175 0.0 3175 3175 6350 0.0 5.000 . MITZSCHIA CHEVSOPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 C 3175 3175 1587.5 141.421 .(,
' ~~~
iTCPR1605ISCUS CHE Tf0 PHYT 4 2 39688 11225.3 317TO 47625 79375 7937.5 2 5. f84 .
- SYMEDRA CHRYSOPHYT1 2 3175 ; 6350 635C 3175.0 141.421 .
- ~ ~fMR0'0=d%A4 ~ tRYFTOVHY'T 4 2 15875 4490.1~
44 % .1 127 W 11050 31760 3175.0 28384 .(:
- C4YPTDar'.a5 CRYPTOPHYTA 2 6350 4490.1 3175 9525 12700 3175.0 70.711 .
. .. OSCILLaf01IA CYAt40PHYTA 2 13970C 17960.5 127600 152400 279400 12700.0 12.556 .
-
- EUGLENA EUGLE'.oPHYTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 3175 3175 1587.5 141 421 . ;l
'~~~[j[ ~~ TRAfMELO*0NAS EufEEEOPHYTA 2 1588 2245 1 C 3175 3175 1587.5 141 421 -
PYRRCPHYT4 2 1586 2245.1 _ 3 3175 3175 1587.5 141.421 - _ __ _ __. _ GYM 40DINIUP.__ _ _
" . (;
.j
**=
( e
.q
-l "d
e f A e J J g
=
^ '
v cy - , ,, zu 1
.(-
SEGUOVAN PMYTDPLANETON CALCULATIONS N~ - FEBRUA4Y 1983 - ECVERSER 1983 . ( seeii'7s;; CO* I4ntwiOUAL 74NA - muMBER/ LITER
... -. ........... ...... . *IVER: TEE 4ESSEE
_ = ( DIV m1LE:476 2 $AP,LCC:A3 GTRR=FEB83 CEPTH:5------------------------------- -
~ -'an0%
T GROUP h #EA4 STO MIN MAX SUM STDERR CV ( EitISTP00Espus CMLCROPHTT4 2 14288 2245 1 12700 15875 28575
. CnLapT309:445 1587.5 15.713 =
CMLeRCPMTTA 2 1588 2245.1 0 3175 3175 C*L3pELLA 1587 5 141 421 = ( CHLORCPHYTA 2 2R575 898C.3 22225 34925 57150 6350.8 31.427 = G3LEn<Inla CHLo#0PHvfA 2 12718 4492.1 9525 15875 25400 3175.8 35.555 = (I4Cw4ER1ELLA CHLCEOFHYTA 2 635: 8920.3 C 12730 12704 6350.0 141.421 * (
=
*EDIASTaue CMLOPOPHYT4 2 6350 89AC.3 0 12700 12758 6350.0 141.491 .
SCE4ECES=us CMLcEOPHYTA 2 3175 449C.1 & 6350 6350 3175.0 141.4It a '. ASTEaIC4ftLA CHRV50PMYT4 2 22225 449*.1 19356 25400 44450 3175.0 20.283 = CTMBELLA CHAYSOPHvia 2 ( 3175 C.0 3175 3175 6350 0.0 0.000 =
. 3I4088T04 CH4YSOPHYTs 2 33338 6735.2 28575 38108 66675 4762.5 29.2C3 .
*ELC$1sa CMRv50PnvTA 2 73C25
-~
maviCULA CM4YSOPHYT4 2 3175 17963.5 f.C 6C325 3175 85725 3175 14605C 6350 12708.8 0.0 24.595 0.008
*(
*TEPMt%COIScuS CHAV50PNYla ? 381CJ 8980.3 31750 44450 7620G 6350.0 23.578 .
ST%Etas CP4YSCPNYTA 2 3175 449C.1 C 6350 6350 3175.0 141.421
'CHiOT=0945 .(
CRfPTOPwvTA 2 15875 449C.1 12705 1905C 3175C 3175.0 28.284 = C4TFTOP3%45 C4YPTCPMTTA 2 1588 2245 1 G 3175 3175 1587.5 141.421 .
-~ ~ ~ ~ 05CILLaf TTa C T a kOF M T T 4 2 13*720 1796f.5 12Tl0C 152400 27940C 12750.8 12.856 .(
TRACHELC#34AS EUGLEkOFHTTA 2 5175 4 4
- G.1 3 6350 6352 3175.8 141.421 .
m $ --< - - - . - . = - m ED a
=
- -(
.(
~ -- .- ---w- .m_ --n n em .-m.
- -e -- - - ---
l.
-me. -- --. -, -
- w
'e i .
