Text

1985 Annual Environ Rept,Nonradiological,Beaver Valley Power Station Units 1 & 2
	ML20202E080
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	12/31/1985
From:	Cody W, Kenderes G, Shema R; AQUATIC SYSTEMS CORP.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20202E063	List: ML20202E058; ML20202E080;
References
	NUDOCS 8607140284
	Download: ML20202E080 (145)
	v • d • e

_ _ _. _ _ _ _ _

I I

I 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNITS NO. 1&2 I

I I

= ':888: n8 m a

eon g

I I

I 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONIENTAL REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION IMITS NO.1 & 2 I

I I

Prepared by:

Robert Louis Shema William R. Cody I

Gary J. Kenderes David K. Waldorf Aquatic Systems Corporation Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and I

J. Wayne McIntire Duquesne Light Company Shippingport, Pennsylvania I

I I

I E

I

I E

TABLE OF CONTENTS i

i Page I

LIST OF FIGURES.........................................

iv LIST OF TABLES..........................................

v

(

I.

INTRODUCTION............................................

1 I

I A.

SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM................

1 B.

SITE DESCRIPTION...................................

1 II.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS.................................

7 III. ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE............

11 I

IV.

MONITORING NON-RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS...................

12 A.

MONITORING CHEMICAL EFFLUENTS......................

12 B.

HERBICIDES.........................................

12 V.

AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM..............................

13 A.

INTRODUCTION.......................................

13 5

B.

BENTH0S............................................

16 l

Objectives....................................

16 Methods.......................................

16 E

Habitats......................................

16 Community Structure and Spatial Distribution..

17 Comparison of Control and Non-Control I

Stations....................................

28 Comparison of Preoperational and Operational Data........................................

28 Summary and Conclusions.......................

30 C.

PHYTOPLANKTON......................................

32 Objectives 32 I

Methods.......................................

32 Sea sonal Dis t ribut ion.........................

32 Comparison of Control and Non-Control I

Transects...................................

40 Comparison of Preoperation and Operational Data........................................

40 Summary and Conclusions.......................

43 D.

ZOOPLANKTON........................................

44 Objectives....................................

44 i

Methods.......................................

44 Seasonal Distribution.........................

44 i

I

I TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

I Page Comparison of Control and Non-Control Transects...................................

51 Comparison of Preoperational and Operational I

Data........................................

55 Summary and Conclusions.......................

58 I

E.

FISH...............................................

59 Ob j e c t iv e s....................................

59 Methods.......................................

59 Results.......................................

61 5

comparison of Control and Non-Control Transects...................................

67 Comparison of Preoperational and Operational I

Data........................................

70 Summary and Conclusions.......................

70 F.

ICHTHYOPLANKTON....................................

72 i

Objectives....................................

72 Methods.......................................

72 Results.......................................

72 i

Comparison of Preoperational and Operational Data........................................

76 Summary and Conclusions.......................

76 G.

FISH IMPINGEMENT...................................

79 Objectives....................................

79 Methods.......................................

79 Results.......................................

79 Comparison of Impinged and River Fish.........

84 Cotparison of Operating and Non-Operating i

Intake Bay Collections......................

84 Summary and Conclusions.......................

95 H.

PLANKTON ENTRAINMENT...............................

96

1. Ichthyoplankton...............................

96 Objectives....................................

96 Methods.......................................

96 i

Results.......................................

96 Seasonal Distribution.........................

97 Spatial Distribution..........................

97 Suenary and Conclusions.......................

97

2. Phytoplankton.................................

102 Objectives....................................

102 i

Methods.......................................

102 Comparison of Entrainment and River Samples...

102 Summary and Conclusions.......................

103 11 1

I TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

PBS' I

3. Zooplankton...................................

103 Objectives....................................

103 Methods.......................................

103 l

I Comparison of Entrainment and River Samples...

103 Summary and Conclusions.......................

104 VI.

REFERENCES APPENDIX 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPAhT BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNITS No. 1 & 2 i

5 I

I I

I E

I I

iii

=

I 1

u

I LIST OF FIGURES I

FIGURE Page I-1 VIEW OF THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, BVPS......

2 I-2 LOCATION OF STUDY AREA, BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, SHIPPINGPORT, PENNSYLVANIA................

3 I-3 OHIO RIVER DISCHARGE (FLOW cfs) AND TEMPERATURE

(*F), RECORDED AT EAST LIVERPOOL, OHIO (MP 40.2)

I BY THE OHIO RIVER VALLEY WATER SANITATION COMMISSION (ORSANCO), 1985.........................

5 V-A-1 SAMPLING TRANSECTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE BEAVER I

VALLEY AND SHIPPINGPORT POWER STATIONS.............

14 V-B-1 BENTH0S SAMPLING STATIONS, BVPS....................

18 V-B-2 MEAN PERCENT COMPOSITION OF THE BENTH0S COMMUNITY IN THE OHIO RIVER NEAR BVPS DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS..............................

27 V-C-1 MONTHLY PHYTOPLANKTON DENSITIES IN THE OHIO RIVER DURING PREOPERATIONAL (1974-1975) AND OPERATIONAL (1976-1985) YEARS, BVPS............................

35 V-C-2 PHYTOPLANKTON GROUP DENSITIES FOR ENTRAIhEENT SAMPLES, 1985, BVPS................................

36 V-D-1 MONTHLY ZOOPLANKTON DENSITIES IN THE OHIO RIVER DURING PREOPERATIONAL (1974-1975) AND OPERATIONAL I

(1976-1985) YEARS, BVPS............................

47 V-D-2 ZOOPLANKTON GROUP DENSITIES FOR ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985, BVPS.........................................

50 V-E-1 FISH SAMPLING STATIONS, BVPS.......................

60 V-F-1 ICHTHY 0 PLANKTON SAMPLING STATIONS, BVPS............

73 V-G-1 INTAKE STRUCTURE, BVPS.............................

80 t

t iv i

I I

LIST OF TABLES l5 TABLE Page 8

I-1 OHIO RIVER DISCHARGE (Flow cfs) AND TEMPERATURE

(*F) RECORDED AT EAST LIVERPOOL, OHIO (MP 40.2)

BY THE OHIO RIVER VALLEY WATER SANITATION COMMISSION (ORSANCO), 1985.........................

6 V-A-1 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM SAMPLING DATES, 1985 i

BVPS...............................................

15 V-B-1 SYSTEMATIC LIST OF MACR 0 INVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS IN THE OHIO RIVER NEAR DVPS....................................

19 2

V-B-2 MEAN NUMBER OF MACR 0 INVERTEBRATES (Number /m ) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, I

MOLLUSCA AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 1985, BVPS...........

24 V-B-3 BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (Individuals /

h m ), MEAN OF TRIPLICATE FOR BACK CHANNEL AND 2

5 DUPLICATE SAMPLES COLLECTED IN THE MAIN CHANNEL OHIO RIVER, MAY 15, 1985, BVPS.....................

25 V-B-4 BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (Individuals /

2 m ), MEAN OF TRIPLICATE FOR BACK CHANNEL AND DUPLICATE SAMPLES COLLECTED IN THE MAIN CHANNEL OHIO RIVER, SEPTEMBER 19, 1985, BVPS...............

26 V-B-5 MEAN DIVERSITY VALUES FOR BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER, 1985, BVPS............

29 V-B-6 BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (Number /m )

2 FOR STATION 1 (CONTROL) AND STATION 2B (NON-i i

CONTROL) DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL l

YEARS, BVPS........................................

31 i

V-C-1 MONTHLY PHYTOPLANKTON GROUP DENSITIES (Number /ml)

AND PERCENT COMPOSITION FROM ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, p

1985, BVPS.........................................

34 5

V-C-2 PHYTOPLANKTON DIVERSITY INDICES BY MONTH FOR ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985, BVPS....................

37 i

V-C-3 DENSITIES (Number /ml) 0F MOST ABUNDANT PHYTOPLAhTTON TAXA COLLECIED FROM ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, JANUARY THROUGH DECEMBER 1985, BVPS........................

38 8

I v

E 1

i

' I I

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

TABLE Page V-C-4 PHYTOPLANKTON DIVERSITY INDICES (MEAN OF ALL SAMPLES 1973 TO 1985) NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, BVPS...................................

41 V-D-1 MONTHLY ZOOPLANKTON GROUP DENSITIES (Number / liter)

AND PERCENT COMPOSITION FROM ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985, BVPS.........................................

46 V-D-2 MEAN ZOOPLANKTON DENSITIES (Number / liter) BY MONTH FROM 1973 THROUGH 1985, OHIO RIVER AND BVPS........

48 V-D-3 DENSITIES (Number / liter) 0F MOST ABUNDANT ZOOPLANKTON TAXA COLLECTED FROM ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, JANUARY THROUGH DECEMBER 1985, BVPS................

52 V-D-4 ZOOPLANKTON DIVERSITY INDICES BY MONTH FOR ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985, BVPS....................

54 V-D-5 MEAN ZOOPLANKTON DIVERSITY INDICES BY MONTH FROM 1973 THROUGH 1985 IN THE OHIO RIVER NEAR BVPS......

56 V-E-1 FAMILIES AND SPECIES OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970-1985, BVPS...............................................

62 V-E-2 NUMBER OF FISH COLLECTED AT VARIOUS TRANSECTS BY GILL NET (G), ELECTROFISHING (E), AND MINNOW TRAP t

(M) IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1985, BVPS.........................................

64 8

V-E-3 NUMBER OF FISH COLLECTED PER MONTH BY GILL NET (G),

ELECTROFISHING (E), AND MINNOW TRAP (M) IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1985, BVPS......

65 V-E-4 NUMBER OF FISH COLLECTED BY GILL NET, ELECTR0 FISHING AND MINNOW TRAP AT TRANSECTS IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1985, BVPS.................

66 V-E-5 ELECTROFISHING CATCH MEANS (5) AT TRANSECTS IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1974-1985, BVPS....................................

68 V-E-6 GILL NET CATCH MEANS (5) AT TRANSECTS IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL THE OH!O RIVER, 1974-1985, BVPS....

69 1

.1 3

I I

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

TABLE Page V-F-1 NLHEER AND DENSITY OF FISH EGGS, LARVAE, JUVENILES, S

AND ADULTS (Number /100 m ) COLLECTED WITH A 0.5 m PLANKTON NET IN THE OHIO RIVER BACK CHANNEL OF 5

PHILLIS ISLAND (STATION 2B) NEAR BVPS, 1985........

74 3

V-F-2 DENSITY OF ICHTHYOPLANKTON (Number /100 m )

5 COLLECIED IN THE OHIO RIVER BACK CHANNEL OF PHILLIS ISLAND (STATION 2B) NEAR BVPS, 1973-1974, 1976-1985...............................................

78 V-G-1 FISH COLLECTED DURING THE IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS, 1976-1985, BVPS....................................

81 I

V-G-2

SUMMARY

OF FISH COLLECTED IN IMPINCEMENT SURVEYS CCNDUCTED FOR ONE 24 HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK DURING 1985, BVPS.........................................

83 V-G-3

SUMMARY

OF IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS DATA FOR 1985, BVPS...............................................

85 I

V-G-4

SUMMARY

OF FISH COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS, 1976-1985, BVPS....................................

87 I

V-G-5 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF ANNUAL TOTAL OF FISH COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS AND IN THE NEW CUMBERL.tND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1985, BVPS.................

88 V-G-6

SUMMARY

OF CRAYFISH COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS CONDUCTED FOR ONE 24-HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK, 1985, BVPS.........................................

89 V-G-7

SUMMARY

OF Corbicula COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS FOR ONE 24-HOL7 PERIOD PER WEEK, 1985, BVPS...............................................

91 V-G-8

SUMMARY

OF MISCELLANEOUS INVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS CONDUCTED FOR ONE 24-HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK, 1985. BVPS........................

93 V-H-1 NUMBER AND DENSITY OF FISH ECC', LARVAE, JUVENILES, I

3 AND ADULTS (Number /100 m ) COLLJCIED WITH A 0.5 m PLANKTON NET AT THE ENTRAINMENT RIVER TRANSECT IN THE OHIO RIVER NEAR BVPS, 1985..................

98 8

t

8 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRCNMEN7'AL REPORT I.

INTRODUCTION This report presents a summary of the non-radiological environmental data collected by Duquesne Light Company (DLCo) during calendar year 1985, for the Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Unit 1, Operating License No. DPR-66.

This study was initiated in the interest of providing a non-disruptive data base between the start up of BVPS Unit 1 and that of Unit W

2.

This is primarily an optional program, since the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on February 26, 1980, granted DLCo's request to delete all of the aquatic monitoring prog;am, with the exception of fish impingement (Amendment No. 25), from the Environmental Technical Specifi-cations (ETS), and in 1983, dropped the fish impingement studies from the ETS program of required sampling along wf.th non-radiological water qual-ity requirements.

I A.

SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM The objectives of the 1985 environmental program were (1) to assess the possible environmental impact of plant operation (including impingement and entrainment) on the plankton, benthos, I

fish and ichthyoplankton communities in the Ohio River, and (2) to provide a long and short range sampling program for establishing a continuing data base.

B.

SITE DESCRIPTION BVPS is located on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, on a 501 acre tract of land.

The Shippingport Station shares the site with BVPS.

Figure I-l shows a I

view of both stations.

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 I-2 shows the site ocation in relation to the principal population centers.

Population density in the immediate vicinity of the site is relatively low.

The I

1 I

I DUQUEStiE LIGHT COMPAt;Y AT;fiUAL Et;VIR0t; MENTAL REPORT I

g

%w g.m,jf '8 "'i'

' I' { j we mv I.ii;4. s ;

f;,areg' plTj i

.g, w, m E

s:uk;.c ]3,,6 c.'

y

.a,,

11, n

. m.

3.

. c/

P

,1~

I e

3

...,; wa

,y J

a f

f.'

[p 5 i.

g

'\\

r: %* ' 7, 3

?cP j.

' Y '.} 2,

"* ' $$' k,

E h

g s

~

7 I

.f,4y f72

'g.,)

4

,4 9

/>

J 4

2 s

r

'Af.,

t p li-j 7.,

~*

'/

e /;k L

v77

~g.. # 3, g y.s, 3

Ag

'f 1i

's.

+

3 4.i3?i f

'e[;.

i t

f a

c:

,,l

%ku r!

e s

i fW l

e. v i l

l W'

J t

E fMpM d, K.

",r J.

Y. w?,

u,.

g

,y l e M,$

<.~ m y i-A 4

e s.

~

i. t 9j

v..i,.

z

=

j B

's 9

s

.,.. a, n u m -

+) l,],

t, t

y

.t I e' W $-f N&.

N ~ * " hM

,f p

t~

A' b

.J.

ey

a d

,M k p%

.)'

3

.t i::

~

q%

d?j

' p.sn<.j Vk@Ws3,< f. f i

9 w

p s:

--2/} )] 5 Tty &I

~clj

~

1

$e% %j.g *;w.

it '-

ob.

N

, a'l ) T

, f,' O., Q. h b l H N

\\ \\

\\

J 'Li

.?

~

4~

a,,

l b!! hhf'

.h

. > g,., ['

Nl

, w T'

l I s.?y%m%n,

, t e n,, f,3 w.

'4 n b15 i !3 ':[,y/ y.-

e a

y

+n C

id g

g{

%pR44s w & : %: q p

/

A

=

m 1

e t.

y m

h ty

\\

4 : {' 'k

-% ; &,** Q,. 3 ~.l7; f

< w b r e f k.$

s.

\\

.+'.

lg

.j O

r1 J -' ;ji'

! Jr j ' T k ;yls W}y'*\\ ;p E

a I

/, s [.,

QM;; y:

Q.. % #,, f):

7,.

V h

gl "A,3li

y T

a 1

A..

}

. ;y t.

..9).,

, <., c 3 g

4 e

\\pf.

Tln

. f. M ' ;'Jfi.fd

\\

l y,*..

4j gr i

y m

4 Ig 1 :;

., m.,j I

3

\\

..-. 3 d.'O lg I,\\ k.[A 3

t

I DUQUESNE LfGHT COMPANY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 7.id:'4' P

c-g %n e

s t

, g..

- y... _

I

- '"'" k 6

~

W ' O.

/

I

/

/'

....--u, 3

esavanvaagyT * *

..... _.7

7......_

/ s ~~p-

/.,;(.

y

==

p.

I gy Q[D[

A c;;-)

\\

5 I

i r

f

.as I

I g

/*[-

j p

I lj uww p

J r'l

\\

h stavte vatur t

POMR $t Alloy 8

\\

v/

'UM11 1 O

(

\\

s g

NV' h

.../

~

E l

s s

.,,d I/

$;s -

I I

0 s:.o i..ni, t

~

FIGURE I-2 LOCATION OF STUDY AREA, BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, SHIPPINGPORT, PENNSYLVANIA BVPS 3

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

population within a 5 mile (8 km) radius of the plant is approximately 18,000 and the only area of concentrated population is the Borough of Midland, Pennsylvania, which has a population of approximately 4,300.

I 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 f t.

(354 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 loca-I tion on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.3 river miles (5.3 km) down-stream from Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19.4 milee (31.2 km) up-stream from New Cumberland Lock and Dam.

The Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia border is 5.2 river miles (8.4 km) downstream from the site.

The river flow is regulated by a series of dams and reservoirs on the Beaver, Allegheny, Monongahela and Ohio Rivers and their tributaties.

Flow gen-I erally varies from 5,000 to 100,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). The range of flows in 1985 is shown on Figure I-3 as well as Table I-1.

~ Ohio River water temperatures generally vary from 32 to 82 (0 to 28 0

0 C).

Minimum and maximum temperatures generally occur in January and July / August, respectively.

During 1985, minimum temperatures were observed in January and maximum temperatures in August (see Figures I-3 and Table I-1).

BVPS Unit 1 has a thermal rating of 2,660 megawatts (Mw) and an electri-I cal rating of 835 Mw.

The circulating water system is 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.

I 8

I i i

8 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT MAXIMUM DAILY 200 -

MONTHLY AVERAGE MINIMUM DAILY

/

'1 l50 -

I

\\

I m

l

~

\\

S

\\

l I

j

'w -

l

\\

j E

I t

I I

~

\\

I

\\(,]6 i

w 50 -

g f

)

\\\\'"-

I I

,N' O

J jFl M l A iM iJlJ l At510 i Ni DI t

I 80 -

5 p/

/\\

\\

70 -

/

s

/

\\

w

/

s

\\

60 -

/

g i

a l

~

\\

f

\\

l t

50 -

\\

f

\\

a f

3 x

/

I N/

40 -

N g

30 JlF lM lA lM l J lV l AlS 10 l Nl Di MONTH FIGURE I-3 OHIO RIVER DISCHARGE (FLOW cfs) AND TEMPERATURE (OF)

RECORDED AT EAST LIVERPOOL, OHIO (MP 40.2) BY THE OHIO RIVER VALLEY WATER SANITATION COMMISSION (ORSANCO), 1985 t

N' M

M M

e2 mW W

W W

mm m

m m

M M

M TABLE I-l OHIO RIVER DISCHARGE (Flow cfs) AND TEMPERARJRE ( F) RECORDED AT EAST LIVERPOOL, OHIO (MP 40.2) BY 'I1IE OHIO HIVER VALLEY WATER SANITATION COMMISSION (ORSANCO) 1985 Jan Feb Mar Apr g

Jun Jul A3 Sep Oct Nov Dec 3

Flow (cfs x 10 )

Max. Daily Value 73.5 177.0 165.3 155.3 44.2 39.7 63.7 17.2 12.7 25.0 127.5 141.3 Monthly Average 37.4 61.0 82.8 58.8 21.8 22.7 25.2 10.1 8.3 10.9 64.2 58.7 O

Min Daily value 15.3 8.2 44.5 14.7 12.7 11.3 9.0 6.7 0.8 5.7 7.2 6.4 gg N

5 e-sw m

Temperature (OF)

Max. Daily Average 45.1 39.1 58.9 68.0 70.5 74.7 78.1 80.1 79.2 69.7 59.5 47.8 t* 5 Monthly Average 37.6 35.2 44.1 59.8 67.5 70.6 76.0 78.5 74.4 64.4 51.6 38.1 E

Min. Daily Average 32.7 34.1 39.4 49.9 64.1 67.6 73.6 76.3 70.1 59.2 46.5 31.6 g

N I

8 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT II.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS The 1985 BVPS Unit 1 non-radiological environmental monitoring program 8

included surveillance and field sampling of Ohio River aquatic life.

This is the tenth year of operational monitoring and, as in the previous operational monitoring years, no evidence of adverse environmental impact to the aquatic life in the Ohio River or vegetation near BVPS was observed.

The aquatic environmental monitoring program included studies of:

I benthos, fish, ichthyoplankton, impingement and plankton entrainment.

Sampling was conducted for benthos and fish upstream an] downstream of the plant during 1985 to assess potential impacts of BVPS ~ discharges.

These data were also compared to preoperational and other operational data to assess long term trends.

Impingement and entrainment data were examined to determine the impact of withdrawing river water for in-plant use. The following paragraphs summarize these findings.

Benthos'.

Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling I

the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft muck-type substrates along the shoreline were conducive to worm and midge proliferation, while limiting macroinverte-brates which require a more stable bottom.

At the shoreline stations, Oligochaeta accounted for 86% of the macrobenthos collected, while Mollusca and Chironomidae each accounted for about 10% and 3% respec-tively. Corbicula were present in the 1981 through 1985 benthic surveys.

I An Appendix to this report contains the results of a Corbicula monitoring program conducted inplant and in the Ohio River System.

Community structure has changed little since preoperational years and there was no evidence that DVPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River.

Phytoolankton.

The phytoplankton community of the Ohio River near BVPS exhibited a seasonal pattern similar to that observed in previous years.

I This pattern is common to temperate, lotic environments.

Total cell I

7 I

l DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT densities were within the range observed during previous years.

Diver-g sity indices of phytoplankton were as high or higher than those previ-ously observed near BVPS.

Zooplankton.

Zooplankton densities throughout 1985 were typical of a temperate zooplankton community found in large river habitats.

Total densities were within the range of those reported in previous years.

Populations during late spring and summer of 1985 maintained high densi-ties except in July with the peak annual maximum occurring in August.

Protozoans and rotifers were always predominant.

Common and abundant taxa in 1985 were similar to those reported during preoperational and I.

other operational years. Shannon-Weiner diversity, number of species and evenness were within the ranges of preceding years.

Based on the data collected during the ten operating years (1976 through 1985) and the three preoperating years (1973 through 1975), it is concluded that the overall abundance and species composition of the zooplankton in the Ohio River near BVFS has remained stable and possibly improved slightly over I

the thirteen year period from 1973 to 1985.

No evidence of appreciable harm to the river zooplankton from BVPS Unit 1 operation was found. The data indicate that increased turbidity and current from high water condi-tions have the strongest effects of delaying the population peaks and temporarily decreasing total zooplankton densities in the Ohio River near BVPS.

Fish.

The fish community of the Ohio River in the vicinity of BVPS has been sampled from 1970 to present, using several types of gear: electro-fishing, gill netting, and periodically minnow traps and seines.

The I

results of these fish surveys show normal community structure based on species composition and relative abundance.

In all the surveys since 1970, forage species (minnows and shiners) were collected in the highest numbers.

This indicates a normal fish community, since sport species and predators rely heavily on this forage base for their survival.

Varia-tions in total annual catch are attributable primarily to fluctuations in the population size of the small species.

Small species with high reproductive potentials frequently respond to changes in natural environ-8 I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT mental factors (competition, food evailability, cover, and water quality) with large changes in population a,12e.

These fluctuations are naturally occurring and take place in the vicinity of BVPS.

I Although variation in total catches has occurred, species composition has remained fairly stable.

Since the initiation of studies in 1970, forage I

fish of the family Cyprinidae have dominated the catches.

Emerald shiners, gizzard shad, sand shiners and bluntncse minnows have consis-tently been among the most numerous fish, although the latter two species may have declined in recent years. Carp, channel catfish, smallmouth and spotted bass, yellow perch, and walleye have all remained common species.

Since 1978, sauger has become a common sport species to this area.

I Differences in the 1985 electrofishing and gill net catches, between the Control and Non-Control Transects were sittilar to previous years (both operational and pre-operational) and were probably caused by habitat preferences of individual species.

This habitat preference is probably the most influential factor that affects where the different species of fish are collected and in what relative abundance.

I Data collected from 1970 through 1985 indicate that fish in the vicinity of the power plant have not been adversely affected by BVPS operation.

Ichthyoplankton.

Gizzard shad, freshwater drum, and cyprinids dominated the 1985 ichthyoplankton catch from the back channel of Phillis Island.

Peak densities occurred in July and consisted mostly of the early to late larval stages.

Little or no spawning was noted in April and May.

No substantial differences were observed in species composition or spawning activity of most species over previous years.

I Fish Impingement.

The result of the 1985 impingement surveys indicate that withdrawal of river water at the BVPS intake for cooling purposes has little or no effect on the fish populations.

One hundred and sixty-four (164) fishes were collected, which is the third fewest collected since initial operation of BVPS in 1976.

Gizzard shad were the most numerous fish, comprising 22.0% of the total annual catch. The total 9

8

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT weight of all fishes collected in 1985 was 2.37 kg (5.2 lbs). Of the 164 I

fishes collected, 60 (36.6%) were alive and returned via the discharge pipe to the Ohio River.

Entrainment.

Entrainment studies were performed to investigate the impact on the ichthyoplankton of withdrawing river water for in-plant use.

Entrainment-river transect surveys for ichthyoplankton were con-ducted to ascertain any changes in spawning activity occurring in the I

Ohio River adjacent to the BVPS intake.

As in previous years, ichthyo-plankton were most abundant in June and July; collections were dominated by cyprinid (minnows and carps) and gizzard shad which together comprised 90.9% of all eggs, larvae and javeniles collected.

Assuming actual entrainment rates were similar to those found in 1976 through 1979, river abundance of ichthyoplankton indicate no substantial entrainment losses should have occurred in 1985 due to the operation of BVPS. Assessment of monthly phytoplankton and zooplankton data of past years indicated that under worst-case conditions of minimum low river flow (5,000 cfs), about I

1.25% of the phytoplankton and zooplankton passing the intake would be withdrawn by the BVPS circulating water system. This is considered to be a negligible loss of phytoplankton and zooplankton relative to river population.

8 I

I I

I 10 8

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

III. ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE

.In accordance with BVPS Unit 1 ETS, Appendix B to Operating License No.

DPR-66, significant environmental change analyses were required on benthos, phytoplankton, and zooplankton data.

However, on February 26, 1980, the NRC granted DLCo a request to delete all the aquatic monitoring program, with the exception of fish impingement, from the ETS (Amendment I

No. 25, License No. DPR-66).

In 1983, the NRC deleted the requirement for additional impingement studies.

However, in the interest of provid-ing a non-disruptive data base between the start-up of BVPS Unit 1 and I

that of Unit 2, DLCo is continuing the Aquatic Monitoring Studies.

I I

lf

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

IV.

MONITORING NON-RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS A.

MONITORING CHEMICAL EFFLUENTS I

The Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) that were developed and included as part of the licensing agreement for the BVPS, required that certain non-radiological chemicals and the temperature of the discharges be monitored and if limits were exceeded they had to be reported to the NRC.

During 1983, the NRC (Amendment No. 64) deleted these water quality requirements.

The basis for this deletion is that the reporting require-ments would be administered under the NPDES permit.

However, the NRC requested that if any NPDES permit requirements were exceeded, that a copy of the violation be forwarded to the Director, of the Office of I

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

B.

HERBICIDES Monitoring and reporting of herbicide used for weed control during 1985, is no longer required as stated in Amendment No. 64; thus, this informa-tion is not included in this report.

I I

I 8

I I

8 8

I E

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENUIRONMENTAL REPORT I

V.

AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM A.

INTRODUCTION I

The environmental study area established to assess potential impacts consisted of three sampling transects (Figure V-A-1).

