ML20138C679
| ML20138C679 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1996 |
| From: | DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138C640 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9704300171 | |
| Download: ML20138C679 (70) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:-. ._ . _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . .-. _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ . . . _ . _ . . . _ _ _ i l i M l l l 1 i l 1 r. l- t i 1 i i i l i i ATTACHMENT 2 4 1 I i ! , 1996 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT : 1 i NON-RADIOLOGICAL i i 1 l 1 4 1 i l l l l i I i e 1 l l a. f i 9704300171 970425 PDR ADOCK 05000334 ' R PDR k.
I l 1 t 1 l I i l l i l 1996 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION ' I UNITS NO.1 AND 2 i l LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 i i i i i l l l l i 1 ) i
.- .. . - -~ . . . - . . - . . . . - -
i TABLE OF CONTENTS
' LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES Page EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
. . . . . . . ............................ ES-1 1
I N TRO D U C TI O N - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 1.1 Objectives of the Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 1.2 Scope of Services .................................. 1-1 1.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2 1.2.2 Fish Monitoring ......... . .................. 1-2 l 1.2.3 Larval Cages / Zebra Mussel Scraper Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.2.4 Corbicula/ Zebra Mussel Density Determinations .................... ......... 1-3 1.2.5 Monthly Activity Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 1.3 Site Description . .......................... ....... 1-3 2 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM .. ........................ 2-1 l 2.1 I n' t ro d u ctio n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2 Benthos ......................................... 2-1 2.2.1 O bj e ct ive s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
- 2. 2. 2 M etho d s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2.3 Habitats . . .................. .............. 2-2 2.2.4 Results . . . . ................................ 2-2 2.2.5 Community Structure and Spatial Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... 22 2.2.6 Comparison of Control and Non-Control S t a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 2.2.7 Seasonal Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 2.2.8 Discussion ....... .......................... 2-4
, 2.3 Fish............................................ 2-4 2.3.1 O bjective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 2-4 2.3.2 Methods ................................... 2-4 l 2.3.3 Re sults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-5 2.3.4 Comparison of Control and Non-Control Stations . . . . . . . . 2-6 l 2.3.5 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ 2-7 2.4 .C.grbicula Monitoring Program .......................... 2-7 2.4.1 I ntrod uction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7 2.4.2 M o nit o ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-8 2.4.3 Corbicula Larvae Study .......... .............. 2-12 i i i l l l i
l l TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Page 2.5 Zebra Mussel Monitor ng Prograrn . . . . . . . . . . ... .. .. . 2-14 2.5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 2-14 2.5.2 Mo nitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .......... 2 15 l i 3 REFERENCES .............................. ........ 3-1 l l i 1 I i l
LIST OF TABLES Table No. Title 2.1 Duquesne Ught Company BVPS Sampling Dates for 1996 2.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 1996 in the Ohio River Near BVPS (5 sheets) 2.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Counts For Triplicate Samples Taken at Each Sample Station By Sample Date for 1996 (3 sheets) 2.4 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number /m2 ) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms,1996 - BVPS 2.5 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number /m2 ) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms in Non-Control Station 28 Samples,1996 BVPS 2.6 Shannon-Weiner Diversity, Evenness and Richness Indices for Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in the Ohio River,1996 2.7 2 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities (Number /m ) for Station 1 (Control) and Station 2B (Non-Control) During Preoperational and Operational Years BVPS (2 sheets) 2.8 (Scientific and Common Name) Families and Species of Fish Collected in the New Cumberland Pool of the Ohio River,1970 through 1996, BVPS (3 sheets) 2.9 Comparison of Control Vs. Non-Control Electrofishing Catches During the BVPS 1996 Fisheries Survey 2.10 Comparison of Control Vs. Non Control Seine Catches During the BVPS 1996 Fisheries Survey 2.11 Fish Species Collected During the May Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 2.12 Fish Species Collected During the July Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of the BVPS 2.13 Fish Species Collected During the September Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of the BVPS l 2.14 Fish Species Collected During the November Sampling l of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of the BVPS
1 i LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) l l Table No. Title 2.15 Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 1996 from BVPS 2.16 Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir l Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 1996 from BVPS l 2.17 Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Corbicula Density Data for the April 1,1996 Sample from BVPS l 2.18 Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir C_grbicula Density Data for the September 4,1996 Sample from BVPS t I 1 i l l l l l l i
l 1 l l l t i LIST OF FIGURES l l Figure' No. Title 1.1 Location M.; for the 1996 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitong Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations 1.2 Location Map for Beaver Valley' Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 1996 Study - 1.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 1996 Study 1.4 Location of Study Area, Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport, Pennsylvania BVPS 2.1 Comparison of Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among 1996 BVPS Unit 1 Tower Cooling Reservoir Sample Events, For Various Clam Shell Size Groups 2.2 Comparison of C_orbicula Clam Density Estimates Among 1996 BVPS I Unit 2 Tower Cooling Reservoir Sample Events, For Various Clam l Shell Size Groups ' l 2.3 Comparison of Corbicula Clam Cage Counts Among 1996 BVPS ; Intake Structure Sample Events, For Various Clam Shell Size Groups l l 2.4 Comparison of Corbicula Maximum and Minimum Sustainable Temperature, and Optimal Spawning Temperatures Range with Ohio River Water Temperature at the BVPS Intake Structure on the 1996 Monthly Sample Dates l 2.5 Comparison of Zebra Mussel Maximum and Minimum Sustainable Temperature, ' and Optimal Spawning Temperatures Range with Ohio River Water I Temperature at the BVPS Intake Structure on the 1996 Monthly Sample Dates
i l ES-1 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The 1996 Beaver Valley Power Station (RVPS) Units 1 and 2 Non-Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program consisted of an Aquatic Program that included surveillance and field sampling of Ohio River aquatic life. The Aquatic Program is an annual program conducted by Duquesne Light Company to provide baseline aquatic resources data, to assess the impact of the operating BVPS on the aquatic ecosystem of the Ohio River, and the potential impacts of biofouling organisms (Corbicula and zebra mussels) on BVPS operations. This is the twentieth year of operational environmental monitoring for Unit 1 and the ninth for Unit 2. As in previous years, no evidence of adverse environmental impact to the aquatic life in the Ohio River was observed. The 1996 benthic macroinvertebrate surveys indicated normal community structure upstream and downstream from BVPS. These benthic surveys are a continuation of a Fate and Effects Study (1990 through 1992) conducted for the Pennsylvania Depirtment of Environmental Protection to assess ecosystem impacts of the molluscicide (.T-1. The mol!oscicide CT-1 is used to control biofouling organisms at BVPS. To date, thesa studies have shown that the continued use of CT-1 at the BVPS has not been detrimental to the aquatic community below the BVPS discharge. Substrate was probebly the most important factor controlling the distribution and ; abundance of the benthic macro lnvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft muck-type substrates along the shoreline were conducive to worm and midge proliferation, while limiting macroinvertebrates that require a more stable bottom. At the shoreline stations, 1 Oligochaeta (segmented worms) accounted for 77 percent of the macrobenthos collected, whereas Chironomidae (midge fly) and Mollusca (snails and bivalves) accounted for about 18 percent ar d 4 percent, respectively. In 1996, nine species were added to the cumulative taxa list of macroinvertebrates l collected near BVPS. The zebra mussel (Dreissena colvmoroh.g) was again collected by divers in the BVPS main and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleaning operations. Community structure has changed little since pre-operational years and there was no evidence that BVPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River. l The fish community of the Ohio River in the vicinity of BVPS was sampled in 1996 by night electrofishing and seining. Results for the 1996 fish surveys indicate normal community structure based on species composition and relative abundance. Since monitoring began 1
I l i I ES 2 l in the early seventies, the number of fish taxa has increased from 43 to 77 for the New I Cumberland Pool. i Forage species were collected in the highest numbers, particularly gizzard shad and emerald , shiners. This indicates a normal fish community, since game species (predators) reiy on this forage base fortheir survival. Variations in total annual catch are a natural occurrence and are attributable primarily to fluctuations in the population size of the forage species. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiner with high reproductive potentials ; frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water qt ality) with large fluctuations in population size. Although variations in total catch occurred from station to station in 1996, species composition remained fairly stable. Common taxa collected in the 1996 surveys by all methoda included gizzard shad, emerald shiner, redhorse species, spottail shiner, channel catfish, common carp, sauger, freshwater drum, quillback, and flathead catfish. Differences observed in catch between the Control (1) and Non-Control Stations (2A,2B, and 3) were probab!y caused by habitat preferences of individual species. Habitat preference is probably the most influential factor that affects where the different species of fish are collected and in what relative abundance. I The monthly reservoir scraper samples collected in Units 1 and 2 cooling towers during l 1996 indicated Corbicula were entering and colonizing the reservoirs. The monthly clam j density estimates for Unit 1 were erratic, and no clear pattern of colonization and l l population dynamics could be inferred from the data. Data from Unit 2 indicate that a population of _Corbicula was established in February and grew in size and maturity untu ;
- August, after which the unit was out of service during scheduled sample events. When i sampling recommenced in December, after the scheduled annual cleaning, no Corbicula i were detected. )
l Sediment samples were collected in the Unit 1 cooling tower (April 1,1996) and Unit 2 l cooling tower (Septembe 4,199b) lower reservoirs during the scheduled outages in order l to estimate the Corbicula populations within those structures. The estimated number of Corbicula inhabiting the Units 1 and 2 cooling towers at the time of the surveys were l 5,621,385 and 51,308,276 clams, respectively. Since 1991, zebra mussels have been moving progressively upstream in the Ohio River. < l l In 1993, zebra mussels were identified at the Pike Island Locks and Dam (mile point 84.2), 50 miles downstream of BVPS. In 1994, zebra mussels were identified in the Ohio River upstream from the BVPS at the Emsworth Locks and Dam (mile point 6.2) and at Lock and Dam 4 and 7 on the Allegheny River. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reported zebra
l-f i ES-3 j l mussels at the New Cumberland Locks and Dam (Ohio River) on May 11,1995 and on l July 28,1995,16 zebra mussels were reported at the Maxwell Locks and Dam j (Monongahela River). In 1995, live zebra mussels were found by divers in the BVPS main intake structure and auxiliary intake structure during scheduled cleaning operations conducted on October 25 (main intake) and November 2 (auxiliary intake). Twenty-four zebra mussels were collected,14 from the inner Bay C of the main intake structure and 10 from the auxiliary l intake structure. The largest zebra mussel found measured 16 mm in length. l
\
l l During the first quarter 1996 (January and February) intake bay clearing, divers observed an undetermined number of zebra mussels in the intake bays. On January 9, a diver brought up a confirmed zebra mussel (~ 5/8-inch long) from Bay D. It was reported by the divers that an astimated 1214 mussels were observed but could not be recovered for confirmed identification due to their inaccessibility. In February, following the January 19 flood, the intake bays were cleaned again. Divers reported seeing an estimated dozen zebra mussels, but none were brought up for confirmation. During the second quarter cleaning, no mussels were reported to be observed. During the third and fourth quarter intake bay cleanings, an estimated dozen mussels were observed each time in Bay C only. None were collected by the divers for confirmation. l l 1 I i J
I f 1-1 l 1 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the Non-Radiological Environmental Program conducted by Duquesne Light Company (DLC) during 1996, for the Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) l Units 1 and 2, Operating License Numbers DPR-66 and NPF 73. This is a voluntary program, because on February 26, 1980, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) granted DLC's request to delete all of the Aquatic Monitoring Program, with the exception of the fish impingement program (Amendment No. 25), from the Environmental Technical l Specifications (ETS). In 1983, DLC was permitted to also delete the fish impingement ! studies from the ETS program of required sampling along with non-radiological water l quality requirements. However, in the interest of providing an uninterrupted database, DLC is continuing the Aquatic Monitoring Program. 1.1 Objectives of the Program l The objectives of the 1996 environmental program were: ' (1) To assess the possible environmental impact of BVPS operation on the benthic macroinvertebrate and fish communities in the Ohio River; l l (2) To provide a minimal sampling program for continuing an uninterrupted database for the Ohio River near BVPS, pre-operational to present; and l (3) To evaluate the presence, growth, and reproduction of macrofouling Corbicula at DVPS, and to moniter for the potentialinfestation of the macrofouling zebra mussel , at BVPS. l 1,2 Scope of Services i
. Acres performed the 1996 Aquatic Monitoring Program as specified in the " Environmental Procedures Manual, Chapter 5, Aquatic Ecological Monitoring Procedures" (the EPMP).