.(
, m-mm o - - ,
--- -~_ . -. - . w. . ,. .---m
~ --w ,~- emm --e --~,n
-m-
"Y
. _ _- __m._ _ _ _ _ . _ - _. .._ _ _ _ __ -_ _ _ _ - - . _ *(
. *(
-(
.^ ~p e
1
- i
(
-e-SftG0YaN PMYTOPtatet T 0fu C A LCUL a T IONS
_ FE_AUARY 1983 - NOVER9CJ 1983 ..( ST ATISTICS FOR 14CIVICUAL TAMA - Nue8ER/ LITER
*(
$~~~~ ... - .....--. - ..... ~ PIVER= tem 4ESSCE #1T_"ILE=478.2 SA*_ LOC =AQ GTRR= PAYS 3 DEPTH =0.3 ------------------------------
G403F ~ h ~ PEaA STD Pli Pau SUM STDERR CV .t Ta n ase 'f
' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ag415TgC.ES*US CPLO4GPHVTA 2 2334J 22&0.5 21784 24896 46688 1556 9.428 - CHLaRY2r;wCh&S CMLCR*PHYTA 2 6224 88C2.1 C {2448 12448 6224 141.421 * (' ASTERJ04ftL2 Cuev50PHVT2 2 24o96 352C8.3 C 49792 49792 24496 141321 = Feasitaata CHRv50PHYYa 2 7CO25 11902.6 62240 778CS 140843 7788 '15.713
- 60*PMohEa4 CMAYSCPHTTA 2 3112 4401.C s 6224 6224 3112 141.421 =(
- mELO$ lea CawY?cPHYTa 2 24R96 17604 1 12448 37544 49792 12448 70.711 .
- mavfCUL4 CMGVSCPM1TA 2 ISS6 22CO.5 0 3112 3112 1556 141 421 .
- SY4 FORA CMaytCPMfTa 2 1556 2200.5 C 3112 3112 1556 141 421 *t CM4C0"Jwas C4:*.JPMvfA 2 3112 44C1.0 3 6224 6224 3112 141 421 .*
. CavpT0*04Af CRYP7CPHYTA 2 10892 2200.5 9336 12448 21784 1556 28.285 =
- EuGLE4a EUGLEhCPMYTa 2 4668 2200.5 3112 6224 9336 1556 4 7. f4 0 .(
= GvP4001%Iu" PYRRCPHTTA 2 1711E 2230.5 1556G 18672 34232 1556 12.856 .
j .
~
j .
.(
3 e _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ g_ _ . _ _ t e e
* *l I --. - ,
- -_m k
m
=
4 _,m ,, , ..m k
.(
Q 1 _ _ _ . - _ 4
- _ . -
- _ _ - __w
. . _ . * . ~ - . -e--
4
*(
~
- 9 O
"'I
y m:- T y-( n SEGUOYAH PHYTOPLAhuTON C"LCULCTIONS- 6- e'
. FEBRUARY lu 3 - LOVEMBE; 1s83 ?(.
6
. . STATISTICS FOR INDIVIDUAL TANA -
NUM8EP/ LITER . _ *(~
.. . ........................ RIVEP= TENNESSEE RIV_ PILE =478.2 SAM _ LOC =A3 GTRR=MAY83 OEPTH=1 ------------------------------- '
. TAKON GROUP N PEAN STD MIN MAN SUM SIDERR CV {
AMMISTRODESMUS CHLOE0PHYTA 2 21784 8802 1 15560 28038 43568 6224 .40.406 *
~~
CHLAMYD04cNas CHLOROPHYT4 2 12448 0.0 1244R 12448 24896 0 0.000 =( SCENEDESPOS CHLOROPHYTA 2- .28 COB 4401.C 24896 '31120 56016 3112 15.713 *
- ASTERIONELLA CH4YSOPHYTA 2 1244R 176C4 1 0 24896 24896 12448 141.421 = = FRAGILA4IA CHRYSCPHYTA 2 54460 22C0.5 52904 56016 108920 1556 4.041 *(
- 4ELOSIRA CHPYSOPHYTA 2 14304 6601.5 9536 18672 28008 4668 47.140 =
%Avicula CnRYSOPHYTA 2 1556 22co.5 0 3112 3112 .1556 141.421 - -. RHIZOSOLEh!A CHAYSOPHYTA -2 1556 2200.5 0 3112 3112 1556 141.421 =(
- SYNEORA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 6224 0.0 6224 6224 12448 0 0.000 =
. CH400M3NAS CRYPTOPHYTA 2 778C 2200 5 6224' 9336 15560 1556 28 284 =
C4YPT0MONAS CEYPTOPHYTA 2 7780 2200 5 6224 9336 15560 1556 28.284 a (
. EUCLENA EUOLENOPHYTA 2 3112 f.0 3112 3112 6224 0 0.000 .
. dTNTODINIUM F Y R6t 0 PHYT A 2 1244e 0.0 12448 12448 24896 0 0.000 .
~ -
..- __ (
E%
. _ ..____ *l
.m. . - . , - . -. - =. .- w
. M
. . (
-.- ~ -- %-. . - -. s .- .~.m . . _ . - . . - ..-- - - - - - - . . - - - ..- . - , . . - c
_ _. _ _._ _ _ _. _ ._.. ~ _ ._. . . _ - . _ - . _ _ . . . _ - _ . . _-_ _ _ . . - - ~ . _ .. . _- . ---- * (
- - - .- . - e. w ,. -
-. -.-- -.%. .-e.. - - ~ .We
..--.ew+-. -
-e.-**-. e%=.,.-a ,.=w-um.. .* g- .*, men. **-=.ummre..m - m en m -* w**-- - ' * ********
.W e
.(
-t, Y &
SEQUOVA9 F'HYTOPL AIH(T0h CALCUL ATIO"S
).