Transect 1 is located at river mile (RM 34.5) approximately 0.3 mi (0.5 km) upstream of BVPS and is the Control Transect.

Transect 2 is located approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) downstream of the BVPS discharge structure.

Transect 2 is divided by Phillis Island; the main channel is designated Transect 2A and the back channel Transect 2B.

Transect 2B is the principal Non-I Control Transect because the majority of aqueous discharges f rom BVPS Unit 1 are released to the back channel.

Transect 3 is located approxi-mately 2 mi (3.2 km) downstream of BVPS.

Sampling dates for each of the program elements are presented in Table V-A-1.

I The following sections of this report present a summary of findings for each of the program elements.

I I

I 13

M M

M 0800 0

6800 9000

' " O

.pyg, la~i a'

12' $.4.

$l.4'phdwg.

FM DLAN 2-TRANSECT 3 'N fD.[ l,p

(

g "gE, Q

e I-e ** *.

Si N

h-1 g g 23 h 5m

)

. yNik

')

4 8e kh

/

.....g gc3 N

/.

g5

~

g y

Eg

'"" *l..

TRANSECT I n,-

hE TRANSECT 2A w "y*

is 83 v

o -<

LEGEND

/

s h

Of BE AVER VALLEY DISCHARGE 0:

D2 SHIPPINGPORT DISCHARGE f!

s.a..g i

g D3 INDUSTRI AL DISCHARGE I

TRAN' SECT 2B gi;PPIN,GPO,R

{,,,,,,,,

...- H AN MISSION HE EH STATION FIGURE V-A-1 SAMPLING TRANSECTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE BEAVER VALLEY AND SHIPPINGPORT POWER STATIONS BVPS

E E

E TABLE V-A-1 AQUATIC flONITORING PROGRAM SAFTLING DATES 1985 BVPS Month Benthos Fish Impingement Ichthyoplankton Phyto-and Zooplankton January 4, 11, 18 11 m*

February 15, 22 15 O

58 March 1, 8, 15, 22, 29 15 2g 5m April 5, 12, 19, 26 18 19 g5 2e May 15 14, 15 3, 10, 17, 24, 31 14 17 yM e5 June 7, 14, 21, 28 10 14 5n 59 5h July 11, 12 5, 12, 19 11 12 4

5 August 9, 16, 23, 30 16 m

O*

September 19 18, 19 6, 13, 20, 27 13 October 4, 11, 18, 25 18 November 1, 8, 15, 22, 29 15 December 23, 24 6, 13, 20, 27 15

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY W

1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT B.

BENTHOS Objectives To characterize the benthos of the Ohio River near BVPS and to determine the impacts, if any, of BVPS operations.

I Methods Benthic surveys were performed in May and September, 1985.

Benthos I

samples were collected at Transects 1, 2A, 2B an 3 (Figure V-B-1), using a Ponar grab sampler.

Duplicate samples were taken off tne south shore at Transects 1, 2A and 3.

Sampling at Transect 2B, in the back channel of Phillis Island, consisted of a single ponar grab at the south, middle and north side of the channel.

I Each grab was washed within a U.S. Standard No. 30 sieve and the remains placed in a bottle and preserved with 10% formalin.

In the laboratory, macroinvertebrates were sorted from each sample, identified to the lowest 2

possible taxon and counted.

Mean densities (numbers /m ) for each taxon were calculated for each, of two replicates and three back channel samples.

Three species diversity indices were calculated:

Shannon-Weiner, evenness indices (Pielou 1969), and the number of species (taxa).

I Habitats Substrate type was an important factor in determining the composition _of I

the benthic community.

Two distinct benthic habitats exist in the Ohio River near BVPS.

These habitats were the result of damming, channeliza-tion, 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 Transect 2A where clay and sand predominate. The other distinct habitat, hard substrate, is located I

at midriver.

The hard substrate may have been initially caused by channelization and scoured by river currents and turbulence from commer-cial boat traffic.

I I

I

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Forty-two macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 1985 moni-toring program (Table V-B-1).

Species composition during 1985 was similar to that observed during previous preoperational (1973 through 1975) and operational (1976 through 1984) years.

The macroinvertebrate assemblage during 1985 was composed primarily of burrowing organisms I

typical of soft t.nconsolidated substrates.

Oligochaetes (worms) and l

f chironomid (midge) larvae were abundant (Tables V-B-2, V-B-3, and V-B-l 4).

Common genera of oligochaetes were Limnodrilus, Nais, and Paranais.

Common genera of thironomids were Procladius, Cryptochironomus, Coelotanvpus, and Chironomus.

The Asiatic clam (Corbicula), which was collected from 1974 through 1978, has been collected in the 1981 through 1985 surveys. None were collected during 1979 or 1980 surveys.

No ecologically important additions of species were encountered during 1985 nor were any threatened or endangered species collected.

Community Structure and Spatial Distribution Oligochaetes accounted for the highest percentage of the macroinverte-brates at all sampling stations in both May and September (Figure V-B-2).

I Density and species composition variations observed within the BVPS study area were due primarily to habita t differences and the tendency of certain types of macroinvertebrates (e.g.,

oligochaetes) to cluster.

Overall, abundance and species composition throughout the study area were similar.

I In general, the density of macroinvertebrates during 1985 was lowest at I

Transect 2A and higher at Transects 1,

2B, and 3 where substrates near the shore were composed of sof t mud or various combinations of sand and silt.

The lower abundance at Transect 2A was probably related to sub-strat.e conditions (clay and sand) along the north shore of Phillis I.

Island.

I I

17

u l

M M

M

'"** h fp,4% '

jf ',f,,y

k [ h-ffi f h,g;,.

3

%#Ml9hAU h j..gy i Q.,, ',1 ' ;i k

C C

Q 3

p c.

\\

g cg A

' dLg ${"d $ t,$

% 4 ;n 8......

m "E

= = " -

N 5

g[

'kh'h.y*Qjj5 ;p e

]

yy I

g-y y

r p

a r-O' E

. a.

-4 M

e 1EGEND j

JyggQQ A sat.tPLING STATION D1 BE AVER VALLEY DISCHARGE os 1-3 STATION NUMBER j g D2 SHIPPINGPORT DISCHARGE

! h 28 i

D3 INDUSTRI AL DISCHARGE O

AID TO NAVIGATION I

BEAVER kI.fF 0 "

LLEY

T R ANSMISSION LINE ST 10N wtg STATION FIGURE V-B-1 BENTHOS SAMPLING STATIONS BVPS

m m

M W

W W

W m

W W

W TABLE V-B-1 SYSTEMATIC LIST OF MACROINVERIEBRATES COLLECTED IN PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS IN Tile 01110 RIVER NEAR BVPS Preoperational Operational 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Porifera Spongilla fragilis X

Cnidaria Hydrozoa Clavidae Cordylophora lacustris X

X X

X llydridae Craspedacusta sowerby1 X

llydra sp.

X X

X g

oo u

Platyhelminthes Tricladida X

X X

e Rhabdocoela X

X X

c cc Nemertea X

X X

X

>M Nematoda X

X X

X MM

]

Entoprocta

$ t-*

Urnatella gracilis X

X X

gg ax Ectoprocta gH Federicella sp.

X X

X mn Paludicella articulata X

X ZO Pectinatella sp.

X

$k Plumatella sp.

X t* p-WM M

Annelida 011gochaeta o

Aeolosomatidae X

X X

X W

d Enchytraeidae X

X X

X Naididae Amphichaeta leydigli X

Amphichaeta sp.

X X

Arcteonais lomondt X

X X

Aulophorus sp.

X X

Chaetogaster diaphanus X

X X

X C. diastrophus X

X X

Dero digitata X

X X

G ivea X

X IIero sp.

X X

Nais barbata X

X G retscheri X

X X

X N. communis X

X X

X N. ei;nguis X

X

M M

M M-M M

M M

M TABLE V-B-1 (Continued)

Preoperational Operational 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 N. variabilis X

X Nais sp.

X X

W donais serpentina X

X X

Paranais frici X

X X

X Paranais sp.

X Pristina osborni X

X X

P. sima X

X X

X Pristina sp.

X 5Ilying appendiculata X

Stephensoniana trivandrana X

X X

X Stylaria lacustYja X

X X

X lhcinais uncinata X

Vejdovskyella in temed ia X

X Tubtficidae ao Autodrilus limnobius X

X X

X A. pigueti X

X X

ge I. pluriseta X

X X

X gj Earthrioneurum vejdovskyanum X

X X

X cc Branchiura sowerbyi X

X X

%Q Ilyndrilus templetoni X

X X

se 1.imnodrilus cervix X

X X

MM L. cervix (variant)

X X

X

$ t*

E. claparedelanus X

X X

QQ E. hoffmeisteri X

X X

.X X

X X

o :I:

E spiralis X

X X

yH E. udekemianus X

X X

mo Elmnodrilus sp.

X Peloscolex multisetosus longidentus X

X X

X

>m P. m. multisetosus X

X X

X F>

Potamothrix moldaviensis X

X X

wM P. vejdovskyi X

X X

Q Psammoryctides curvisetosus X

o Tubifex tubtfex X

X X

X W

Unidentified immature foms:

with hair chaetae X

X X

without hair chaetae X

X X

Lus.briculidae X

X llirudinea Glossiphoniidae llelobdella elongat X

X llelobdella stagnalis X

Helodbella sp.

X Erpobdellidae Erpobdella sp.

X Moorcobdella microstoma X

X

M M

M m

m m

TABLE V-B-1 (Continued)

Preoperatfonal operatinnal 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Arthropoda Acarina X

X X

Ostracoda X

X X

Amphipoda Talitridae flyallela azteca X

X Cammaridae Crangonyx pseudogracilis X

Crangonyx sp.

X Gammarus fasciatus X

X X

Gammarus sp.

X X

X Decapoda X

Collemtolla X

Ephemeroptera lieptageniidae X

X t.n Stenacron sp.

X X

ye Stenonema sp.

X z c:

Ephemeridae y@

X

>M liexagenia sp.

Caenidae M$

Caenis sp.

X X

mm y

Tricorythodes sp.

X

$y H H Ephemeridae Ephemera sp.

X yQ Megloptera gH Statis sp.

X gn Odonata zo Comphidae Q%

& p(

Dromogomphus spoliatus X

Dromogomphus sp.

X g

Comphus sp.

X X

m Trichoptera Psychomyidae w

l d

Polycentropus sp.

X Ilydropsychidae X

Cheumatopsyche sp.

X X

Ilydropsyche sp.

X llydroptilidae i

11ydroptila sp.

X Oxyethira sp.

X Leptocer13ae Oecetis sp.

X X

X Coleoptera X

llydrophilidae X

Elmidae Ancyronyx variegatus X

Dubiraphia sp.

X X

X IIelichus sp.

X

'm m l _ __J u O

O M

M M

i TABLE V-B-1 (Continued)

Preoperational Operational 1971 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1981 1984 1985 Stenelmin sp.

X X

X Psephenidae Diptera Unidentified Diptera X

X X

X Psychodidae X

X Pericoma sp.

X Psychoda sp.

Telmatosco us sp.

X Lnidenti e sychodidae pupae X

Chaoboridae Chaoborus sp.

X X

X Simulidae Similium sp.

X Chironomidae

'Chironominae X

X (n

X X

ye Chironcminne pup.

Chironomus sp.

X X

X Z c':

X X

M$

Cladopelma sp.

Cryptochironomus sp.

X X

X

>m Dicrotendipes nervosus X

F$

Dicrotendipes sp.

X X

mm X

X X

yp fj Glyptotendipes sp.

Ilarnischia sp.

X X

H H Micrcpsectra sp.

X

@Q Microtendipes sp.

X gH Parachironomus sp.

X X

gn Polypedilum (s.s.) convictum type X

Zo P.

(s.s.) simulans type X

j$

Polypedilum sp.

X X

X td P-Rhectanytarsus sp.

X X

X gd Stenochironomus sp.

X X

m Stictochironomus sp.

X Tanytarsus sp.

X X

X m

H X

Xenochironomus sp.

Tanypodinae Tanypodinae pupae X

Ablabesmyia sp.

X X

Coelotanypus scapularis X

X X

Proc 1adfus (Procladtus)

X X

X Procladius sp.

X X

X

'Ihf enemannimyia group X

X X

Zavrelimyia sp.

X Orthocladiinac X

X Orthocladiinae pupae Cricotopus bicinctus X

C.

(s.s.) trifascia X

Pricotopus (Isocladius) sylvestris Group X

C. (Isocladius) sp.

X w

(

E E

E 1

TABLE V-B-1 (Continued)

Preoperational Operational 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Cricotop y (s.s.) sp.

X X

X Eukief feriella so.

X X

X liydrobaenus sp.

X Limnophyes sp.

X Nannocladius (s.s.) distinctus X

X X

Nar.nocladius sp.

X X

Orthocladius sp.

X X

X Parametriocnemus sp.

X X

Paraphaenocladius sp.

X X

Psectrocladius sp.

X X

Pseudorthocladius sp.

X Pseudosmittia sp.

X X

Smittia sp.

X X

X Diamesinae y

Diamesa sp.

X u

Potthastia sp.

X e

Ceratopogonidae X

X X

X b c:

Dolichopodidae X

X yQ Empididae X

X X

>m Wiedemannia sp.

X My X

m tri Ephydridae

,ro Muncidae X

X yg Rhagionidae X

ss Tipulidae X

yQ Stratiomyiidae X

/g Syrphidae X

n Lepidopte ra X

X X

zo Mollusca yy Castropoda eg Ancylidae gg Ferrissia sp.

X X

m Planorbidae X

y Valvatidae

o H

Valvata perdepressa Pelecypoda X

Corbiculidae Corbicula manilensis*

X X

Sphaeridae X

X X

Pisidium sp.

X X

Sphaerium sp.

X X

X Unidentified immature Sphaeriidae X

X X

X Unionidae Anadonta grandis X

Elliptio sp.

X Unidentified immature Unionidae X

X X

Recent literature relegated all North American Corbicula to be Corbicula fluminea.

TABLE V-B-2 2

MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (Number /m ) AND PERCEtTP COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 1985 BVPS STATION 1

2A 2B 3

2 2

2 8/m I/m g

gf,2 I/m May 15 h

us Oligochaeta 2,256 100 60 55 703 81 1,428 99 h@

Chironomidae 30 27 164 19 Mollusca

$Q Others 20 18 10 1

y ta Totals 2,256 100 110 100 867 100 1,438 100 gg 5

h September 19 t< 5 Oligochaeta 778 76 374 81 460 50 1,124 90 g

h Chironomidae 158 15 88 19 341 37 70 6

Mollusca 88 9

98 11 50 4

g Others 14 2

10 1

8 Totals 1,024 100 462 100 913 100 1,254 101

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE V-B-3 2

BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (Individuals /m ), MEAN OF TRIPLICATE FOR BACK CHANNEL AND DUPLICATE SAMPLES COLLECTED IN THE MAIN CHANNEL OHIO RIVER, MAY 15, 1985 BVPS STATION Taxa 1

2A 2B 3

Nemertea 10 Entoprocta I

Federicella sp.

+

Annelida Oligochaeta egg

+

Enchytraeidae 10 Amphichaeta sp.

10 Nais bretscheri 20 Nais communis 30 I

Nais elinguis 10 Nais variabilis 10 Nais sp.

10 20 10 Paranais frici 58 39 88 Pristina sima 10 Vejdovskyella intermedia 10 I

Aulodrilus limnobius 10 10 Limnodrilus cervix 30 13 10 Limnodrilus cervix (variant) 10 Limnodrilus claparedianus 10 Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri 443 33 295 Limnodrilus udekemianus 10 33 20 Peloscolex m. multisetosus 7

I Potamothrix vejdovskyi 20 7

10 Immatures w/o capilliform chaeta 1,477 512 718 Immatures w/ capilliform chaeta 178 39 217 Diptera Chironominae 10 Chironomus sp.

144 Tanypodinae pupae 20 I

Procladius sp.

13 Nanocladius sp.

7 Terrestrial diptera 20 Total 2,256 110 867 1,438

+ Indicates organisms present.

I 25 l ll

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I

1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT f

TABLE V-B-4 I

BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (Individuals /m ), MEAN OF TRIPLICATE j

2 FOR BACK CHANNEL AND DUPLICATE SAMPLES COLLECTED IN THE MAIN CHANNEL OHIO RIVER, SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 I

BVPS STATION Taxa 1

2A 2B 3

Nematoda 10 I

Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis

+

Ectoprocta Federicella sp.

+

I Annelida Nais comunis 20 Nais sp.

7 I

Ophidonais serpentina 10 Pristina sima 10 Stvlaria lacustris 13 Branchiura sowerbyi 502 20 10 I

Limnodrilus cervix (variant) 13 10 Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri 10 108 52 404 Limnodrilus udekemianus 236 7

30 I

Potamothrix vejdovskyi 13 Imature w/o capilliform chaetae 10 246 309 650 Imature w/ capilliform chaetae 20 26 Arthropoda I

Gamarus sp.

7 Trichoptera Oecetis sp.

7 Diptera Chironomini pupae 7

Chironomus sp.

50 10 39 30 I

Cladopelma sp.

7 Cryptochironomus sp.

68 78 52 40 Polypedilum sp.

72 Rheotanytarsus sp.

20 7

I Coeletanypus scapularis 105 Procladius sp.

20 52 Mollusca I

Corbicula manilensis 88 98 40 Sphaerium sp.

10 Total 1,024 462 913 1,254

+ Indicates organisms present, t

2e I

W aceGmm hzH @g2*

>EEr !2 hy,zN mt

g-c: .

W W

5 91[

8 l!

9 f

W 1

4 ga

,. ?

6 j?

8 9

1 W

3

%$w ': nim" 8

9 1

S Y

W

+ GEE

.1 2 R T

+i:c:

8 A I

9 1

E N

Y U

M W

8 L O

S 1

M

t t

9 A

CGR 1

N NA SIE O

ORY 0

I HU W

98 T 1

A TDL R

N A

9 E ESN BPO 7 P VI W

9 O EBT 1

2 H

A TRR 8

B AE 7

FEP W

9 V

ONOS 1

P E

NRDV 7

R OENB 7

U IVA 9

G TI W

1 I

IRL F

S A

6 OON 4

7 PIO 9

MHI W

1 OOT C

A ER E

S THE A

5 R NTP AS E

O T

7 W

A CNE DR 9

E I

E E

RIR AM 1

Y E

P H

P HO T

m 4

u 7 L C N s

N W

O 9 A A

OO 1

N E

G R I

I L

O M

3 LHL i

7 T I

OCA 1

R 9 A W

I l

2 E 7 P l

I f

- O 0 -

W 1

R 7 E 9

P 0

0 0

O O

W 0

9 8

7 6

5 4

3 2

I 1

wcCp$orW

(

W W

Z

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMEN*AL REPORT Comparison of Control and Non-Control Stations No adverse impact to the benthic community was observed during 1985.

This conclusion is based on a comparison of data collected at Transect 1 (Control-) and 2B (Non-Control) and on analyses of species composition and densities.

Data indicates that oligochaetes were usually predominant throughout the I

study area (Figure V-B-2).

Abundant taxa at Transects 1 and 2B in both May and September were immature tubificids without capilliform chaetae (Tables V-B-3 and V-B-4).

In May, the oligochaetes which were common or abundant at both stations were Paranais frici and Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri.

In September, the oligochaetes Limnodrilus hof fmeisteri, Limnodrilus udekemianus, and Branchiura sowerbyi; midges Procladius sp.,

Coelotanypus scapularis, Cryptochironomus sp. and Chironomus sp.; and the I

clam Corbicula fluminea were the common organism collected at both stations.

In previous surveys, a greater variety of organ' isms have been found at Transect 2B than at Transect 1.

This usually results in a slightly higher Shannon-Weiner diversity and evenness at Transect 2B (Table V-B-5).

In May, 1985, a slightly greater diversity of organisms was col-lected at the control station, however, the mean number of taxa and Shannon-Weiner indices for the back channel were within the range of i

values observed for other stations in the study area.

Differences observed between Transect 1 (Control) and 2B (Non-Control) and between other stations could be related to differences in habitat.

done of the differences were attributed to BVPS operation.

I Comparison of Preoperational and Operational Data Composition, percent occurrence and overall abundance of macroinverte-I brates has changed littla from preoperational years through the current study year.

Oligochaetes have been the predominant macroinvertebrate in the community each year and they comprised approximately 86% of the individuals collected in 1985 (Figure V-B-2).

A similar oligochaete assemblage has been reported each year. Chironomids and mollusks have i

2d E

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

TABLE V-B-5 i

MEAN DIVERSITY VALUES FOR BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER, 1985 BVPS STATION 1

2A 2B 3

DATE: May 15 No. of Taxa 8

4 6

10 Shannon-Weiner Index 1.56 2.09 1.34 1.95 Evenness 0.52 0.97 0.49 0.65 DATE: September 19 No. of Taxa 9

4 10 7

Shannon-Weiner Index 2.22 1.63 2.48 1.79 Evenness 0.70 0.81 0.81 0.64 I

I i

t i

I I

29

1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

cceposed the remaining fractions of the community each year.

The poten-tial nuisance clam, Corbicula, had increased in abundance from 1974 I

through 1976, but declined in number during 1977.

Since 1981, Corbicula have bcen collected in the benthic surveys including 1985.

Total macroinvertebrate densities for Transect 1 (Control) and 2B (Non-Control) for each year since 1973 are presented in Table V-B-6.

Mean densities of macroinvertabrates graduelly increased from 1973 through 1976 (BVPS Unit 1 start-up) through 1983.

The 1985 data, although show-5 ing no increase, is well within the range of pre-operational and opera-tional year data. Mean densities have frequently been higher in the back channel of Phillis Island (Non-Control) as compared to densities at Tran-sect 1 (Control). In years such as 1985 (also 1984, 1983, 1981, 1980, 1979) when mean dansities were lower at Transect 2B than at Transect 1 the differences were negligible. These differences could be related to substrate, variability, and randomness of sample grabs.

Higher total densities of macroinvertebrates in the back channel (Transect 2B) as compared to Transect 1 was probably due to the morphology of the river.

e Mud, silt sediments and slow current were predominant at Transect 2B creating conditions more favorable for burrowing macroinvertebrates in conparison to Transect 1, which has'little protection from river currents and turbulence caused by commercial boat traffic.

9 Summary and Conclusions Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling the dis-5 tribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS.

Soft muck-type substrates along the shoreline were conducive to worm and midge proliferation, while limiting macroinverte-brates which require a more stable bottom.

At the shoreline stations, Oligochaeta accounted for 86% of the macrobenthos collected, while Mollusca and Chironomidae each accounted for about 10% and 3% respec-

tively, Community structure has changed little since preoperational years and f

there was no evidence that BVPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River.

u E

l E

O M

N O

O N

E O

O O

O M

O O

O E

TABLE V-B-6 e

BENTHIC MACRothVERTFBRATF DfNSITIES (Numit er/m ) FOR STATI0h 1 (CONThol.) AND STATION 28 (NON-UWTROL) DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS BVPS Preeperational Yeara Operational Years 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1

2B 1

28 1

7B 1

2B 1

28 1

2B 1

28 1

2B 1

78 1

7B January Februs.ry 205 0

703 311 358 200 312 1,100 1,499 2,545 1,029 1,2%

we March 425 457 oc V1 April E"h Ny 248 508 1,116 2,197 927 3,660 6 74 848 351 126 1,004 840 1,041 747 209 456 3,490 3,026 3,590 1,314 2,741 621 2,256 867 yrm mh June 5

40 507 686 g

%e

~

July 653 119 421 410 ss WO O lI:

August 99 244 143 541 1,017 1,124 851 785 591 3,474 601 1,896 1,185 588 gH MO September 175 92 1,523 448 2,185 911 2,956 3,364 4,172 4,213 1,34 1 828 1,024 913 ZO

>My e

0:tober 256 23)

WM y

November 149 292 318 263 75 617 388 1,295 108 931 386 1,543 812 806 O

h December Mean 231 206 483 643 546 871 631 1,485 421 1,588 709 1,528 856 673 1,198 830 1,197 684 3,223 3,272 3,881 2,764 2,041 725 1,640 890

l DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT PHYTOPLANKTON Objectives Plankton sampling was conducted to determine the condition of the phy-toplankton community of the Ohio River in the vicinity of the BWS and to assess possible environmental impact to the phytoplankton resulting from the operation of Unit 1.

I Methods One entrainment sample was collected monthly.

Each sample was a one-gallon sample taken from below the skimmer wall from one operating intake bay.

This one-gallon sample was preserved with Lugol's solution and was used for the analyses of both phytoplankton and zooplankton.

In the laboratory, a known aliquot of well-mixed sample was concentrated I

by settling, the supernatant was decanted and the concentrate adjusted to a final volume.

An aliquot of 0.1 m1 from the final concentrate was I

placed in a Palmer-Maloney cell and examined at 400X magnification.

A miniinum of 200 cells were identified and counted in each sample.

For each collection date, volume of the final concentrate was adjusted depending on cell density, however, the same area of the Palmer cell was examined for.all samples. A Hyrax diatom slide was also prepared monthly from each sample.

This slide was examined at 1000X magnification in order to make positive indentification of the diatoms.

I Densities (cells /ml), Shannon-Weiner and evennecs diversity indices (Pielou 1969), and richness index (Dahlberg and Odum 1970) were calcu-lated for each monthly sample.

Seasonal Distribution e

Total cell densities of phytoplankton from stations on the Ohio River and in the intake samples have been similar during the past years (Annual Environmental Reports 1976-1984).

Species composition has also been similar in entrainment samples and those from the Ohio River (DLCo 1980).

Therefore, samples collected from the intake bays should provide an adequate characterization of the phytoplankton community in the Ohio River.

I u

w I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT During 1985, the January, February and March samples had the fewest phytoplankton present, with mean densities of 460 to 510 cells /ml (Table V-C-1 and Figure V-C-1).

Total mean densities increased in April and May.

Densities peaked in June and October and decreased in November and December (Table V-C-1) to 608 cells /ml (Figure V-C-1).

Diatoms (Chrysophta), green algae (Chlorophyta) and blue-green algae 8

(Cyanophyta) were generally the most abundant groups of the phytoplankton during 1985 (Table V-C-1 and Figure V-C-2).

The relative abundance for the group microflagellates was highest in November and December, making up 52% and 40% of the total numbers observed in these months respec-tively.

Relative densities of blue-green algae (Cyanophyta) were highest during February (33%) and August (14%) (Table V-C-1).

I Diversity indices for the phytoplankton during 1985 are presented in Table V-C-2.

Shannon-Weiner indices ranged from 2.57 to 4.44, evenness values from 0.43 to 0.78, and richness values from 4.71 to 8.48.

High diversity values occurred in 11 of the 12 months.

The lowest value for Shannon-Weiner Index occurred in October; however, the lowest number of species occurred in February when microflagellates and Schizothrix I

calcicola (blue-green) were predominant.

Highest number of taxa (61) occurred in October.

Phytoplankten communities were generally dominated by different taxa each season.

The most abundant taxa during winter (January through April) were microflagellates, Asterionella, Schizothrix calcicola and small centric / diatoms (Table V-C-3).

In May, Scenedesmus spp. (green algae)

I were most abundant.

Small centric diatoms, which were present in all phytoplankton samples, were the most common organisms in the summer and early fall. They included several small (4 to 12 um dia.) species. Post-i tive species identification was not possible during quantitative analysis at 400X magnification.

Burn mount analysis at 1000X magnification revealed the group "small centrics" included primarily Cyclotella atomus, C.

pseudostelligera, C_. meneghiniana, Stephanodiscus hantzschii, and S_. astraea.

Small centrics and microflagellates were the most abun-dant organisms collected in November and December.