This EPMP describes in detail the field and laboratory procedures used in the various monitoring programs, the data analysis requirements, and the reporting requirements. The procedures are summarized according to task below. I s
I
)
1-2 I l 1.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring 1 1 The benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring program consisted of benthic sampling by a ponar grab sampler at four stations on the Ohio River. Prior to 1996, duplicate sampling occurred at Stations 1,2A, and 3, while triplicate sampling occurred at Station 2B (i.e., one sample at each shoreline and mid-channel) (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). In 1996, a review c,f the sampling design suggested tha+ sampling should be performed in triplicate at each station to conform with standardized USEPA procedures. Therefore, in 1996, triplicate samples were taken at Stations 1,2A, and 3, as in 1995, with triplicate samples also collected at each shore and mid- I channel location at Station 2B. A petite ponar was used to collect the samples, replacing the standard ponar used in prior studies. This sampling was conducted twice in 1996, during the months of May and Septernber. For each field effort, a total of 18 benthic samples was collected and processed in the laboratory, as described in the EPMP. 1.2.2 Fish Monitoring l 1 The fish monitoring program consisted of seasonal sampling (May, July, j September, and November) using two gear types: boat electrofishing and seining. l Boat electrofishing was conducted during the hours of darkness at Stations 1,2A, l 2B, and 3 (both shorelines) (Figure 1.3). Seining occurred at Stations 1 and 28 during early evening. All field procedures and data analysis were conducted in l accordance with the EPMP. I l l 1.2.3 Larval Cages / Zebra Mussel Scraper Sampling l Three locations were monitored for the presence of Corbicula and zebra mussels: the intake structure: Unit 1 cooling tower; and Unit 2 cooling tower. The barge slip and intake wall were additional stations established to monitor for zebra mussels. This task involved the setting of larval cades (for Corbicula) and artificial substrate samplers (for zebra mussels) in the project intake structure; wall scraping samples from the cooling tower reservoirs, the riprap near the intake structure, and shore wall support of the Unit 1 barge slip; and bottom sediment samples from the cooling tower reservoirs. These samples were taken once each month. Acres utilized a larval cage design as specified in the EPMP to monitor Corbicula. For zebra mussels, bridal veil samplers, and pump samplers were used as agreed upon with DLC. The wall scraper samples were taken with a D-frame scraper, with
l 1-3 ! five scrapes made per sample at the four sample locations (each cooling tower i i reservoir, the riprap near the intake structure, and the barge slip supports). Prior ! to 1996, the scraper was used to co' lect the bottom samples from the cooling j tower. To quantify the abundance of Corbicula and zebra mussels in the ; , sedimerits, a petite ponar dredge was used to collect the bottom samples. i 1 All samples were processed as specified in the RFP, and included live / dead counts l l and length category measurements of the Corbicula and zebra mussels. ' 1.2.4 Corbicula/ Zebra Mussel Density Deterrninations I l During the annual shutdown period of each unit, each cooling tower reservoir ) bottom was sampled by petite ponar at " standardized" locations within the reservoir, as agreed upon with DLC. Counts of live and dead clams and determination of density (per square meter) were made. This sampling occurred on April 1,1996 for Unit 1 and September 4,1996 for Unit 2. During all Corbicula/ zebra mussel sampling activities (Tasks 3 and 4), observations were made on shoreline and other adjoining hard substrates for the presence of either macrofouling species. 1.2.5 Monthly Activity Reports Activity reports were prepared each month, which summarized the activities of the ! previous month. The reports included the results of the monthly Corbicula/ zebra j mussel rnonitoring, including any trends observed, and any preliminary results available from the benthic and fisheries programs. The reports addressed progress made for each task, and reported any observed biological activity of interest. l 1.3 Site Description BVPS is located on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, nn a 501-acre tract of land. The Shippingport Atomic Power Station once shared the site with BVPS before being decommissioned. F!gure 1.4 is an aerial view of BVPS. The site is approximately 1 mile (1.6 km) from Midland, Pennsylvania: 5 miles
- (8 km) from East Liverpool, Ohio; and 25 miles (40 km) from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Figure 1.5 shows the site location in relation to the principal population centers. The , population within a 5 mile (8 km) radius of the plant is approximately 18,000. The Borough of Midland, Pennsylvania has a population of approximately 3,500. s I
( 14 The site lies along the Ohio River in a valley which has a gradual slope extending from the ! river (elevation 665 ft. (203 m) above sea level) to an elevation of 1,160 ft (3b4 m) along_ a ridge south of BVPS. Plant entrance elevation at the station is approximately 735 ft (224 m) above sea level. The station is situated on the Ohio River at river mile 34.8, at a location on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.3 river miles (5.3 km) downstream frorn Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19.4 miles (31.2 km) upstream from New Cumberland Lock and Dam (Latitude: 40*, 36',18"; Longitude: 80 *, 26', 02"). The Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia border l is 5.2 river' miles (8.4 km) downstream from the site. The river flow is regulated by a l series of dams and reservoirs on the Beaver, Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers and I 1 their tributaries. ' i Ohio River water temperatures generally vary from 32' to 84 F (0* to 29*C). Minimum 1 and maximum temperatures generally occur in January and July / August, respectively, i 1 BVPS Units 1 and 2 have a thermal rating of 2,660 megawatts (Mw). Units 1 & 2 have a design electrical rating of 835 Mw and 836 Mw, respectively. The circulating water systems are a closed cycle system using a cooling tower to minimize heat released to the ! Ohio River. Commercial operation of BVPS Unit 1 began in 1976 and Unit 2 began operation in 1987. l l
/
h... N /! v/ a.0 li,' Z",1, i c/ , e - g 4/ I:;[Udild
- 5 N ^l*
' > ::~ N
+ ' ' deesos n Indus ry r i, sM' o
^~
?s', 'V # s4
~
\ N'
/
,q Ql" /
^f
, " .m
", ; il
;;s
#p, g , ,'g'N', [ \ , , g' A ' g ZO N
- l'2 d' gf
/ CC Qlw ' /
\ l1 Station 3 -Non-control'
- 7":N' s<v
\
l 4
/ ,g*h}1'
[ hD m C f!2 f ' M Nwd a,,o Istation i - con
'f ' M'+ !
% ;c'; y g W/ . fg> ! Shippingport zg
\\ i \ s #e '
'-i g % ,
r f' / Mag 14 00 po
' y# ?q e ~2" Thu Jan 1610 401997 h dStation 2A-Nonetrol[{ , s;' yf pm scale 131.250 (at center) mg Y!'hl
'^
s '
'd^ .
/ 2000 Feet O4
*'s~;)g '"% a. > * : s h-):q[5N'#
- s' C ' ' ' 3
's *- i * '$ f H
,' k) ':3 s_ a i s' . ~,JLQp' :i;f +}f't
~ ,
' . 1oco Meters f s
+^ ' e -o e , alle e ver Station , l 7,' m e u. Z W \
> 'M ,~4
/ ,
} ,,_- i i l Station 2B - Non-control i .
W ' l j --}1~~[ , , '{'y ~~~~~
,( pc
; - 8 i - ; ,_________________ , A k ms Deu ' l' \ /' ,/- i W FIGURE 1.1 LOCATION MAP FOR THE 1996 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM SAMPLING CONTROL AND NON-CONTROL SAMPLING STATIONS
_ _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--___-__m_-__ _ - _ _ _ _ - -#4__ __ _ __-_____-___--___-____u _ _ _ _ - __ma__
h - h
,s>
%'N e ,/
4
- x ~
,,3_ '+
%u y
,N'$ ~, , . , .
\pe, l$
.. a t-
" ]p ,
^
i s '
/ 1
+w@
b ~
'F
# *C'k.t M ;'. /
% 0 e@G m9, Y
$% b jp6 \ ,s w!' g
?",,-
,~,
s*
d) ,;w e
[ V, s3 .
}esn' , fste ,
s9 # lb .M-
, . 'C['Ye 'O, T 2 ,,
P g.
;;!'i ~r ,
M@$ib3. 4 g' . m d$ $ . .
. swk,k[;
"' d '2Y^r' 3M'#' p 9"s$
, .A s 5
A 1 e f n,e , fe ~ .. t I
\
\
T
\9*0# ,
g
- 1. .
\
\.,
f, d, , r' / \,
/
/ s
, s ,, ';
$Y p[t-seo***,ogs9h'#' ,
#d eo# cco' #*'* s** so#
is t *#c*'s# - ._ - - - - - _ - _ - -
s e SM*Ite R *
- p
/
\ /
rg / . . . M / ~' y
'^ "
.i -
/ #4!.c .
l$': OrbRn'er"';, U'^' ' '-
,so M ~fs 44t$$Q$
j^ R"*^ pdstry >
;7 ,
. me
, t # :.n,>:y; -
j 'N y [' %
^'
s 6 J "' + Z d 9 s y'o Zc
"'d ?M 'b, D't Cc
& \ %_ Station 3 l N
>g
':{ j'-< /
- V h;Mf T{K%'
V SSj q 0 $@c
$Z
"'"hs Rum 3 y,
'"*'{ 8 l Station %e' n I / f,,~;~;*f am OC Midland MN['
g},,'s- ; ,SNppingport Zo r < ', ;, ,a. Ez mq s- 'n a Z n
't 'J;[I c M SQ Mag 14 00 f ' s l'
- Thu Jan 1610-141997 O f LEGEND ^",
> > s rE H Electrofishing site s' ^ a ~y h ', .s scale 131,250 (at center) ,m c's , y, ,3 \ m l Station 2A ;>JN h' ' /C ? 2000 Feet
& Se.ine site - y As ,s - s 4 > ' :
. . m<
O L t ol
- n ->: '
' 9 m M
if(TWL R * !'Jh 'es ta:'-ig ' J t, es,y ', /$i', '<{ $ # Blik9
^,'c , 1000 Meters i l j "y a ' maia~1nk , ^'7,
,u .