F E .; R U A ,.Y 12_3 - u v E;,. E R ltS3- ~ .
.]
STATISTICS FOR INDIVIDUAL TANA - NUMBER / LITER .
. ............................... RIVER = TENNESSEE RIV_ MILE =479.2 SAM _ LOC =AD GTRR= MAYS 3 DEPTH =3 .............. .............. -
TAXON GPOUP N- MEAN STO MIN MAX . SUN STDERR CV e (
~
ANKIST*0 DES"US CHLO90PHYTA 2 14C04 -2200.5 12448 1556G 28008 1556 15.713 "
~
CHLaMY30MONAS CHLOROPHYTA 2 -46b8 6601 5 0 9336 9336 4668 141.421 * ( SCENEDES=US CHLOROPHYTA 2 12448 0.0 12448 12448 24896- 0 0.008 ' = ASTERIONELLA CH_RYSOPHYTA 2 2800P 4401.0 24896 31120 56016 3*12 15.713 '=
- FRAGILARIA CH9YSOPHYTA 2 - 38900 .11002 6 31120 46600 7780G 7780 28.284 *
=
MELOSIRA CH9VSOPHYTA 2 24R96 4401.0 (
~ 21784 28008 49792 3112 17.678'
- SYIEDRA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 6224 0.0 6224 6224 12448 0 0.008 =
. CHR00MONAS CPyrr0PHYTA 2 4668 2220.5 3112
- CRYPTOM3NAS CRYPTOPHYTA 2 6224 6224' 9336' 1556 47.140 .(
0.0 6224 6224 12448 0 0.000 =
= EUGLENA E U GL ENDPHY T A 2 3112 C.C 3112 3112 6224 0 0.000 =
GYMNODINIUM PYRROPHYTA 2 466M 220G.5 3112 6224 9336 1556 47.140 * ( 13
. e f
W. O a_ g.. - . . -- - - . . . , - , . . - - -
..-.-m.-.-
p 3 4
- ----.m .. - - ., . -
.w.-
. . .- .... - --- ...-... -. ...- - -. .w-- .
- . . . . - - . . - ..---s -.-
9
...- -- . - - - . . - . . ~
.-..--ann.- . . - _ . . . ,.-w.w L .
* (
t b .
=
( 9 (
, ~
_s
U ~
^T a -
. (: ,
g -SEGUOvaN PHYTOPL'hWTOM C ALCUL ^ TI0 ass - . FEBR JV 3.83 - howCM8ER 1.- y 5 . (- ST A T 1'. TICS F OR 140!VIDUAL TANA - 9uneER/ LITER .:
*(
..... ~......................-- RIVER:TENNESSCE .RIV_*ILf=478.2 SA*_ LOC =43 QTRR=MAY83 DEPTH:5 --~~---------------------------
b TAWO4 GROUP N MEAN STD MIN MAN SUM STDEAR CV - .( ~ AmnISTROCESMUS CHLDEOPHYTA- 2 12449 44C1.6 9336 15560 24896 3112 35.355 - 4 CHLAnv3090tAS CHLOSOPHYYA I 3112' 4401.G S 6224 6224 3114 141.421 =( SCENEDES40S CHLOADPHVTA 2 .32448 0.3. 12448 12448 24896 0 0 000 . o
; ASTERIONELLA CHAYSOPHf T A 2 2334C 22SC.5 21794 24896 46688 1556 9.42R .,
o MELOSIRA CHRYSOPHYTA 2 38900 11LC2.6 .31120 466sc 778CB 7780 26.284 .( b SYNEDRA CHRTSOPHYTA 2 6224 0.0 6224 6224 12448 0 0.000 . CMtC09CNAS CRYPTGPHYTA 2 +66h 2200 5 3112 6224 9336 1556 47 140
- o
- C4VPY0=0AAS CRYPTOPHYTA 2 4666 2200.5 3112 6224 9336 1556 47 140 =f o
EUGLENA EUGLENOPHYTA 2 3112 0.3 3112 3212 6224 C 8.800 = a Ta ACHELOPON AS EUGLENOPHYTA 2 1556 2200.5 e 3112 3112 1556 141 421 .
- GYMNC01410M PYdROPHYTA 2 3112 0.0 3112 3112 6224 0 0.000 .(
_ _ . . . . _ . - . -- _- 5 en m w-k
- . -%. - -- .- - - . . . - , . - . - . . , _~
6 .k es . 0 . o
.g
.g
~
- :1 o
.g o .
- - +-- e. - .
. e
- w e-- - -e .w.w. ..e. . - - . .- , . , . .w * . . . . - , .
- ..-e. .e p.. -.e- . . -e -, ,
a . O e o a
.(
g a
( SEQuoYrH PHYTOPL'hET'N CALCULaT1*~S , .. FEw-UA.Y:1.~3 - NOVERSER isa3 .(
. ST4TISTICS FOR 1hDIV10U4L TAXA - MUMBER/ LITER
*I'
..... ............. ........ RivtaiTENNESSEE Riv_m!LE=47e.2 SA*_ LOC =AO QTRA=AUG83 DEPTH:6.3 ................... ... ....