I n

I

E O

E E

OM O

E E

E' O O

O O

O TABLE V-C-1 MONTl!LY PilYTOPLANKTON GROUP DENSITIES (Number /ml) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION FROM ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985 BVPS Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Group t/ml I/ml 8/ml t/ml t/ml t/ml Chlorophyta 105 21 29 5

68 15 88 6 10,491 74 6,956 33 g

Chrysophyta 277 54 178 28 248 54 793 56 2,668 19 13,488 64 g

Cyanophyta 44 9

207 33 35 8

13 1

238 2

21

<1 m

Cryptophyta 8

2 2

<1 11 2

69 5

405 3

260 1

2Olb Microflagellates 75 15 210 34 98 21 442 31 270 2

225 1

ph Other Groups 1

(l 0

0-0 0

5 41 14

<1 42

<1 Total 510 101 626 100 460 100 1,410 99 14,086 100 20,992 99

(

95 S Ei Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

' b Group 8/ml t / nil 8/ml 8/ml 8/ml t/ml b

h Chlorophyta 662 33 4,561 42 3,109 36 3,501 18 125 8

80 12 h

Chrysophyta 556 27 4,154 38 4,236 49 12,960 68 501 33 236 37 Cyanophyta 41 2

1,505 14 469 5

1,796 9

66 4

53 8

Cryptophyta 239 12 167 2

310 4

66

<1 24 2

16 2

8 Microflagellates 510 25 405 4

495 6

720 4

780 52 255 40 Other Groups 19

<1 35

<1 45

<1 14

<1 2

(l 0

0 Total 2,027 99 10,827 100 8,664 100 19,057 99 1,498 99 640 99

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

JAN-JUL 1974. AUG-0CT 1974 81975, NOV-DEC 1975

+

AVERAGE IS76-1984 22,000-i W 1985 l

20.000 -

Il W 18,000 -

I I6.000 -

!I i

14,000 -

!I I

N A

\\

a

}

3 12.000-

/

fg I

b l' \\

i

\\

i d

i

\\

i

/

s

\\

l g

-j 10,000 -

,I i

ig u

h l

v'

's I

lg i

1 I\\

l

\\

/

I gg 8,0m -

ot i

\\

l I i

\\

l I

\\

l

\\

t L

/

\\

6,000 -

l j

\\

i l

t l3 l

\\

/

/\\'\\

.0..

i

\\

'\\

I g

g

's y

2,000-l

/

'/

N' l

g i

~ * "

l 0-l J

'F M

A

'M J

J A

S 0

N 0

MONTH i g i

FIGURE V-C-1 g

ig 1

MONTHLY PHYTOPLANK"ON DENSITIES IN THE OHIO RIVER DURING PREOPERATIONAL (1974-1975) AND OPERATIONAL (1976-1985) YEARS 4

I BVPS 35 I

1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

CHLOROPHYTA CHRYSOPHYTA W

CYANOPHYTA CRYPTOPHYTA & MICROFL AGELLATES 2

2 13,500-g n

l

!\\

l.\\

12,000-lI

I E

l\\

I\\

10,500-1 I I

i l

I i

I l

1 l

I 9,000-1 I

l I

\\

l

\\

K l

I I

I

)

e U

l I

I I

g 3

7,500-g i

i 1

3 l

\\

l i

l 1

t

,I

-j 6,0 00 -

I I

I g

U I

i g

l I

4,500-I I

i i

g g

l l

\\

i~~

\\

l 1

I s

\\ l/

3,000 -

l 1

l

\\

1

/

l

/

1 I I

I l,500 -

/

I,

/

I r

Yk 5

L

~

0'J F

M A

M J

'J A

S' O

'N D

MONTH FIGURE V-C-2 PHYTOPLANK' ION GROUP DENSITIES FOR ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985 BVPS 36

M M

S W

M m

e m

e e,

W W

W W W

W W

TABLE V-C-2 PIIYTOPLANKTON DIVERSITY INDICES BY MONTil FOR ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985 DVPS Date Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun No. of Species 41 38 53 39 46 52 Shannon-Weiner Index 3.80 3.31 4.44 3.00 4.24 2.95 5

Evenness 0.71 0.63 0.78 0.56 0.77 0.52

g o Richness 6.42 5.75 8.48 5.25 4.71 5.12 g,8

0 sm Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec X

M bU U

No. of Species 53 58 50 61 50 39 48 8O 55 5 Shannon-Weiner Index 4.16 4.28 3.59 2.57 3.15 3.26 3.56

$8 d$

Evenness 0.72 0.73 0.63 0.43 0.55 0.61 0.64 Richness 6.83 6.14 5.40 6.09 6.70 5.88 6.06 8

Y

TABLE V-C-3 DENSITIES (Number /ml) OF MOST ABUNDAfff PHYTOPIANETON iAXA (Fifteen Most Abundant On Any Date)

COLLECTED FROM EffrRAINMERa,"MLES JANUARY THROUGH DECEMBER 1985 BVPS A_ug Sep Oct Nov Dec Taxa Jan Feb Mar AE M

Jun Jul u

CYANOPHYTA Anabaena circinalis 70 pphanizomenon flos-aquae 1

1 70 14 4

Coelosphaerium naagellanum 1,470 L nqbya spp.

4 12 4

2 y

Merismopedia tenutssima 32 1,288 168 112 Microcystis aeruginosa 238 H

Oscillatoria subbrevis 126 W

oscillatoria tenuis 7

1 Osettlatoria spp.

6 3

5 2

>c Schizothrix calcicola 32 157 30 8

238 21 36 70 14 66 50 47

$c hM CHLOROPHYTA mz kM Ankistrodesmus convolutus 1

1 13 405 1,440 2

14 49 245 4

Ankistrodessus falcatus 15 1

1 20 540 98 41 28 28 49 25 2

< t1 Chlamydomonas spp.

6 22 15 360 270 2

21 45 45

$ "c3 Og chlorophyta I 22 22 8

22 540 75 540 270 180 30 k

coetastrum microporum 112 19 378 161 168 Crucigenia crucifera 91 MQg Crucigenia quadrata 60 56 46 Dictyosphaerium pulche11um 448 1,372 588 1,080 336 65 pp Micractinium pusillum 364 35 14 70 112 55 Pediastrum duplex 420 77 371 7

14

%N Scenedesmus acuminatus 5

280 283 10 140 56 46 7

g Scenedesmus bicellularis 15 1,575 720 180 1080 630 900 y

Scenedessus dimorphus 2,905 8

Scenedesmus obollensis 28 112 24 21 56 122 Scenedesmus quadricauda 4

1,288 168 86 273 140 287 7

20 Selenastrum minutum 8

270 765 405 90 315 Sphaerocystis schroeteril 74 140 Tetrastrum heteracanthum 140 29 28 56 Ulothrix spp.

11 Weste11a botryoides 126

TABLE V-C-3 (Continued)

Taxa Jan Feb Mar Apr g

Jun Jul Ay Sep Oct Nov Dec CHRYSOPHYTA Achnanthes_ minutissims 15 8

30 30 4

Asterionella formosa 148 9

37 176 658 112 2

Dinobryon sertularia 1

13 70 22 4

Fragitaria crotonensis 70 154 62 47 Gomphonema parvulum 1

2 11 2

2 Mallomonas tonsurata 1

Melnstra ambigua 9

16 42 539 182 256 29 9

Melostra distans 15 1

15 41 63 322 182 203 133 5

Melnstra granulata 54 154 12 497 42 74 14 Fs Melostra varians 4

12 17 4

14 7

14 45 11 Navicula cryptocephala 10 34 19 11 21 7

45 7

4 32 11 m

Navicula minima 15 30 ye Navicula viridula 10 27 27 17 7

21 24 21 4

18 13 g c3 dO Nitzschia dissipata 11 2

5 1

2 4

4 Nitzschia holsetica 168 175 31 63 gQ Nitzsch3 pales 1

3 11 7

22 35 19 9

g Skeletonema potanos 90 585 180 to Surtrella ovata 5

5 p

Synedra filifc: mis 15 10 1

16 203 154 26 54 7

180 5

yy Synura uvella 3

13 45 o

small centrics 15 22 45 428 1,215 11,655 225 2,385 3,510 12,060 150 135 CRYPTOPHYTA Cryptomonas erosa 6

2 24 270 224 29 77 175 21 9

9 g

phodomonas minuta 2

8 45 135 36 210 90 135 45 15 7

gM MIC'OFIAGELIATES 75 210 98 442 270 225 510 405 495 720 780 255 8

Total Phytoplankton 510 625 460 1,386 14,086 20,992 2,027 10,827 8,664 19,057 1,498 640 Total of Most Abundant Taxa 479 594 398 1,350 12,114 20,173 1,902 10,147 8,096 18,315 1,395 592 Percent Composition )f Most Abundant Phytoplankton 94 95 87 97 86 96 94 94 93 96 93 9i

8 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

Comparison of Control and Non-Control Transects Plankton samples were Not collected at any river stations after April 1, 8

1980, due to a reduction in the scope of the aquatic sampling program, therefore, comparison of data was not possible in 1985.

Comparison of Preoperational and Operational Data The seasonal succession of phytoplankton varied from year to year, but, in general, the phytoplankton taxa has remained generally consistent.

8 Phytoplankton communities in running waters respond quickly to changes in water temperature, turbidity, nutrients, velocity and turbulence (Hynes 1970).

The phytoplankton from the Ohio River near BVPS generally I

exhibited a bimodal pattern of annual abundance.

During the preopera-tional year 1974, total densitics peaked in August and October, while in operational years of 1976 through 1979, mean peak densities occurred in June and September (DLCo 1980).

Total phytoplankton densities also dis-played a bimodal pattern in 1985, when peaks occurred in i ne and October (Figure V-C-1).

I In general, the phytoplankton community in 1985 was similar to those of preoperational and operational years.

No major change in species compo-sition or community structure was observed during 1985.

The small dif-ferences in the phytoplankton community between 1985 and the previous years are believed to be due to natural fluctuations and were not a result of BVPS operations.

8 Yearly mean Shannon-Weiner diversity indices from 1973 through 1985 were j

similar (except during 1973 when the value was much lower) ranging from a y

low of 3.56 in 1985 to a maximum of 4.36 in 1975 (Table V-C-4). Evenness values were also similar, except during 1973 and 1974 when values were lower.

From 1975 through 1985, evenness ranged from 0.64 to 0.83.

The maximum evenness diversity value is 1.0 and would occur when each species is represented by the same number of individuals.

The mean number of taxa ' ach year ranged from 19 in 1973 to 48 in 1984 and 1985. The highest e

number of taxa (66 in July) ever observed in phytoplankton studies at I

BVPS occurred during the operational year 1982.

I e

I

O TABLE V-C-4 PilYT0 PLANKTON DIVERSITY INDICES (MEAN OF ALL SAMPLES 1973 TO 1985)

NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF Tile OHIO RIVER BVPS Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Y

1973 No. of Specieg,)

7 2

13 24 27 28 30 24 17 16 19 Shannon Index 1,55 0.54 No 0,63 1.64 2.28 3.55 3.72 No 3.37 3.25 3.27 2.38 Evenness 0.33 0.15 Sample 0.11 0.25 0.35 0.55 0.52 Sample 0.50 0.54 0.53 0.38 Richness 1.24 0.29 1.50 2.63 3.17 3.61 3.46 3.24 2.89 2.80 2.48 1974 No. of Species 12 8

17 22 44 46 47 60 34 47 34 Shannon Index 2.96 2.23 3.18 3.50 4.89 4.40 4.03 4.25 3.85 5.02 3.83 No Sanple Eveness 0.55 0.46 0.57 0.58 0.62 0.62 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.58 0.56 Richness 2.55 1.82 3.05 3.74 5.56 5.45 5.46 6.49 4.77 5.44 4.43

[g en 1975 Ln No. of Species 52 34 43 32 40 40 2, ty Shannon Index 4.53 4.22 4.37 4.22 4.48 4.36 25 c:

No Sample 0.80 0.83 0.81 0.87 0.85 0.83

!$i$

Evenness Richness 5.57 3.96 4.89 3.92 6.19 4.91 f; [j

A c-1976 P1 P1 No. of Species 31 35 31 38 47 49 46 43 38 33 35 38 39 3! e<

Shannon Index 3.98 4.36 3.90 4.25 4.14 4.27 4.28 4.30 3.93 4.16 4.24 4.45 4.19

d Md Evenness 0.80 0.85 0.78 0.81 0.75 0.76 0.78 0.80 0.75 0.83 0.83 0.85 0.80

!$ $3 Richness 5.15 5.89 4.92 4.70 4.68 4.79 4.72 4.34 3.85 4.17 4.95 5.79 4.83 g "i Mn 1977 DC C)

No. of Species 20 28 31 24 36 30 44 39 37 32 33 27 32

$2 O!

Shannon Index 1.96 3.31 3.00 2.78 4.16 3.52 4.36 4.26 4.29 3.92 4.12 4.00 3.64 t* g Evenness 0.44 0.70 0.61 0.60 0.80 0.72 0.80 0.81 0.82 0.78 0.82 0.83 0.73 p%

1 Richness 3.14 4.57 4.44 2.95 3.53 2.77 4.63 4.26 3.87 3.98 4.18 3.72 3.84 m

o 1978 Pc "i

No. of Species 37 29 32 42 28 42 36 37 35 37 34 32 35 Shannon Index 4.08 3.68 3.77 4.67 3.30 4.16 3.95 4.17 3.81 3.99 3.60 4.44 3.99 Evenness (b) 0.78 0.76 0.76 0.87 0.69 0.78 0.77 0.80 0.76 0.77 0.76 0.90 0.78 Richness 1979 No. of Species 18 16 19 36 34 27 34 24 29 25 28 38 27 Shannon Index 3.49 3.36 3.79 3.22 3.78 3.84 4.10 3.88 4.12 4.07 3.68 4.32 3.80 Evenness 0.84 0.82 0.88 0.62 0.74 0.81 0.80 0.84 0.84 0.88 0.77 0.83 0.81 Richness 2.97 2.64 3.36 4.69 4.08 2.98 3.46 2.72 3.26 3.52 3.57 5.19 3.54

U-M M

M M

M W

W W

W M

W W

W M

M W

W W

W TABI.E V-C-4 (Continued)

Jan Feb Mar Apr thy Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1

IC 1980 No. of Species 78 18 24 25 21 18 30 16 32 24 33 37 24 Shannon Index 3.88 2.64 3.78 3.82 3.28 3.26 3.61 3.45 4.10 3.54 3.73 4.56 3.57 Evenness 0.81 0.64 0.83 0.82 0.75 0.78 0.74 0.86 0.82 0.77 0.74 0.87 0.78 Richness 4.07 2.65 3.49 4.02 2.50 2.38 2.90 1.94 3.33 2.59 4.01 5.40 3.15 1981 No. of Species 22 35 37 39 34 33 33 51 35 27 40 32 35 thannon Index 3.92 4.39 4.39 2.29 3.66 4.56 4.13 4.59 4.07 3.90 4.00 4.32 3.95 E enness 0.88 0.85 0.84 0.43 0.72 0.90 0.82 0.81 0.79 0.82 0.75 0.86 0.79 Richness 3.91 5.84 6.10 4.58 3.69 4.61 3.73 5.76 3.85 3.56 5.00 4.55 4.60 1982 No. of Species 51 41 46 72 55 45 66 54 53 35 50 49 47 g

Shannon Index 4.68 4.80 4.96 1.88 4.79 4.33 4.72 4.54 4.22 3.97 4.09 4.66 4.30 cm Evenness 0.82 0.90 0.90 0.42 0.83 0.79 0.78 0.79 0.74 0.77 0.72 0.83 0.77

'a Richness 7.17 6.43 6.88 2.36 6.15 4.96 6.65 5.33 5.23 3.61 5.36 6.23 5.53 g ts 1983 No. of Species 36 42 51 52 25 42 37 40 37 45 37 52 41

>M Shannon Ind.x 4.27 4.01 4.60 4.74 3.67 4.41 4.16 4.28 3.56 3.51 4.17 4.72 4.18 p

Evenness 0.82 0.74 0.81 0.83 0.79 0.82 0.80 0.80 0.68 0.64 0.80 0.83 0.78 yM N

Richness 5.17 6.45 7.35 6.64 2.98 4.18 3.63 4.17 3.83 4.46 4.38 6.48 4.98

<: t-*

1984 o :r:

No. of Species 31 60 36 46 41 51 57 54 51 53 54 44 48 El H Shannon Index 4.02 4.89 4.30 3.06 4.37 4.48 4.34 4.03 4.38 4.00 4.59 4.10 4.21 Rn Evenness 0.80 0.83 0.82 0.55 0.81 0.79 0.74 0.70 0.77 0.70 0.80 0.75 0.76

%O Richness 5.05 8.95 6.54 6.98 5.55 6.41 7.29 5.97 5.43 5.70 7.10 6.71 6.47 t-*

1985

o

5. af Species 41 38 53 39 46 52 53 58 50 61 50 39 48 M

Shan..sn Index 3.60 3.31 4.44 3.88 4.24 2.95 4.16 4.28 3.59 2.57 3.15 3.26 3.56 o

Evenness 0.71 0.63 0.78 0.56 0.77 0.52 0.72 0.73 0.63 U.43 0.55 0.61 0.64 PC Richness 6.42 5.75 8.48 5.25 4.71 5.12 6.83 6.14 5.40 6.09 6.70 5.88 6.06

'* Shannon-Weiner Index (b)No data IC} Data for period April 1980-December 1985 represents single entrainment samples collected monthly, a

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

Su:mnary and Conclusions The phytoplankton community of the Ohio River near BVPS exhibited a seasonal pattern similar to that observed in previous years.

This pat-tern is common to temperate, lotic environments.

Total cell densities were within the range observed during previous years.

Diversity indices of phytoplankton were as high or higher than those previously observed near BVPS.

I I

I 8

8 8

lt t

a3 h

l

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT D.

ZOOPLANKTON Objectives Plankton sampling was conducted to determine the condition of the zoo-plankton community of the Ohio River in the vicinity of the BVPS and to assess possible environmental impact to the zooplankton due to the opera-I tion of Unit 1.

Methods The zooplankton analysis was performed on one liter aliquots taken from the preserved one-gallon samples obtained from the intake bay. (see Phytoplankton methods, in Part C above).

One liter from each sample was I

filtered through a 35 micron ( 035 mm) mesh screen. The portion retained was washed into a graduated cylinder and allowed to settle for a minimum of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months .

The supernatent was withdrawn until 10 ml of concentrate I

remained.

One ml of this thoroughly mixed concentrate was placed in an inverted microscope cell and examined at 100X magnification.

All zooplankters within the cell were identified to the lowest practicable taxon and counted. Total density (individuals / liter), Shannon-Weiner and evenness diversity indices (Pielou 1969), and richness index (Dahlberg

.and Odum 1970) were calculated based upon one sample, which was collected below the skimmer wall from one operating intake bay.

I Seasonal Distribution The zooplankton community of a river system is typically composed of protozoans and rotifers (Hynes 1970, Winner 1975). The zooplankton com-munity of the Ohio River near BVPS during preoperational and operational monitcring years was composed primarily of protozoans and rotifers.

1 Total organism density and species composition of zooplankton from the Ohio River and entrainment samples were similar during 1976, 1977, 1978, and 1979 (DLCo 1980).

Samples collected from intake bays are usually representative of the zooplankton populations of the Ohio River.

I During 1985, protozoans and rotifers accounted for 96% or more of all i

zooplankton on all sample dates (Table V-D-1).

Total organism densities during the winter and early spring (January through April) were less than I

m I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COhPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 485/ liter (Figure V-D-1, Table V-D-1).

Total organism densities increased in May and June, declined in July, and peaked (10,000/ liter) in August.

Zooplankton populations in the Ohio River usually exhibit a bimodal pattern.

The maximum zooplankton density in the Ohio River near BVPS frequently occurs in the spring, although it is sometimes delayed until summer or early fall (Table V-D-2, Figure V-D-1).

Below average I

precipitation in summer provided optimum conditions for zooplankton pop-

{

ulations to develop in August.

The effect of a dry year and low river l

discharges was noted by Hynes (1970) to favor plankton populations.

l The seasonal pattern of zooplankton densities observed in the Ohio River near BVPS is typical of temperate climates (Hutchinson 1967).

Zooplank-ton densities in winter are low due primarily to low water temperatures l

and limited food availability (Winner 1975).

In the spring, food avail-abililty and water temperatures increase, which stimulates growth and reproduction.

Zooplankton populations decrease during the fall and I

winter from the summer maximum because optimum conditions for growth and reproduction decrease during this period.

Densities of protozoans during January through April of 1985. were between 230 and 455/ liter (Table V-D-1).

Protozoans increased in May and June, decreased in July and increased August through October, peaking in August I

(6,680/ liter).

Protozoans progressively decreased in November to densi-ties to 520/ liter in December.

Vorticella sp. and Strobilidium spp.

occurred fairly consistently throughout the year.

The most common protozoan during 1985 was Vorticella sp. which dominated the protozoan assemblage during eight months (Table V-D-3). The most abundant protozoa in the other months were Difflugia and Strobilidium.

These taxa have been a main part of the protozoan assemblange of the Ohio River near BVPS since the studies were initiated in 1972.

The rotifer assemblage in 1985 (Figure V-D-2) displayed a typical pattern I

of rotifer populations in temperate inland waters (Hutchinson 1967).

Rotifer densities increased from a minimum of 10/ liter in April to a maximum of 3,240/ liter in May and a secondary peak in August (Table V-D-2).

Rotifer populations generally decreased af ter August to densities of f

I

~

M M

M m

mM M

M mmmm m

TABLE V-D-1 MONTilLY ZOOPLANKTON GROUP DENSITIES (Number / liter) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION FROM ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985 BVPS Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Group t/l f/1 t/l t/l 9/1 t/l Protozoa 365 89 455 94 230 90 355 97 3,280 50 4,440 71 g

8 Rotifera 40 10 30 6

25 10 10 3

3,240 50 1,820 29 m

Crustacea 5

1 0

0 0

0 20

<1 a

b en Total 410 100 485 100 255 100 365 100 6,520 100 6,280 100 n@

C

o o 3

d' Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

@y Group 3 /1 t/l 8/l f/1 8/l t/1 g

8 fg Protozoa 1,340 70 6,680 67 1,860 40

080 86 670 90 520 91 h

Rotifera 580 30 2,880 29 2,740 58 660 14 70 10 40 7

a Crustacea 0

0 440 4

80 2

20

<1 0

0 10 2

8 Total 1,920 100 10,000 100 4,680 100 4,760 100 740 100 570 100 l

l

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

JAN-JUL 1974, AUG-0CT 1974 81975,NOV-DEC (975 AVERAGE 1976-1984 1985 10,000-I 9.000-I 8.000-7,000 -

I w 6,000 -

3 I

$ 5,000 -

eN l \\

4,000 -

\\. s 3,000-

/'

/,

\\

.g k/ \\

/

i g

/

x

\\.

2,000-

/

\\

p I

/

\\.\\

\\

r I,000 -

/

j

~

0 J

F M

A M

J J

A

'S o

'N 0

MONTH FIGURE V-D-1 MONTHLY ZOOPLANKTON DENSITIES IN THE OHIO RIVER DURING PREOPERATIONAL (1974-1975) AND I

OPERATIONAL (1976-1985) YEARS BVPS 47

m M

e m

W W

W m

eeM M

M e

m m

M i

l l

l TABLE V-D-2 l

l MEAN 200PIANKTON DENSITIES (Numt>er/ liter) BY HUNTH FROM 1973 T11ROUGli 1985, O!!!O RIVER AND BVPS Total Zoonlanktm Jan Fet>

Mar Apr May Jun Jul AuL Sep Oct Nov Dec I'}

1971 50 90 154 588 945 1,341 425 180 87 1974 78 5'

96 118 299 625 4,487 3,740 1,120 4,321 1975 4,426 3,621 1,591 2,491 623 1976 327 311 347 10,948 2,516 5,711 3,344 3,296 3,521 51R 446 577 1977 147 396 264 393 5,153 4,128 1,143 1,503 3,601 553 934 486 1978 31 30 20 35 403 1,861 1,526 800 1,003 435 297 60 1979 357 96 228 534 2,226 599 2,672 4,238 950 370 542 550 1980 320 265 389 270 530 420 3,110 490 2,020 3,820 1,030 700 1981 190 360 220 580 840 310 3,800 1,940 4,490 1,850 760 370 1982 400 320 340 880 4,650 1,020 5,630 5,170 5,520 6,410 2,300 1,030 1983 285 330 1,415 540 480 8,220 4,780 6,010 3,280 2,880 950 560 1984 270 290 295 290 560 1,520 610 1,380 6,700 6,080 570 390 l

1985 410 485 255 365 6,520 6,280 1,920 10,000 4,680 4,760 740 570 u

h Protozoa jg cc 1973 45 63 82 188 56 331 346 135 58

>> nd 1974 50 42 72 91 138 409 1,690 716 1,006 4,195 i

1 1975 835 3,295 1,141 2,239 452 MM co 1976 278 274 305 10,774 1,698 6

1,903 1,676 808 425 396 492

$ t-*

1977 135 365 236 312 4,509 2,048 808 947 2,529 401 825 344 H H l

1978 18 14 14 27 332 1,360 407 315 256 222 227 z6

$0 1979 312 64 188 380 2,052 459 340 712 609 326 454

28 gH 1980 244 250 354 190 390 370 1,620 380 1,15t0 3,010 760 640 tr3 n 1981 130 310 180 510 480 230 730 1,250 4,020 1,580 550 330 ZO 1982 350 310 310 820 1,300 870 2,360 1,560 1,590 4,850 2,060 980 1983 250 320 315 500 390 6,940 1,320 5,030 1,100 1,670 890 490 t-* g 1984 225 280 285 260 500 1,190 530 1,210 5,000 5,300 530 360

n 4 1985 365 455 230 355 3,280 4,440 1,340 6,680 1,860 4,080 670 520 Qo Rotifera

n d

1973 5

25 64 388 859 1,001 75 43 27 1974 26 12 22 24 155 213 2,783 2,939 115 120 1975 3,339 313 444 250 164 1976 48 36 38 169 8 0

4,864 1,398 1,597 2,643 89 48 78 1977 12 31 26 76 031 1,oP4 328 539 1,022 147 108 136 1978 29 33 15 14 16 24 72 61 67 47 22 48 1979 44 33 37 151 112 135 2,255 3,482 324 42 66 220 1980 72 14 33 80 140 50 1,470 110 790 780 260 50 1981 40 50 40 70 34 0 80 2,800 630 470 260 210 40 1982 50 10 30 50 3,340 130 3,250 1,550 3,840 1,520 140 40 1983 30 10 1,100 40 90 1,270 3,440 880 1,930 1,190 60 70 1984 45 10 10 30 40 330 80 160 1,700 780 40 30 1985 40 30 25 10 3,240 1,820 580 2,880 2,740 660 70 40

U UMl dU M

M e

e m

W m

aus a

m m

e m

m m

M M

TABYE V-D-2 (Continued)

Crustacea Jan Feb Nr Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1973 1

1 3

12 29 9

3 2

2 1974 2

2 3

3 6

3 14 85 7

6 1975 51 12 6

3 6

1976 2

1 5

4 10 141 43 23 69 3

2 8

1977 2

5 13 96 7

17 50 5

1 6

1978 4

6 3

2 6

48 12 27 75 9

5 5

1979 1

0 3

3 2

4 78 44 17 2

2 2

1980 3

1 1

0 0

0 20 0

50 30 10 10 1981 20 0

0 0

20 0

270 60 0

10 0

0 1982 0

0 0

10 10 20 20 60 90 40 0

10 1983 5

0 0

10 20 100 250 20 0

0 1984 0

0 0

0 20 0

0 10 0

0 0

0 1985 5

0 0

20 0

440 80 20 0

10

>cd (a)No sample collected.

yQ b$

5 g

&e

<r N

$E s8 c E5 "B"

2 4

1 a

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l

ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT l

' I l I PROTOZOA ROTIFERA I'000 -

CRUSTACEA l

6900 -

l l

w 5,000 -

I a:

f 4000 -

I 3

a:

I A

f 5p00 -

\\\\

z l \\

F-,3 I

\\

l I

\\

l q'

\\

k 2900 -

g'

\\

I I

\\

l

\\

I

\\

I

\\

I

\\

I

\\

I

\\

l

\\

I I

\\

l

\\

l,000 -

I

\\ l

\\

3 l

V l

A"'s

^

0

-~

l J I F3 M 8 A8 M 6 J ' J 8 A 3 S iO6 N 3 0 8 MONTH FIGURE V-D-2 I

ZOOPLANKTON GROUP DENSITIES FOR ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985 BVPS I

l DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY ur 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 40/ liter in December.