Beaver Valle ower Station g
+s, )
{. l Station 2B l [x s [ , a i' i
/ 4 I>
\.
p FIGURE 1.3 LOCATION MAP FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION FISH POPULATION SURVEY FISH 8AMPLING SITES FOR THE 1998 STUDY
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SHENANGO prVER OAM & RESERVOIR h WARR(N g$HARON Rgti. 7- YOUNGSTOWN l AKRON ' D j NC CASTLE i ALLIANCE CANION t < LIVERPQOt MlOLAND t WILLSVILLE g stiggip,4 NEW KENSINGTON POWER STATION' e WitKINS8URG i l WtlRTON PITTSBURGH I$ ! I situetNvitLE I N l MC KE(SPORT oi ' 11 I WASHINGTON 70 , L E(tNC E x ,
\
- n. /' \, o/p l
/e 5 l p H I \ A utounb nr.Avra vai.or.v O o POWER STATION N gp '$"', rirreincronT
% ' l nst
's \ j -
]
"%g l ,,_,,,._
0 gggg s .,ggi i FIGURE 1.4 LOCATION OF STUDY AREA, BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION SHIPPINGPORT, PENNSYLVANIA BVPS \
i 2-1 1 1 1 2 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM l l 2.1 Introduction . The environmental study area, established to assess potential impacts, consists of four sampling stations each having a north and south shore (Figure 1.1). Station 1 is located at river mile (RM) 34.5, approximately 0.3 mile (0.5 km) upstream of BVPS and is the control station. Station 2A is located approximately 0.5 mile (0.8 km) downstream of the BVPS discharge structure in the main channel. Station 2B is located in the back channel of Phillis Island, also 0.5 mile downstream of the BVPS discharge structure. Station 2B is the principal non-control station because the majority of discharges from BVPS Units 1 l and 2 are released to the back channel. Station 3 is located approximately 2 miles i (3.2 km) downstream of BVPS. l Sampling dates for each of the program elements are presented in Table 2.1. The following sections summarire the findings for each of the program elements. 2.2 Benthos i i l 2.2.1 Objectives I The objectives of the benthic surveys were to characterize the macroinvertebrates of the Ohio River near BVPS and to determine the impacts, if any, of BV?S j operations. 2.2.2 Methods Benthic surveys were scheduled and performed in May and September,1996. Benthos samples were collected at Stations 1, 2A, 28, and 3 (Figure 1.2), using a petite ponar grab sampler. Triplicate samples were taken off the south shore at Stations 1,2A, and 3. Sampling at Station 28, in the back channel of Phillis Island, consisted of triplicate petite ponar grabs at the south side, middle, and north side of the channel. ( Each grab was gently washed through a U.S. Standard No. 30 sieve and the retained contents were placed in a bottle and preserved in ethanol. In the laboratory, rose bengal stain was added. Macroinvertebrates were sorted from
2-2 each sample, identified to the lowest taxon practical and counted. Mean densities 2 (number /m ) for each taxon was calculated for each replicate. Three species diversity indices were calculated: Shannon-Weiner; evenness indices (Pielou, 1969), and the number of species (taxa). These estimates provide an indication of the relative quality of the macroinvertebrate community. 2.2.3 Habitats Substrate type is an important factor in determining the composition of the benthic community. Two distinct benthic habitats exist in the Ohio River near BVPS. These habitats are the result of damming, channelization, and river traffic. Shoreline habitats were generally soft muck substrates composed of sand, silt, and detritus. An exception occurs along the north shoreline of Phillis Island at Station j 2A where clay and sand predominate. The other distinct habitat, hard substrate, is located at mid-river. The hard substrate is probably the result of channelization 1 and scouring by liver currents and turbulerice from commercial boat traffic. 2.2.4 Results Fifty-five macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 1996 monitoring program (Tables 2.2 and 2.3). The macroinvertebrate assemblage during 1996 was dominated by burrowing organisms typical of soft unconsolidated substrates. , Oligochaetes (segmented worms) and chironomid (midge fly) larvae were abundant i (Table 2.4). The Asiatic clam (Corbicula fluminea), has been observed in the Ohio River near BVPS from 1974 to pment. No zebra mussels have been collected in the BVPS benthic samples to date, however, they were detected in 1995 and 1996 by divers in the BVPS main and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleaning operations, in 1996, aine new species were added to the cumulative taxa list of macroinvr.rtebrates collected near BVPS (Table 2.2). No threatened or endangered macromvertebrate species were collected during 1996. 2.2.5 Community Structure and Spatial Distribution Oligochaetes accounted for the highest mean percentage of the macroinvertebrates at all sampling stations in May (Tables 2.4 and 2.5). In September, chironomids were the most abundant macroinvertebrate at Stations 2A and 3, where they I i l i l i
.- . - . - - . _ ~ _ _ _ - . . - . _ . - - . _ . - . . . _ . - - .- - - . - - . -
1 i l 4 ; j 2-3 l comprised half of the total organisms observed. Oligochaetes were the second
- most abundant group at these stations. -
t Density and species composition variations observed within the BVPS study area [ were due primarily to habitat differences and the tendency of certain types of i macroinvertebrates (e.g., oligochaetes) to cluster. 4 j 2.2.6 Comparison of Control and Non-Control Station ) l Species composition at the control and non-control sample stations was similar j: (Table 2.3). e
- Data indicate that oligochaetes were dominant at Station 1 (control) and Station 2B j (non-control) for both the May and September sample events.
t I in May, oligochaetes comprised 86 to 90 percent of the species observed, while f in September they dropped to 40 to 57 percent. The relative abundance of each l species group was also similar in terms of the estimated number of species j r m erved per square meter (Table 2.4). Differences observed between Station 1 wo itrol) and 2B (non-control) and between other stations could be related to the i s I differences in habitat. Observed differences were within the expected range of ! variation for natural populations of macroinvertebrates. ) Indices were calculated to determine the relative diversity, evenness, and richness i among stations and between control and non-control sites. The Shannon-Weiner i diversity indices in May collections ranged from 1.05 at Station 1 (control) to 2.30 ; at Station 2B1 (Table 2.6). A higher diversity index indicates a relatively better ; j structured assemblage of organisms, while a lower index generally indicates a low J l quality or stressed community. Evenness, an index that estimates the relative j contribution of each taxon to the community assemblage, ranged from 0.37 at control station 1 to 0.95 at control station 3. The evenness of the macroinvertebrate communities in the non-control station fell between these values. The community richness, another estimate of the quality of the macroinvertebrate i community, was greatest at non-control station 281 and lowest at control j station 1. 1 in September, the highest diversity was present at control station.1 (3.12) and } lowest at non-control station 282 (2.29). The lowest value for September was i comparable to the most diverse station in May. Evenness and richness indices also l' I
l I I i 2-4 did not indicate any impacts of the BVPS on the benthic community, as measured by differences between control and non-control stations. l 2.2.7 Seasonal Comparison l The number of species observed in September of 1956 was nearly double those observed in May 1996 (Table 2.3). Many more chironomid species were observed l in September compared to May. This is consistent with the annual life cycles of j dipterans (including chironomids). 2.2.8 Discussion Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling the distribution and i abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft muck-type substrates along the shoreline were conducive to oligochaete, chironomid, and mollusk proliferation, while limiting to species of macroinvertebrates that require a more stable bottom. Community structure has changed little since pre-operational years, and there is no evidence that BVPS operations have affected the benthic community of the Ohio River (Table 2.7). 1 2.3 Fish ' I 2.3.1 Objective Fish sampling was conducted to detect any changes that may have occurred in the fish populations in the Ohio River near BVPS. 2.3.2 Methods Adult fish surveys were scheduled and performed in May, July, September, and November 1996. During each survey, fish were sampled at four stations (Figure 1.3) utilizing standardized electrofishing techniques. Seining was performed at Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island), to sample species (young-of-the-year fish and small cyprinids) that are generally under-represented in electrofishing. Night electrofishing was conducted using a boat-mounted boom electroshocker and flood lights mounted to the bow of the boat. A Coffelt variable voltage, pulsed-DC unit powered by a 3.5-kW generator was the power source. Voltage used
2-5 depended on water conductivity and was adjusted based on amperage of the current passing through the water. The north and south shoreline areas at each station were shocked for at least 10 minutes of unit "on" time (approximately five minutes each shore) during each survey. I Fish seining was performed at Station 1 (control) and Station 28 (non-control) during each 1996 BVPS fishery survey. A 30-ft long bag seine (1/4-inch nylon mesh) was used to collect fish located close to shore in a water depth of one to 4 ft. Three seine hauls were performed at both Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore) during each survey. Fishes collected during electrofishing and seining efforts were processed according to standardized procedures. All captured game fishes were identified, counted, measured for total length (mm), and weighed (g) individually. Non-game fishes were counted and lengths taken on a subsample. Live. fish were retumed to the l river immediately after processing was completed. AM fish that were unidentifiable or of questionable identification were placed in plastic sample bottles, preserved, labeled and returned to the laboratory for identification. Any fish that had not previously been collected at BVPS was retained for the voucher collection. A threatened orendangered species (if collected), would have been photographed and released. l 2.3.3 Results l Fish population surveys have been conducted in the Ohio River near BVPS annually from 1970 through 1996. Thisc surveys have resulted in the collection of 70 fish species and four hybrids (Tab!e 2.8). This includes the alewife, which was first collected by DLC in 1996. Various agencies (PAF&BC, ORSANCO) have also conducted fishery surveys in the New Cumberland Pool in recent years, resulting in the identification of taxa nut collected in previous BVPS surveys. These additional fish taxa (goldeye, redear sunfish, and pumpkinseed redear sunfish hybrid) are included on Table 2.8, bringing the total number of fish taxa to 77 for the Nesv Cumberland Pool of the Ohio River, in 1996, 272 fishes representing 27 taxa were collected during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining (Tables 2.9 and 2.10). The most common species collected in the 1996 BVPS surveys were emerald shiner (27.6 percent), redhorse species (11.4 percent), and spottail shiner (7.4 percent). The remaining species combined accounted for 46.4 percent of the total catch. Game fishes collected during 1996 included channel catfish, white crappie, black crappie, smallmouth
I i. b 1 2-6 bass, striped bass, sauger, and walleye. Game fishes represented 17.3 percent of 4 the total catch. S~ A total of 163 fishes, representing 23 taxa, were collected by electrofishing in 1996 (Table 2.9). Silver redhorse accounted for the largest percentage (13.5
- percent) of the -electrofishing catch in 1996 followed by emerald shiner 3 (12.9 percent), spottail shiner (12.3 percent), and gizzard shad (11.0 percent). The most
- frequently-collected game species was sauger (9.2 percent of all fish collected) followed by smallmouth bass (6.7 percent).
, l A total of 109 fishes representing 9 taxa were collected by seining in 1996 (Table 2.10). Fish taxa collected included emerald shiner (68.8 percent), gizzard
- shad (9.2 percent), sand shiner (8.3 percent), and white perch (7.3 percent).
A total of 29 fish representing 13 species was captured during the May'1996 sample event (Table 2.11). Few fish were captured at all stations during the May sample event. No fish were captured at seine station S-1. The low numbers of i fish collected were probably due at least in part to the high flow, turbid conditions I that occurred during the sampling event. I A total of 141. fish representing 16 species was captured during the July 1996 sample event (Table 2.12). No fish were collected at electrofishing station E-2A. A total of 96 fish was collected during seining and 45 during electrofishing. Emerald shiner was the most common species captured by seining,' and silver l redhorse was the most common species collected during electrofishing efforts. During the September sample event,46 fish were collected (Table 2.13), No fish were collected at seine station S-2 or electrofishing station E i28. ' Emerald shiner was the most common species captured by both gears. l During the November sample event,56 fish were captured (Table 2,14). No fish were captured by seining in November. The most common taxa captured was , shiners (50 percent of all fish). ! i 1
- 2.3.4 Comparison of Control and Non-Control Stations i The electrofishing data (Table 2.9) represents relatively minor differences in species composition between the control station (1) and non-control stations 2A,29, and 3.
i
2-7 More individual fish representing more species were captured at non-control stations than control stations. This is most likely due to the extra effort expended at non-control stations versus control stations (i.e., there are three non-control
- stations and only one control station).
The seining data for 1996 (Table 2.10) demonstrated more species being caught at the non-control ctation 2B, but more total fish being caught at the control Station 1. Emerald shiner was the most common species captured at both stations. 2.3.5 Discussion The results of the 1996 fish surveys show a normal community structure based on species composition and relative abundance. Forage species were collected in the ! highest numbers, particularly emerald shiners and redhorse suckers. Variations in ttotal annual catch are a natural occurrence and are attributable primarily to fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and spawning / rearing ! success due to abiotic factors. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiner with high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural l eiwironmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with i large fluctuations in population size. I I Ahhough variations in total catch occurred from st.ation to station in 1996, species { composition remained fairly stable. Common taxa collected in the 1996 surveys by all methods included gizzard shad, emerald shiner, redhorse species, spottail shir.er, channel catfish, common carp, sauger, freshwater drum, quillback and smallmouth bass. Differences observed in catch between the control (1) and non-control stations (2A, 2B and 3) were probably caused by differential effort and habitat preferences of individual species. Habitat preference is probably the most important factor affecting where different species nf fish are collected. 2.4 Corbicula Monitoring Program 2.4.1 Introduction The introduced Asiatic clam (Corbicula fluminea) was first detected in the United States in 1938 in the Columbia River near Knappton, Washington (Burch 1944). It has since spread throughout the country, inhabiting any suitable freshwater habitat. Information from prior aquatic surveys has demonstrated the presence of
. . . ~ . - . - . ~ . . - ,_ . - - ~ _ _ . _ - . . - - - . - - - - . - - . - . _ _ . .