. tau 3h G4*UP 4 PE A ?. STD MIN MAR SU* STDERR CV j(
CHLC90PHYTa 2 17116 66!2 ~ ~ ~1244E 21784 34232 4668 38.569 . ACamTHOSFHAERA
. ACT!4ASTRUM CHLOGOPHTTA 2 349rt __J54t4 2m33a 49792 7780C 19892 39.598 *(; . A% KIST 40CES=us CHLC70PHTTA 2 24896 13 03 1556C 34232 49792 9336 53.C33 . . CHLAwy00potAT CHLDECPHTTA 2 *C246 22Ct5 74688 105808 180496 15560 24.303 . - C4LORELLA C"LCacpHyTA 2 143:4 22c1 12448 1556C 28008 1556 15.713 .(
CHO3ATELLa CHLCFCFHYTA 2 3112 44C1 ___ C 6224 6224 3112 141.421 .
- COELASTiUM CHLO4CP%YTa 2 37344 176C4 24996 49792 74688 12448 47.140 -
4668 22C1 3112 6224 9336 1556 47.140 .(
. CO S4 AR It'P CHLO*CSHTTA 2 . C40CIGE%IA CHLoaGrHYT4 2 52964 13:03 43568 6224C 1C5808 9336 24.957 . . DICivCSPHAEa1U9 CHLCPOPHYTA 2 68464 132C3 59128 778C0 13692L 9336 19.285 =
- EJASTRUM CHLOPOPHTTA 2 466e 2201 3112 6224 9336 1556 47 140 =
(
. FaAkCTIA CHLORCPHvfA 2 311? 44C1 0 6224 6224 3112 141.421 . . GLCECACTINIUM CHLO50pHYTA 2 49792 H8C2 43568 56016 99584 6224, 17.678 . - GOLE%4I114 CHLC80 PHYT 4 2 18672 132C3 9336 28008 37344 9336 70.711 .. .
- IRCHMEE. IELL A CHLCROPHYTA 2 1:425 266C7 64324 124480 2C8504 20228 27.44C .
. WICDACTINIU" CHLO800HYTA 2 56S16 8P02 49792 62240 112C32 6224 15.713 . - FAkOCRI44 CHLCROPHYTA 2 6224C 17tG4 49792 74688 12448C 12448 28.284
- CHLO80 PHYT 4 2 1A672 88S2 12446 24896 37344 6224 47.140 .
. PE3IASTaCM .' P90TCCOCCUS CHLCRCPHYTA 2 55124 6602 40456 6224 49792 6224 9&24e 12448 4668 0
14.63G 5.000
. g:
. PTERC#04AS CHLOROPHYTA 2 6224 5
---~-~ 3 C E NE D E f MU S CHLC40 PHYT 4 2 22562: 15404 214728 236512 451240 10892 6.827 .
SCH4CECE4IA CHLC2CPHYTA 2 17116 6602 12448 21784 34232 4668 38.569 =
, ~~- itzus a$ f fui - '- tHLeacPHiTA 2 1ce9? 2201 --~ 9536 12448 21784 1656 ft;243 -(
#336 12448 21784 1556 2C.2C3 .
ll TETM1ECRON CHLO50PHvfA 1C492 22:1
. ffTTTYffu" CHLCAOPHTTA 2 6224 8P"2 L 12446 12448 6224 141.421 . . TREUE44!4 CHLGECPHYTA 2 1556 22C1 $ 3112 3112 1556 141.421 .
r
.-~~--'-'- V3L(0m-- - CHCCTfFRYTA 2 995M4 14CF33 ; 139168 199168 99584 141.421 . , ACHEANTHES CHPTSSFHYTA 2 F4C2e 176C4 71576 96472 168048 12448 20.951 . .~ ~~1 TTh ri s-- CHFfTtF 4f TA 2 9336 C 433f~ 9336 18672 C c . t~5 5 . :
CH4ETCCEa05 CHAYSOPHYTA 2 29564 66*2 24896 34232 59128 4668 22.33C . JTVJ4WC C-~
~'---
TW7f57iri7T**~~7 24mu 44!1 2177FF~ EscGB 49792 3112 17 672 CHave0PHYva 2 e5352 132C3 56C16 74688 13L704 9336 20.203 - _ -. _ Fe4GILARIA_ _ _ _ - --
, zygg --- 3 7l g g _y3 gg g g- 4g3,,,
- ~
564 2 0.83 f ~~ ~ ~ . 4AWICULA CHRv50PHviA 2 3110 0 3112 3112 6224 0 C.80C .
~ ' HIZOTCLEhTT ~ ~~~ChE vickMT1- ifs 72 24K96 43568 3112 2 G753 -~.. .- 2 21784 -44C1 '
18672 34232 1556 12.856 . <
. STEPHANODISCUS CMPTSOPHYT4 2 17116 2291 1556;
-~ ~ ~- ~~ 7 M01tl ETTY3DM T A 2 le 2i;5; 11 ( ';3 174272 189832 364154 778G o- 844 +
. TaeELLARIA C PE.1 $0 PH Y T A 2 1556' 4461 12449 18672 3112C 3112 28.284 .(
-'nM 2 - ~~ 18U2 ' 4668D 4T65 2 B;78 4 -' -- ~ ~~~
. J4*3*34A5 ~ ~ - - ER W T3bHYTA ~ ~ 2- 233 4T ~2RBOP 041PT0"04A1 CRYFTOPnfiA 2 1556 22:1 J 3112 3112 1556 141.421 .