Rotifers were usually the second most abundant group during 1985. Keratella cochlearis and Polyarthra dolichoptera were the most abundant rotifers during most of the year (Table V-D-3).

I Crustacean densities were low (0 to 440/ liter) through 1985 (Table V-D-1).

Most crustaceans were collected during late summer and fall (Figure V-D-2).

Crustacean densities never exceeded protozoan or rotifer I

densities and constituted from 0 to 4% of the total zooplankton density each month (Table V-D-1).

Copepod nauplii were the most numerous crustaceans collected during 1985.

Crustacean populations did not develop high densities due to unfavorable high flow / turbidity river con-ditions through most of 1985.

Crustaceans are rarely numerous ja the open waters of rivers and many are eliminated by silt and turbulent water (Hynes 1970).

I The highest Shannon-Weiner diversity value of 3.72 occurred in September, whereas the maximum number of species (32) occurred in August (Table V-D-

4).

Evenness ranged from 0.49 in April to 0.80 in July. Richness varied f rom a low of 1.44 in March to a high of 3.37 in August. The number of species ranged from 9 in March to 32 in August. Low diversity indices in February, March, April and December reflect the dominance of Vorticella ep.

I Comparison of Control and Non-Control Transects Zooplankton samples were not collected from stations on the Ohio River after April 1,

1980; therefore, comparison of Control and Non-Control Transects was not possible.

I I

I n

O TABLE V-D-3 DQ4SITIES (Number / liter) OF MOST ABUNDANT ZOOPLANKTON TAXA (Greater than 28 on any date)

COLLECTED FROM ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES JANUARY TilROUGli DECEMBER, 1985 BVPS Taxa J, an,

{3,

pg r,,

Apg, M

M M

A,g[

Sep, ggi

!gt peg b

PROT 0ZOA Arcella sp.

15 15 100 20 50 11 40 20 100 20 Askenasia sp.

160 320 Bursaria sp.

60 Carchesium sp.

Codonella cratera 30 100 320 260 640 10 Fd Difflugia acuminata 5

40 3,72C 800 40 40 ui Euglypha ciliate 20 140 60 o

Halophyrid ciliate Lionotus sp.

5 10 gg Nuclearia simplex 280 200 80 20 cj c gM opercularia sp.

35 75 5

40 120 2

Paradileptus sp.

Parameciam sp.

40 15 10 10 20 MM kt*

Phascolodon vortice11a 180 20 40 1,140 20 10 tn Staarophrya elegans 220 yy Strobilidium gyrans 5

15 120 40 120 240 20 10 O :::

Strobilidium sp.

20 5

20 60 280 40 240 100 1,160 80 10 3d Suetorian ciliate 20 40 80 NO

$9 M a'nidium fluviatile 5

300 440 80 100 300 10 g9 Taraniella sp.

1,000 400 vortice11a sp.

240 300 170 265 1,860 2,580 220 1,000 180 360 290 390 Ciliate unidentified 10 10 40 25 40 300 80 40 40 100 40 40 y *<

M ROTIFERA 8

Bdelloidea 5

10 Brachionus bodapestinensis 240 Brachionus calyctflorus 5

200 120 160 Brachionus urceolaris 140 40 Conochilus dossuarius 360 Keratella cochlearts 15 5

1,000 1,280 360 400 880 560 10 10 Polyarthra dolichoptera 20 1,280 20 160 560 920 20 10 20 Polyarthra vulgaris 20 60 20 240 80 40 Synchaeta sp.

5 5

460 200 200 Trichocerca rouss 720 160 Ratifer unidentified 10 5

5 60 100 20 40 60 30

m M

M M

M V-D-3 (Continued)

Taxa Jan Feb Mar Ag M

Jun Jul Ay Oct Nov Dec CRUSTACEA Nauplii 5

20 200 20 20 10 TOTAL 2OOPIANKTCN 410 485 255 365 6,520 6,280 1,920 10,00n 4,680 4,760 740 570 TOTAL of pt>st Abundant Taxa 405 470 245 365 6,440 6,220 1,860 9,320 4,280 4,560 650 541 l

?ercentage Composition of rest Abundant Zooplankton 99 97 96 100 99 99 97 93 91 96 88 95 we W

i W

1 gO db cg Gmz UM an

'3 NN 5e Ro 5>5 e a:

EeO MH I

i i

i

m m

M M

M TABLE V-D-4 ZOOPLANETON DIVERSITY INDICES BY MONTil FOR ENTEAINMENT SAMPLES, 1985 BVPS Date Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun No. of Species 13 12 9

10 16 19 Shannon-Weiner Index 2.32 1.98 1.72 1.64 2.90 2.91 5

Evenness 0.62 0.55 0.53 0.49 0.72 0.68 h8 O

Richness 2.00 1.78 1.44 1.52 1.71 2.06

0 sm Jul Aug Sep

-Oct Nov Dec X

Ej 2 t*

H H No. of Species 18 32 27 20 19 13 17 89

$n L

z@

hQ Shannon-Weiner Index 3.35 3.60 3.72 3.27 3.25 1.97 2.72

" i5 b

Evenness 0.80 0.72 0.78 0.76 0.76 0.53 0.66 R

Richness 2.25 3.37 3.08 2.44 2.72 1.89 2.19 3

E l

d;>9f to 9

1% 'ff i

///gj Ok IMAGE EVALUATION ggx3//f t y#,

I TEST TARGET (MT-3) y

([/p 4lg, sf//,,

$4,,,, '

)

1.0 F m as l

9 m 7"u

.: :1 lbb l,l

]

l.8 1.25 1.4 lll 1.6 4

150mm 6"

y; 3, s gs(y:

4 a

y

,: e e p-

8>&*

tO O

/o t @ > k ' " k/

////p

/g %g IMAGE EVALUATION t,/

/p Y i

TEST TARGET (MT-3)

,;j >

egg 3

$777 77 3

3 l.0 lf a m y :n g"u C 2Lt l,l

[ II' hN I l.8 I

1.25 1.4 l

1.6 4

150mm 4

6" w?'%/////

/ f4%

A

+s*c,,.;&,,g A

vs

//'

hs

' 't 0

4Q 4;fs

gg

A gy A gb b'

k//// tY[t)@/'

j/

8; IMAGE EVALUATION

%'{>,W'

'%f[@,

TEST TARGET (MT-3)

I.0 G.9 71 m

n pm n

3 73, bb l,l l 1.8 1.25 1.4 l'

l.6 150mm --

6" l4 wy,,.

.us z

'o

%M sy y efg

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

Comparison of Preoperational and Operational Data Population dynamics of the zooplankton community during the seasons of preoperational and operational years are displayed in Figure V-D-1.

Total zooplankton densities were lowest in winter, usually greatest in I

summer and transitional in spring and autumn.

This pattern in the Ohio River sometimes varies from year to year which is normal for zooplankton populations in other river habitats.

Hynes (1970) concluded th'at the zooplankton community of rivers is inherently unstable and subject to constant change due to variations of temperature, spates, current, turbidity and food source.

Total densitiec of zooplankton during 1985 were within the range established during the preoperational years (1973 through 1975) and operational years (1976 through 1984) (Figure V-D-1).

In 1985, the data indicate that the peak zooplankton densities were I

delayed until August because of above average river flow, precipitation and turbidity.

The species composition of zooplankton in the Ohio River near BVPS has remained stable during preoperational and operational years.

The common or abundant protozoans during the. past ten years have been Vorticella, Codonella, Difflugia, Strobilidium, Cyclotrichium, Arcella and I

Centropyxis.

The most numerous and frequently occurring rotifers have been Keratella, Polyarthra, Synchatta, Branchionus and Richocerca.

Copepod nauplii have been the only crustacean taxa found consistently.

Community structure, as compared by diversity indices, has been similar during the past eleven years (Table V-D-5).

In previous years, low I

diversity indices and number of species occurred in winter; high diver-sities and number of species usually occurred in late spring and summer.

In 1985, the diversity indices and species numbers were lowest in February, March and April which is typical for months of winter and early spring.

Shannon-Wiener diversity indices in 1985 ranged from 1. 64 to 3.72 and were roughly equivalent to the range of 1.80 to 3.28 that occurred during preoperational years from 1973 to 1975. The variation in evenness during 1985 (0.49 to 0.80) was at the upper portion of the range I

reported from 1973 to 1984 (0.21 to 0.93).

55 I

M M

Mb M

M M

M TABLE V-D-5 MEAN ZOOPLANKTON DIVERSITY IN') ICES BY MONTil FROM 1973 TlikOUCil 1985 IN TiiE 011I0 RIVER NEAR BVPS i

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul A 1 Sep Oct Nov Dec 1973 I"

FuHer of Spegs 8.44 15.29 21.28 25.07 21.96 22.86 16.33 14.40 14.30 Shannon Index 1.80 3.06 3.08 2.79 2.25 2.20 2.21 2.31 3.10 9

Evenness 0.37 0.63 0.58 0.46 0.39 0.36 0.37 0.44 0.61 1974 Number of Species 14.64 9.18 14.92 17.75 23.25 15.56 21.14 18.89 9.56 14.47 Shannon Index 3.18 2.53 2.91 3.06 3.25 2.32 3.28 2.24 2.15 1.84 Evenness 0.62 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.55 0.41 0.60 0.41 0.42 0.30 1975 Number of Species 24.75 18.75 14.38 17.44 15.38 Shannon Index 3.20 1.86 2.90 2.01 3.20 Evenness 0.69 0.44 0.77 0.49 0.82 w

1976 pe Number of Species 7.00 9.13 8.69 17.56 19.19 23.56 28.06 23.50 23.56 11.19 8.75 11.75 AC Shannon Index 1.67 2.64 2.24 0.89 3.06 2.33 3.36 3.63 2.76 2.73 1.60 2.64

$Oc Evenness 0.60 0.84 0.73 0.21 0.72 0.51 0.70 0.80 0.61 0.79 0.51 0.75 gM M

u 1977 MM Number of Species 4.00 10.00 12.00 13.31 21.00 25,62 22.38 25.50 36.75 16.88 20.31 15.31

$ r*

Shannon Index 1.53 2.59 3.01 2.98 3.15 3.45 3.32 3.60 3.71 3.35 3.42 3.42 HH Evenness 0.78 0.79 0.87 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.73 0.77 0.71 0.82 0.79 0.86 h

1978 mn Number of Species 0.12 7.12 4.31 5.12 7.62 6.25 10.25 11.25 12.50 0.25 10.88 10.38 ZO Shannon Index 2.48 2.41 1.53 1.70 1.53 1.33 2.50 2.44 2.53 2.28 2.15 2.00 Evenness 0.83 0.85 0.74 0.71 0.52 0.50 0.76 0.70 0.70 0.73 0.62 0.83 r* >'

ck 1979 M

Number of Species 10.62 6.00 10.25 15.88 17.25 14.25 16.88 21.50 18.12 12.00 14.62 14.00 o

Shannon Index 2.51 2.52 3.05 3.42 2.36 3.02 2.42 3.30 3.36 2.99 2.84 3.10 P3 d

Evenness 0.74 0.93 0.90 0.86 0.58 0.80 0.60 0.74 0.80 0.84 0.74 0.83 ICI 1980 Number of Species 11.62 11.00 12.50 10.00 8.00 15.00 21.00 15.00 18.00 22.00 18.00 18.00 Shannon Index 2.51 2.70 3.03 2.41 2.00 2.91 3.63 2.79 3.23 2.88 3.26 3.36 Evenness 0.70 0.78 0.84 0.72 0.66 0.74 0.82 0.71 0.77 0.64 0.78 0.80 1981 Number of Species 8.00 12.00 7.00 11.00 19.00 12.00 23.00 24.00 20.00 21.00 17.00 10.00 Shannon Index 2.14 3.02 2.28 2.32 3.44 2.73 2.96 3.55 2.62 3.05 2.66 2.47 Evenness 0.71 0.84 0.81 0.67 0.81 0.76 0.65 0.77 0.60 0.69 0.65 0.74

m M

M M

e m

m m

M M

M TABLE V-D-5 (Continued)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1982 Nun.ber of Species 10.00 9.00 11.00 22.00 27.00 20.00 37.00 36.00 40.00 34.00 19.00 17.00 Shannon Index 2.99 2.22 2.89 3.59 2.46 3.20 3.82 4.28 3.86 3.09 3.54 3.14 Evenness 0.90 0.70 0.83 0.80 0.52 0.74 0.73 0.83 0.72 0.61 0.83 0.77 1983 Number of Species 18.00 10.00 23.00 14.00, 17.00 24.00 34.00 30.00 37.00 33.00 17.00 18.00 Shannon Index 3.20 2.39 2.41 3.09 3.54 2.36 3.56 2.65 3.92 3.43 3.28 3.54 Evenness 0.76 0.71 0.53 0.81 0.86 0.51 0.70 0.54 0.75 0.68 0.80 0.85 1984 Number of Species 17.00 10.00 7.00 10.00 13.00 18.00 12.00 18.00 23.00 14.00 14.00 11.00 Shannon Index 3.29 2.64 0.82 2.10 2.26 2.63 2.40 2.28 3.62 2.84 2.89 2.52 Evenness 0.80 0.79 0.28 0.63 0.61 0.63 0.67 0.54 0.80 0.67 0.74 0.72

-e 1985 Number of Species 13.00 12.00 9.00 10.00 16.00 19.00 18.00 32.00 27.00 20.00 19.00 13.00 Shannon Index 2.32 1.98 1.72 1.64 2.90 2.91 3.35 3.60 3.72 3.27 3.25 1.97 Nec:

Evenness 0.62 0.55 0.53 0.49 0.72 0.68 0.80 0.72 0.78 0.76 0.76 0.53 y@

>m t~ fn Z

MM

'd (a) Blanks represent periods when no collections were made, y

(b)Shannon-k'einer Index yQ Data for period April 1980-December 1985 represents single entrainment samples collected monthly.

O$

l ICI o

5>k td >

W td Ow H

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Summary and Conclusions Zooplankton densities throughout 1985 were typical of a temperate zoo-plankton community found in large river habitats.

Total densities were within the range of those reported in previous years.

During the late spring and summer of 1985 populations maintained high densities, except i

in July.

Peak diversity was found to occur in August.

Protozoans and rotifers were always predominant.

Common and abundant taxa in 1985 were I

similar to those reported during preoperational and other operational years.

Shannon-Weiner diversity, number of species and evenness were within the ranges of preceding years. Based on the data collected during the nine operating years (1976 through 1984) and the three preoperating years (1973 through 1975), it is concluded that the overall abundance and species composition of the zooplankton in the Ohio River near BVPS has I

remained stable and possibly improved slightly over the thirteen year period from 1973 to 1985.

No evidence of appreciable harm to the river zooplankton from BVPS Unit 1 operation was found. The data indicate that i

increased turbidity and current from high water conditions have the strongest effects of delaying the population peaks and temporarily decreasing total zooplankton densities in the Ohio River near BVPS.

I I

I t

I I

I 4

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY j

1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT E.

FISH Objective Fish sampling was conducted in order to detect any changes which might I

occur in fish populations in the Ohio River near BVPS.

(

_ Methods I

Adult fish surveys were performed in May, July, September and December 1985.

The final survey was intended to be conducted in early November, however, high flow conditions prevented collection until late December.

During each survey, fish were collected at the three study transects (Figure V-E-1), using gill nets, electrofishing and minnow traps.

I Gill nets, consisted of five, 25-ft. panels of 1.0, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5 inch square mesh. Two nets were positioned close to shore at each tran-sect, with the small mesh inshore.

As transect 2 is divided by Phillis Island into two separate water bodies consisting of the main river chan-nel (2A) and the back channel (2B), south of the island, a total of eight gill nets were set per sampling month.

Nets were set for approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months . All captured fish were identified, counted, measured for total length (mm) and weighed (g).

Electrofishing was conducted with a boat-mounted boom electroshocker.

Direct current of 220 volts and one to two amps was generally used.

Shocking time was maintained at 10 minutes per transect for each survey.

The shoreline aress of each transect were shocked and large fish pro-cessed as described above for the gill net collections.

Small fish vere immediately preserved with 10% formalin and returned to the laboratory for analysis. Non-game fish were counted and a batch weight obtained for the entire sample.

The length range was determined by visual inspection and measurement of the largest and smallest fish.

!I l

Minnow traps were baited with bread, cheese and sucrose and placed next l

to the inshore side of each gill net on each sampling date. These traps were painted black and brown with a camouflage design and were set for 24 j

hours.

All captured fish were preserved and processed in the laboratory in the manner described for electrofishing.

59 I

M M

M 4600 0

15u0 5000 p,'. n,

r.: ;r 2 --- ~

..d

. &i, p :.i,.,

E.eN an,,

Ni,,

i sj

..., wi 2

k

. 'l

,s

...NdT6,% M>3 3E N

"7

,**a'

~m Q,. ' Tb E '~-

y*, ing m,Ocfj-w..

,7 e

cn Cff.,-Qp.

2 ig,%?%dQpt

m%

o 2

ny gn r- @

g g

v..no Q

~

' ~ " * '..

o*

r,-

O' E

.l LEGEND

// 2A

,e SYM{lQL1 Di BE AVER VA1.L E f DISCHARGE

[,

l-3 STATION HUMBER en if hee-i EL ECTRUFISHING D5 INDUS T HI AL DISCll ARGE

,* II,%s /

g D2 SHIPPINOPORT DISCll A RGE il i GILL NET MilJNOW TR AP O

AID 10 NAVIG ATION BEAVER LLEY h,,,,,,,

- - - - TH ANSMISSION LlHE

[ER S AT ON owgp STATION FIGURE V-E-1 FISH SAMPLING STATIONS BVPS.

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Results Fish population studies have been conducted in the Ohio River near BVPS i

from 1970 through 1985. These surveys have collected 62 fish species and two hybrids (Table V-E-1).

In 1985, 29 fish species were collected, all of which had been captured previously.

A combined total of 420 individ-uals were collected in 1785 by gill neeting, electrofishing and minnow traps (Table V-E-2).

I A total of 297 fish, representing 17 species was collected by electro-fishing (Table V-E-3).

Collectively, the minnows and shiners accounted for 46.1% of the total electrofishing catch in 1985.

Gizzard shad, also a forage species, represented 28.3% of the catch. Carp, smallmouth bass, and freshwater drum accounted for 9.8%,

2.0%,

and 2.0% of the catch.

Each of the other taxa accounted for less than 2% of the total. Most of the fish sampled by electrofishing were collected in May (46.8%).

The fewest fish were collected in December (3.0%).

It should be noted that " observed" fishes were included in the catch per unit effort.

This was necessary t,ecause of the turbidity and swif tness of the high water.

Since the netters c.ould not physically collect these stunned fishes, they were recorded as " observed".

This accounts for the numbers of electroshocked fishes being identified to the genus level.

I The gill net results varied by month with the highest catch in the month of September (38 fish).

May was the next highest month with 36 fish.

July and December catches resulted in 26 fish and 9 fish, respectively.

Gill net sampling typically results in catching more fish in warmer weather when fish are usually more active, thus the low sample numbers encountered from December are to be expected (Table V-E-4).

I A tott.1 of only 14 fish were captured using minnow traps in 1985 (Table V-E-2).

Again, the poor sampling success was attributed to high river I

flows and resultant turbidity encountered.

The most common species (i.e., those which contributed more than 1% to the annual total catch) collected through the use of gill nets, electro-I G1 I

I LUQUESNE LICHT COMPANY 1985 ANi4UAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I

TABLE V-E-1 (SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME)1 FAMILIES AND SPECIES OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970-1985 BVPS E

Family and Scientific Name Common Name Lepisosteidae (gars)

Lepisosteus osseus Longnose gar I

Clupeidae (herrings)

Alosa chrysochloris Skipjack herring Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Salmonidae (salmon and trouts)

Salmo gairdneri Rainbow trout I

Esocidae (pikes)

Esox lucius Northern pike E. masquinongy Muskellunge E. lucius X E. masquinongy Tiger muskellunge Cyprinidae (minnows and carps)

Campostoma anomalum Central stoneroller I

Carassius auratus Goldfish Cyprinus carpio Common carp C. carpio X Carassius auratus Carp-goldfish hybrid I

Ericymba buccata Silverjaw minnow Nocomis micropogon River chub Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis atherinoides Emerald shiner 2

N. chrysocephalus" Striped shiner N. hudsonius Spottail shiner N. rubellus Rosyface shiner I

N. spilopterus Spotfin shiner N. stramineus Sand shiner N. volucellus Mimic shiner Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose dace Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chub I

Catostomidae (suckers)

Carpiodes carpio River carpsucker i

Carpiodes cyprinus Quillback Catostomus commersoni White sucker I

Hypentelium nigricans Northern hog sucker j

Ictiobus bubalus Smallmouth buffalo I. niger Black buffalo i l Moxostoma anisurum Silver redhorse W

M. carinatum River redhorse j

M. duquesnei Black redhorse

' g

[.erythrurum Golden redhorse g

M. macrolepidotum Shorthead redhorse l

62 I

l DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE V-E-1 (Continued)

I Family and Scientific Name Common Name i

Ictaluridae (bullhead and catfishes)

Ictalurus catus White catfish I. melas Black bullhead I. nataJis Yellow bullhead I

I. nebulosus Brown bullhead I. punctatus Channel catfish Noturus flavus Stonecat Pylodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Percopsidae (trout-perches)

Percopsis omiscomaycus Trout-perch Cyprinodontidae (killifishes)

Fundulus diaphanus Banded killifish Atherinidae (silversides)

Labidesthes sicculus Brook silverside Percichthyidae (temperate basses)

Morone chrysops White bass I

I Centrarchidae (sunfishes)

Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish

,E L. gibbosus Pumpkinseed i

g L. macrochirus Bluegill Micropterus dolomieui Smallmouth bass M. punctulatus Spotted bass

}.salmoides Largemouth bass Pomoxis annularis White crappie P. nigromaculatus Black crappie Percidae (perches)

Etheostoma blennioides Greenside darter E. nigrum Johnny darter 5

E. zonale Banded darter

-'erca flavescens Yellow perch P

Percina caprodes Logperch I

P. copelandi Channel darter Stizostedion canadense Sauger S. vitreum vitreum Walleye Sciaenidae (drums)

Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum i

1 Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1980).

2A former subspecies of N. cornutus (Gilbert, 1964) and previously reported as common shiner.

(3 I

l

=

W W

W W W

W W e TABLE V-E-2 NLhBER OF FIS11 COLLECTED AT VARIOUS 'IT:ANSECTS BY CILL NET (G), ELECTROFISli1NG (E),

AND MINNOW TRAP (M) IN Tile NEW CLitBERLAND POOL OF Tile 01110 RIVER,1985 BVPS Percent 1

2A 2B 3

Crand Total

.innual Annual Taxa C

E M

C E

N C

E M

C E

H C

E M

Total Total Irngnose gar 1

1 1

0.2 Cizzard shad 1

18 3

46 1

9 7

11 12 84 96 22.9 Muskellunge 1

1 1

0.2 Tiger muskellunge 1

1 2

2 0.5 Pike sp.

1 1

2 2

0.5 Cermon carp 6

9 3

4 7

14 2

2 18 29 47 11.2 Emerald shiner 4

10 4

5 28 1

47 5

52 12.4 Sperfin shiner 2

4 6

6 1.4 g

Bluntnose minncw 1

1 1

3 3

0.7 g

Shiner sp.

2 35 6

44 87 87 20.7 g

thite sucker 1

1 1

0.2 j

Ouillback 1

1 2

2 0.5 gQ River carpsucker 1

1 1

0.2 Fy Silver redhorse 2

2 2

1 2

5 7

1.7 yM e

Colden redhorse 1

1 1

3 4

5 5

10 2.4

$[

Shorthead redhorse 1

1 2

2 0.5 yQ Redhorse sp.

I 1

1 1

2 0.5 yH Channel catfish 3

2 8

9 1

22 1

23 5.5 yQ Flathesd catfish 1

1 1

0.2 gy Trout perch 2

2 2

0.5 F>

Lhite bass 2

2 7

0.5 y

i<ock bass 1

1 2

3 6

1 7

1.7 y

Green sunfish 1

1 1

0.2 y

Pumpkinseed 1

1 1

0.2 i

Bluegill 1

1 1

0.2 Sunfish sp.

I 1

1 0.2 Smallmouth bass 2

2 2

6 6

1.4 Spotted bass 8

1 1

1 2

2 10 1

21 3

2 26 6.2 Pass sp.

2 1

1 1

5 5

1.2 khite crappie 4

4 4

1.0 Black crappie 1

1 2

2 0.5 Saurer 1

5 2

5 3

8 1.9 Walleye 2

2 2

0.5 Freshwater drum 2

4

,6 6

1.4 Total 22 45 1

11 105 7

24 49 4

52 98 2

109 297 14 420

TABLE V-E-3 SUEcR OF FISil COLLECTED PER Molml BY CILL NET (C), ELECTPDFISillNC (E), AND MINNOW TRAP (M)

IN TIIE NEW Ct'MBERLAND POOL OF Tile OHIO RIVER,1965 BVPS Percent May Jul Sep Dec

_ Crand Total Annual Annual Tau C

E M

C 1

1 G

1 M 1 1 1 C

E M

Total tal Longnose gar 1

1 1

0.2 Gizzard shad 47 1

19 5

17 6

1 12 84 96 22.9 Muskellunge 1

1 1

0.2 Tiger ruskellunge 1

1 2

2 0.5 Pike sp.

I 1

2 2

0.5 Common carp 6

10 5

13 7

3 3

18 29 47 11.2 Emerald shiner 4

2 35 7

3 1

47 5

52 12.4 Srotfin shiner b

6 6

1.4 Bluntnose ofnnow 2

1 3

3 0.7 g

Shiner sp.

69 14 2

2 87 87 20.7 khite sucker 1

1 1

0.2 e

Ouillback 2

2 2

0.5

.f j River carpsucker 1

1 1

0.2 Silver redhorse 1

1 4

1 2

5 7

1.7 FQ g Celden redhorse 1

4 5

5 5

10 2.4 QM Shorthead redhorse 1

1 2

2 0.5

$[

Redhorse sp.

I 1

1 1

2 0.5

@Q Channel catfish 11 2

1 9

22 1

23 5.5 yH Flathead catfish 1

1 1

0.2 yQ Trout perch 2

2 2

0.5 Q%

khite bass 1

1 2

2 0.5 FP2 i

Rock bass 3

3 1

6 1

7 1.7

%d Creen sunfish 1

1 1

0.2 Pumpkinseed 1

1 1

0.2 W

g Bluegill 1

1 1

0.2 Sunfish sp.

I 1

1 0.2 I

Smallmouth bass 2

3 1

6 6

1.4 Spotted bass 10 1

4 2

7 1

1 21

'3 2

26 6.2 Bass sp.