1 l i , 2-8 ;
- I Corbicula in the Ohio River in the vicinity of the BVPS, and the plant is listed in NUREG/CR-4233 (Counts 1985).
1 e One adult clam is capable of producing many thousands of larvae called early juveniles. These early juveniles are very small (approximately 0.2 mm) and will easily pass through the water passages of a power plant. Once the juveniles settle ' on the substrate, rapid growth occurs. If Corbicula develop within a power plant's - , 1 water passages, they can impede the flow of water through the plant, especially i through blockage of condenser tubes and small service water piping. Reduction of flow may be so severe that a plant shutdown is necessary. Corbicula are of
)
particular concern when they develop undetected in emergency systems where the flow of water is not constant (NRC, IE Bulletin 81-03). : The Corbicula Monitoring Program at BVPS includes the Ohio River, and the
]
circulating river water and service water systems of the BVPS (intake structure and , cooling towers). This report describes this Monitoring Program and the results of , i the field and plant surveys conducted through 1996. ' 2.4.2 Monitoring - .j (a) Objectives i The objective of the ongoing Monitoring Program is to evaluate the ; presence of Corbicula at BVPS and the Ohio River in the vicinity of the intake structure, to evaluate the potential for and timing of infestation of the BVPS. This program is also used to monitor for the presence of zebra j mussels (see Section 2.5). I (b) Methods t (1) Cooling Towers Monthly Reservoir Sampling Corbicula enter the BVPS from the Ohio River by passing through the water intakes, and eventually settle in low flow areas including the lower reservoirs of Units 1 and 2 cooling towers. The density and growth.d these Corbicula are monitored by collecting monthly samples ; from the lower reservoir sidewalls and sediments by using a sampler. The sampler used on the sidewalls consists of a D-frame net attached j behind a foot long metal scraping edge. This device is connected to ! a pole long enough to allow the sampler to extend down into the
2-9 reservoir area from the outside wall of the cooling tower. Beginning in February 1996, a petite ponar dredge was used instead of the scraper for bottom sediment collection to provide a more quantifiable estimate of Corbicula abundance. l 1
- Previous to the February 1996 sampling event, five scraper pulls (each approximately 4 ft length) were taken along the bottom of the I reservoir, scraping up sediment covering approximately 20 square feet of area for each cooling tower. From February through the remainder i
of 1996, a single petite ponar grab sample was taken in each reservoir. , The samples collected from each tower were returned to the laboratory
- and processed. Samples were individually washed, and any Corbicula f removed and rinsed through a series of stacked U.S. Standard sieves that ranged in mesh size from 16.0 mm to 0.6 mm. Live and dead clams on each sieve were counted and the numbers were recorded.
The size distribution data obtained using the sieves reflects clam width, rather than length. Samples containing a small number of Corbicula were not sieved; individuals were measured and placed in their respective length categories. (2) Cooling Towers -porbicula Density Determination Population surveys of both BVPS cooling tower reservoirs have been conducted during scheduled outages (1986 through 1996) in order to estimate the number of Corbicula present in these structures. In 1996, both BVPS cooling towers were sampled during their respective scheduled outages to estimate the Corbicula population. The sediment and Corbicula were removed from the drained cooling tower basin after the population survey sampling was completed for each respective outage. (3) Unit 1 Cooling Tower The Corbicula population in the basin of the Unit 1 cooling tower was estimated based on sampling performed during the scheduled outage. Seventeen samples (consisting of two or three petite ponar grabs depending on the depth of the sediment at the sample location) were collected at standardized sampling locations within the drained reservoir basin on April 1,1996. These sampling locations were
. - . - . ._ .__ _ . m. . _ _. . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ . - . _ . _ _ _
J 2-10 consistent with previous Unit 1 cooling tower population surveys (DLC, 1993). The substrate of each sample was characterized at the time of collection. The samples were returned to the laboratory, kept cool, and sorted for Corbicula within 72 hours of collection. This procedure - ; increased overall sorting efficiency because a preservative was not ' , needed, and live Corbicula could be seen moving in the sorting trays. Counts were made of live and dead Corbicula in each dredge sample. These sample counts were converted to densities (clams /m 2) based on the surface area sampled by the dredge. An average density was then ,
- calculated for each cooling tower sample. An estimate of the area of the cooling tower basin covered by sediment was calculated, since the Corbicula were concentrated almost entirely in the sediment. The estimated population was calculated by multiplying the average density
[ times the area of sediment coverage. t (4) Unit 2 Coolmg Tower I The Corbicula population in the lower reservoir of the Unit 2 cooling tower was estimated based on sampling performed during the scheduled outage. Ten samples were collected at designated sampling locations within the drained reservoir basin on September 4,1996, using a petite ponar dredge. These sampling locations were consistent with previous Unit 2 cooling tower population surveys (DLC,1993). The methods used for sample processing and the calculation of the estimated Corbicula population are identical to those descri"- 1 in the Unit 1 cooling tower population survey section. (c) Results l (1) Unit 1 Cooling Tower - Monthly Reservoir Sampling In 1996, a total of 15 Corbicula (60 percent alive) were collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower basin during monthly reservoir sampling. The largest live Corbicula collected measured 18 mm in length (Table 2.15). In 1996, DLC continued its Corbicula control program (seventh year) which included the use of a molluscicide (CT-1) to prevent the j proliferation of Corbicula within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission l l l
.. . - . _ . _ _ . . . _ . . . . _ - . - ..- _ _ . . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . . _ . ~ . _ _ . . . ~ . _ .
p l i 3 2-11 j by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to use l CT-1 to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service j water system.
- In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications (CT-1) focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water '
system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 and 1995, the ' l CT-1 applications targeted the internal water systems, therefore the l CT-1 concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-1 applications. Consequently, adult and juvenile Corbicula in the cooling
- j. towers often survived the CT 1 applications. Reservoir sediment
{ samples taken af ter CT-1 applications represent mortality of Corbicula I in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal 4 j water systems. j 4
- (2) Unit 2 Cooling Tower - Monthly Reservoir Sampling l d
4 In 1996, a total of 343 Corbicula (94.8 percent alive) were collected , from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir during monthly sampling. The ) { largest Corbicula collected measured 18 mm in length (Table 2.16). l (3) Cooling Towers - Cortacula Density Determination 4 i
- Unit 1 Cooling Tower 1
- - The results of the April 1,1996 Corbicula density determination in i the Unit 1 cooling tower (lower reservoir) . are presented in 4
Table 2.17. Based on the seventeen ponar dredge samples collected from the lower reservoir, the estimated number of Corbicula inhabiting this area was 5,621,385 clams, of which 89.3 percent were alive. The largest Corbicula collected measured 23 mm in length. No zebra mussels were found in the seventeen samples collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir. l
- Unit 2 Cooling Tower The results of the September 4, 1996 Corbicula density determination in the Unit 2 ccoling tower reservoir are presented in i Table 2.18. Based on the ten panar dredge samples collected from the reservoir, the estimated number of Corbicula inhabiting this
l 2-12 area was 51,308,296 clams, of which 91.6 percent were alive. The largest Corbicula collected measured 58 mm in length. No zebra mussels were found in the ten samples collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower basin. (d) Discussion The monthly reservoir sediment samples collected in Units 1 and 2 cooling towers during 1996 indicated that Corbicula were entering and co:onizing the reservoirs. The monthly clam density estimates for Unit 1 were unpredictable, and no clear pattern of colonization and population dynamics could be inferred from the data (Figure 2.1). Data from Unit 2 (Figure 2.2) indicate that a population of Corbicula was established in February and grew in size and maturity until August, after which the unit was out of service during scheduled sample events, and no data is available. 2.4.3 Corbicula Larvae Study (a) Objective The Corbicula larvae study was designed to collect data on Corbicula spawning activities and growth of individuals entering the intake from the Ohio River. (b) Methods Specially constructed clam cages were utilized for this study. Each cage was constructed of a 1 ft 2durable plastic frame with fiberglass screening (1 mm mesh) secured to cover all open areas. Each cage contained I approximately 10 lbs of industrial glass beads (3/8-inch diameter) to provide ballast and a uniform substrate for the clams. The clam cage mesh size l permits only very small clams or pediveliger larvae to enter and colonize the cage. In 1988 through 1994, the cages were left in place for five months following initial placement. Changes in procedure were made to better define the time period when Corbicula were spawning in the Ohio River and releasing larvae that could enter BVPS through the intake structure. f
l l l I l i 2-13 Larval cages were maintained in the BVPS intake structure in 1995 l I according to the following procedure. Each morith, two empty clam cages < were placed in the intake structure bays. Each cage was left in place for
- two months, after which time it was removed and examined for clams.
Four clam cages were maintained in the intake structure bays each month
- throughout 1995 1996.
I in February 1996, it was decided to further modify the sampling regime so j i that two of the four cages in the fore' oay were long-term samplers and the other two were monthly short-term samplers. Each month, the two long-f term samplers were pulled; the fine sediment carefully washed from the cage and any Corbicula present were measured. The cages were immediately redeployed along with any identified Corbicula. The two short- - term cages were pulled monthly and the contents removed for laboratory analyses. New short-term cages were then deployed. Each short-term clam cage removed after the one or two month colonization period was returned to the laboratory where it was processed to obtain the clams which had colonized inside the cage. Corbicula obtained from each cage were rinsed through a series of stacked U.S. Standard sieves ranging in mesh size from 9.5 mm to 0.6 mm. Live and dead clams on each sieve were counted and the numbers were recorded. The largest and smallest clams were measured using Vernier calipers to establish a length range for the sample. The size distribution data obtained using the sieves reflects clam width, rather than length. (c) Results Figure 2.3 illustrates size distribution data which represents the average for - the two larval cages that were removed each month from the intake structure. Larval cages removed in May, June, and November 1996 contained no Corbicula. The largest number of Corbicula in the clam cages occurred in September and October. The clams for these two months were also the largest observed during the survey. (d) Discussion A late-spring /early-summer spawning period typically occurs in the Ohio River near BVPS each year when optimal spawning temperatures are
A 4 l 2-14
; reached (Figure 2.4) The Corbicula larvae typically enter the larval cages I during the summer months.
I High sediment loads in the Ohio River in 1996 resulted in rapid clogging of j the cages with hard-packed fines. During most months, a thick layer of l sediment was present on the top of the cages, which would limit the ability of the cages to sample. Any Corbicula that settled in the cages prior to this i sediment buildup would likely die in the anoxic conditions, which would also j , lead te an underestimate of the degree of facility infet.tation based on the clam cage results. 2.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program 2.5.1 Introduction Zebra mussels (Dreissena oolvmorcha) are exotic freshwater mollusks that have ventrally flattened shells generally marked with alternating zig-zag yellowish bands. They are believed to have been introduced into North America through the ballast water of ocean-going cargo vessels probably from Eastern Europe. They were first identified in Lake St. Clair in 1987 and spread rapidly to other Great Lakes, becoming increasingly abundant in the lower, middle, and upper Ohio River in recent years. Adult zebra mussels can live up to five years and grow to 2 inches in length. Recent research suggests that each female may be capable of producing over one million microscopic (veliger larvae) offspring per year, that can easily pass through water intake screens. They use strong adhesive byssal threads, collectively referred to as the byssus, to attach themselves to any hard surfaces (e.g., boat hulls, intake pipes and other mussels). Transport of these organisms between waterbodies is accomplished in part by boats that have adult mussels attached to their hulls or larvae in their live wells and/or bilges. In anticipation of zebra mussel infestation and responding to NRC Notice No. 89-76 (Biofouling Agent Zebra Mussel, November 21,1989), BVPS instituted a Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program in January 1990. The Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program includes the Ohio River and the circulating river water system of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling towers). This section describes this Monitoring Program and the results obtained during Ohio River and BVPS surveys conducted through 1996.