TGeV
~
~ ~ - ~ ~
Au tf5TII
-tV4 LCPTY T a 2 f315046 f5 C4T7'- ~T223 f14 1447D o 2670096 112NT2 . <
. CaCTTLOCCCCCPSIS CYA%CPHTTA 2 1244F 8802 6224 18672 24896 6224 78.711 .
. LYNEW~Ya CVA%CPHVTA 2 112332 176l4 99584 12448C 224D64 12448 15.713 .
. *E41SPOPEDIA CY440PHYTA 2 556812 94622 4419C4 575720 1017624 669C8 18.597 .
cy AiTCFHirl - M f4t 105625 ~921152- ~ 1T7T528 199168c 74686 16~;667-~ .
.~ ~ ~ --- 33:!LLATeafs 2 . EJCLEh4 EUGLENCPHYTA 2 77ar 2201 E224 ^
9336 15560 1556 28.284 .
- 'Th M LOPCD E ~ - ' ' -EufLMorHvTA 2 9336 4*a1" ~~6224~ ' 1 '24'4 F 12672 5fi2 ~ ~47.14C . . GT*1C01NIU" PT4ROF"YT4 2 233eL 2291 2178* 24896 46680 1556 9.428 .
PYRTCFHYTA 2 3112 C 3112 3112 6224 C G.OCO .
. PEMIDT%IUM .,
. 1 e
v (~ SEGUOYAH PHVTOPL'hKTOM C"LCULeTT'"S o ' FEBRUART 1983 - L.VEMBEJ 1983 *f STATISTICS FC4 IMDiv100AL TAXA . MUMBER/ LITER ,
*(
--. .- -- ........... .. ..-.. ... E I R E F. = T E h 4 E S S E E RIW.PILf=478.2 ______ ____.. SAM _GTRA=AUG83 LOC =4C DEPTH =1------------------------------- -
. Tan 34 GROUP h *EAN STD MIN pax SUM STCERR CV =(
ACAETHOSPHaE4A CHLC40ENTTA 2 12448 4401 9356 15560 24896 -- 3112 35.355
. ACTI%Asimum CHL0kOPHYTA 2 24496 C 24896 24896 49792 0 8.588 .(
- AMEISTROCESPUS CHLO50fMTTA 2 7780 22L1 6224 9336 15560 1556 28.284 = CHLs!Y30p0445 C Ht 0_E OPH f 7 4 2 14054 22C1 12448 15560 28058 1556 15.713 . + CatD4ELLA CHLo*0PHYTA 2 12448 44:1 9336 15560 24896 3112 35.355 .(
. CH03ATELLA CHL0e3PHTTA 2 9336 4431 6224 12448 18672 3112 47.140 *
- COELAST40p CHLO=OPHTTA 2 57344 176L4 24&96 49792 74688 12448 47.140 a
. CRUC16Esta CHLa8CFHTTA 2 4356P 88:2 37344 49792 87136 6224 28.203 -r DICTTCSPHAEeIUM CHLOa0PHTTA 2 51348 66C2 4668C 56016 102696 4668 12.856 =
EUAST4uw--- CHLCROPHYTA 2 4668 22:1 3212 6224 9336 1556 47.148 . o i(aEfET A CHLO4CFHTTa 2 4668 2201 3112 6224 9336 1556 47.14C =(
- GOLEndIgIA CHLO*0PHTTA 2 140e4 22C1 12448 15560 28CC8 1556 15.713 .
6041up CHLOiOFHTTA 2 4356e 6e02 37344 49792 87136 6224 20.2C3 .
- 414H4E*1 ELLS CHLO*CPHTTA 2 IC2696 17654 4C248 115144 2C5392 12448 17.142 -t + *1fTACT!%Iua CHLCeceHVTA 2 71576 0 71576 71576 143152 0 0.000 . . 00 CYST!! CHLOROPHTTA 2 21784 132c3 12448 31120 43568 9336 68.609 . - r 4%304 f4 A CHLaF6PHVTA 2 37344 17604 24896 49792 79688 12448 47.140 .: . PE3IASTRUM CHL C RCPHT TA 2 35786 2241 34232 37344 71576 1556 6.149 . .~~ Fi5fcCoCCus CHLCacPHTTA 2 1556 22G1 0 3112 3112 1556 141 421 . . PTEEG#344S CHLC40PHTTA 2 3112 44*1
- 6224 6224 3112 141.421-~ .;
J ~ ~ SCEiiEM $ pus C6LOTcfM1FTA 2 20L383 132TY 2Wt4T 289416 560160 9336 4D 14 - SCHE 3EJEs14 CHLCRCPHTTA 2 17116 22C1 15560 18672 34232 1556 12.856 . J '~~17 - STAdWilTAU9 CH[feCPHVIA 2 3112 44C1 C 6124 6224 3112 ITf!421-~ g
. " TET*AE3444 CHLORCPHTTA 2 124th 2 12448 12448 24896 3 0.000 -
- fffTe{tF[* CHLc40PHYTA 2 6224 8802 3 12448 12446 6224 141.421 .