2 1

2 5

5 1.2 khite crappie 2

2 4

4 1.0 Black crappie 1

1 2

2 0.5 Sauger 1

3 1

5 3

8 1.9 Walleye 1

1 2

2 0.5 Freshwater drum 4

2 6

6 1.4 Total 36 139 3

26 110 0

38 39 11 9

9 0

109 297 14 420

l DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE V-E-4 NUMBER OF FISH COLLECTED BY GILL NET, ELECTR0 FISHING AND MINNOW TRAP AT TRANSECTS IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1985 BVPS Transect Gill !;et 1

2A 2B 3

Total Average May 12 2

11 11 36 9.0 i

July 2

3 1

20 26 6.5 September 8

6 11 13 38 9.5 December 0

0 1

8 9

2.2 Total 22 11 24 52 109 Average 5.5 2.8 6.0 13 Electrofishing May 13 69 18 39 139 34.8 9

July 24 15 18 53 110 27.5 September 7

!8 10 4

39 9.8 December 1

3 3

2 9

2.2 4

Total 45 105 49 98 297 Average 11.2 26.2 12.2 24.5 l

1 Minnow Trap May 0

1 0

2 3

0.8 July 0

0 0

0.0 9

1 September 1

6 4

0 11 2.8 December 0

0 0

0.0 Total 1

7 4

2 14 Average 0.2 1.8 1.0 0.5 4

i e

1 9

CC f

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT fishing and minnow traps included the following:

gizzard shad; common carp; emerald shiner and shiners spp.; golden redhorse and silver red-horse; channel catfish; rock bass, spotted bass, smallmouth bass, bass spp.; sauger; and freshwater drum.

The remaining 18 species each accounted for 1% or less of the total.

Comparison of Control and Non-Control Transects Comparisons of the data obtained from the Control Transect (1) with that from the Non-Control Transects indicate that the fish populations have i

fluctuated slightly since 1974 (Ta ble V-E-5).

However, comparisons between years include many natural variables and can be misleading.

Fluctuations in catches occur with changes in the physical and chemical properties of the river's ambient water quality.

Since electrofishing efficiency depends largely on the water's conductivity, any sampling conducted during extremes in this parameter will affect catch-per-unit-effort.

In addition, turbidity and current affects the collectors' 8

ability to observe the stunned fish.

Direct sunlight also influences where fishes congregate, thus determining their susceptibil,ity to being shocked.

Electrofishing collects mostly small forage species (minnows and shad) and their highl) fluctuating annual populations were reflected in dif ferences in catch-per-unit-effort from year to year and station to station.

However, gill nets catch mostly game species and are more indicative of true changes in fish abundance.

When comparing gill net I

data (Table V-E-6), little change is noticed either between Control and Non-Control Transects or between pre-operational and operational years.

The 1985 gill net catch-per-unit-effort (fish /24 hours) averaged near the upper end of the range established by previous collections with 2.7 and 3.3-4.0 for the Control and Non-Control Transects respectively.

Con-tributing to these increased yields are notibly high catches of carp, channel catfish, and spotted bass.

Comparison of Preoperational and Operational Data I

Electrofishing and gill net data, expressed as catch-per-unit-effort, for the years 1974 through 1985 are presented in Tables V-E-5 and V-E-6.

These twelve years represent two preoperational years (1974 and 1975) and ten operational years (1976 through 1985).

Fish data for Transect 1 m

i

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT t

C.

O.

em O.

em. en. en. C. O.

C.

em. en. en. O. O.

em. e6 O.

O.

^

ee eee o e,e e C e e e e e== s e e ev e o se o es e o e e C e se e e e e a e o e O O N e* *== s O e e s **

es e een e

m m

ce 4

ce s-e g

ee.

e o.

ce.

en.

O.

ee. C.

in. em.

en.

O. O. O. en. o. se.

O. c. )

en. se.

0 em.

se 4

e c

e ~ee C e as e o e e. e = a eoe e eoe e O s-e e e e e eoOeCe o e e se,e,o O e e e ** O m o O O e e ea e t

e em M

4 em m

N en. en.

em. O.

O.

se.

C. em. em.

O.

en.

9 em.

o. em. em.O. O. O. en.

a

e enoe e C e en e ee e e e e.= e 4 ee ce e o e o em6 e a e 5

me aee o e e a m o m a d e h eo e e e eOe 4

e me e

ce r's 4

e e ee e e e e 4 0 -e e s e N 4 4 e e e e e e e C e m sa e e -e e o e e a e e C O O e en O O e e o e eOe e e

N 9

es.

e. ce. e.

O. e. e. ce.

N.

en. em.

O.

N.

e N. ce.

e. e. em.

e.

m.

m

+

O es ce N

s e.

ce E

o.

se.

e. ce. M. en.

e.

ce.

N. es.

en.

es ce. e.s en.em. en e.

e. N.

O.

es ce es go o== e eoe e e e e** a O O m en e e e e e C e C e O O e O ce.e e e e e eO OOOOeeOOe e o e eOOe e e 4

em.

e N

e.

e ce 4

en N

m

.e m* 9 e.

m. N.

O.

C. e. O. N.

N.

e.

N.

e.

N.

e. e. N.

e.

N. N. e.

N.

m.

n O

0e e e e eoe e eCe e eOeOe eoe eOe e eNmOeOe eOOOeCe 4=

e eN s e e eO4em o an en.== m e

e m

c s's N

u

e. **. m.

N. N es e..

d.

.e

==.

m.

es.

N.

e. es ** e.

a. N.

m. M.

N.

em.

e*

9 p

+

w m

oN e oe e ea e e e C e6 en o e C O e O O e e e e o e eoeCe e e e eOeC e o ce O e eOOOOe e o e s

se 4

4 6

.e.

es e.

e.

d.

e.

e. m. e. d.

u. m.

m. m.

4. N. a. m.

e. m.

m. e. d.

m.

N.

m.

e. m.

e.

e e

Eb

~

eCe e Ce eeeeeOmOme e e eOOeOOeOOOOeCCeCO e O O==

O e O e O e O O e e e e e ce P*

C N

pe N

t f

n.

N.

e.

e. N. m. e.

m. e. e.

e.

n. e. c. e.

O. n. n.

m.

e.

u K.

~-

e e e e eCOOeoe e e eee e e e e e OmmoeWNOe e o e eCe ee e ce eos e e e.

-o s a-e 4 e. m J e

em e

es*

=

G b

u, 4

m.

m. e. m. m.

N. N. N.

4

k. N.

e.

M. 4 m.

a

~

e== e e e e e O e

e d e* ** em o e e e e e e e e o eC00e e e e eO e e00eoeae eCOe o e e e e e

t w

N na e

==

+

4 g

==

C a

O.

e.

00

e.

e.

C.

e. e.

O.

N.

n e

W N

e me e e e e s oe e e ce

e =* e e e eCe o e e e e e e sie e e e e o e e eOOe s 8 *

e e se e e e e e e e

m a

m en a

e.m s

N M

esa N

9 a

e 4

e

e. d.

a.

44 e.

e. 4 4

e. O.

e.

e 4

e.

oO e e e e ***n. a 4>e ee e e i e o e e e e eOOe e e e o e e e e e-eoOm a e O.e o e o e o e e

m.e m

.O*

N..$.e e

O.

e.

C.

e.

O. c.

o.

e.

D. e.

C.

e.

b e

v.

e s*=,

e e e e== a e o e e 6 -o e e e m.e e e me we e e e e e e e e e e e e a e e m we e e e.* e e e e e e e=

ce me E4 e.

0 em eC N ps.e ep. =

9 ee.

e.

o. se. C.

em. O.

ee.

C. en.

O. se.

se.

e

e. O. O.

em.

O.

e.

B e4 en i

F aA E

a== a e p se s 4 se ce e eeme4e e e 4

e e o e 4 es e e e e ce e e o e e o ce e e e 4 e e e me eme e we 4 as. e.

r.== e

.e e

d's 4

eng a>>

m 4

es N

I se== a I

wa 4

T-en. O.

O.

O. e. se. O.

O.

se.

e.

se.

se. em.en. in.

em.

en.O e.

2 =

E os e e e e e e 79 e e se 4 @ eee e e e e se e me o es e e e e e e e e e e e

se se e44e e e es e o e o e e e e

gw

=

e 4

r=

=

4g e

N 4

aa e m e e.

O.

e.

o.

O. e. o p*-

e.

e. se.

e.

9 a

~

p

=

e Oe o e e O.e e 4 me e e e o e i Oe eoe e e eoe o e e e e eCeeeOe e e o e e e e e e e

m ee em g

m

==

m m

a w

e e me e s e a 2

sm 9

O.

e. e. se.

em. O. O.

en. e.

e.

en.

O. e.

e.

N.

en 5

one e.ne O m a

e en ce a

e e e e e e e e ce C e eoe e e e e e o e e e o m ee e e e e eCe oe e e en e e a a en o am ce se ce 9

m. e.

m M. 4 e.

e.

m A

e e e a e e e eae e e e e m e e e e e e e e e 440e mo e e e a e e e 4

N e c.=

e E

emOe e eNOem

6 G

9 m'*

4 m

5

~

N es

~

E 6

Z W

e6 4*

444 O.

en. em. en.

em. @.

c. em. em.

e.

A C

e

=

e e e e ee e *== e e e e e e e e e== a e e e e e e e e o e e O O O

O e4 e e e eOOO8 e e e o

e h

e e e Ce m.

en m

se e

e e en e

b N

I4 so.

e.

en. e. te. e.

m. er*.

eoe e e eCe e e e Ce e O O m o O e se e e e eOOe e e e e

e.

m.

te.

e. m. o.

e.

O.

m. est e.

LJ We h.

re OeON e e e eOOe h

e e e e e eNme e e. e b

e s=e 4

p*

O.

C.

O. p C. 80. en.

O.

C. ew O.

e.

un 8 es e o e e e re eW e ** is'* P= P* O e e e e me e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e ce se 8 e e o e e o e e e te i

e.

m e

e te

9 ce te ce eee 4 eo We m O e e e e e e e e e e a e e e e e e e e e e e se e es e e e e o e e e eOe e e

M.

e. e. en. et. e.

se.

M.

se.

4 4

8=

es e e e eOe

.=

c en e

e se se 8

m 4

ee Fw 4

A se.

ce.

m.

ee.

se se A

eN e 8 e e s e em e eee N e e e e e e e e e e e a e e e e e e e e e e e s e e e e e e e e e e e ae e e

e J

sue g

4 e.

O.

e. 4

m. e.

>=.

d.

e. e. se.

e.

4 N

e o e e e e oen e es e oA e*Oe e e eCe e e a e e o e a e e e e e e e e e o O O ** e e *

e e e e e e C

e 4

em M

en em se no D.

t 9

O 6

m 9

A}

e g

R et u

e i

e=

bga J

$s C C bm e

b C

3 g

A ev

=

e 5

es es em 6

e e$e eyaem it. e G

G mm4 9 he ans ese

= =

m e

6, S.

e a=*

6 as gD6 y

p. e. e b b

b C 64 w a >

a AmA DA 99 WM 6

&m C ** *=== es bg 6 v sk 4 h.a.m.2.e 4 9e6m wegggggE

. A ** g e ]

== g e

e o

les gg g g g g as u.

se gg

.ggg g

b e

b. m G $

y agA eg g & y se e.J e

6

% e 4 en e e S ** 6 3 ** $ E W 6

S 4 j e 4 ** e # Gggh4 en ] at j.* Ae e. em a,se 6

S ** W eWw

. Sw4w 4 4 9b 6m am.

&.ed L

gg g s'*Sg4e

C e

a ge q,. g & A 3

.g g se g

e e. e en==

e b

e A g A,e g.e.g g

m 0 te O. O w

M e

w g se es

,23 e.

we e 6

e

>3 h.

38 C

M C

e.

g e

ga

=e e C

e Cb e n. e.

p 6.es a 9 m a. % bi C 4. e.s.@ A a 3.g 2 4 e. m. 7 mo g

m..I G

e a a

e W an A gJ s.e.Q e se g

m e b d E s.e 6A4 We m g.e.

o

=

40 es ao es o a% 3 e.

owem4 e.

me

,og gm g

e

- E es.

em e se

$ te E m E

=

6. m m.a s s. 3,s

. m a b

=

m M

J ^ e. "Q

b. m j E e L.,ee4 m b k d 4 4 e d*

H e GE h h

.e M J ad e >

lh o 4 A e4 9 6 Ke gQ

$ e.

e. O

&ge ed g

1. W.

e C s.s S

dip

'J De K d S. Q W G A A w.

an e e

b

l l

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT M

a g

7*

mm e

7,

-9 9

=~ q m eq 99 'J gl g o i ngeio igoi ioo'9'

6'o'Soo' g

-liiifin l

id e i m

- ~--

m-

~ ---< o efedfdiii.edpifiife idigddd,4 9

, dd8 dddf d e addl l iddl l did ddl l did dddddd

~_

m_-_

_a~___m-~

l-~__l f6effa a

~- -

_m-

~mma 5

ad s ofa sfffs adfefa af66e edidd l

e s s e n afsfs m

_-~_m f

s ad s

n. s s e e, e e e ede e ofe efa efidda e n a

m

- --~

a

_~

~~

'g i s i fiffd effis s i s i e i soi s i s s i s idde idfi i

)1

.g

... 9 ei....n~n"n" a

~

,"nn"g...

e

.n 9

o gee

..oe gegego

)

-l 9

i m

ede efe

--~

afdf.d n easdn e n a e a e e e affa edideJ a s 8

M e4 N--

O

--_M

__--~N-m y

%l eieae sdd anaffie efe ede efdddafdfdddfsj e e g

el s

t e

~

o

-~

_-~-_m-l

$le n

efd efn ofddffads e]

efnfda i e a e e

e e n e a e e s e N

kj.",,,,,"

c".

9.."..,e~,

,9"","

8

~

g e

o o

....e o

oco m

hh hel. 9

,9

.....N1 9......

9.

9.,"

?.

, o oe oc c

.. o

~

7 1[

pE

~

"kl

- =

, ~

o

~

l ide iedid i s e is ede i s. s i dede s i t i i Ji n i e i4 g

Qgg

^EE

.,el ed i e e e s e ede e e e a e e e e ede e a a e e a e edd g

e.

~

n sda e e 9

Ycds w-

_l e o i S S S

p g

i icie io..,, i i i i.oio, e i i., eo-o.. coo, t

g glid......

6

_m

.~~.

,d..d.....e

,d

......dd,,,ddd4 c

~

a p

1 1 6 I I i I d i l dI i i f I i1 8 8 idiii4 I l 1 0 l l 9 Sd,8 d I

4'

~

l

,I bl i l l l i 1 0 0 t l l l l e 1 6 i l dl l l $ 1 1 8 1 0 $ $ 4 tdg d I.

zl.

...e

~

9 9

. e" g" ",, 9 9. 4

.....ee.....

.c.

. o..

e co Nl

,7 N

1 9

9 NU U

U 999 *.

g i s e s oso e e so a s e n soe eoi eoce soe sosoooe~

t 11

~ ~

NN 9

s "o s 7

7""

gj i e aososo i eoce s s i s i s s ioi e is soecooi sm I

Yj"o.

9 7

N',,""

,9

~

od ooe ~

e

..., eo

........ e... eoe,,

Ql.......~

,,,m e

m

~

e d.,,,,,,,,d..d....

d,ed,,,s

..g

%'g

'fd5 a

-~

e s i e e e ed l e i s e s e e e edis e e i e i e i s ees idde i4 l

ILiai((e))]s!g!

va e i

l' 2

33 as I

11 3

't us-n t i a j e a f f j p=,3 = ~r j ]B -$1i 313j5jaeeJett e af, -_3 i te hh h eEA3as,3-31 ]- r_-b 2cm a 3 a3 8 a]v e l t s e 3 I. t -25ssn3m3j es_3 asa 4 e y1

3. e s

<>f w legedd 69

DUQUPSNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I (Control Transect) and the averages of Transects 2A, 2B and 3 (Non-Control Transects) are tabulated separately. These data indicate that new species are continuing to inhabit the study area and that, in gen-eral, the water quality of the Ohio River has steadily improved. I Summary and Conclusions The _ fish community of the Ohio River in the vicinity of BVPS has been sampled from 1970 to present, using several types of gear: electro-fishing, gill netting, and periodically minnow traps and seines. The results of these fish surveys show normal community structure based on g species composition and relative abundance. In all the surveys since W 1970, forage species (:ninnows and shiners) were collected in the highest numbers. This indicates a normal fish community, since sport species and predators rely heavily on this forage base for their survival. Varia-tions in total annual catch are attributable primarily to fluctuations in the pop.alation size of the small species. Small species with high reproductive potentials frequeatly respond to changes in natural environ-8, mental f actors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large changes in population size. These fluctuations are naturally occurring and take place in the vicinity of BVPS. I. Although variation in total catches has occurred, species composition has remained fairly stable. Since the initiation of studies in 1970, forage fish of the family Cyprinidae have dominated the catches. Emerald shiners, gizzard shad, sand shiners and bluntnose minnows have consis-tently been among the nost numerous fish, although the latter two species I may have declined in recent yearn. Carp, channel catfish, smallmouth and spotted bass, yellow perch, and walleye have all remained common species. Since 1978, sauger has become a common sport species to this area. Differences in the 1985 electrofishing and gill net catches, between the Control and Non-Control Transects were similar to previous years (both operational and pre-operational) and were probably caused by habitat preferences of individual species. This habitat preference is probably the most influential factor that affects where the different species of 8 fish are collected and in what relative abundance. 70 8

DUQUESNC LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Data collected from 1970 through 1985 indicate that fish in the vicinity of the power plant have not been adversely affected by BVPS operation.

8-l

9 l

f l i e l l8 l 3

i 71 8

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I F. ICHTHYOPLANKTON Objective l' Ichthyoplankton sampling was performed in order to monitor the extent fishes utilize the back channel of Phillis Island as spawning and nursery grounds. This is important because of the area's potential as a spawning ground and relative proximity to the BVPS discharge structure. Methods Four monthly surveys (18 April, 14 May, 10 June, and 11 July) were con-I ducted during the spring and summer, which is the primary spawning season for most resident fish species. One surface and one bottom collection were taken at Transect 2B (back channel of Phillis Island) during each 4 survey (Figure V-F-1). Tows were made in a zig-zag fashion across the channel utilizing a conical 505 micron mesh plankton net with a 0.5 m mouth diameter. A General Oceanics Model 2030 digital flowmeter, mounted centrically in the net mouth, was used to determine the volume of water filtered. Samples were preserved in the field using 5% buffered formalin containing rose bengal dye. In the laboratory, ichthyoplankton was sorted from the sample and enu-metated. Each specimen was identified as to its stage of development (egg, yolk-sac larvae, early larvae, juvenile, or adult) and to the lowest possible taxon. Densities of ichthyoplankton (numbers /100 m) 3 were calculated for each sample using flowmeter data. 8 Results A total of 13 eggs, 372 larvae, and 2 juveniles was collected in 1985 3 from 1,141.2 m of water sampled (Table V-F-1). Nine taxa representing six families were identified. Gizzard shad (Dorosona cepedianum) accounted for 74.2% (287 larvae) of the total catch. Freshwater drum eggs (Aplodinotus grunniens) represented 92.3% of the eggs collected in 1985. No adults were collectd in 1985. I On a seasonal basis, ichthyoplankton was most abundant and displayed the i most diversity on 11 July when total daily density was 117.39 individuals 72 8

mW W W 6 O' M M M W-W W-W W W W @ W W e. s. O r+

3,,,.

.zar . p.v. 1 A,. m 4;. '. ' 1,% 3 N i ; i.= MIDp AND.. z., z %;.. 1 ;,..,1 > a c.n c n 2 o i-,. c

s

'. :.s...'d b q 3. : ~ . 4. p. ' )...,. S rOc ....,. 4 1-1 N W,7 ~,,t,M, te.,, e....se c0 = z y i N.... , s.5 N. s r" .-. m Ni.... Q' *.,,c..q.".

m.. -

- 4.if

o i

o,, i y / 2 w j. ~ iF, g %} x .......y H .~ z g 3g

s...

r x i.

o g A5 m 2 dag3 d

3-< 26 8' s U

n

, = ". n e\\ ~ _ LEGEND jf ,op llMEDL3. h. & SURFACE TOWS Of BE AVER VALLEY DISCHARGE er o *f. rena. j D2 SHIPPINGPOHT DISCHARGE ,,!yt i Q a BOTTOt4 TOWS D3 INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE 4628 I O AfD TO HAVsGATION 8 BEAVER

T R ANSMISSION LINE PO ER ST TION P WER STATION FIGURE V-F-1 ICHTHYOPLANKTON SAMPLING STATIONS BVPS

E O N N M M N O N O E O M E O TABLE V-F-1 nut 0ER AND DENSITY OF FIS11 EGGS, LARVAE, JUVENILES, AND ADULTS 3 (Number /100 m ) COLLECTED WITil A 0.5 m PLANKTON NET IN Tl!E 011I0 RIVER BACK CilANNEL OF PHILLIS ISLAND (STATION 2B) l NEAR BVPS, 1985 Date Depth of Collection Total Collected and April 18 Surface Bottom Taxa Density 3 Vol. water filtered (m ) 163.0 192.5 355.5 No eggs collected 0 0 0 No. larvae collected 0 0 0 g No. juveniles collected 0 0 0 No. adults collected 0 0 0 Density (number collected) g$a g Eggs 0 0 0 Cg b Larvae 0 0 0 y Total Density (number collected) 0 0 0 !3 M bN l ruy 14 gQ i =s Vol. water filtered (m ) 119.1 102.0 221.1 h Q 3 No. eggs collected 1 0 1 4gi b R No. larvae collected 2 1 3 gN No. juveniles collected 0 0 0 N ). adults collected 0 0 0 g Density (number collected) y Eggs Unidentified Egg 0.84 (1) 0 0.45 (1) Larvae Dorsoma cepedianum (YL) 0.84 (1) 0 0.45 (1) Etheostoma sp. ( EL) 0.84 (1) 0.98 (1) 0.90 (2) Total Density (number collected) 2.52 (3) 0.98 (1) 1.81 (4) June 10 3 Vol. water filtered (m ) 141.9 127.6 269.5 No. eggs collected 3 9 12 No. larvae collected 10 14 24 No. juveniles collected 0 0 0 No. adults collected 0 0 0

W W M M S M M eM M M M M M M M M eW TABLE V-F-1 (Continued) l Date Depth of Collection Total Collected and June 10 Surface Bottom Taxa Density Density (number collected) Eggs Aplodinotus grunniens 2.11 (3) 7.05 (9) 4.45 (12) Larvae Cyprinidae (EL) 2.82 (4) 2.35 (3) 2.60 (7) Cyprinus carpio (EL) 2.11 (3) 7.05 (9) 4.45 (12) Etheostoma spp. (EL) 0.70 (1) 3 0.37 (1) Aplodinotus grunniens (EL) 1.41 (2) 0 0.74 (2) [ Unidentifiable (L) 0 1.57 (2) 0.74 (2) Total Denisty (number collected) 9.16 (13) 18.03 (23) 13.36 (36) ya E E! July 11 "E 3 vol. water filtered (m ) 137.9 157.2 295.1 M No. eggs collected 0 0 0 mC a No. larvae collected 31G 35 345 80 %b No. juveniles collected 0 2 2 o No. adults collected 0 0 0 Density (number collected) Eggs 0 0 0 Larvae Dor soma cepedianum (YL) 1.45 (2) 0 0.68 (2) 8 Dorsoma cepedianum (FL) 187.09 (258) 15.90 (25) 95.90 (283) Dorsoma cepedianum (LL)

72 (1) 0 0.34 (1) 1.91 (3) 1.02 (3)

Cyprinidae (YL) v Cyprinidae (EL) 0. ',. (1) 1.27 (2) 1.02 (3) Notropis spp. (EL) 14.50 (20) 1.91 (3) 7.79 (23) Pimephales spp. (EL) 1.45 (2) 1.27 (2) 1.36 (4) Lepomis spp. (EL) 2.18 (3) 0 1.02 (3) Etheostoma spp. (EL) 0.73 (1) 0 0.34 (1) Aplodinotus grunniens (YL) 2.90 (4) 0 1.36 (4) Aplodinotus grunniens (EL) 13.05 (18) 0 6.10 (18) Juveniles Ictalurus punctatus (JJ) 0 1.27 (2) 0.68 (2) Total Density (number collected) 224.80 (310) 23.54 (37) 117.59 (347)

O O O N U U M U U O M O E E O O W TABLE V-F-1 ) (Continued) Date Depth of Collection Total Collected and Yearly Mean Totals Surface Bottom Taxa Densig 3 Vol. water filtered (m ) 561.9 579.3 1,141.2 No. eggs collected 4 9 13 No. larvae collected 322 50 372 No. Juveniles collected 0 2 2 No. adults collected 0 0 0 Densities (number collected) Eggs Aplodinotus grunniens 0.53 (3) 1.55 (9) 1.05 (12) Unidentifiable 0.18 (1) 0 0.09 (1) g Larvae m Dorsoma cepiedianum (YL) 0.53 (3) 0 0.26 (3) Dorsoma cepiedianum' (EL) 45.92 (258) 4.32 (25) 24.80 (283) h8 Dorsoma cepiedlanum (LL) 0.18 (1) 0 0.09 (1) dO Cyprinidae (YL) 0 0.52 (3) 0.26 (3) $"m Cyprinidae (EL) 0.89 (5) 0.86 (5) 0.88 (10) gm Cyprinus carpio (EL) 0.53 (3) 1.55 (9) 1.05 (12) <g y Notropis spp. (EL) 3.56 (20) 0.52 (3) 2.02 (23) g9 Pimephales spp. (EL) 0.36 (2) 0.35 (2) 0.35 (4) g4 Lepomis spp. (EL) 0.53 (3) 0 0.26 (3) Mg hg Etheostoma spp. (EL) 0.53 (3) 0.17 (1) 0.35 (4) Aplodinotus grunniens (YL) 0.71 (4) 0 0.35 (4) t< > d Aplodinotus grunniens (EL) 3.56 (20) 0 1.75 (20) g Unidentifiable (L) 0 0.35 (2) 0.18 (2) m Juveniles O" Ictalurus punctatus (JJ) 0 0.35 (2) 0.18 (2) Total Density (number collected) 58.02 (326) 10.53 (61) 33.91 (3R7) aDevelopmental Stages YL - Hatched specimens with yolk and/or oil globules present. EL - Specinens with no yolk and/or oil globules and with no development of fin rays and/or spiny elements. LL - Specimens with developed fin rays and/or spring elements and evidence of a fin fold. L - Specimens with undefinable larval stage due to deterioration.