- . ..-. ... - . . _ . . -. . . - - ~ . - . .
l l l 4 2-15 1 2.5.2 Monitoring , (a) Objectives q The objectives of the Monitoring Program are: (1) To identify if zebra mussels are in the Ohio River adjacent to BVPS and provide early warning to operations personnel as to their possible ; ) infestation; ' (2) To provide data as to when the larvae are mobile in the Ohio River and insights as to their vulnerability to potential treatments; and l i (3) To provide data as to their overall density and growth rates under ', different water temperatures and provide estimates as to the time it requires for these mussels to reach clogging size and density. 4 ! (b) Methods i i, , (1) Intake Structure and Barge Slip j Three surveillance techniques were used in the intake structure and 2 open water. These were: 4 f
- Wall scraper sample collections on a monthly basis from the barge slip and the riprap near the intake structure to detect attached adults;
- Bridal veil samples from the intake structure for detection of settleable-sized mussels; and
- Pump samples from the barge slip for detection of the planktonic early life forms (April through October).
(2) Cooling Towers The cooling towers were monitored for zebra mussels using three techniques:
- The monthly reservoir scraper samples in each cooling tower;
l i l 2 16 -)
- The bi-monthly wall scraper samples in each cooling tower; and
- The Corbicula population density surveys conducted during regularly scheduled outages. l l
l (3) Results 1
- No zebra mussels were collected in any of the sampling gear during I 1996. This indicates that zebra mussel densities in the Ohio River near BVPS remained low. Optimal spawning temperatures for zebra mussels occurred from March through October in 1996 (Figure 2.5).
l (d) Discussion BVPS initiated a Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program in January 1990. From 1991 through 1993, zebra mussels moved progressively upstream from the l lower to upper Ohio River. In 1994, there were confirmed zebra mussel sightings at locations both upstream and downstream from BVPS, including the Allegheny River. The July 1995 sighting of zebra mussels at Maxwell i Locks and Dam on the Monongahela River established the presence of these
)
organisms within the Allegheny, Monongahela and Ohio Rivers in Western : Pennsylvania. l The 1996 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program did not collect any live zebra mussels at BVPS. In 1995, live zebra mussels were found by divers in the BVPS main intake structure and auxiliary intake structure during scheduled cleaning operations conducted on October 25 (main intake) and November 2 (auxiliary intake). Twenty-four zebra mussels were collected,14 from the inner Bay C of the main intake structure and 10 from the auxiliary intake structure. The largest zebra mussel found measured 16 mm in length. During the first quarter 1996 (January and February) intake bay cleaning, divers observed an undetermined number of zebra mussels in the intake bays. On January 9, a diver brought up a confirmed zebra mussel (~ 5/8-inch long) from Bay D. It was reported by the divers that an estimated 12-14 mussels were observed but could not be recovered for confirmed identification due to their inaccessibilt;y, in February, followhq the January 19 flood, the intake t,ays were cleaned again. Divers reported seeing an estimated dozen zebra mussels, but none were brought up for confirmation. During the second quarter cleaning, no mussels were
_ _ , . _ .. _ - . - . _ m . . _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ . _ - - . ~ _ . _ . _ _ . . - . . . . - - . _ _ ~ . - . _ _ . _ . - . . _ _ _ + 4 t 2-17 - 8 reported to be observed. During the third and fourth quarter intake bay ' { cleanings, an estimated dozen mussels were observed each time in Bay C . . only. None were collected by the diverc for confirmation. I o < 1 t I k 'l ' i l i 4 k 4 4 } i
- j. l
!' I s ' i l i i 1 i l l
+
l
.a l
I l s
4 I TABLE 2.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY BVPS I SAMPLING DATES FOR 1996 l r Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l Benthic Macroinvertebrates 21 5 Fish 20-21 15 4-5 6 CorbicMa and Zebra Mussets 18 23 19 25 20 19 15 14 4 22 6 3 Corbicula CT Density 1 1 4 l 4 t I i d 4
. . .. . _ - _ . _~._ _ _ . . . . . _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _. . . . . ~ . ~ . . . . .
{. TABLE 2.2
- - . SYSTI3thTIC LIST OF MACROIN7ERTEBRATES COLLECTED FROM I l 1973 THROUGE 1996 IN THE OHIO RIVER NEAR i BVPS i
i Collected in collected in New in ] Taxa E,revicus Years 1996 1996 i Porifera i g Sooncilla fracilis X l Cnidaria j Hydrozoa i Clavidae cordvlochora lacustris X Hydridae .- Craspedacusta sowerbii X I i Hydra sp. X X ) t I Platyhelminthes Tricindida X i Rhabdocoela X 1
- Nemartea X Nematoda X X Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis X i Ectoprocta Fredericella sp. X Paludicella articulata l l X '
j- Eggtinatella sp. X j i Plumatella sp. X 1 Annelida l j oligochaeta X X i Aeolosomatidae X l Enchytraaidae X X i Naididae Allonais nectinata X Amohichaeta levdici X 1
- Amphichaeta sp. X l
&EEteonais lomondi X 1 Aulophorus sp. X j Chaetonaster diachanus X
- Q. diastrochus X l D.1E2 dioitata X j Dero flabellioer X
! 2. nivea X 4 Qtgq sp. X Nais barbata X ((. behninal X ) H. bretscheri X i H. communis X H. elinouis X
- M. cardalis x j H. oseudobtusa X a 3
- H. simplex X l H. variabilis X X
.HA11 sp. X X Cohidonais seroentina X a Paranais . frig.1 X j Paranais sp. X j Piouetiella miehicanensia X 3 Pristina idrensis X
.q 1 j i
d
- . . - . -- - -. . . . - _ . - . . ~ . . . . . - - . - _ . .. - . _ - - . - .-. . . -
TABLE 2.2 l i (Cant'd) i collected in collected in New in, Taxa Previous Years' 1996 ,,l E l 8, , i l Pristina b naisoma X Pristina lonaiseta X ,2 E. osborni X E. Man X g- Pristina sp. X Pristinella omborni X
- l Finistes parasita X
= h 4}gJ accendiculata X j Stephersoniana trivandr4ng X stvlaria fossularis X R. lacustris X l Uncinais uneinata .X ! Veidovskvalla ,comata X Veidovskve11a intermedia X Veidovskvella sp. X 4 Tubificidae X X ) Aulodrilus sp. X X ' Aulodrilus limnobius X ! l ' A. Dioueti X j A. oluriseta . X
]
Bothrioneurum yeidovskvanum X j l Branchiura sowerbvi X X
,Uypdrilus ,1;goletoni X 1
Limnodrilus cervix X i L. cervix (variant) X X l ! .L. g anarodianus X ! L. hoffmeisteri L. soiralis X X X ! l ! L. udekemianus X l Limnodrilus sp. X X i s Peloscolex multisetosus lonoidentus X j E. M. multimatosus X
. Potamothrix moldaviensis X j E. veidovskvi X X
, Psammorvctides curvisetosus X Tubifex tubifex X Unidentified immature forms: j with hair chaetae X X without hair chaetae X X
- Lumbriculidae X l
Hirudinea X X i Glossiphoniidae X 4 Helobdella elonaata X
- g. staanalis X i litlD.kde_lla sp. X I
- Erpobdellidae l Ercobdella sp. X
- Mooreobdella microstoma X i ' Arthropoda Acarina X Ostracoda- X X Isopoda
- Asellus sp. X Amphipoda
. Talitridae j- Hvalelig azteca X Gammaridae i Cranconyx oseudoaracilis X j Cranconyx sp. X 3
a 0
l TABL3 2.2 (C5nt'd) ! Collected in Collected in New in Taxa Previous Years 1996 1996 Gammarue f aeC11Ltuf X X Gammarus sp. X X i
-Decapoda X l r Collembola X l l Ephemeroptera )
Heptagoniidae X l Stenacron sp. X X l Stenonama sp. X 1 Ephemeridae ' Ephemera sp. X X l , Hexacenia sp. X ; ! Ephron X '* Baetidae l-X ! Caenidae l l Caenis sp. X l ! serattal.in X
- i L. mauTeeDJ.E X *
- Tricorythidae Tricorythodes sp. {
X i Megaloptera l Sialis sp. X Odonata i Gomphidae l AEg.Lg sp. X
- Dromocomohus soolintus .X Dromocomphus sp. X !
Gomphus sp. X Libellulidae Libe11 ult sp. X Trichoptera Hydropsychidae X Cheumatoosvche sp. X X Hydroosvche sp. X .] Hydroptilidae , Hydropilla sp. X l Oxvethira sp. X l Leptoceridae ' Ceraclea sp. X Oecetis sp. X X-Polycentropodidae cvrnellus sp. X Polvcentrocus sp. X Coleoptera X X Hydrophilidae X
.Elmidae Ancvronyx varieoatus X Dubirachia sp. X X Helichus sp. X Stenelmis sp. X Psephanidae X Diptera
. Unidentified Diptera X l Psychodidae. X Egr.,1 coma sp. X Psychoda sp. X Telmatoscoous sp. X
! Unidentified Psychodidas pupae X l Chaoboridae , Chaoborus sp. X i Simuliidae Similium sp.. X 3 l
.__. _ ...._._.__..._m . . _ _ . _ . . _ . _ _ . . _ . . . _ .. . _ _ ~ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ .
l 5 TABLE 2.2 , I (Cant 84) ) I collected in collected in New in i Taxa Previous Years 1996 1996 ' i l
- Chironomidas X X Chironominae X X Tanytarsini pupa X ,
} Chironominae pupa X X j Axarus sp. X 3
- Chironomus sp. X X '
' Cladopelma sp. X , j Crvatochironomus sp. X X < . Dicrotendices nervosus X l , Dicrotendioeg sp. X X l l Glvptotendices sp. X l j Harnischia sp. X ]
- Microchironomus sp. X j l Microosectra sp. X <
j Microtendices sp. X' l ! Parachironomus sp. X l Paratendices albimanus . X l Phaenoosectra sp. X j Polvoedilum (s.s.) convictum type X l - E. (s.s.) simulans type X i Polvoedilum sp. X X Rheotanvtarsus sp. X- X Stenochironomus sp. X Stictochironomus sp. X Tanvtarsus sp. X Tribelos sp. X
- Xenochironomus sp. X X Tanypodinae Tanypodinae pupae X Ablabesavia sp. X Coelotanvous semoularis X Coelotanvous sp. X X Dialmabatista Dulcher X Dialmabatista sp. X Procladius (Procladius)_ X Procladius sp. X X Tanvous sp. X Thienemannimvia group X Eavrolimvia sp. X Orthocladiinae' X orthocladiinae pupae X Cricotoous bicinctus X G. (s.s.) trifascia X cricotoous (Isocladius)-
-svlvestris Group X ,
G. (Isociadius) sp. X cricotoous (s.s.) sp. X X Eukiefferiella sp. X Hydrobaenus sp. X Limnochves sp. X Nanocladius (s.s.) distinctus X Nanocladius sp. X Orthocladius sp. X Parametriocnemus sp. X Parachaenocladius sp. X Poectrocladius sp.' X Pseudorthocladius sp. X Pseudosmittia sp. X Eglittia sp. X 4
1 l l TABLE 2.2 i ! (Cant'd) l I Collected in Collected in New in l Taxa Previous Years 1996 1996 ' I Diamesinae I RiALnggg sp. X l
, Potthastia sp. X i Ceratopogonidae X X 1 Dolichopodidae X ;
Empididae X l
- Wiedema @ sp. X i i Ephydridae X i 1
Muscidae X l Rhagionidae X Tipulidae X Stratiomyidae X 1 Syrphidae X 1 Lepidoptera X dollusca Gastropoda X X l Physacea
- Physidae Physa X
- Ancylidae- X X ]
Ferrissia sp. X X ! Planorbidae . X
]
l Valvatidae i
- Valvata perdepressa X l i
Pelecypoda X X l Corbiculidae . Plecoptera X
- i
, Corbicula sp. X X Corbicula fluminea X X Sphacriidae X , ! Pisidium sp. X X l Pisidium ventricosum X * , Schaerium sp. X l , Unidentified immature Sphaeriidae X Dreismanidae Dreissena polymorcha X l Unionidae X X l Anodonta arandis X Anodonta immatura X Elliotio sp. X l Unidentified immature Unionidae X l, 5
s i TABLE 2.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COUNTS FOR TRIPLICATE SAMPLES TAKEN AT EACH SAMPLE STATION BY SAMPLE DATE FOR 1996 Page 1 of 3
- Collection Date
- 5/21/96 I
Scientific Name 1 2A 2B1 282 283 3 Total Limnodritus sn. 12 5 47 64 Chironominae 1 1 2 Autodrilus 1 1 l Egtomothrix y_qidovskyj 1 1 2 Limnodrilu.s cervix 4 4 l Nailin. 1 1 g Enchytraeidae 1 1 Tubificida 53 5 97 155 Olicochaeta 112 23 1 2 138 Corbicula fluminea 9 9 1 3 22 Ancviidae 1 1
]
Procladius 12 1 1 Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri 1 1
$_erattella 1 1 ,Dicrotendices n. 1 1 Crvatochironomus an. 2 4 4 10 Polvoedilum 12 4 3 7 Tribelos an. 2 2 1
Gomohidae 1 1 Dromocomohug ag. 1 1 Gammarus an. 1 1 2 Echemera sn. 2 2 Chironomus 12 1 1 Collection Date Total 138 106 9 164 4 421
TABLE 2.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COUNTS FOR TRIPLICATE SAMPLES TAKEN AT EACH SAMPLE STATION BY SAMPLE DATE FOR 1996 Page 2 of 3 Collection Date: 9/5/96 Scientific Name 1 2A 281 2B2 283 3 Total
)(enochironomus sp. 10 10 tiy_dra sg. 3 7 17 27 C20l otanvous sn. 12 5 17 E9tyAesli!um sn. 1 1 94 7 27 130 Cryotochironomus sp. 2 2 7 6 5 22 Chironomus sp. 3 2 5 E,rocladius 32 12 1 22 35 Chironominae Dyp_a 4 1 5 Chironominig 2 2 4 Namploda 1 2 3 Hirudinej, 1 1
Circotoova (s.s.) .sa. 3 3 Chiranomid33 2 2 Nais variabilis 3 3 Cg&i.cylasg. 2 3 8 6 60 16 95 Ebio_11Lnylpffp3 an. 3 3 Pisidium sp. 2 2 Eildism i ventricosy!p 1 1 Unionidae 1 1 2 Ceratococonid_a3 1 1 Enchytraeidag 2 2 Cumberlandia 1 2 3 Pristinella EsbROI 1 1 Tubificidae immature w/o hair 53 3 115 74 27 272 Tubificidae immature with hair 3 5 8 Branchiura 32werbvi 2 2 Limnodritua hoffmeisteri 4 9 6 1 20 Limnodritus maumeensis 1 6 7
TABLE 2.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COUNTS FOR TRIPLICATE SAMPLES TAKEN AT EACH SAMPLE STATION BY SAMPLE DATE FOR 1996 / Page 3 of 3 CoNection Date: 9/5/96 Scientific Name 1 2A 2B1 2B?. 283 3 Total Autodrilus 1 1 QI!9Achagia 1 1 _Chgymatoosyche n. 1 1 Argig g. 1 1 Lib.gliuJa H . 1 1 Q11rapoda 1 1 2 Gammarus M. 1 1 Gammarus fasgjitVI 2 2 Corbicula flyminga 1 1 Enhlqn 1 2 3 Egleevooda 3 12 1 1 1 18 Qgggtif sp. 3 3 Coleootera 1 1 Qubriaohia g. 1 1 Plecootera 1 1 Caltr_pp.poja 1 1 1 3 Physa 1 1 Ancylidae 1 1 Ferrissia 12 2 4 6 Stenacron n. 2 2 CoBection Date Total 115 33 277 19 209 116 769 GRAND TOTAL 253 33 383 28 373 120 1190 _
TABLE 2.4 2 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (Number /m ) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 1996 BVPS STATION 1 (Control) 2A (Non-Control) 2B (Non-Control) 3 (Non-Control)
#/m 2 g pf ,2 g pf ,2 g pf ,2 g May 21 Oligochaeta 1778 90 0 -
1147 86 43 75 Chironomidae 57 3 0 - 96 7 0 0 Mollusca 143 7 0 - 48 4 0 0 Others 0 0 0 - 43 3 14 25 Total 1978 100 0 - 1334 100 57 100 September 5 Oligochaeta 932 57 43 9 1161 48 545 33 Chironomidae 459 28 229 49 626 26 817 49 Mollusca 172 10 57 12 435 18 272 16 Others 86 5 143 30 191 8 29 2 Total 1649 100 472 100 2413 100 1663 100 l l
TABLE 2.5 2 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER /M ) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA AND OTHER ORGANISMS IN NON CONTROL STATION 28 SAMPLES 1996 BVPS Station 281 2B2 2B3 28 (Combined) 2
#/m % #/m2 % #/m2 % #/m2 %
D:te: May 21 Oligochaeta 1,190 74 86 67 2,165 92 1,147 86 Chironomidae 158 10 0 0 129 5 96 7 Mollusca 129 8 14 11 43 2 48 4 Othars 126 8 29 22 14 1 43 3 TOTAL 1,603 100 129 100 2,351 100 1,134 100 Dats: September 5 Oligochaeta 2,151 54 0 0 1,333 45 1,161 48 Chironomidae 1,577 40 0 0 301 10 626 26 Mollusca 244 6 100 37 1,061 35 435 18 Othtra 0 0 172 63 301 10 191 8 TOTAL 3,972 100 272 100 2,996 100 2,413 100
I TABLE 2.6 SHANNON-WEINER DIVERSITY, EVENNESS AND RICHNESS INDICES FOR BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER 1996 l Station 1 2A* 2B1* 2B2* 2B3' 3 Date: May 8 No. of Taxa 7 0 12 4 10 3 Shannon-Weiner index 1.05 -- 2.30 1.66 1.57 1.50 Evenness 0.37 - 0.64 0.83 0.47 0.95 Richness 1.22 - 2.36 1.3 / 1.76 1.44 Date: September 5 No. of Taxa 25 12 18 7 16 13 , Shannon-Weiner index 3.12 3.20 2.40 2.29 2.68 2.74 l l Evenness 0.67 0.89 0.57 0.82 0.67 0.74 Richness 5.06 3.14 3.02 2.04 2.81 2.52 Non-Control station. s -
TABLE 2.7 2 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (NUMBER /M ) FOR STATION 1 (CONTROL) AND STATION 2B (NON-CONTROL) DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS BVPS Preoperational Years Operational Years 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 Month 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B 2B 1 1 2B 1 2B 1 28 May 248 503 1.116 2,197 927 3,660 674 848 351 126 1,004 840 1,041 747 August 99 244 143 541 1,017 1,124 851 785 591 3,474 601 1,896 1,'. 8 5 588 September 1,523 448 Mean 173 376 630 1,369 1,017 1,124 889 2,223 633 2,161 478 1.011 1,095 714 1,282 598 l Operat!onal Years 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Month 1 28 1 2B 1 2B 28 2B 1 1 1 28 1 2B May 209 456 3,490 3,026 3,590 1,314 2,741 621 2,256 867 601 369 1,971 2,649 September 2,185 912 2.956 3,364 4,172 4,213 1,341 828 1,024 913 849 943 2,910 2,780 Mean 1,197 684 3,223 3,195 3,881 2,764 2,041 725 1,640 890 725 956 2,440 2.714
TABLE 2.7 (Cont'd) 2 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (NUMBER /M ) FOR STATION 1 (CONTROL) AND STATION 2B (NON-CONTROL) DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS BVPS Operational Years 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Month 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B 1 28 1 2B 1 2B 1 28 j May 1,804 1,775 3,459 2,335 15.135 5,796 7,760 6,355 7,314 10,560 8,435 2,152 6,980 2,340 Septembe- 1,420 1,514 1,560 4,212 5,550 1,118 3,855 2,605 2,723 4,707 4,693 2,143 1,371 2,930 Mean 1,612 1,645 2,510 3,274 10.343 3,457 5,808 4,480 5,019 7,634 6,564 2,148 4,176 2,640 i Operational Years i 1995 1996 I Month 1 2B 1 2B May 8,083 9,283 1,978 1,333 September 1,669 3,873 1,649 2.413 Mean 4,876 6,578 1.fs14 1,873
I i
- TABLE 2.8 i
i (SCIEN11FIC AND COMMON NAME)1 ' FAMILIES AND SPECIES OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER,1970 THROUGH 1996 j BVPS Page 1 of 3 j FamRv and Scientific Name Common Name l Lepisosteidae (gars) i Laoisosteus osseus Longnose gar f Hiodontidae (inooneyes)
- Hiodon alcsoides Goldeye l- N. ternisus Mooneye Clupeidae (herrings)
Alga chrysochloris Skipjack herring l A. oseudoharenaus Alewife Dorosoma caoedianum Gizzard sh_ad Cyprinidae (carps and minnows) Camoostoma anomalum Central stoneroller Carassius auratus Goldfish Ctenonharvnoodon idella Grass carp Cvorinella soilootera Spotfin shiner ' Cvorinus SEDi e Common carp C. caroto x C. amatyi Carp goldfish hybrid Luxilus chrysocephalus Striped shiner j Macrhvbooses storeriana Silver chub Nocomis micronoaon River chub Notemiconus grmapleucas Golden shiner Notronis atherinoides Emerald shiner H.buccatus Silverjaw minnow M. hudsonius Spottail shiner N. rubellus Rosyface shiner N. stramineus Sand shiner N.velocallus Mimic shiner Pimechales notatus Bluntnose minnow E. oromelas Fathead minnow Rhinichthv4 atratulus Blacknose dace Samotelus atromaculatus Creek chub Catostomidae (suckers) Carniodes carnio River carpsucker C. cvorinus . Ouillback C. velifer Highfin carpsucker Catostomus commersoal White sucker Hvoentelium nearicans Northern hogsucker Ictiobus bubalus Smallmocth buffalo 1.n!am Black butfaio Minvtrema melanons Spotted sucker i e