- TaEuB4418 C HLO 40 PHY T 4 2 778C 2001 6224 9336 15560 1556 28.284 .(
25!f83
~'
AC44E%THEY ~-~ (MITS6PNVYi 2 32676 6602 2AET) 37344 65352 " 5E6T8 -
. ATT*fTA CHPv5cPHTTA 2 18672 4401 15560 21784 37344 3112 23.570 ~~
4 4 ? f --~14 5 7'2- ~ ~24896
~ . CHAETCCfl4$ ~ ~ " ' THAv'10PHYTA 7 F --~~21744 43568 TH2 20.2 C 3 ~ - . Et4Caev2% CH4 YSOPHY T A 2 1CP92 154*4 0 217k4 21784 1C892 141.421 .
87.91'2-
~~~~ ~
^*ECs3144^ ---CHTv f0MT A 2 %24 P 132C3 99584 18C496 9336 14. 5TO~ -
~ - ~ ~ ' '
AM12?SCLEh1A CNETSOPHTTA 2 933. 44C1 6224 12448 18672 3112 47.140 ..
- STE8HA%0CI5CVf'~~~~ Ch h fC ETTA 2 I62f4 44G1 7 TIT 9336 12*48 3112 7 c . ffi- - - Sv%ECDA CHcTSCOHYTA 2 1447c4 242s6 127592 161824 289416 17116 16.727 .
- .----- ~ C H4 0c e g A
- --~ - - CR I P TfNYTA T 9334 44C1 ~ ' 72 2 I 12448 18672 311) 47.~ 14 0 ..
. 144095T15 CVANOPHTTA 2 1372C84 151836 96472C 1179448 2144168 107364 14.163 . ,=
AP40%IfiFf564 CTA%0FhvTA 2 248900 552GA 224654 273856 497920 24896 14.142 *
- l. 04CTTL3 COCO 3PSIS CYA%CPHvfA 2 7789 22C1 6224 -9336 15560 1556 28.284 ..
j, ---- p g ,g-- - -- CfAkof6fta 2 211616 52P12 f74272 - ~ T43963
~
423232 37344 24.957~ ~ .'
. = Eats
- PEDIA CYA40FHTTA 2 8!1340 77018 746880 8558CC 16C2680 54460 9.611 .
* ? mis ~~~5 ffic 8 f3.469- ~
-- ~ - ~- Sit 1R AT"KYs ~ fyamCPHvfA 2 5Y2816 7E417 1CT5632 49?f2 - *(
. Eu1LE4A EUCLE40PHv7A 2 77PC 22C1 6224 9336 15560 1556 28.284
- TRAfHIEDF!%AS fuhLEh0fMTTA 155s 2fT1 ! 3112 3112 1556 141.411 =
- 6v*%C31%Ium fYEROPMyTA 6224 f L224 12448 L 0.C00 -(
' - ~ ~ 6224
~~ ~- ~~ -
DE*!C1%IU*
~ P T R 4 0'Pn Y f A 2 "~ 2 466P 6602 e 9334 9335~ 4'668 - 141.421' ~~~~~~~~.
-(
__ -l !. s. T
(- SEGUOYaN PHsT0FLAhMTON qiLCUL^TIONS . FEunua Y 1983 - h0VEm8ER 1983 (
. STATISTICS FOR 140!VIDUAL T4MA - NbPBER/ LITER .
. (
-- - ---------------- agvEg=TgggESSEE RIV_ MILE =4TS.2 SAP _ LOC =AO QTRR=AUG83 DEPTH:3 -------------------------------
G400P m MEAN STD 91% MAX SUM STOERR CV . ( TanC4 acatTHC!PaaEDA CHLO4CPNTTa 2 15560 4*C1 12448 18672 31120 3112 28 284 -
- aCTIsasTau" ChLfSOPMTTa 2 420]2 11:03 34.212, 49792 84024 7780 26 189_ * (
414ISTR00fSpuS C*LC40P*TTa 2 1711e 6602 12448 21784 34232 866A 38 569 *
. CwtamTDC93 mas CMLCRCPHYTA I 26452 6602 21784 31120 529:4 4666 24.957 - . CMLcaELLA CMLOROPHTTA 2 1711e 22C1 15565 18672 34232 1556 12 856 * (
Cntca0G0gILM CHLC&CPav7A 2 779 2201 6224 9336 15560 1556 28.284 = CH32aTELLa CnLCaCPHvTA 2 3112 **C1 C 6224 6224 3112 141.421 .
. COELASTejg CHLne9PHyra 2 68464 132C3 59128 77800 136928 9336 19 285 . .
CiuCTECs!A CWLJiLeavia 2 2e3:8 44 1 24896 31120 56c16 3112 15.713 -
. DICTTC$swarslu* ChloaspHTTA 2 70320 28EC7 49792 90248 140C40 20228 48.855 =
ELanaTOTraf: CnLC40PMvTA 2 6224 8eC2 C 12448 12448 6224 141 421 . (-
. EJaST4Um CHLeacFHv7A 2 3112 4401 C 6224 6224 3112 141.421 .