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 3 per 100 m of water filtered (Table V-F-2). Collections on 10 June 3 yielded 13.36 individuals per 100 m (mostly freshwater drum eggs and l cyprinid larvae). The May 14 sample resulted in 1.81 individuals per 100 3 m collec'ted. Sampling on 18 April yielded no ichthyoplankton. Comparison of Preoperational and Operational Data Species abundance and composition was similar to that found in previous I years. Gizzard shad and minnows dominated the catch with other taxa represented by only a few individuals. Densities of ichthyoplankton i collected in the backchannel (Station 2B) from 1973-1974, 1976-1985, are presented in Table V-F-2. I Summary and Conclusions i Gizzard shad, freshwater drum, and cyprinids dominated the 1985 ichthyo-plankton catch from the back channel of Phillis Island. Peak densities occurred in July and consisted mostly of the early to late larval stages. Little or no spawning was noted in April and May. No substantial differ-ences were observed in species composition or spawning activity of most j species crer previous years. I I i 3 1 l, I t 1 8 I l 8 8 77 8 t

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIROF11 ENTAL REPORT TABLE V-F-2 3 DENSITY OF ICHTHYOPLANKTON (Number /100m ) COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER BACK CHANNEL OF PHILLIS ISLAND (STATION 23) NEAR BVPS, 1973-1974, 1976-1985 Date Density Date Density Date Density 1973 1974 1976 12 Apr 0 16 Apr 0 26 Apr 0.70 17 May 0 24 May 0 19 May 0 ,1 20 Jun 16.10 13 Jun 6.98 18 Jun 5.99 26 Jul 3.25 26 Jun 9.25 2 Jul 6.63 l 16 Jul 59.59 15 Jul 3.69 ) 1 Aug 6.85 29 Jul 4.05 1977 1978 1979 14 Apr 0 22 Apr 0 19 Apr 0 11 May 0.90 5 May 0 1 May 0 9 Jun 24.22 20 May 0.98 17 May 0.81 l i l 22 Jun 3.44 2 Jun 4.01 7 Jun 0.39 7 Jul 3.31 16 Jun 12.15 20 Jun 11.69 20 Jul 28.37 2 Jul 13.32 5 Jul 14.82 1980 1981 1982 { 23 Apr 0.42 20 Apr 1.10 19 Apr 0 '8 21 May 0.53 12 May 0 18 May 3.77 19 Jun 9.68 17 Jun 26.40 21 Jun 7.54 22 Jul 107.04 22 Jul 17.14 20 Jul 31.66 1983 1984 1985 13 Apr 0 16 Apr 0 18 Apr 0 i 8 11 May 0.66 10 May 0 14 May 1.01 14 Jun 4.46 8 Jun 15.46 10 Jun 13.36 12 Jul 44.05 12 Jul 44.23 11 Jul 117.59 l 9 I I I ~ l

8 DUQUESPE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 5 G. FISH IMPINGEMENT I Objective Impingement surveys were conducted to monitor the quantity of fish and 8 other aquatic organisms impinged on the traveling screens. Methods The surveys were conducted weekly throughout the 1985 for a total of 47 weeks (Table V-A-1). Except when technical difficulties delayed the start of collections, weekly fish impingement sampling began on Thursday l mornings when all operating screens were washed. A collection basket of 0.25 inch mesh netting was placed at the end of the screen washwater sluiceway (Figure V-G-1). On Friday mornings, af ter approximately 24 hours, each screen was washed individually for 15 minutes (one complete revolution of the screen) and all aquatic organisms collected. Fish were identified, counted, measured for total length (mm) and weighed (g). Data were sumarized according to operating ir.take bays (bays that had pumps operating in the 24 hour sampling period) and non-operating intake bays. I Results The BVPS impingement surveys of 1976 through 1985 have resulted in the collection of 36 species of fish representing nine families (Table V-G-1). A total of 164 fish, representing 19 species (20 taxa) was collected in 1985 (Table V-G-2). Gizzard shad were the most numerous fish, comprising l 22.0% of the total annual catch, followed by bluegill (17.1%) freshwater I (15.2%), emerald shiner (9.8%), chann?1 catfish (7.3%), spotted bass drum (6.1%), with all other species represented by less than 10 specimens. Cheek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), which had not been collected in previous years, was collected in 1985. All fishes ranged in size from 28 mm to 370 mm, with the majority under 100 mm. The total weight of all fishes collected in 1985 was 2.37 kg (5.2 lbs). Approximately 58.5% of the total weight of fish collected (both alive and dead) was comprised of the gizzard shads collected in January and February. No endangered or threatened species were collected (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,1985). 79 8

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I u n ,........, e u.. .9 8..(.3 g., ggt..(taeg %_O-u.,.. 8 . g~ .4t" "*a= EL '34. 0 a -\\ ' SC.i t. so.11 4,..) -/ g .n. cuu...uun fr / i S a*t e a"' ** 'eas. '* * *.t o et....,, 5 )k 8 O[\\ 7f'. i2Cc h ,M ';!:!.";.!!!!';l:'; ~' %{ , - ".l:,.' !!,:t!!';;;,':::: a gd 'I '@ ,/ a l h h^ ....... h (( w.4 IUil'. Il "" '" 1 \\ k l. ,<y 3m r P',.. w.llj:i M !.h j l3 i in..un......, . g*s i h mi }{L:,jj !! i 9 L * 'llylj j I a *a " n m, g. 4, p. ...u n...,. i n, n.. u.n. n,...,n...,.,,,,,,,,,.8 N n I (': tree dimensienal: Cutaway View) I I I h*, N': e g.,,c g .+csaeu aus ,.,y,, ...t , ruce e se. ' v 1 sy s 8 3r(18 g **?t.6.'. t evu q t / l { g

l s*

r'.,:L3 e.'.4. AA0 **ca tt*b4C3 65786 tw"St.3 t I l{' = = _ _ - e f

B I

SAtt tut I ^ .n.s,. e&.:.e.t* I yIl i ..et. I _ *e,...,,, 3r, ,T,'.--.---- st.tts a i t h,,l - t :."; m-:- m...=~ i. hd'

I '.". I'.

1 .u f:f .'." tW_'.@3 I j pe N s o.... ,. 1 a E p s m... (*wo dimensional: side view) FIGURE V-G-1 INTAKE STRUCTURE DVPS 80

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I TABLE V-G-1 FISH COLLECTED DURING THE IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS, 1976-1985 BVPS 8 Family and Scientific Namel Common Name Clupeidae (herrings) Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad i l 8 Cyprinidae (minnows and carps) Cyprinus carpio Common carp Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis atherinofdes Emerald shiner i N_. spilopterus Spotfin shiner N. stramineus Sand shiner N_. volucellus Mimic shiner I Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chub Catostomidae (suckers) I Carpiodes cyprinus Quillback Catostomus commersoni White sucker Moxostoma carinatum River redhorse 1 l W Ictaluridae (bullhead and catfishes) l Ictalurus catus White catfish g I. natalis Yellow bullhead g 1.nebulosus Brown bullhead I_. punctatus Channel catfish Noturus flavus Stonecat l Pylodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Percopsidae (trout-perches) Percopsis omiscomaycus Trout-perch Cyprinodontidae (killifishes) Fundulus diaphanus Banded killifish Centrarchidae (sunfishes) Ambloplites rupestric Rock bass I Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish L. gibbosus Pumpkinseed ( L_. macrochirus Bluegill j Micropterus dolonieui Smallmouth bass I M. punctulatus Spotted bass ( M_. salmoides Largemouth bass Pomoxis annularis White crappie P_. nigromaculatus Black crappie I cl I

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I TABLE V-G-1 (Continued) l 8 l l l Common Name Family and Scientific Name 8 ( Percidae (perches) Etheostona nigrum Johnny darter E. zonale Banded darter I Perca flavescens Yellow perch Percina caprodas Logperch P. copelandi Channel darter Seizostedian vitreum vitreum Walleye Sciaenidae (drums) Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum I 1Nomenclature follows Robins et al. (1980) I I I I I I I I I I 1 i l

TABLE V-C-2

SUMMARY

OF FISH COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SttRVEYS CONDUCTED FOR ONE 24 HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK DURING 1985 BVPS I OPERATING INTAKE BAYS NON-OPERATING INTAKE B AYS Precent Alive Dead Alive Dead Length Frequency Percent Weight Weight Weight Weight Range Taxa Namber Occurrence Composition Number (1) Number (g) Number JL Number (1) (mm) Gizzard shad 36 15 22.0 6 122 30 1,263 ,J-370 Common carp 2 4 1.2 1 150 1 1 55-310 Emerald shiner 16 4 9.8 8 16 8 8 45-60 Shiner sp. 10 6 6.1 9 9 1 1 30-37 Creek chub 1 2 0.6 1 3 67 Sucker sp. 1 2 0.6 1 60 210 g Yellow bullhead 1 2 0.6 1 18 110 u) Brown bullhead 3 4 1.8 1 5 2 2 28-75 Channel catfish 12 6 7.3 4 16 8 17 55-85 Flathead catfish 1 2 0.6 1 3 83 h@ Catfish sp. 2 4 1.2 2 2 40-51 E F3 Trout-perch 1 2 0.6 1 2 51 h$ Rcck bass 1 2 0.6 1 1 31 t* g Green sunfish 5 10 3.0 4 65 1 22 39-115 ps R Bluegill 28 23 17.1 9 27 8 15 9 20 2 3 35-97 yp Sia211 mouth bass 1 2 0.6 1 22 118 H H Spotted bass 10 12 6.1 5 102 3 25 2 57 70-165 @9 Bisck crapple 1 2 0.6 1 82 175 l2: @ Sunfish sp. 2 4 1.2 1 1 1 3 29-70 $"b Johnny datter 1 2 0.6 1 2 42 Yellow perch 1 2 0.6 1 6 89 Logperch 2 2 1.2 2 14 78 Fre;hwater drum 25 17 15.2 1 3 17 166 2 11 5 22 60-217 Q Unidentifiable 1 2 0.6 1 1 50 y O Total 164 44 479 86 1,736 16 114 18 39 y 1 Intake bays that had pumps operating within the 24 hour sampling period. 2 Intake bays that had no pumps operating within the 24 hour sampling period. i i

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I The temporal distribution of the 1985 impingement catch closely follows the pattern of catches of previous years (1976 to 1984) (Tables V-G-3 an V-G-4). During each year, generally the largest numbers of fish have been collected in the winter months (December-February) and then the catch has gradually decreased until the late summer period when another smaller peak has occurred. Other organisms collected in the impingement surveys include 88 crayfish, I 79 native clams, and 19 dragonflies (Tables V-G-6 and V-G-8). In addition, 1,650 Asiatic clams (Corbicula) were collected (Table V-G-7). Comparison of Impinged and River Fish A comparison of the numbers of fish collected in the river and traveling screens is presented in Table V-G-5. Of the 35 species collected, 13 I were observed in both locations, 6 species were collected only in the impingement surveys, while 16 species were taken exclusively in the river. The major difference in species composition between the two types of collections is the absence of large species in the impingement col-lections. Six species of suckers and/or redhorses, and four species of sport fish (muskellunge, tiger muskellunge, walleye, and sauger) were I collected in the river studies, but were not collected in the impingement surveys. Sport fish which were collected on the traveling screens (channel catfish and bluegill) were smaller than individuals of those species collected by river sampling. Minnows and shiners constituted a large percentage of the river and impingement collections. I Comparison of Operating and Non-Operating Intake Bay Collections Of the 164 fish collected during the 1985 impingement studies, 130 (79.3%) were collected from operating intake bays and 34 (20.7%) from non-operating intake bays (Table V-G-2). However, due to differences I between the number of operating (64) and non-operating (78) screens washed in 1985, the impingement data were computed with catch expressed 2 as fish per 1,000 m of screen surface area washed. These results showed 11.4 and 2.4 fish for operating and non-operating screens, respectively. As in previous years, the numbers of fish collected in non-operating bays 84 8

TABLE V-G-3

SUMMARY

OF IMPINGEMENT SURVEY DATA FOR 1985 BVPS River Operating Hon-Operatigg Intake Bays Intake Elevation Date N aber of Fish Percent Intake Bays Intake Bays Operating Water Above Mean O Month Day Collected Annual Total Alive Dead Alive Dead A_ B C D Temp F Sea Level January 4 1 0.6 1 X 45.0 667.0 11 1 0.6 1 X 38.0 665.2 18 4 2.4 4 X 34.0 666.5 25 38.0 665.0 3 3 February 1 3 3 15 0 0.0 X 39.0 665.5 g 22 2 1.2 2 X 40.5 665.5 u) co un March 1 0 0.0 X 44.5 673.0 8 1 0.6 1 X 45.0 669.8 8 15 4 2.4 4 X 48.5 672.9 IO 22 1 0.6 1 X 47.4 667.5 >h 29 1 0.6 1 X 52.6 673.5 0y am April 5 0 0.0 X 51.0 672.5 gg m 12 0 0.0 X 51.6 669.0 M M 19 0 0.0 X 61.2 668.2 @O 26 0 0.0 X 70.3 667.2 Zk g i May 3 0 0.0 X X 70.7 667.0 g 10 1 0.6 1 X 68.8 666.6 17 0 0.0 X X 75.0 667.3 24 0 0.0 X X 73.2 667.8 k 31 1 0.6 1 X X X 75.4 667.4 y O June 7 1 0.6 1 X 75.8 667.3 14 0 0.0 X X 73.5 667.7 21 0 0.0 X X 75.8 666.9 26 1 0.6 1 X X 78.2 667.0 July 5 0 0.0 X X 78.8 667.2 12 2 1.2 2 X X 77.6 668.3 19 2 1.2 2 X X X 77.7 665.4 26 X X 80.4 665.5 4

m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M V-G-3 (Continued) River Operating Non-Operating Intake Bays Intake Elevation l 2 Date Number of Fish Percent Intake Bays Intake Bays Operating Water Above Mean 0 Month Daj[ Collected Annual Total Alive Dead Alive Dead A B, C D Temp F Sea Level 4 August 2 X X 80.2 665.8 9 1 0.6 1 X X X 80.4 665.6 16 1 0.6 1 X X X 81.8 665.7 23 2 1.2 1 1 X X 78.3 665.1 30 3 1.8 1 1 1 X X 77.0 664.5 September 6 3 1.8 1 1 1 X X 77.2 ,664.4 13 5 3.0 4 1 X X 76.8 665.5 20 2 1.2 1 1 X X 72.9 665.8 27 2 1.2 1 1 X X 71.9 665.8 H october 4 2 1.2 1 1 X 68.2 665.5 11 6 3.7 1 2 3 X 65.4 665.8 Ln 18 4 2.4 2 1 1 X 64.5 665.9 3, ty 25 5 3.0 1 1 3 X 64.0 665.6 r2 OC November 1 1 0.6 1 X 59.4 665.9 >* D1 8 60 36.6 20 32 8 X 52.7 671.6 h! 15 4 2.4 2 2 X 53.8 671.6 Q D1 22 6 3.7 1 5 X 49.5 669.0 a e4 oc 29 9 5.5 2 6 1 X 48.4 679.7 >d >d an D3 C3 O December 6 5 3.0 1 3 1 X 44.0 670.0 13 0 0.0 X 44.5 672.0 Mg 20 8 4.9 2 6 X 36.0 666.7 27 12 7.3 5 7 X 33.0 666.5 2: Total 164 44 86 16 18 g3 1 M Intake bays that had pumps operating in the 24 hour sampling period. jg 2 Intake bays that had no pumps operating in the 24 hour sampling period. 3 Irpingement could not be conducted due to frozen discharge pipe. 4 Overhead crane in screenhouse was out-of-service, cancelling impingement.

E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REFORT I ~~e .o~,.~. ~ ~. .....,~a... .. ~ e-e ~e -e P e c. C C k =. c c. E ->"2 o-c~a.a a..o o 42 ..oo-o~A.... S - ~ g. ~ g P3 ?3 C 2.C C C. Oa p e-a .o .. ~..... .. a eo.-~. ~. 4 .=s q ~ ~ E b m.

t. J.a w

.e e 4.-.~,.. .... ~ ~~... .~.e..a. I ~. a.- e. -- ~ ~~~a c C C 68 ..c.. c. s u. . ~. ~ eon.. ~ I .o. -4 4 ~ m. m.. ~ .k.m., km o ,r . s. ~ sc a- . o. -z ..~ l e 12 e44 -o ,a.m . 2 12 ...~.... R a me ~ a t m. =. 3. V. 4 W m. 8% 8 E. a. E 0 E z. a. w e.-.o.e-~~ ....~a..,~ ~on .,~,.~.oe ~ 2. o.* .. ~ c. = o.. a o C -9 G = I o Z b b 4 ep o. b 6 6 J _s <-a n .e.. .s.. as a s. x ea w 4_. 42 e.e~ e-< eon - %J ~~~onon-enoa e n o s o o - o m a e.o. - 9 -~ LJ. L2 5 LJ E .= P ~~.

c.,

e W EC @ EC. ,a. ~ 8C 2- . 1- -m -x I w ~ I .I "2 .4 ,~aan-,,..o, R TL 5 52 52

- 4. ~ a ~.

o...

T. S. 2 - ~ ~, - -, ~ ~..... - ~~ ~ e. ~ ~ s. . m.

s. e.

-m.. p h w. 6 oa 4 -= v c c sp I a.

e..

o ERR...e. ao~~ ~~ a-.R~e~~ane- .~ e~e ~aaa.aae. 8 c w ...~. 9 en g e. e. e~ e. e. s. E n a w $e f 1, ~. 5 ~. 5 ". ~~ e. .x A.,.-~ o.. 4 o,a.~ o,o -o e -c 4 ~ .o- ~ L. c.o.- r, t-L. l .e* f. a ~ a Q m., S .1 . m. O. m. O h. I =C d' C -=- e. E.P C @ OC h Q .a4 t ES I S2

"S***R****R 3

52

- - - - 2*"**

3 52

- - - - '""**** 2

~. o. ~ e. w J a. m . m. - m. - m. ti fw Qw hw Qw

5

'N

N I

= 6 JA- .= h b. b 3.3 A D. 6

- A b hs 8

g wb D. 3a .a E h. a a ns G.B w ~ s. s. sa a s s 3 w 5 m a. .5E . Se diw aa

e. s.

E. . 3 &.* . w G f. C . ei A C 5 c gL Dw u- ~ GG } ~~ 3 w 3m 4 %3m 6 ww w-f f Y ,i t " E "4, <. 3"3" m" 2 % ,. t " L *4, < A"3" 2" 4 ,%.t " " 2,,5 " A" ; f 2 % -.5 4 5 2<2 se 2< mm<2 w e I 17 8

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPA24Y 1985 ANNUAL E24VIRONME2fl'AL REPORT I TABLE V-G-5 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF ANNUAL TOTAL OF FISH COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS AND IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL CF THE OHIO RIVER,1985 BVPS Total Number of Percent of I Fish Collected Annual Total Species (a) Impingement River Impingement River I Longnose gar 1 0.4 Gizzard shad 36 41 24.3 16.4 Muskellunge 1 0.4 Tiger muskellunge 2 0.8 I Common carp 2 31 1.4 12.4 Emerald shiner 16 52 10.8 20.7 Spotfin shiner 6 2.4 I Bluntnose minnow 3 1.2 Creek chub 1 0.7 White sucker 1 0.4 I Quillback 2 0.8 River carpsucker 1 0.4 Silver redhorse 7 2.8 Golden redhorse 10 4.0 Shorthead redhorse 2 0.8 Yellow bullhead 1 0.7 Brown bullhead 3 2.0 I Channel catfish 12 23 8.1 9.2 Flathead catfish 1 1 0.7 0.4 Trout-perch 1 2 0.7 0.8 White bass 2 0.8 I Rock bass 1 7 0.7 2.8 Green sunfish 5 1 3.4 0.4 Pumpkinseed 1 0.4 I Blueg ill 28 1 18.9 0.4 Smallmouth bass 1 6 0.7 2.4 Spotted bass 10 26 6.8 10.4 White crappie 4 1.6 I Black crappie 1 2 0.7 0.8 Johnny darter 1 0.7 Yellow perch 1 0.7 I Logperch 2 1.4 Sauger 7 2.8 Walleye 2 0.8 Freshwater drum 25 6 16.9 2.4 I Total 148 251 (a) Includes only those specimens identified to species or stocked hybrids. I u I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I V-G-6

SUMMARY

OF CRAYFISH COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS CONDUCTED FOR ONE 24-HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK 1985 BVPS Number Collected Operating Non-Operating Date Intake Bays Intake Bays I Month Dg Alive Dead Alive Dead January 4 0 0 2 2 I 11 0 0 0 1 18 0 1 0 0 25(a) February 1(a) 8 (a) 15 0 0 1 1 22 1 0 3 2 March 1 0 0 6 0 8 4 1 0 0 I 15 8 0 0 0 22 3 0 3 0 29 1 0 1 1 April 5 1 0 2 0 12 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 I 26 0 0 0 0 my 3 0 0 0 0 I' 10 1 0 0 1 ) 17 0 0 0 3 24 0 0 0 0 31 3 0 0 0 June 7 0 0 0 0 14 2 0 0 0 f I 21 0 0 0 0 28 0 2 0 0 I July 5 2 1 0 1 12 1 0 0 0 19 1 1 0 0 26 (b) I August 2(b) 9 1 0 0 0 I 16 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 30 0 1 0 0 I o I

h DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY W 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I V-G-6 (Continued) I Number Collected j Operating Non-Operating l I I Date Intake Bays Intake Bays Month Day Alive Dead Alive Dead September 6 1 1 1 0 I 13 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 27 1 1 0 0 October 4 0 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 1 18 0 0 0 0 I 25 0 0 0 0 November 1 0 1 0 1 8 4 0 0 0 15 2 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 1 0 December 6 2 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 1 I 20 2 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 Total 41 10 20 17 (a) Impingement could not be conducted due to frozen discharge pipe. IDI overhead crane in sceenhouse was out-of-service, cancelling impingement. I I I I I I ') O I ~

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I l TABLE V-G-7

SUMMARY

OF Corbicula COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT l g SURVEYS FOR ONE 24-HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK, l'985 l 3 BVPS Number Collected _ Operating Non-Operating Date Intake Bays Intake Bays Month Day Alive Dead Alive Dead January 4 0 0 3 2 f 11 0 0 0 0 18 0 5 0 2 25(a) February 1(a) 8(a) 15 0 0 0 6 22 0 1 0 1 I March 1 0 0 0 3 8 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 I 29 0 0 0 0 April 5 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 I 19 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 my 3 0 18 0 9 10 2 1 6 16 I 17 0 1 1 0 24 0 2 0 0 31 4 3 0 0 I June 7 0 1 0 3 14 6 4 0 2 21 1 5 0 0 28 7 16 0 1 I July 5 5 7 0 1 l 12 7 2 1 1 19 11 9 0 0 I 26 (b) August 2(b) 9 77 89 1 3 16 32 28 7 2 I 23 162 56 3 4 30 81 47 4 5 September 6 71 30 8 3 l I 13 181 50 5 4 l 20 50 29 2 6 27 59 47 3 16 October 4 0 3 1 13 l 11 9 5 5 6 18 11 9 3 5 25 1 4 5 5 91 l I i

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I TABLE V-G-7 Number Collected Operating Non-Operating Date Intake Bays Intake Bays I bbnth Day Alive Dead Alive Dead November 1 3 3 3 7 I 8 4 12 124 16 15 0 2 4 2 22 0 0 0 2 29 0 0 0 0 I December 6 1 4 2 23 13 0 1 0 0 l 20 1 0 5 2 I 27 0 0 2 1 Total 786 494 198 172 I "' impingement could not be conducted due to frozen discharge pipe. (b) Overhead crane in screenhouse was out-of-service, cancelling impingement. I I I I I I I I I g 02 I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I TABLE V-G-8

SUMMARY

OF MISCELLANEOU5 INVERTEBRATES COLLECTED I IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS CONDUCTED FOR ONE 24-HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK, 1985 BVPS Date Number of Organisms in all Bays Month Day Mollusks (c) Dragonflies January 4 0 0 11 0 0 I 18 0 0 25 (a) I February 1(a) 8 (a) 15 0 0 22 0 0 March 1 0 0 8 0 0 I 15 0 0 22 0 0 29 0 0 April 5 0 0 12 0 0 19 0 1 I 26 0 0 May 3 0 0 I 10 0 0 17 0 0 24 0 0 31 0 0 June 7 0 0 14 0 0 I 21 0 0 28 0 0 July 5 0 0 I 12 0 1 19 0 0 26 (b) August 2(b) 9 0 0 I 16 0 0 23 0 0 30 5 1 n I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT V-G-8 (Continued) Date Number of Organisms in all Bays 111usk s (c) Dragonflies Month Day September 6 0 0 13 6 1 20 7 0 I 27 6 1 October 4 2 3 I 11 1 1 18 1 3 25 1 1 November 1 2 0 8 44 4 15 0 0 I 22 1 0 29 0 0 I December 6 0 1 13 0 1 20 3 0 27 0 l I Total 79 IS (a) Impingement could not be conducted due to frozen discharge pipe. (b) Overhead crane in screenhouse was out-of-service, cancelling impingement. (c) Other than Corbicula. I I I I I I s I l

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I indicates that fish entrapmer.t, rather than impingement, accounts for some of th'e catch. Entrapment occurred when fish were lif ted out of the water on the frame plates as the traveling screen rotates. Alterna-tively, when fish were impinged they were forced against the screens due I to velocit as created by the circulating water pumps. Of the 88 crayfish collected in the 1985 impingement studies, 51 (58.0%) were collected from operating bays and 37 (42.0%) were collected from non-operating bays (Table V-G-6). Adjusting these data for screen sur-2 face area washed (crayfish per 1,000 m ) the results show 4.5 and 2.7 crayfish for operating and non-operating screens, respectively. Corbicula collected in the 1985 studies included 1,280 (77.6%) in the operating bays and 370 (22.4%) in the non-operating bays (Table V-G-7). Again, adjusting these data for the screen surface area washed (Corbicula 2 per 1,000 m ) the results show 112.2 and 26.6 Corbicula for operating the non-operating screens, respectively. It should be noted that in November 1985, all bays were cleaned of silt by divers. During this pumping oper-ating, live Corbicula and shells were deposited in the basket at the end of the sluiceway. Although an accurate count was not possible, due to I the flushing action of the water being pumped, the remaining Corbicula volume in the basket was approximately 75 gallons for Bay D alone. The average size of these clams was approximately 1.7 cm. A further 41scussion of Corbicula occurrance at the BVPS may be found in an l Appendix to this report. I Summary and Conclusions The results of the 1985 impingement surveys indicate that withdrawal of river water at the BVPS intake for cooling purposes has little or no I effect on the fish populations. One hundred and sixty four (164) fishes were collected, which is the third fewest collected since initial operation of BVPS in 1976. Gizzard shad were the most numerous fish, comprising 22.0% of the total annual catch. Tae total weight of all fishes collected in 1985 was 2.37 kg (5.2 lbs). Of tae 164 fishes collected, 60 ( 36. 6 %) were alive and returned via the discharge pipe to the Ohio River. 95 I

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I H. PLANKTON ENTRAINMENT 1. Ichthyoplankton Objective The ichthyoplankton entrainment studies are designed to determine the species composition, relative abundance, and distribution of ichthyo-plankton found in proximity to the BVPS intake structure. I Methods Previous studies have demonstrated that species composition and relative abundance of ichthyoplankton samples collected in front of the intake structure were very similar to those ichthyoplankton entrainment samples taken at BVPS (DLCo 1976,1977,1978, and 1979). Based on these results, a modified sampling program was utilized from 1980 through the current sampling season which sampled the Ohio River along a transect adjacent to the BVPS intake structure (Figure V-F-1). Samples were collected I monthly, from April through July, during daylight hours along a five station transect. Surface tows were made at Stations 1, 3, and 5 and bottom tows were taken at Station 2 and 4 utilizing a 505 micron mesh plankton net with a 0.5 m diameter mouth. Sample volumes were measured by a General Oceanics Model.2030 digital flowmeter mounted centrically in the mouth of the net. Samples were preserved upon collection in 5% buf-fered formalin containing rose dengal dye. I In the laboratory, eggs, larvae, juveniles, and adults were sorted from the samples, identified to the lowest possible taxon and stage of devel-3 opment, and enumerated. Densities of ichthyoplankton (number / 100m ) were calculated using appropriate flowmeter data. I Results A total of 64 eggs, 1,464 larvae and 2 juveniles representing eight taxa 3 of five families was collected from 2,490.3 m of water filtered during sampling along the river entrainment transects (Table V-H-1). Gizzard shad and minnows (Cyprinidae spp.) were the most common taxa, represent-i ing 79.2 and 11.8% of the total catch. Gizzard shad comprised 82.5% of the larvae and 50.0% of the juveniles collected. Minnows comprised 12.2% of the larvae, and 50.0% of the juveniles. I

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I Seasonal Distribution No eggs or larvae were collected during the first survey (18 April) (Table V-H-1). Samples collected on 14 May yielded 49 unidentified eggs and 39 larvae with an average.per sample density of 15.68. Samples col-lected 10 June contained 15 eggs and 168 larvae. The June collections resulted in a per sample density average for eggs and larvae of 27.17/100 3 m. These consisted largely of cyprinids. 3 Greatest density per sample (237.01/100 m ) was obtained at Station 5 on I 11 July. Greatest density per station was also obtained on this date at 3 Station 5 (1,071.01/100 m ). Gizzard shad larvae comprised 87.6% of the sample. Spatial Distribution Larvae were dominant at all stations, being most abundant at Station 5. = Nearly all larvae collected at Station 5, the station furthest from the BVPS intake structure, were gizzard shad taken during a single sampling 3 effort in July (N=793; 938.46/100 m ). Larval catch at Station 5 also exhibited the greatest diversity of taxa. Stations 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 yielded 198, 114, 59, 110 and 483 larvae respectively.. Summary and Conclusions The similarity of species composition and relative abundance of ichthyo-plankton taken in 1985 along the river transect to those of 1979-1984, I ccxnbir.ed with the close correlation between river sampling in front of t k.e intake and actual entrainment sampling established in previous years (DLCo 1976, 1977, 1978 and 1979) suggests little change in ichthyo-plankton entrainment impact by BVPS in 1985. I I I I ?? I