1 . TABLE 2.8 + (Continued) Page 2 of 3 I Family and Sc;antific Name Common Name Moxostoma anisurum Silver redhorse M. carinatum River redhorse M. duouesnei Black redhorse M. erythrurum Golden redhorse M. macroleoidotum Shorthead redhorse 3 letaluridae (bullhead catfishes) Ameiurus catus White catfish A.melas Black bullhead A. natalis Yellow bullhead A. nebulosus Brown bullhead letalurus pynetatus Channel catfish Noturus flavus Stonecat Pvlodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Esocidae (pikes) 4
- fig.E lucius Northern pike
, E. magouinonov Muskellunge , E lucius x E. masouinonov Tiger muskellunge
, Salmonidae (trouts) 4 Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout Percopsidae (trout-perches) j Percoosis omiscomaveug Trout-perch Cyprinodontidae (killifishes)
Fundulus diaohanus Banded killifish Atherinidae (silversides) Labidesthgg sicculus Brook silverside Percichthyidae (temperate basses) Morone chrysons White bass M. saxatilis Striped bass M. saxatilis x M. chrysops Striped bass hybrid f Centrarchidae (sunfishes) Ambioolites runestris Rock bass Lecomis, cyanelius Green sunfish L. oibbosus Pumpkinseed L. macrochirus Bluegill L. microlochus Redear sunfish L. albbosus x L. microloohus Pumpkinseed-redear sunfish hybrid Microoterus dolomieu Smallmouth bass M. punctulatus Spotted bass M. salmoides Largemouth bass Pomoxis annularis White crappie E. nioromaculatus Black crappie
TABLE 2.8 (Continued) Page 3 of 3 Famiv and Scientific Name Common Name Percidae (perches) Etheostoma biennioides Greenside darter E. n6 arum Johnny darter E. zonale Banded darter EEGA flavescens Yellow perch Percina caorodes Logperch i E. conelande Channel darter I Stizostadion canadense Sauger H. vttreum Walleye S. canadense x S. vitraum Saugeye Sciaenidas (drums) j Anlodinolga nrunnigna Freshwater drum i 1 Nomenclature follows Robins,3131. (1991)
)
. . - - . . _ _ = . - . . . - - .. - . . -. . ..- . - .- - . . . .-
TABLE 2.9 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL ELECTROFISHING CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 1996 FISHERIES SURVEY l l Non- Total Common Name Scientific Name Control % Control % Fish % l Longnose gar Leoisosteus osseus 1 0.8 1 0.6 Gizzird shad Dorosoma ceoedianum 2 5.0 16 13.0 18 11.0 l Alewife Alg33 oseudoharenous 1 0.8 1 0.6 l l C:mmon carp Cvorinus caroio 4 10.0 4 2.5 Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides 21 17.1 21 12.9 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 4 10.0 16 13.0 20 12.3 Spotfin shiner Cvorinella soilooterus 12 9.8 12 7.4 Cre;k chub Semotilus atromaculatus 0.8 1 1 0.6 Ouillback Carniodes crvorinus 3 7.5 4 3.3 7 4.3 Northern hogsucker Hvoentelium niorica 1 2.5 1 0.6 Smillmouth buffalo Ishokus bubalus. 1 0.8 1 0.6 Black buffalo Ictiobus nigst 1 2.5 3 2.4 4 2.5 Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum 8 20.0 14 11.4 22 13.5 Gilden redhorse Moxostoma grythrurum 8 6.5 8 4.9 Channel catfish Ictaturus punctatyi 2 5.0 2 1.6 4 2.5 Striped bass Morone saxatilis 3 7.5 1 0.8 4 2.5 Smillmouth bass Microoterus dolomieu 3 7.5 8 6.5 11 6.7 Whita crappie Pomoxis annularis 1 0.8 1 0.6 Black crappie Pomoxie nioromaculatus 1 0.8 1 0.6 Logperch Percina caorodes 1 0.8 1 0.6 Sauger Stirostedion canadense 7 17.5 8 6.5 15 9.2 Willeye Stirostedion yitreum yltra 2 1.6 2 1.2 Fr:shwater drum Aolodinotus orunniens 2 5.0 1 0.8 3 1.8 i BIctrofishing Gear Total: 40 123 163 i I l
1 1 4 TABLE 2.10 ! COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL SEINE CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 1996 FISHERIES SURVEY Non- Total
- Common Name Scientific Name Control % Control % Fish %
Gizzard shad Dorosoma goedianum 10 11.8 10 9.2 Emert.ld shiner Notroois atherinoid 67 78.8 8 33.3 75 68.8 4 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 1 1.2 1 0.9 Rosyface shiner Notroois rubelius 3 12.5 3 2.8 Sand shiner Notropis stramineus 7 8.2 2 8.3 9 8.3 Black buffalo Ictiobus nigt 1 4.2 1 0.9 l Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum 1 4.2 1 0.9 White perch Morong americana 8 33.3 8 7.3 White crappie Pomoxis annularis 1 4.2 1 0.9 ' Seine Gear Total: 85 24 109 , 1 I i l Seine and Electrofishing Year Total 125 147 272 l l J t i 1
- - - . ~ . ~ . . . _ ~ . - - . - . . . . . . . . ~ . - - - . . . . _ . . - - . . _ . . - . . . . . - - . . - - - - . - . - - - - . . - . - - ~ . - . . - - . - - . - .
TABLE 2.11 . t f FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE MAY SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS - Sample Locations Seine ElectroRoNng ! Common Nome Scientific Non e S-1* S-2* E-1* E-2A* E-28' E-3* Total . % Total % ' l Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides 5 5 41.8 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 1 3 4 23.5 i Rosyface shiner Notropis rube #us 3 3 25.0 1 Sand shiner Notropis stramineus 1 1 8.3 t Quillback carpsucker Carpiodes cyprinus 3 2 5 29.3 Northern hogsucker Hypente#um nigricans 1 1 5.9 Black butfalofish Ictiobus niger 1 1 8.3 Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum 1 1 1 8.3 1 5.9 Channel catfish Ictaturus punctatus 1 1 5.9
. Striped bass Morone saxatilis 1 1 5.9 i White crappie Pomoxis annularis 1 1 1 8.3 1 5.9 i
Wall eve Stizostedion v. vitream 1 1 5.9 Freshwater drum Aplodlinotus grurWens 2 2 11.8 TOTAL 0 -12 6 2 4 5 12 100.0 17 100.0
- Gear - (E) Fish captured by electrofishing: (S) Seine
'I i
TABLE 2.12 l ;
- FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE JULY SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS ;
Sample Locedons Seine Electronshing , i S-1* S-2* E-1
- E-2A' E-28' E-3* Total % Total . %
Common Nome Sciend6c Name [ Emerald r,hiner Notropis atherinoides 66 3 69 71.9 l t Silver redhorse Morostoma anisurum 4 1 10 15 33.4 ! Gizzard shad Dorosome cepedanum 10 3 10 10.4 3 6.7 Sand shiner Notropis stramineus 7 1 8 8.3 White perch Morone smedeana 8 8 8.3 Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythmrum 7 7 15.6 , Black buffalofish lettobus riger 1 1 2 4 8.9 Common carp Cyprinus carpio 4 4 8.9 Sma;; mouth bass Micropterus dolomieul 1 2 1 4 8.9 Channet catfish Ictakorus punctatus 1 1 2 4.4 r Sauger Stizostedon canadense 1 1 2 4.4 i Freshwater drum Aplodnotus grunniens 1 1 2.2 i Log perch Arrcina caprodes 1 1 2.2 ; a Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus 1 1 2.2 , Guittback carpsucker Carpiodes cyprinus 1 1 2.2 Spottait shiner Notropis hudson /us 1. 1 1.0 TOTAL 84 12 12 0 8 25 96 100.0 45 100.0 t i l
- Gear - (E) Fish capturad by e8ectrofishing; (S) Seine
_ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ - _ _ _ .- . , . . . - . . - ._ - __ _ _ ~ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _
TABLE 2.13 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE SEPTEMBER SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS ; i l Sample Locations Seine Electrofishing ! Common Name Scientific Name S-1* S-2* E-1* E-2A' E-2B' E-3* Total % Total % Emerald shiner Notropis at/terinoides 1 20 1 1 100.0 21 46.7 Gizzard shad Dorosome cepedianum 7 7 15.6 : Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum 4 2 0 6 13.3 : Smalimouth bass Micropterus dolomievi 2 2 4 8.9 Sauger Stizostedian canadense 3 3 6.7 Striped bass Morone saxatilis 2 2 4.4 Channel catfish Ictaturus punctatus 1 1 2.2 Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum 1 1 2.2 TOTAL 1 0 12 31 0 2 1 100.0 45 100.0 ,
- Gear - (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) Seine t
4
TABLE 2.14 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE NOVEMBER SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS i Sample Locations Seine Electrofishing Common Name Scientific Nome S-1* S-2* E-1* E-2A' E-28' E-3* Total % Total % r Alewife Alosa pseudoherengus 1 1 1.8 Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum 2 4 2 8 14.2 Shiners Norropis spp. 4 9 12 3 28 50.0 Creek chub Semoti/us 1 1 1.8 atromaculatus Quillback carpsucker Carpiodes cyprinus 1 1 1.8 Smallmouth buffalo /criobus bubalus 1 1 1.8 Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu 1 1 1 3 5.4 Striped bass Morone saxati//s 1 1 1.8 Black crappie Pomoxis 1 1 1.8 nigromaculatus Walleye Stizostedian v. vitreum 1 1 1.8 Sauger Stizostedion canadense 3 2 5 10 17.8 i TOTAL 0 0 10 21 13 12 0 0.0 56 100.0
- Gear - (E) Fish captured by electrofishing: (S) Seine ;
t l Table 2.15 Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density l Data for 1996 from BVPS I i l l Area Mean Maximum Minimum Estimated i Sampled Live or Length Length Length Number Collection Date (sq ft) Dead Count (mm) (mm) (per sq m) (mm) i Unit Number: 1 mummmmmmmmu ummmmmmmmu 01/18/96 20.00 - 0 02/23/961 20.00 Live 2 1.5 1.75 1.25 1 03/19/96 0.25 Live 2 2.5 3.00 2.00 87 04/25/962 _ l 05/20/96 0.25 0 0 a 06/19/96 0.25 0 0 07/15/96 0.25 Dead 5 4.0 10.00 1.50 217 l 07/15/96 0.25 Live 1 18.0 18.00 18.00 43 08/14/96 0.25 Dead 1 5.2 5.20 5.20 43 4 09/05/96 0.25 0 0 10/22/96 0.25 Live 1 8.2 8.20 8.20 43 11/06/96 0.25 Uve 3 6.1 12.60 2.10 130 l 12/03/96 0.25 0 0
- Unit Summary 2.25 Live & 15 5.2 18.00 1.25 53 Dead i
1 l Collection technique changed from bottom scrape samples to petite ponar grab samples after the February 1996 sample. The February data are, therefore, not comparable to the remaining
- monthly samples and are not included in the year end " Unit Summary".
; a No collection due to unit outage.