. FAanCEla CnLOAOPWTT4 2 1556 22C1 0 3112 3112 1556 141 421 .
. GLCE0aCTINIun CHLCEOPhvia 2 26452 2201 24896 28008 52904 1556 8.319 . (
- - - ~ '
CC' LEU TQ F ~ ~ FWCCT4TWTA 2 1556: 44f1 12448 18672 31120 3112 28 2ii4 .
. 50410P CHLC40PwvTA 2 1244* 176C4 S 24896 24896 12448 141.421 .
4fN C4%f41 ELL 4 CMLOTOPa via 2 157364 2201 105838 1:8920 214728 1556 2.05D . 1
. w!CRACTI%IUM CHLO40PhvfA 2 49792 13203 4C456 59128 99584 9336 26.517 . .-~
03CTSTIS CHLCEOPHTTA 2 18672 8802 12448 24896 37344 6224 47.14C .
. PEDIASTau* CHLC40PHYTa 2 12448 17604 C 24896 24896 12448 141.421 .
( l
~ ~
PTEa380%AS CnLORDFETTA 2 3112 0 3112 3112 6224 8 5.000 . SCENE ES*JS CMLO4LPMYTA 2 17582f, 19805 161824 189832 351656 140c4 11 264 =
'~
- 3Cna0Ett4I A --~~CE[54 SeKv7 A 2 IJ892 2231 ~~~9136 12448 21784 1556 25.71T -
(:
, 6224 141.421 as TETaaSTRu' CHLc4:FMvia 2 6224 8662 D 12448 12448 .
'74TUF3TTI cnLcacFniTa 2 3112 44;1 c 6224 6224 3112 141 421 .
. aC9%s%TMES CHEV$CPNTTA 2 ?1120 88?? 24896 37344 62240 6224 28.284 . (
, ~ - ~ - ^ -~~ CKa [ T c C E u G 3 ERIVKUFeTTa 2 3112C 8802 24836 37344 62240 6774 28 264 .
. D1%0PRT04 CHRYSCPHYTA 2 466F 6602 : 9336 9336 4668 141 421 .
, .- - - - - 'wrtrsfu -- tHav50enfTC 2 1h2c52 22U1 18 54H- 1836c8 364104 1556 1.2t9 . 4 1
%AvtCULs O*4450*PTTa 2 1556 22;1 C 3112 3112 1556 141.421 .
.- - - - - ~ LTT7355EriTA - TamrWYTi- 2 17116 22c1 f556T ~ le672 34232 1556 12.e56 STEPwa%COISCUS 2 21794 C 21784 21784 43568 C 0.000 ~ '~
~
ST%EDE t ~ ~ - ~ CHPv5CF4TTA
~
CWav5CFWifa 2 1*47"4~' 11M3 T3G F 152068 289416 778c 77603 - ~ .
. Cp4CCPO4&S CRYPTCFavia 2 1556C 44C1 12448 18672 31120 3112 28 284 -
~
CTYFTTPhYfA 2 6224 'O 67T4 6224 12448 c 5.CEO . i CTY P T*
- 0VIT-
. A48C75T1! CVANCPHVTa 2 8666*2 28637 846464 886920 1733384 20228 3.301 _
Uz"TVTUT57ft"#5TX --~CTINtPWf T A 2 12446 8832 6224 18672 24896 6224 75 711 .
. Lv%G?vA CVA%DPnTTA 2 149376 21125C 2 298752 298752 149376 141.421 -
O
.-- - - uraygespr$r4-cy agtpsy yg--~ 2 66%8r 35f96 ~ e441B4- ~ O 3476 1338160 24896 -'~'5 . 752 - =
CVah0PNYTa 2 423232 105t25 348544 497920 846464 74688 24.957 ' 3SCILLATC.IA - 3112 0' 3112--- 3112 --- 6224 C ~5. C 0 0-- = (, K0GLE%A-- ~ TUCCfifPhTTA I GTego ggrue pygp0PpTTa 2 17116 2221 1556 18672 34232 1556 12.856 = e - - - * -*'*-m-= = + = w ---e -* e w.=
-. -e- -- -e l -. . . - - ----- - ---
.q
, 9 n _ _ ..