TABLE V-if-1 NUf41ER AND DENSITY OF FISH ECCS, LARVAE, JUVENILES, AND ADULTS 3 (Number /100 m ) COLLECTED W2TH A 0.5 m PLANKTON NET AT TiiE ENTRAINMENT RIVER TRANSECT IN Tile OHIO RIVER NEAR DVPS, 1985 Total Collected and Date Station 1(a) Station 2(b) Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Taxa Density 18 April 3 vol, water filtered (m ) 100.1 150.3 176.8 169.6 127.4 724.2 No. eggs cc11ected 0 0 0 0 0 0 No. larvae cullected 0 0 0 0 0 0 No. juveniles collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 No. adults collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (number collected) Eggs 0 3 0 0 0 g e f.er vee 0 0 0 0 0 g Total Station Density 0 0 0 0 0 0 >0 (number collected) C 14 May g 3 Vol. water filtered (m ) 101.2 119.0 126.8 120.1 94.3 561.4 [ co No. eggs collected 3 0 5 41 0 49 .c c3 No. larva-collected 7 15 4 10 3 39 Og f No. juveniles collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 No. adults collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 W Density (number collected) ~, s Unidentified 2.96 (3) 0 3.94 (5)

3. 14 (41) 0 8.73 (49) hN Larvae Dorosoma cepedianum (EL)ICI 0.99 (1) 0.84 (1)'

0 1.67 (2) 0 0.71 (4) 9 Dorosoma cepedianum (YL) 3.95 (4) 10.08 (12) 2.37 (3) 5.83 (7) 0 4.63 (26) Cyprinidae (YL) 0 0 0 0.83 (1) 0 0.18 (1) d Cyprinus carplo (EL) 0 0.84 (1) 0.79 (1) 0 0 0.36 (2) Etheostoma spp. (EL) 1.98 (2) 0 0 0 3.18 (3) 0.89 (5) Etheostoma app. (YL) 0 0.84 (1) 0 0 0 0.18 (1) Total Station Density 9.88 (10) 12.60 (15) 7.10 (9) 42.46 (51) 3.18 (3) 15.68 (88) (number collected)

M M M M M M M M M TABLE V-H-1 (Continued) Total Collected and Date Station 1(a) Station 2(DI Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Taxa Density 10 June 3 Vol. water filtered (m ) 104.6 138.1 158.8 148.9 123.1 673.5 No. eggs collected 1 5 1 8 0 15 No. larvae collected 14 29 14 35 76 168 No juveniles collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 No. adults collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (number collected) Eggs Aplodinotus grunniens 0.96 (1) 3.62 (5) 0.63 (1) 5.37 (8) 0 2.23 (15) Larvae Dorsoma cepedianum (EL) 0 0 5.67 (9) 0.67 (1) 28.43 (35) 6.68 (45) P Dorsoma cepedianum (YL) 5.74 (6) 8.69 (12) 0 9.40 (14) 4.37 (6) 5.64 (38) cyprinus carpio (EL) 0.96 (1) 5.07 (7) 2.52 (4) 8.0G (12) 0 3.56 (24) Notropis spp. (EL) 5.74 (6) 0.72 (1) 0 0 27.62 (34) 6.09 (41)

p o Not ropis spp. (YL) 0 0

0 2.01 (3) 0 0.45 (3) Aplodinotus grunniens (EL) 0 1.45 (2) 0 0 0 0.30 (2) d c: Aplodinotus grunniens (YL) 0.96 (1) 2.90 (4) 0 3.36 (5) 0.81 (1) 1.63 (11) Unidentifiable 0 2.17 (3) 0.63 (1) 0 0 0.59 (4) g Total Station Density 14.34 (15) 24.62 (34) 9.45 (15) 28.88 (43) 61.74 (76) 27.17 (183) [ u> (number collected) y g3 O~ 11 July vol water filtered (m ) 97.2 151.7 108.3 89.5 84.5 531.2 k 3 No. eggs collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 No. larvae collected 177 70 41 65 904 1,257 Z No. juveniles collected 1 0 0 0 1 2 %N ] No. adults collected 0 0 0 0 0 0 g j Density (number collected) g Eggs 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 ) Lar vae Dorsoma cepedianum (EL) 144.03 (140) 38.23 (58) 27.70 (30) 65.92 (59) 910.06 (769) 198.80 (1,056) Dorsoma cepedianum (YL) 4.12 (4) 3.30 (5) 0 1.12 (1) 3.55 (3) 2.45 (131 Dor som.s cepedianum (LL) 5.14 (5) 0 0 0 24.85 (21) 4.89 (26) l

"M M l J M M M M M M M M M M TABLE V-H-1 (Continued) Total Collected and Station 1(a) Station 2IDI station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Taxa Density Date 11 July Cyprinidae (EL) 0 0 0 0 1.18 (1) 0.19 (1) Cyprinidae (YL) 0 0 0 3.35(3) 2.37 (2) 0.94 (5) Notropis spp. (EL) 15.43 (15) 1.32 (2) 1.85 (2) 1.12 (1) 79.29 (67) 16.38 (87) Notropis spp. (YL) 0 1.32 (2) 0 0 0 0.38 (2) Pimephales spp. (EL) 0 0.66 (1) 1.85 (2) 0 11.83 (10) 2.45 (13) Lepomis spp. (EL) 1.03 (1) 0 1.85 (2) 1.12 (1) 2.37 (2) 1.13 (6) Etheostoma spp. (EL) 2.06 (2) 0 0 0 15.38 (13) 2.82 (15) Etheostoma spp. (YL) 0 0 0 0 1.18 (1) 0.19 (1) ApJodinotus grunniens (EL) 10.29 (10) 1.32 (2) 3.69 (4) 0 17.75 (15) 5.84 (31) Aplodinotus grunniens (LL) 0 0 0.92 (1) 0 0 0.19 (1) g to Juveniles Dorsoma y dianum (JJ) 1.03 (1) 0 0 0 0 0.19 (1) Notropis athrenoides (JJ) 0 0 0 0 1.18 (1) 0.19 (1) p C Total Station Density le3.13 (178) 46.14 (70) 37.86 (41) 72.63 (65) 1,071.01 (905) 237.01 (1,259) Q (number collected) g CG b H o 53 O o 8 h!. l mO lc l l l l l

M W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W TABLE V-H-1 (Continued) Total Collected and Yearly Mean Total Station 1(a) Ststion 2(b) Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Taxa Density 3 Vol. water filtered (m ) 4G3.1 559.1 570.7 528.1 429.3 2,490.3 No. eggs collected 4 5 6 0 64 No. larvae collected 198 114 59 119 983 1,464 No. juveniles collected 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 No. a.Sults collected 0 0 Density (number collected) Eggs Aplodinotus grunniens 0.25 (1) 0.89 (5) 0.18 (1) 1.51 (8) 0 0.60 (15) Unidentified 0.74 (3) 0 0.88 (5) 7.76 (41) 0 1.97 (49) Larvae Dorsoma cepedianum ( EL) 34.98 (141) 10.55 (59) 6.83 (39) 11.74 (62) 187.28 (804) 44.37 (1,105) Dorsoma cepedianum (YL) 3.47 (14) 5.19 (29) 0.53 (3) 4.17 (22) 2.10 (9) 3.09 (77) [ Dorsoma :epedianum (LL) 1.24 (5) 0 0 0 4.89 (21) 1.04 (26) c) Cyprinidae ( EL) 0 0 0 0 0.23 (1) 0.04 (1) Cyp r in id'ae (YL) 0 0 0 0.76 (4) 0.47 (2) 0.24 (6) > 0 Cyorinus carpio (EL) 0.25 (1) 1.43 (8) 0.88 (5) 2.27 (12) 0 1.04 (26) k$ Notropis spp. (EL) 5.21 (21) 0.54 (3) 0.35 (2) 0.19 (1) 23.53 (101) 5.14 (128) CC Notropis spp. (YL) 0 0.36 (2) 0 0.57 (3) 0 0.20 (5) h$ Pimephales spp. (EL) 0 0.18 (1) 0.35 (2) 0 2.33 (10) 0.52 (13) y Lepomis spp. (YL) 0.25 (1) 0 0.35 (2) 0.19 (1) 0.47 (2) 0.24 (6) g Etheostoma spp. (EL) 0.99 (4) 0 0 0 3.73 (16) 0.80 (20) [ g g Ett.costoma spp. (YL) 0 0.18 (1) 0 0 0.23 (1) 0.0d (2) 30 0 Aplodinotus grunniens (EL) 2.48 (10) 0.72 (4) 0.70 (4) 0 3.49 g15) 1.33 (33) Og Aplodinotus grunniens (LL) 0 0 0.18 (1) 0 0 0.04 (1) Aplodinotus grunniens (YL) 0.25 (1) 0.72 (4) 0 0.95 (5) 0.23 (1) 0.44 (11) Unidentifiable 0 0.54 (3) 0.18 (1) 0 0 0.16 (4) Juveniles p Dorsoma cepedianum (JJ) 0.25 (1) 0 0 0 0 0.04 (1) Z Notecpis athrenoides (JJ) 0 0 0 0 0.23 (1) 0.04 (1) hN

o Total Station Density 50.36 (203) 21.28 (119) 11.39 (65) 30.11 (159) 229.21 (984) 61.44 (1,530) h d

(number collected) (a) Station 1 -- South Shorelines Station 3-Mid-Channels Station 5 -- North Shcreline (surface tows). (b) Stations 2 and 4 (bottom tows). (c) Developmental Stages. YL -- Hatched specimens in which yolk and/or oil globules are present. EL -- Specimens in which yolk and/or oil globules are not present and in which fin rays and/or spiny elements have developed. LL -- Specimens with developed fin rays and/or spiny elements and evidence of a fin fold.

~ DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I i 2. Phytoplankton Objective The phytoplankton entrainment study was designed to determine the compo-sition and abundance of phytoplankton entrained in the intake water system. Methods Af ter April 1, 1980, plankton sampling was reduced to one entrainment sample collected monthly. Each sample was 1 gal taken from below the I' skimmer wall from one operating intake bay. In the laboratory, phytoplankton analyses were performed in accordance with procedures described above in Section C, PHYTOPLANKTON. Total densities (cells /ml) were calculated for r.ll taxa. However, only densi-ties of the 15 most abundant taxa each month are presented in Section C I of this report. Comparison of Entrainment and River Samples Plankton samples were not collected at any river stations af ter April 1, 1980 due to a reduction of the aquatic sampling program, therefore, com-parison of entrainment and river samples was not possible for the 1905 phytoplankton program. Results of phytoplankton analyses for the entrainment sample collected monthly are presented in Section C, PHYTO-PLANKTON. I g E During the years 1976 throught 1979, phytoplankton densities of entrain-ment samples were usually slightly lower than those of mean total densi-ties observed from river samples (DLCo 1980). However, the species com-position of phytoplankton in the river and in the entrainment samples were similar (DLCo 1976, 1977, 1979, 1980). I Studies from previous years indicate mean Shannon-Weiner indices, even-ness and richness values of entrainment samples were very similar to the river samples (DLCo 1979, 1980). I 102

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT I Summary and Conclusions 1 Past results of monthly sampling of phytoplankton in the Ohio River near BVPS and within the intake structure showed little difference in densi-ties (cells /ml) and species compositicn. During periods of cnimum low river flow (5,000 cfs), about 1.25% of the river would be withdrawn into the condenser cooling system. Based on the similarity of density of l phytoplankton in the river and the BVPS intake structure, and the small amount of water withdrawn from the river, the less of phytoplankton was 1 negligible, even under worst case icw flow conditions. I, 3. Zooplankton Objective The zooplankton entrainment studies were designed to determine the com-position and abundance of zooplankton entrained in the intake water system. I Methods Plankton entrainment samples were collected and zooplankters were counted. For the zooplankton analyses, a well-mixed sample was taken and processed using the same procedures described in Section D, ZOOPLANKTON. After April 1, 1980, plankton sampling was reduced to one entrainment sample collected monthly. Each sample was 1 gal taken from below the skimmer wall from one operating intake bay. Total densities (number / liter) were calculated for all taxa, however, I only taxa which comprised greater than 2% of the total are presented in Section D, ZOOPLANKTON. Comparison ' Q ntrainment and River Samples Plankton ssmples were not collected at any river stations after April 1, 1980 due to a reduction of the aquatic sampling program, therefore, com-I parison of entraf nment and river samples was not possible for the 1985 zooplankton program. Results of zooplankton analyses for the entrainment sample collected monthly are presented in Section D, ZOOPLANKTON. I = 1 I J

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT W During past years, composition of zooplankton was similar in entrainment and river samples (DLCo 1980). Protozoans and rotifers were predominant, whereas crust.aceans were sparse. Densities of the four most abundant taxa for each month (DLCo, 1976, 1977,1979, and 1980) indicate the same taxa were present in both river and intake samples. In addition, they were present in similar quantities. Shannon-Weiner indices, evenness, and richness values for river and entrainment samples were also similar, further demonstrating similarity between entrained ana river zooplankton. Summary and Conclusions Past results of monthly sampling of zooplankton in the Ohio River near BVPS and within the intake structure showed little difference in densi-ties (number / liter) and species composition. During periods of minimum, low river flow (5,000 cfs), about 1.25% of the river would be withdrawn into the condenser cooling system. Based on the similarity of density of zooplankton in ther river and the DVPS intake structure, and the small I mount of water withdrawn from the river, the loss of zooplankton was negligible, even under worst case low fAuw conditions. I I I I I I I l E IN

E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT l 9 VI. REFERENCF.S Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1985. Pennsylvania's Endangered Fishes, Reptiles and Amphibiens. Published by the Pennsylvania Fish Commis-f sion.

Dahlberg, M.

D. and E. P. Odum, 1970. Annual cycles of species occur-8 rence, abundance and diversity in Georgia estuarine fish popula-tions. Am. Midl. Nat. 83:382-392. DLCo, 1976. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological Volume 91. I Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station. 132 pp. DLCo, 1977. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological Volume ll. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station. 123 pp. DLCo, 1979. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological Volume $1. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station. 149 pp. DLCo, 1980. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 160 pp. DLCo, 1981. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 105 pp. + Appendices. DLCo, 1982. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1-126 pp. g = DLCo, 1983. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 124 pp. + Appendix. DLCo, 1984. Annual Environmental Report, Nonradiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 139 pp. EPA, 1973. Biological field and laboratory methods. EPA-670/4-73-001. Cincinnati, OH. 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, R.

B. N., 1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. ORSANCO, 1985. Quality Monitor. (Monthly summary of data for the State of Ohio.)

Pielou, E.

C., 1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley f Interscience, Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. I 105

e I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Robins, C. R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. I N. Lea, and W. B. Scott, 1980. A list of common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada (Fourth edition). Amer. Fish. Sco. Spec. Publ. No. 12:1-174.

Scott, W.

B. and E. J. Crossman, 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Bd. Canada. Bulletin 184. 966 p.

Winner, J.

M., 1975. Zooplankton. In: B. A.

Whitton, ed.

River ecology. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. pp. 155-169. I I 5 i l I I i E I i )

I 8 9 9 E 1985 Corbicula MONI'10 RING PROGRAM DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNITS NO. 1 & 2 I ) t 8 Prepared by: h Robert Louis Shema 5 William R. Cody David K. Waldorf 9 Gary J. Kenderes Aquatic Systems Corporation Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and J. Wayne McIntire 3 Duquesne Light Company Shippingport, Pennsylvania i E I I

t DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM INTRODUCTION I 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 body. Information from prior aquatic surveys has demonstrated the I presence of Corbicula in the Ohio River in the vicinity of the Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS), and the plant is listed in NUREG/CR-4233 (Counts 1985). I One adult clam is capable of producing many thousands of larvae called veligers. These veligers are very small (approxi.nately 0.2 mm) and may pass easily through the water passages of a power plant. Once the veliger settles and attaches itself to the substrate, growth of the clam occurs very I quickly. If clams develop within a power plant's water passages, they impair the flow of water through the plant. Reduction of flow may be so severe that a plant shutdown is necessary, as occurred in 1980 at Arkansas Nuclear One Power Plant. The clams are of particular concern when they develop undetected in emergency cystems where the flow of water is not constant (IE Bulletin 81-03, Attachment). I These clams are extremely hardy; they can live out of water for more than a week. Poisons and other water-borne contol methods have generally proved to I be inadequate because the clams can survive prolonged periods closed in their shells. In light cf increased concern about the effects of these clams, Duquesne Light Company expanded the scope of its existing Environmental Monitoring Program to include a focused Corbicula Monitoring Program in the Ohio River and in the circulating cooling water system of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling I tower). This report describes this Monitoring Program and the results obtained during field and plant surveys conducted during the spring and fall, 1985. The two objectives of the Monitoring Program were to evaluate the infestation of Corbicula at the BVPS and to assess the population of Corbicula in the Ohio River to evaluate the potential for infestation of the BVPS. I

E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM In-Plant Collections were made during the end of May and the second week of September, 1985. Samples were collected using a (6x6") petite Ponar dredge in the innerbay and forebay regions of the intake structure and in the upper reservoir of the cooling tower. Two samples were collected from each of the four (A,B,C and D) forebay and innerb'ay areas, each at points approximately one third distance from the walls of the intake structure and directly beneath I' the catwalk. No samples were taken behind the traveling screens, as this area was believed to have been inaccessible to adult clams. It was also perceived that annual cleaning operations minimize colonization by veligers or juveniles. Information gained during the December, 1985 cleaning revealed that these were falce assumptions. Two samples were also collected on either side of the northeastern catwalk over the cooling tower reservoir. This area 8 was chosen for all four sarcple locations because the water velocity elsewhere in the reservoir would not permit sampling with a Ponar dredge. The substrate of each sample was characterized at the time of collection. The samples were then returned to the laboratory and sorted for C_orbicula within 16 hours of collection. This procedure increased overall sorting efficiency because formalin, normally used to preserve the samples for long periods of 8 time, was not needed and live Corbicula could be seen moving in the sorting trays. Counts were made of live and dead Corbicula for each dredge sample. 2 These counts were converted to densities (clams /m ) for each collection with W factors based on the area sampled by the dredge. Plant operations personnel have the intake surveyed semi-annually by divers for silt buildup, and if necessary, the intake bays are cleaned. Flooding from record heavy rains in November, 1985 (>l5 ft. above normal pool) caused I excessive (>7 ft.) siltation behind the travelkng screens in Bay D, which prompted an unscheduled second cleaning of the bays for 1985. I The cleaning operation was performed by divers using a Flygt 20 hp submersible pump. This pump has a capacity of 500 gpm (1,750 rpm) and uses a 5 inch propeller to push water and debris up a flexible hose (Jenkins and Logar 1985). Water and debris were sluiced through the drainage system of the 2

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM intake structure, where some of the larger clam shells remained after the cleaning operations. Field 8 Field collections were usually made during the same week as in-plant collections. Samples were collected using either a regular Ponar (9x9") or a petite Ponar (6x6") dredge along transects across each of the water bodies. W Eighteen transects were established along the Ohio River, ten upstream, seven (transect segments) downstream and one at the plant intake. Two transects below the BVPS were divided where samples were taken on either side of Phillis ~ and Georgetown Islands. Each transect was selected in the field, based on suitable substrate (e.g., sand and/or gravel) or heated discharge (HD). Each station was identified by river navigation mile (rigure 1). Two tributaries were included to assess any contribution to the system from the Beaver River I and Raccoon Creek (Figure 1). The collection and laboratory methods were identical to those used for samples from the plant. In May, duplicate samples were taken on the left and right shores of each transect. The samples collected in September included single, left, right and mid-channel stations. I 8 \\ 8 i E \\ E I I 3

S o5 y pE5 m 5* 5$ oo5 y y0EO 5g@x M G W EG N D M E I SA D 8 R DD A 8 B L Y B 1 M ES W S W I A D HK ),s 4 R SC NA AO 3 OY 2 DL R 2 C I 4 E >l f/ 1 4 1 W T 5 S E H s S / 1 H O C 0 O 7 N 0 R 1 2 PI S A A T I 0 2 P U T O 2 V T 0 l S l M RER A G VE N V A I I ER L B P N 4 S M R O E MM L AE E O I ST V 2 C M S A 0 C E A MY B R 1 AS W R ^ E GRS _ 2 P R OEP 8 Y M U RVV 2 R G PIB A E D I R W M F G O 8 E NO GS L W TK A II NC 5 C RH OO 0 S UO _ W I I' V ML I O H N O p N RY O O EER I M VLE T _ W EAOT 0 ALWA a l 3 3 BVPS 8 u T D 4 c N 3 N A i 0 NI i W I 4 A E C OO b L 5 I P r D 3 T o 5 T L 3 S I M G 0 E

7. I LR P

E 3 7 M V 5 D AI 5 N 3 SR 7 W N W 3 O E T E G G E R L O W E W M a l lllll

v 8 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM RESULTS 8 Results of the Corbicula survey within the intake structure and cooling tower are presented in Tables 1 (May) and 2 (September). Densities were calculated I only for :'.ve Corbicula, as densities for empty shells do not translate into potential colonizers, and such figures could be distorted by the redistribution of dead clams by currents. Although the number of live Corbicula found was not large, more clams were found in the September samples than those collected in May. No live Corbicula were collected in the cooling tower reservoir; however, the presence of shells indicates that they were transported within the circulating water system. While performing the innerbay cleaning operation, the divers reported an g unusually high concentration of Corbicula in Bays A, B, and D. Divers reported that the clams appeared to be distributed in ring-shaped patterns within the bays and that they were mostly concentrated toward the back and downstream side of the bays. No clams were found in Bay C (Hammill 1985). A cut-away diagram of the intake structure is provided in Figure 2. The submersible pump used for cleaning was very successful in the removal of various size clams (largest 32 mm) (Jenkins and Logar 1985). The clams were I removed largely intact, with just over 1% of the live Corbicula showing any shell damage. Many dead clams were removed with both halves attached. Photographs of Corbicula are provided in Figure 3. The number of clams reported to have been cleaned from the intake bays was far than any concentration of clams collected in Macroinvertebrate Programs more since 1973. Approximately 75 gallons of live clams and shelin (measured in 55 gallon drums) were retained in the drainage structure of the intake screens after the cleaning of Bay D. Four one quart samples of these clams were taken to the laboratory and counted to obtain a per gallon estimate of 3,600 Corbicula (32% live). Thus, at least 86,800 live and 183,500 dead Corbicula 2 were removed from Bay D, which correspends to 3,750 clams /m. The diver in charge ~of this operation estimated that these numbers represented only 20% of the clams that were actually present in Bay D prior to cleaning; the remainder were washed out through holes in the drain structure. This estimate indicates that as many as 1,350,000 clams were present in Bay D prior to cleaning, or a I live clam density of 6,000/m2 A roughly equivalent number of clams were also I

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I TABLE 1 Corbicula COLLECTED INSIDE THE INTAKE STRUCTURE AND COOLING TOWER I MAY 31, 1985 BVPS Clams Collected Station Density Sample Location Substrate Alive Dead Live Clams /m' 8 Innerbay A det 0 0 0 det 0 0 B det/gra 0 12 0 det 0 2 8 C det 0 1 0 det 0 1 D det 0 1 0 8 det 0 2 Forebay A det 0 1 22 san /det 1 '14 B san /det 0 1 0 san /det 0 2 C det 0 8 0 det 0 2 l D det 0 1 0 W det 0 0 Cooling Tower san /det 0 5 0 I det 0 0 det 0 0 det 0 4 i S estrar. cm.s. det - detritus gra - gravel san - sand i E I I E s

8 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I TABLE 2 Corbicula COLLECTED INSIDE THE INTAKE STRUCTURE AND COOLING TOWER SEPTEMBER 13, 1985 I BVPS 8 Clams Collected Station Density Sample Location Substrate Alfve Dead Live Clams /m# g Innerbay A det 1 5 43 3 det 1 5 B det 0 2 0 det 0 3 8 C det 0 4 0 det 0 4 D det 1 2 22 8 det 0 1 Forebay A det 4 11 86 det/gra 0 6 B det/gra 1 6 22 i det 0 7 C det 0 5 0 det 0 6 l D det 0 3 0 W det 0 10 Cooling Tower det 0 2 0 det 0 6 I det/ mud 0 1 det 0 3 5 l Substrate Codes: det - detritus gra - gravel = mud - mud 6 lI 7

W DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM (THREE DIMENSIONAL: CUTAWAY VIEW) I ~ ^ %x ) TRASH M 8 RACK AREA CLEANED BY N DIVING OPERATIONS d I TRAVELING SCREEN g \\ B L A g-v. s Forabay Sample innerba\\y Sample 8 Location Location g BAY D (TWO DIMENSIONAL: SIDE VIEW) n TRAVELING SCREEN / rash Rock .J. T 8 AREA CLEANED BY l DIVING OPERATIONS p '/

,.27 sc A

q g b mW \\ g \\ / \\ innerboy Sample Forebay Sample Location Location E FIGURE 2 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM SAMPLING STATIONS INTAKE STRUCTURE

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM i 8 l Cm l 2 3 I i Cody 1985, Aquatic Systems Corporation i FIGURE 3 PHOTOGRAPHS OF Corbicula: (1 AND 3) SHOWING KEY I CHARACTERISTIC (serrated hinges) FOR GENUS LEVEL IDENTIFICATION, AND (2) CLAM SHELLS FROM BAY D BVPS I 9

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM removed from Bay A and a lesser number was removed from Bay B (Hammill 1985). Estimates of clam densities were not made for these bays. Calculations were performed for Bay D because this area was dry in October; therefore, it served as a reference point. I No Corbicula were found during a hand search conducted by the divers in the forebay areas of each of the four (4) bays, although sufficient substrate was present for colonization. A diver hand search was made in the innerbay region between the traveling screens and the bar rack. This area was also sampled by dredge in m y and September resulting in few Corbicula collected. The results of the Corbicula survey in the Ohio River are given in Tables 3 (May) and 4 (September). Dead clams were not counted in samples of the regular macroinvertebrate monitoring program. The clams displayed a preference for sand and gravel dominated substrates and for areas to the side of the main channel. Corbicula collected from the center channel areas came exclusively from back channel areas behind islands. No Corbicula were collected from the center of the main channel of the Ohio River, the Beaver River, or Raccoon Creek. All Corbicula collected from the Ohio River were juveniles less than 12 mm in diameter. Table 5 summarizes Corbicula frequency in past macroinvertebrate collections for the BVPS (1973 through 1905). Peaks in population density are apparent in the years 1976 and 1981: no Corbicula were found during 1973, 1979 and 1980. Corbicula densities increased during fall collections. I from collection of Corbicula during impingement sampling, are presented

Data, in Table 6.