i
l Table 2.16 Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 1996 from BVPS Area Mean Maximum Minimum Estimated Sampled Live or Length Lerigth Length Number Collection Date (so ft) Dead Count (mm) (mm) (mm) (per sq m) Unit Number: 2 m . 01/18/96 20.00 -- 0 02/23/961 20.00 Dead 6 1.8 2.0 1.0 3 02/23/961 20.00 i < 31 2.1 6.0 1.0 17 03/19/96 0.25 Deaa 1 1.0 1.0 1.0 43 03/19/96 0.25 Live 29 5.1 12.5 1.5 1,261 04/25/96 0.25 Dead 2 3.6 4.2 3.0 87 04/25/96 0.25 Live 49 5.5 17.0 2.0 2,130 05/20/96 0.25 Live 36 7.1 16.4 1.4 1,565 06/19/96 0.25 Live 42 9.0 16.0 3.0 1,826 07/15/96 0.25 Dead 1 11.0 11.0 11.0 43 07/15/96 0.25 Live 72 8.4 15.0 3.0 3,130 08/14/96 0.25 Dead 8 9.2 18.0 2.2 348 08/14/96 0.25 Live 66 12.5 18.0 2.0 2,870 09/05/962 .. _ o 10/22/96 -- - 0 11/06/96 - - 0 12/03/96 0.25 0 Unit Summary 1.50 Uve & 343 7.7 18.0 1.0 2,217 Dead 1 Collection technique changed from bottom scrape samples to petite ponar grab samples after the February 1996 samples. The February data are therefore not comparable to the remaining monthly ; samples and are not included in the year end " Unit Summary". 2 No collections from September through November due to unit outage. l i l l l
- 1 i
a f ! TABLE 2.17 f' E UNIT 1 COOLING RESERVOIR l CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR THE j APRIL 1,1996 SAMPLE FROM BVPS i i s ; i Area Mean Maximum Minimum Estimated j t Sampled _ Uve or Length Length Length Number I j stenson ID togft) Dead, count (mm) Imm) (mmi (per sq m) ! Unit No.1 1 1 0.75 Uve 16 4.5 7.0 2.0 232 1 2 0.50 Dead 2 13.0 17.0 9.0 43 l 2 0.50 Uve 65 14.3 23.0 2.5 1,413 4 l 3 0.50 Uve 14 15.0 18.0 4.5 304
- l 4 0.50 Uve 9 2.4 5.0 1.5 196
. 5 0.50 Dead 30 9.2 15.0 4.5 652 l 5 0.50 Uve 47 10.8 19.0 4.0 1,022 l 6 0.50 Dead 1 7.0 7.0 7.0 22
- 6 0.50 Uve 85 5.4 19.5 2.0 1,848 i
, 7 0.75 Uve 13 3.8 16.5 1.0 188 l 8 0.75 Uve 3 3.8 4.5 3.5 43 9 0.75 Uve 2 2.3 2.5 2.0 29 10 0.75 Live 1 4.0 4.0 4.0 14 ? 11 0.75 0 0 12 0.50 Dead 3 11.0 11.0 11.0 43 12 0.50 Uve 32 12.2 20.0 2.5 696 13 0.50 Live 3 5.0 6.5 4.0 65 14 0.50 Dead 2 12.0 17.0 7.0 43 14 0.50 Uve 21 5.3 18.0 1.5 457 15 0.50 Live 3 3.5 5.0 2.5 65 16 0.50 0 0 17 0.50 Dead 1 6.0 6.0 6.0 22 17 0.50 Live 2 11.3 17.5 5.0 43 Unit Summary: 10.00 Uve & 354 9.0 23 1 385 Dead I l l 1 1
TABLE 2.18
- UNIT 2 COOLING RESERVOIR l CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR THE
- SEPTEMBER 4,1996 SAMPLE FROM BVPS i Area Mean Maximum Minimum Estimated Sampled Uve or Length Length Length Number j Station ID (sq ft) Dead Count (mm) (mm) (mm) (sq m) l 1 0.25 Uve 62 12.5 20 6.0 2,696 2 0.25 Uve 9 8.8 14 20.0 391 3 0.25 Dead 4 6.8 8 4.0 174 l 3 0.25 Uve 33 12.3 18 2.0 1,435 4 0.25 Uve 232 12.2 58 3.0 10,087 5 0.25 Uve 104 12.2 17 4.5 4,522 l 6 0.25 Dead 27 8.6 16 3.0 1,174 6 0.25 Uve 108 12.0 18 3.0 4.690
) 7 0.25 Dead 5 4.4 7 2.0 217 7 0.25 Uve 39 12.6 17 5.0 1,696 8 0.25 Dead 7 12.1 16 4.0 304 8 0.25 Live 91 11.5 18 2.0 3,957 9 0.25 Dead 12 8.6 14 1.5 522 9 0.25 Uve 124 12.4 18 3.2 5,391 10 0.25 Dead 22 11.8 16 1.5 G57 10 0.25 Uve 39 12.2 17 5.0 1,696 Unit Summary: 2.50 Uve & 918 11.9 58 1.5 3,991 Dead I J
/
/
/
/
/
/
100 m e 90 = sat meses muass i E 80 g CT 70 $
-z-4 4
O y 60 M M
.M,,,ll i '
n_ 50 p_ g ,_ _ _ _ g j , _p
-g 40 /- a y mener - - - - mammer .
T--g f amme- m-- r /
/ emu-r = mamuse - mummer - - - - M s sur mummer /
b /- enimme h nur manus, emmmer - - ammer meer h 1 - f' 29.S o 20 f_ ,,,,, = _ ,,,,, _ ,,,,,, _ ,,,,, m _j 30 3., g 10 /- M du'ur dauur - - mumur d"'ar dua'r d"'r d="" / 3 -29mg
/ mummer - ammer - m--mr mummer meer mammy ammmer mmmer -/ p,g 74fng o 1/18' 2/23* 3/19 4/25** 5/20 6/19 7/15 8/14 9/S 10/22 11/6 12/3 1'8 0.01-0.99mme 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0
0 09%m 1.00-1.99 mms 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00-3.34mmO O 1 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 3.35-4.74mm O O O O O O O O O O 43 0 4.75-6.29mm 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.30-9.49mm O O O O O O O O O 43 0 0
> 9 50mmO O O O O O 43 0 0 0 43 0 Total #/m2 0* 2* 86 0 0 43 0 0 43 129 0 Reservoir Total *** 1256 0 0 628 0 0 628 1884 0 1 1996 Sample Monthly Date Comparison of Corbicula clam density estimates among 1996 BVPS Unit 1 tower cooling reservoir sample events, for various clam shell size groups.
- Data reported as actual number
- 4 ollected. After the February sample the collection technique was moddied to allow for expanded estimrtes. [L ,. s. . ]
" No Data reported due to unit out zge during the scheduled sample event.
"*Re-ersoir totals me estimates i , thousands.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ ._ ~_ _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - . - _ _ _ _ _ _
/ mum
/
/
/
,/ -
t
/ """
2400
~
u 2200 $
$ 2000 ,
g 2 1800 - g 1600 : {
' 1400 4 &
' g 1200 # 4
~
f ,,,, ,,,, mg1 / Q ;( 1000 /- }g1 P < *N
/
--g .
,l g 800 /- mm.= EEE j '
3 - 8 meer / 29, 600 /^= =. W ^= ="" M / 6.3g g,<g% 400 l ^= M iO 2 & ^"' '" = / 3 2%m
- q 200 / '"'" """ 'J ~ '""" '""" d'='
/ 2.g 74mm g /= = ===v == = = = = / 1.g , 34mm q 0.01-0.99mmG 1/18*
0 2/23* 0 3/19 0 4/25 0 5/20 0 6/19 0 7/15 0 8/14 0 9/5" 10/22** 11/G** 12/3" '8 cf 1.00-1.99mmO O O 301 0 43 0 0 0 2.00-3.34mmO O 25 516 473 86 0 0 0 3.35-4.74mm O O 2 172 733 129 0 0 43 4.75-6.29mmG 0 2 0 517 473 43 215 0 6.30-9.49mma 0 2 172 172 559 473 1118 215
>9.50mmO O O 172 302 258 1290 1763 2451 Total #/m2 0* 31* 1333 2197 1548 1806 3096 2709 Reservoir Tota! *** 17137 28245 19901 23218 39802 34827 '
1996 Sample Monthly Date Comparl son of Corbicula clam density estimates among 1996 BVPS Unit 2 tower cooling reservoir sample events, for various clam shell size groups.
- Data reported as actual numbers collected. After the February sample the ecliection technique was modified to allow for expanded estimates. ,~E"' 'T "No Data reported due to unit outage during the scheduied sample event. ';
- "8teservoir totals are estimates ir. thousands. -(
FIGURE 2.2 J - l
/
/
/
/
/ <*
/
10 9 c) g ' yt p 2 m
.x, -"I ; ,
1p Li gymr ,'
/ mmer mmme- mammer mamme, m ummer g i-{ i em-r - ,
5 4 / ==m7 mem- essmer mummr omrw . g3 l j . 17 - pin 3 U !yI 3 [m ammme - mummma - - m-m- E.Lisblll 2' mumme tg*! 2 6 %@m p
% y mummw - meer amme - - y .R .Jd ammmy
_g_ 4,7 9.49mm M " ' [5-m' ^=mr - - - emu' ^==' =='
\
3.3 2%m c 1 /- '
- ==' ^ = =' ^*=' = ^==' ^'m' 2 l4mm &g,
, /- - - - - - - - - - -/^'='/gg.00 i.r , m 3,'<m , :
1/18 2/23 3/19 4/25 5/20 6/19 7/15 8/14 9/4 10/22 11/G 12/3 89mm 0.01-0.99mmG 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00-1.99mm!ID 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00-3.34mmO O 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 3.35-4.74mma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 1 4.75-6.29mmED 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 4 0 1 6 30-9.49mmO O 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 8 1 0 0
>9.50mmQ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 TOTAL 4 5 1 1 0 0 1 2 18 9 0 4 1996 Cage Removal Date Comparison of Cort;icula clam cage counts among 1996 BVPS Intake structure sample events, for various clam shell size groups.
I FIGURE 2.3 51 mw
f 100 Maximurp Sustainable Temnerature , , , , , , , u - - - - - - - - - - .. 90 50 c o o o o ^ e ^A o o o { o j 70 Optimal Spawning Temperature Range f. 8. 5 o o o o ^' o o o o o o o i h t 60 _ [ l lis 5 50 40 i i i i i i i i i w V V V V V V V V V Minimum Sustainable Temperature 30 1/13 2/23 3/19 4/25 5/20 G/19 7/15 8/14 9/4 10/22 11/6 12/3 1996 Monthly Sample Date Comparison of Corbicula Maximum and Minimum Sustainable Temperature, and Optimal Spawning Temperature Range with Ohio River Water Temperature at the BVPS Intake Structure on the 1996 Monthly Sample Dates. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ____ FIGURE 2.4___ _ -
100 90 Maximum Sustainable Temperature
.i A A A A A A A A A A .i 80 C O O O O O O O O O O O ^
u. e y 70 3
- 8. Optimal Spawning Temperature Range E
e F 60 _ D - 16 C O O O O O O O O 3 O O 50 40 , at A A A A A A A A A A as 30 MinimunI Sustainable Temo5rature 1/18 2/23 3/19 4/25 5/20 6/19 7/15 8/14 9/4 10/22 11/6 12/3 1996 Monthly Sample Date Comparison of Zebra Mussel Maximum and Minimum Sustainable Temperature, and Optimal Spawning Temperature Range with Ohio River Water Temperature at the BVPS Intake Structure on the 1996 Monthly Sample Dates. FIGURE 2.5
i t-i 3-1 ) 3 REFERENCES
- Burch, J. Q.,1944. Checklist of West American Mollusks. Minutes, Conchology Club of i Southern California 38
- 18.
l Commonwealth of Pennsylvan!a,1994. Pennsylvania's Endangered Fishes, Reptiles and ! Amphibians. Published by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission. 1 i Counts, C. C 111,1985. Distribution of Corbicula fluminea at Nuclear Facilities. Division j of Engineering, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREGLCR. 4233. 79 pp. i Dahlberg, M. D. and E. P. Odum,1970. Annual cycles of species occurrence, abundance ] and diversity in Georgia estuarine fish populations. Am. Midl. Nat. 83:382-392. i l DLC,1976. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological Volume #1. Duquesne Light j Company, Beaver Valley Power Station.132 pp. i l DLC,1977. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological Volume #1. Duquesne Ught Company, Beaver Valley Power Station.123 pp. i l DLC,1979. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological Volume #1. Duquesne Light I Company, Beaver Valley Power Station.149 pp. j DLC,1980. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, 1 Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1.160 pp. I
- DLC,1981. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company,
] Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1.105 pp. + Appendices. t j DLC,1982. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, j Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1.126 pp. DLC,1983. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, j Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1.124 pp. + ' Appendix. DLC,1984. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1.139 pp. DLC,1985. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.106 pp.
-. ~ . _ -. . . ~ - - . , - ~ ,- - -
3-2 DLC,1986. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Ught Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.152 pp. l DLC,1987. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, j Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.145 pp. i DLC,1988. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, ! Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.161 pp. l l DLC,1989. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Ught Company,
- Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.145 pp.
DLC,1990. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.181 pp. ) l DLC,1991. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.165 pp. DLC,1992. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, l Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2.164 pp. DLC,1993. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2. 90 pp. DLC,1994. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 & 2. 78 pp. Hutchinson, G. E.,1967. A treatise on limnology. Vol. 2, introduction to lake biology and the limnoplankton. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.1115 pp. Hynes, H. B. N.,1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. NRC, IE Bulletin 81-03: Flow Blockage of Cooling Tower to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and Mvtilus sp. (Mussel). Pielou, E. C.,1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley Interscience, Wiley
& Sons, New York, NY.
l l t
4 j l
' l 4
3-3 j Robins, C. R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B. ! i Scott,1991. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and j Canada (fifth edition). American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 20:1-183. j I I l Shiffer, C.,1990. Identification Guide to Pennsylvania Fishes. Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Bureau of Education and Information. 51 pp. ) l Winner, J. M.,1975. Zooplankton.10: B. A. Whitton, ed. River ecology. Univ. Calif. } Press, Berkely and Los Angeles. 155-169 pp. I 1 I 6}}