~
O 9 k b SEGUOYAH FHYTCPLADET0h CALCUL#TIONS e o FE8R;m Y 198 3 - N O V E PB EJ 1983 - ( o . b STATISTICS FOR INDIVICUAL TANA - wumbER/ LITER . 4 . (
-.--. ._--.--- ------...-.. agyE4:T[44!SSEE RIV_ MILE =47P.2 SA*_ LOC =AD QTRR=AUG83 DEPTH:5 -------------------------------
o TarC4 G40UP N MEAN STD MIN MAN SUM STDERR CV . ( ACA%THOSPHAEEA CHLC9CPrYTA 2 466e 6601.5 0 9336 9336 4668 141.421 . o ACTIMASTau9 CHLCROPHYTA 2 2334b 22:5.5 21784 24896 46680 1556 9.428 .( A441STRCDESPUS CHLCROPnTTA 2 12448 0.0 1244e 12448 24896 0 0.008 =
- CwtA*VCCpo%AS CHLOAOPHYTA 2 24896 4401.C 21784 28G08 49792 3112 17.678 . . CHLORELLA CHLCROPHYTA 2 20228 11C&2.6 12448 28008 40456 778C 54.393 =(
- CH0cATELLA CHLCROPwYTA 2 7786 2200.5 6224 9336 15560 1556 28.284
- C3ELASlaug CHLC#GPHYTA 2 37346 176*4.1 24996 49792 74688 12448 47.140 -
CRUCIGENIA CHLG20PHYTA 2 2PSCf 4401.C 24896 31120 56016 3112 15.713 = 3ICTYoSPHAERIUM CHLCROPHYTA 2 34232 44C1.0 31120 37344 68464 3112 12.856 .
. ELANATCTHRIs CHLCROPHYT4 2 6224 8802.1 0 12448 12448 6224 141.421 .
FilECEIA CHLCRCPHYTA 2 4666 2200.5 3112 6224 9336 1556 47.140
- i
. GOLEwalh!A CHLCRcPHYTA 2 18672 4401.P 15560 21784 37344 3112 23.570 .
- G341u* CHLCMCPHYTA 2 6224 8802.1 0 12448 12448 6224 141.421 ~~~. - <!ACH4ERIELLA CHLCFCFHYTA 2 3112C 68P2.1 24696 37344 62240 6224 28.284 ..
. alCRAYTINIUM CHLO80PhYTA 2 43568 88C2.1 37344 49792 87136 6224 20.203 .
. 30 CYST 13 CHLOROPnVTA 2 24896 176C4.1 12448 37344 49792 12448 78.711 . .~~ '~~~ P Effilflue CELT 30FFYTA 2 43568 A802.1 37344 49792 87136 6224 20.203 - ~-
PTEaCaokAS CHLOAOPHYTA 2 4669 22c0.5 3112 6224 9336 1556 47.140 .
- SCEREDESmus CHLCEOPHYTA 2 214T26 132C3.1 205392 224C64 429456 9336 6.149 .
. SCMRDEDERIA CNLCROFHYTA 2 12448 4451.0 9336 15560 24896 3112 35.355 ..
~
- ~ ~ Sf fL1FSTTFM CEC A MFY TF I 1556 22i075 ~ ~F ' 31T2 3112 1556 141.471 -
TETaAED404 CHLCRDPHYTA 2 1556 2 ts.5 0 3112 3112 1556 141.421 .
. ~ 7 - -- TETIFITTRUM TMLCTWHTTI 2 1244t 0.L 7 74T8 12445 24896 3 67308 ..
'8
- TAEUPA*IA CHLCa0PHYTA 2 6224 0.C 6224 6224 12448 0 0.000 .
. - ~~~I5NEI%TRES CHR Y5OFHYT A i 21784 44:1.s 18572 248Y6 43568 3112 20.205 .
. ATTHEYA CHEYSCPHYTA 2 3112 44C1.0 0 6224 6224 F112 141.421 .i 66C1'.T~~~~12448~' - ~7f754
, - - - ' ~ '~ ~~ TTI ETCfftU'I~-~ CHNisUFRTTI : 1711t 34232 46EB 38.559 .
CY9EELLA CHRYSCPHYTA 2 1556 2260.5 C 3112 3112 1556 141.421 -----~. __.~DI T C S E YDM ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CH E Y10PHVT A-- T-~ ~ ~JJ3 C ~~I S EI 3T ~ ~ ~ 12 4 4 s ' '-- T4732 46680 10892~ ~ 65.~997 .
, "EL3 SIR A - CHRVSOPHYTA 2 T1576 176C4.1 59126 64324 143152 12448 24.595 - ~ ~ ~'-~ ~-~ '- 2 ff 73 5 REET r~ ~ ~ CM VYUTM T1 'T +6a 66 c l . :) 6 5336 9336 4668 141.421 - - An3 t C CS PHE 412 CHRYSOPHYTA 2 6224 88C2.1 C 12448 12448 6224 141.421 ,
STEFnA%5DTfttf C@ v torHYT A I-~~ ~- 913 6 c.G~ ~ 9I36 9336 18672 c s.050 .
~~ - _SYtE3a4 CHR.YSOPHYTA 2 132263 242C5.7 115144 149376 264520 17116 18.302 -
p - , W W~ 3C 0. 5 ~~~3f12 - ' 6 2 2 E- 9336 IW- 4 7. f s e--~ ~-- ~ . ,
. ANACYSTIS CYAMOPHYTA 2 630180 33CC7.7 ~~6C6840 653520 1260360 23340 5.238 . < G A 5T'YlDC3tYlPSl5 CYTk6DEifA 2 3112 4451.3 ~T' 6224 6224 3112 141 471 . . LYMG8YA CYA40PHYTA 2 *9792 70416.5 3 #9584 99584 49792 141.421 .(
6T614.5 2s63C C ~~373440 435Eh
~ - - ~ .}}