The number of organisms collected increased dramatically in August and September and gradually declined through the end of October. A major exception to this pattern occured during the week of November 8, where large numbers of clams were impinged during the flood. I I I o

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING FROGRAM TABLE 3 Corbicula COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER SYSTEM, MAY 31, 1985 Clams Station Sample River Collected Density Location Mile Bank Substrate Alive Dead Live Clams /m# Raccoon Cr. (0.3) R mud /sil 0 0 0 R mud /sil 0 0 I L det 0 0 0 L det 0 0 Beaver River (1.0) R det 0 0 0 8 R det G 0 L san /det 0 5 0 L det 0 2 (0.0) R san /det 0 1 0 I R san /det/gra 0 0 L san /det 0 1 0 L san /det 0 0 I Ohio River (14.2) R gra 4 1 86 R san /gra 0 0 L san /det 0 0 0 I L san /gra 0 0 (15.4) R san /det 0 2 0 R san /det 0 2 L san /gra 1 2 64 i L gra 2 0 (17.6) R san /det 0 1 0 R sil/ san /det 0 1 8 L gra/ cob 0 0 0 I I L san /gra 0 0 (18.8) R san /gra 0 1 0 R gra 0 0 L san /det 0 0 0 L san /det 0 1 (22.2) R san /gra 0 0 0 R san /gra 0 0 L det 0 0 0 L det 0 0 (23.4) R san /det 0 0 0 1 R san /det 0 0 L san /gra 0 1 0 L san /gra 0 1 I (27.2) R gra 0 1 0 R gra 0 1 L sil/ san /det 0 0 0 I L sil/det 0 1 (28.2) R san /gra O G 0 R san /gra 0 0 L sil/ san /det 0 0 0 i L sil/ san /det 0 0 11

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I Table 3 (Continued) Clams Station Sample River Collected Density Location Mile Bank Substtate Alive Dead Live Clams /m' (33.0) R mud / san 0 0 0 I R san /gra 0 0 L det 0 2 22 L det 1 5 (34. 5) III R san /det 0 1 0 R det 0 1 L det 0 0 L det 0 3 (34.8) R san /gra 0 1 0 R san 0 0 L san /det 0 5 0 i L det 0 2 L((HD) (35.0) det 0 3 0 HD) (Back channel) L det 0 1 ( 35. 4) (2A) R san 0 0 0 I R san 0 0 L sil 0 0 L sil/ san 0 (35. 4) (2B) R det 0 0 I (Back channel) M gra/det 0 0 L det 0 0 (35.7) M gra 0 0 0 1 (Back channel) M gra 0 2 L san 0 0 0 l (37.0)(3) L(HD)

- "!9
I R

san 0 44 0 R san 0 41 L det 0 0 L det 0 (37.5) R san /gra 0 0 0 R gra 0 0 Substrate Codes: Footnotes: cob - cobble (HD) - Heated Discharge I det - detritus (1) - Transect 1 gra - gravel (2A) - Transect 2A (Main Channel) mud - mud (2B) - Transect 2B (Back Channel) I san - sand (3) - Transect 3 sil - silt I 12

I ) DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I TABLE 4 Corbicula COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER SYSTEM SEPTEMBER 11 & 19, 1985 BVPS Clams Station Sample River Collected Density Location Mile Bank Depth S_ubstrate Alive Dead Live Clams /m' Raccoon Cr. (0.3) R 2 det 0 0 0 I M 7 det/ san 0 0 0 L 5 det 0 0 0 Beaver River (1.0) R 5 det 0 0 0 M 12 det 0 0 0 L 3 det 0 0 0 (0.0) R 8 det 0 0 0 M 18 ash /gra 0 0 0 i L 2 det 0 0 0 Ohio River (14.2) R 8 gra 0 2 0 M 25 gra 0 0 0 L 3 gra 0 2 0 I (15.4) R 2 gra 1 0 43 20 san 0 0 0 M(HD) L 2 san /gra 0 0 0 I (17.6) R 2 det/saa 0 0 0 M (HD) 30 san /gra 0 2 0 L 2 cob 0 0 0 (18.8) R 3 san 0 0 0 1 M 18 cob 0 0 0 L 2 ash / cob 0 0 0 (22.2) R 3 san /gra 0 0 0 8 M 24 san / cob 0 0 0 L 5 det/ san 0 0 0 (23.4) R 3 det/gra 0 1 0 I M 27 san /gra 0 0 0 L 4 ash /gra 9 3 388 (27.2) R 2 cob 0 0 0 M 25 san /gra 0 1 0 I L 2 det/ san 0 0 0 (28.2) R 10 det 0 0 0 M 40 det 0 0 0 I L 2 det 0 0 0 (33.0) R 4 san /gra 0 0 0 M 19 san 0 0 0 L 4 det 1 4 43 I (34.5)III R 3 gra 0 0 0 M 23 san /gra 0 1 0 L 2 mud / san 6 118 I L 2 mud / san 3 59 ( 34. 8) R 4 det 0 1 0 M 25 san 0 0 0 I L 18 det/ mud 2 6 86 13

I DUQUES14E LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I Table 4 (Continued) Clams Station Sample River Collected Density I Location Mile Bank Depth Substrate Alive Dead Live Clams /m' (35.0) R 2 san 1 2 43 I (Back channel) M 20 san /gra 2 0 86 L(HD) 21 det/ mud 0 3 0 ( 35. 4) (2A) R 2 cob 0 0 0 I M 18 san /gra 0 1 0 L 2 san 0 0 L 2 san 0 0 (35.4) (2B) ~ R 4 det 6 118 (Back channel) M 12 san /gra/ cob 4 79 L 3 san 5 99 (35.7) R 2 det/ mud 0 4 0 I (Back channel) M 13 san /gra 1 5 43 L 2 det/ mud 0 4 0 (37.0) (3) R IEI 12 det/ san 0 3 0 M 25 gra 0 2 0 I L 2 mud / san 4 79 L 2 san 0 0 (37. 5) R 2 gra 1 2 43 I M 23 san 1 0 43 L 2 gra 0 3 0 (37.5) R 2 mud / san 0 1 0 8 (Back channel) M 25 gra 2 0 86 L 10 gra 2 0 86 8 Substrate Codes: Footnotes: ash - ash (HD) - Heated Discharge cob - cobble (1) - Transect 1 I det - detritus (2A) - Transact 2A (Main Channel) gra - gravel (2B) - Transect 2B (Back Channel) I mud - mud (3) - Transect 3 g san - sand 5 sil - silt 8 I 14

DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM TABLE 5 2 Corbicula DENSITIES (clams /m ) SUMMARIZED FROM BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COLLECTIONS 1973 THROUGH 1985 BWS I TRANSECT 1 2A 2B 3 Back Date L M R L M R Channel L M R 1973 Nov 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1974 May 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Jun 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 C Jul 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Aug 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sep 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 1975 Aug, 26 7 0 20 20 20 33 20 7 0 0 Nov, 13 0 0 0 7 46 0 7 0 198 0 1976 Feb, 24 7 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 8 May, 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Aug, 18 40 20 290 99 0 53 92 0 20 0 Nov 0 0 356 13 475 20 139 7 422 13 1977 Feb, 24 0 0 7 7 53 508 7 0 7 0 8 May, 17 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 Aug, 17 0 0 0 0 86 7 13 0 172 0 Nov 13 20 59 0 46 13 46 7 145 0 1 1978 Feb, 15 0 13 0 0 0 132 6 6 6 32 May, 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Aug, 9 0 0 0 6 13 0 0 0 0 0 Nov, 14&l5 25 13 0 6 403 38 32 6 19 6 8 1979 Mar, 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 May, 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Aug, 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Nov, 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980 Feb, 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 May, 21 0 0 0 0 I Sep, 23 0 0 0 0 1981 May, 12 0 0 7 0 Sep, 22 40 90 408 99 1982 May, 18 0 0 0 0 t Sep, 23 0 10 0 0 1983 May, 11 20 0 0 0 Sep, 13 59 20 251 40 I 1984 May, 10 0 0 7 0 Sep, 6 0 0 0 0 1985 May, 15 0 0 0 0 Sep, 19 89 0 99 40 I (-) indicates area not sampled ll

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I TABLE 6

SUMMARY

OF Corbicula COLLECTED IN IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS FOR ONE 24-HOUR PERIOD PER WEEK, 1985 BVPS I Number Collected Operating Non-Operating I Date Intake Bays Intake Bays Month

Day, Alive Dead Alive Dead I

January 4 0 0 3 2 11 0 0 0 0 18 0 5 0 2 25(a) 5 a) February 1 8 15 0 0 0 6 I 22 0 1 0 1 March 1 0 0 0 3 8 0 0 0 0 I 15 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 April 5 0 0 0 0 I 12 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 I May 3 0 18 0 9 10 2 1 6 16 17 0 1 1 0 24 0 2 0 0 8 31 4 3 0 0 June 7 0 1 0 3 14 6 4 0 2 I 21 1 5 0 0 ) 28 7 16 0 1 1 July 5 5 7 0 1 I 12 7 2 1 1 19(b) 11 9 0 0 26 August 2 (b) 9 77 89 1 3 16 32 28 7 2 23 162 56 3 4 8 30 81 47 4 5 September 6 71 30 8 3 13 181 50 5 4 20 50 29 2 6 I 27 59 47 3 16 8 16

t DUQUESNE LfGHT COMPANY 1905 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I Table 6 (Continued) ~ Number Collected Operating Non-Operating I Date Intake Bays Intake Bays Month Dy Alive Dead Alive Dead I October 4 0 3 1 13 11 9 5 5 6 18 11 9 3 5 8 25 1 4 5 5 I November 1 3 3 3 7 8 4 12 124 16 15 0 2 4 2 .I 22 0 0 0 2 29 0 0 0 0 December 6 1 4 2 23 I 13 0 1 0 0 20 1 0 5 2 27 0 0 2 1 Total 786 494 198 172 I I (a) Impingement could not be conducted due to frozen discharge pipe. (b) Overhead crane in screenhouse was out-of-service, cancelling impingement. I I I I I I I I 17

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM DISCUSSION I The most unanticipated collections of Corbicula were taken in the innerbay areas by the divers. I Substantial numbers of clams were recovered from Bays A, B and D. However, more important than the actual numbers of Corbicula tha t were present behind the traveling screens following the November flood is the short period in which the Corbicula colonized these areas. Bay D was totally dewatered for a flange replacement in October and had been returned to service just prior to the flood. At that time, the floor of Bay D was bare and dry, containing no clams at all (Logar 1985). Therefore, all of the clams later I found in Bay D colonized the area within four weeks. It seems reasonable to presume that the large numbers of clams removed from Bays A and C were also transported there by the flood. However, these bays were last cleaned in May, 1985; therefore, the exact time of colonization cannot be determined. The majority of clams were too large to have passed through the traveling screens (average size 17 m, largest 32 m, for live Corbicula). Thus, they probably colonized the area by passing through the 1.5 to 2 inch (38 to 51 mm) opening on either side of the traveling screens. I large numbers of clams collected during the impingement studies the week The i of November 8 (Table 6) supports this hypothesis. During that week, only Bay A was operating, and 84% of the clams collected from non-operating screens were from Bay D. Bays B and C yielded 6.5% and 4.5% of the Corbicula, respectively. Therefore, eddy currents were probably influential in the distribution of clams into the bay areas. I Regional variation and this species adaptability appear to be key survival tactics for Corbicula and pose major challenges for those who study these organisms (Britton 1983). A number of natural phenomena regarding the population dynamics of Corbicula are observable in the present data. Some of these phenomena have been observed previously. I Corbicula in the vicinity of the BVPS and the upper Ohio River were found most often in near shore habitats with primarily gravel or sand substrates, although past data (Table 5) show that Corbicula were present in mid-channel I areas during periods of high population density. Corbicula were most of ten reported to prefer shallow, soft, sandy substrates (Dreier and Tranquilli 18

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I 1981, Gottfried and Osborne 1982). Our observations indicate that in the upper Ohio River the Corbicul3 also prefer gravel substrates. This preference may relate to interspecific c omposition, predation patterns, or an adaptation to lotic systems. Large unexplained die-offs of Corbicula populations have been reported in the literature (e.g., Sickel et a.1 1981, Walker 1982, Sickel 1985). This could explain the year to year variation in Corbicula density in the vicinity of the BVPS. However, any such speculation should be considered tentative. I Several theories have developed regarding the great natural distributive capacities of the Corbicula and how they can spread quickly throughout a watershed (McMahon 1982). One way in which this species may be able to spread downstream is by drif ting in the water column using a mucous " drogue" as a flotation device (Prezant and Chalermwat 1984, Figure 4, Photo 2). This relocation mechanism probably is used by the Ohio River population of I Corbicula. Live clams were commonly collected on the vertically oriented traveling screens during impingement surveys (Table 6) ; thus, they must be able to suspended themselves in the water column in ceder to have been collected in this way. Another method for shell movemant occurs when dying C_ot bicula produce a mucous sack that is inflated with decomposition gases that would cause bouyancy and downstream movement (McMahon 1983). Corbicula are generally known to be well established in the lower reaches of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers, where flooding occurred prior to the December cleaning of the BVPS intake structure. The colonization by large numbers of live Corbicula in the intake during November and early December was probably the I result of deliberate downstretan drif t. This phenomenon has been documented for many aquatic insects in tmall streams. Perhaps the rising or receding flood waters acted as a cue to initiate this behavior in the Corbicula. If true, this insight advances our understanding of this species. The lack of clams on the river side of the traveling screens may have been the result of flow patterns during the flood or predation by organisms that use the I I sheltered waters of the intake structure as a feeding ground (e.g., catfish). 1 I I 19

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM I I

eCm, j

I I (1) Cody 1985, Aquatic Systesas Corporrtion I I I I y, ' I I (2) Presant and Chalerimwat 1984, Courtesy of SCIENCE MAGAZINE Copyright 1984 by the AAA.i I FIGURE 4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF Corbicula: (1) SIZE RANGE COLLECTED FROM BAY D CLEANING OPERATIONS, AND (2) MUCOUS " DROGUE" EXCRETION AS A METHOD OF LOCOMOTION BVPS I 20

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM CONCLUS IONS This investigation has shown that natural phenomena (e.g., flooding) and the opportunistic methods of locomotion (e.g., mucous " drogue" excretion) provide Corbicuh with a means to recolonize areas greater than 20 miles downstream. I Both the May and September collections (141 samples) revealed only 59 clams in the Ohio River Study Area. However, concurrent with the river flooding during November, Bay D had a dramatic infestation (an estimated 1,350,000) of clams in only four weeks. It is highly unlikely that such a large population of Corbicula would have been missed in the May and September collections had they inhab.ted the Study Area. It is significant to note the unusually high numbers of Corbicula collected in the intake bays considering the following factors. First, the physical positioning of the intake structure is parallel to the shoreline, designed to I reduce f unneling of debris into the bays. A skimmer wall located below the surface also prevents floating debris from being drawn into the plant. Second, the percentage of river water withdrawn into the BVPS was very small compared with the total flow. Flow data, provided by ORSANCO's East Liverpool, Ohio gage (MP 40.2) for November and December, 1985, show monthly averages of 64,200 and 58,700 cfs and maximum daily values of 127,500 and 141,300 cfs, respectively, with only approximately 60 cfs being withdrawn into I the BVPS. When comparing the high numbers of clams collected in light of the above factors, it becomes appearent that there was a very large Corbicula population inhabiting the upper Ohio River drainage, above the 1985 Study Area. These clams most likely utilized a mucous excretion to relocate a distance of greater than 20 miles downstream to the BVPS during the flood of November, 1985. It is also significant that, in spite of this very large infestation of clams into the intake, no problems were encountered at the BVPS and operations I continued normally throughout the event. l I I 21 W

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM

Britton, J.

C., 1983. Minutes of the Biology Panel Discussion, Second International Corbicula Symposium, Corbicula Newsletter 8(2):9-19. I Burch, J. Q., 1944. Checklist of West American Mollusks. Minutes, Conchology Club of Southern California 38:18

Counts, C.

C. III, 1985. Distribution of Corbicula fluminea at Nuclear I Facilities. Division of Engineering, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREGLCR. 4233. 79pp.

Dreier, H.

and Tranquilli, J. A., 1981. Reproduction, Growth, Distribution and Abundance of Corbicula in an Illinois Cooling Lake, ILL Nat. Hist. Survey Bull. 32(4):378-393. I Hammill, Vincent, J., Jr. (Corratercial Diver) personal communication, November 29, 1985. Jenkins, Harold and Frank Logar, (DLCo Operations Personnel, BVPS) personal communication, January 10, 1986. Logar, Frank, (DLCo Operations Personnel, BVPS) personal communication, December 3. 1985. I

McMahon, R.

F., 1982. The occurence and Spread of the Introduced Asian Freshwater Clam, Corbicula fluminea in North America: 1921-1982. Nautilus 96(4):123-141. McMahon, R. F., 1983. The Mollusca. Academic Press, Orlando, FL: 505-561. Prezant, R. S. and Chalermwat, K., 1984. Flotation of the Bivalve Corbicula I fluminea as a Means of Dispersal. Science 225:1491-1493. Sickel, J. B.,

Johnson, D. W.,

Rice, G. T., Heyn, M. W. and Wellner, P. K., 1981. Asiatic Clam and Commercial Pishery Evaluation. Final Report, unpublished. (Cited Corbicula newsletter 6(2):15 with abstract.) 22 I 4

I DUQUESi4E LIGHT COMPANY 1985 Corbicula MONITORING PROGRAM Sickel, J. B., 1985. Other News. Corbicula Newsletter 9(1):2. I

Walker, M.

W., 1982. Corbicula Mortality in the Towaliga River, Georgia. Corbicula Newsletter 7(1):13. ' I I 1 l I I I I I I I l I I I I I I 23

I I I I I ATTACHMENT OF NRC IE BULLETIN 81-03 I I I ) I 'I I I I I I I \\ I I I

SSlNS No.: 6820 i Accession No.: 8011040289 IEB 81-03 UNITED STATES l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 I April 10,1981 I FLOW BLOCKAGE OF COOLING WATER TO SAFETY SYSTEM IE Bulletin 81-03 : COMPONENTS BY CORBICULA SP. (ASIATIC CLAM) AND MYTILUS SP. (MUSSEL) Descriotion of Circumstances: On September 3, 1980, Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), Unit 2, was shut down after the NRC Resident Inspector discovered that Unit 2 had failed to meet the technical specification requirements for minimum service water flow rate through the containment cooling units (CCUs). After plant shutdown, Arkansas l Power and Light Company, the licensee, determined that the inadequate flow was due to extensive plugging of the CCUs by Asiatic clams (Corbicula species, a I non-native fresh water bivalve mollusk). The licensee disassembled the service water piping at the coolers. Clams were found in the 3-inch diameter supply Some of piping at the inlet to the CCUs and in the cooler inlet water boxes. the clams found were alive, but most of the debris consisted of shells. The I sin. of the clams varied from the larvae stage up to one inch. The service water, which is taken from the Dardanelle Reservoir, is filtered before it is g pumped through the system. The strainers on the service water pump discharges g were examined and found to be intact. Since these strainers have a 3/16-inch l mesh, much smaller than some of the shells found,-it appears that clams had been growing in the system. I Following the discovery of Asiatic : lams in the containment coolers of Unit 2, the licensee examined other equipment cooled by service water in both Units 1 and 2. Inspection of other heat exchangers in the Unit 2 service water system I revealed some fouling or plugging of additional coolers (scal water coolers for both redundant containment spray pumps and one low pressure safety injec-tion pump) due to a buildup of silt, corrosion products, and debris (mostly I clam shell pieces). The high pressure safety injection (HPSI) pump bearing and seal coolers were found to have substantial plugging in the 1/2-inch pipe service water supply lines. The plugging resulted from an accumulation of I silt and corrosion products. Clam shells were found in some auxiliary building room coolers and in the I auxiliary cooling water system which serves non-safety-related equipment. Flow rates measured during surveillance testing through the CCus at ANO-2 had deteriorated over a number of months. Flushing after plant shutdown initially resulted in a further reduction in flow. Proper flow rates were restored only af ter the clam debris had been removed manually from the CCOs. The examination of the Unit 1 service water system revealed that the "C" and "0" containment coolers were clogged by clams. Clams were found in the 3-inch inlet headers and in the inlet water boxes. However, no clams were found

l 3 April 10, 1981 l 5 Page 2 of 5 l in the "A" and "B" coolers. This fouling was not discovered during surveillance testing because there was no flow instrumentation on these coolers. The service water system in Unit I was not fouled other than stated above, and the licensee attributed this to the fact that the service water pump suctions are located behind the main condenser circulating pumps in the intake structure. I It was thought that silt and clams entering the intake bays would be swept through the condenser by the main circulating pumps and would not accumulate in the back of the intake bays. In contrast, Unit 2 has no main circulating pumps in its intake structure because condenser heat is rejected through a cooling tower via a closed cooling system. As a result of lower flowrates of water through the Unit 2 intake structure, silt and clams could have a tendency to accumulate more rapidly in Unit 2 than in Unit 1. During the September I outage, clams and shells were found to have accumulated to depths of 3 to 4-1/2 feet in certain areas of the intake bays for Unit 2. The Asiatic clam was first found in the United States in 1938 in the Columbia River near Knappton, Washington. Since then, Corbicula sp. has spread across the country and is now reported in at least 33 states. The Tennessee Valley I Authority (TVA) power plants also have experienced fouling caused by these clams. They were first found in the condensers and service water systems at the Shawnee Steam Plant in 1957. Asiatic clams were later found in the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in October 1974 only a few months after it went into operation. This initial clam infestation at Browns Ferry was enhanced by the fa'ct that, during the final stages of construction, the cooling water systems I were allowed to remain filled with water for long periods of time while the systems were not in use. This condition was conducive to the growth and accumulation of clams. Since that time, the hsiatic clam has spread across the Tennessee Valley region and is found at virtually all the TVA steam-electric I and hydrcelectric generating stations. Present control procedures for Asiatic clams vary from station to station and I in their degree of effectiveness. The use of shock chlorination during surveil-lance testing as the only method of controlling biofouling by this organism appears to be ineffective. The levt1 of fouling has been reduced to acceptable levels at TVA stations by using continuous chlorination during peak spawning periods, clam traos, and mechanica] cicaning during station outages. I The results of a series of tests on mollusks periormed at the Savannah River facility showed that mature Corbicula sp. had as much as a 10 percent survival rate af ter being exposed to high' concentratiens of free residual chlorine (10 I to 40 ppm) for up to 54 hours. When the clams were allowed to remain buried in a couple of inches of mud, their survival rates were as high as 65 percent. In studies on shelled larvae, approximately 200 microns in size TVA reported I preliminary results indicating that a total chlorine residual of(0.30 to 0.40 npm,for 9E to 108 hours would be required to achieve 100 percent control of the Asiatic clans larvae. I I I L

IEB 81-03 April 10, 1981 l Page 3 of 5 Corbicula sp. has also shown an amazing ability to survive even when removed from the water. Average times to death when left in the air have b6en reported for low relative humidity as 6.7 days at 30 C (86*F) and 13.9 days at 20 C o I (68*F) and for high relative humidity as 8'.'3 days at 30 C and 26.8 days at 20*C. Corbicula sp. on the other hand, has shown a much greater sensitivity to heat. I Tests performed by TVA resulted in 100 percent mortality of clam larvae, very young clams, and 2mm clams when they were exposed to 47*C (117 F) water for 2 minutes. Mature clams, up to 14mm, were also tested and all-died at 47 C I following a 2 minute exposure. A statistical analysis of the 2 minute exposure test data revealed that a temperature of 49 C (120 F) was necessary to reach the 99 percent confidence level of mortality for clams of the size tested. To date, heat has been shown to be. the most effective way of producing 100 p.ercent mortality for the Asiatic clam. At ANO, the service water system was I flushed with~77*C (170 F) water obtained from the auxiliary boiler for approx-imately one half hour; 100 percent mortality was expected. I A similar problem has occurred with mussels (Mytilus sp.). Infestations of mustels have caused flow blockage of cooling water to safety-related equipment at nuclear plants such as Pilgrim and Millstone. Unlike the Asiatic clam, mussels cause biofouling in salt water cooling systems. The event at ANO is significant to reactor safety because (1) the fouling represented an actual common cause failure, i.e., inability of safety system I redundant components to perform their intended safety functions, and (2) the licensee was not aware that safety system components were fouled Although the fouling at ANO-2 developed over a number of months, neither the licensee I management control system nor periodic maintenance or surveillance program detected the failure. ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN BY LICENSEES l Holders of Operating Licenses: 1. Determine whether Corbicula sp. or Mytilus sp. is present in the vicinity of the station (local environment) in either the source or receiving water body. If the results of current field monitoring programs provide reason-I able evidence that neither of these species is present in the local environment, no further action is necessary except for items 4 and 5 in this section for holders of operating licenses. I 2. If it is unknown whether either of these species is present in the local environment or is confirmed that either is present, determine whether I fire protection or safety-related systems that directly circulate water from the station source or receiving water body are fouled by clams or mussels or debris consisting of their shells. An acceptable method of I confirming the absence of organisms or shell debris consists of opening and visually examining a representative sample of components in po'tentially af fected safety systems and a sample of locations in potentially af fected I

April 10, 1981 3 Pag 2 4 cf 5 3 fire protection systems. The sample shall have included a distribution of components with supply and return piping of various diameters which exist in the potentially affected systems. This inspection shall have been conducted since the last clam or mussel spawning season or within the nine month period preceding the date of this bulletin. If the absence of organisms or shell debris has been confirmed by such an inspection or I another method which the licensee shall describe in the response (subject to NRC evaluation and acceptance), no further action is necessary except { for items 4 and 5 of actions applicable to holders of an operating license. I 3. If clams, mussels or shells were found in potentially affected systems or their absence was not confirmed by action in item 2 above, measure the flow rates through individual components in potentially affected systems I to confirm adequate flow rates i.e., flow b. lockage or degradation to an unacceptably low flow rate has not occurred. To be acceptable for this determination, these measurements shall have been made within six months I of the date of this bulletin usino calibrated flow instruments. Di f fer-ential pressure (DP) measurements between supply and return lines for an individual component and DP or flow measurements for parallel connected individual coolers or components are not acceptable if flow blockage or degradation could cause the observed DP or be masked in parallel flow paths. Other methods may be used which give conclusive evidence that flow blockage or degradation to unacceptably low flow rates has not occurred. If another method is used, the basis of its acceptance for this determination shall be included in the response to this bulletin. If the above flow rates cannot be measured or indicate significant flow degradation, potentially affected systems shall be inspected according to item 2 above or by an acceptable alternative method and cleaned as necessary. This action shall be taken within the time period prescribed for submittal of the report to NRC. 4. Describe methods either in use or planned (including implementation date) I for preventing and detecting future flow blockage or degradation due to clams or mussels or shell debris. Include the following information in this description: a. Evaluation of the potential for int-usion of the organisms into these systems due to l'ow water level and high velocities in the intake structure expected during worst case conditions. I l l b. Evaluation of effectiveness of revention and detection methods used in the past or present or planned for future use. ' I 5. Describe the actions taken in items 1 through 3 above and include the following information: a. Applicable portions of the environmental monitoring program including last sample date and results. I I

r IEB 81-03 April 10,1981 I Page 5 of 5 b. Components and systems affected. c. Extent of fouling if any existed. d. How and when fouling was discovered. e. Corrective and preventive actions. Holders of Construction Permits: 1. Determine whether Corbicula sp. or Mytilus sp. is present in the vicinity of the station by completing items 1 and 4 above that apply to operating I licenses (OL). 2. If these organisms are present in the local environment and potentially affected systems have been filled from the station source or receiving I water body, determine whether infestation has occurred. 3. Describe the actions taken in items 1 and 2 above for construction permit holders and include the following information: Applicable portions of the environmental monitoring program including a. last sample date and results. b. Components and systems affected. c. Extent of fouling if any existed. d. How and when fouling was discovered. e. Corrective and preventive actions. Licensees of facilities with operating licenses shall provide the requested report within 45 days of the date of this bulletin. Licensees of facilities with construction permits shall provide the report within 90 days. Provide written reports as required above, signed under oath or affirmation, under the provisions of Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Reports I shall be submitted to the Director of the appropriate Regional Office and a copy forvarded to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, NRC, Washington, D.C. 20555. This request for information was approved by GAO under a blanket clearance number R0072 which expires November 30, 1983. Comments on burden and dupli-cation should be directed to Office of Management and Budget, Room 3201, I New Executive Of fice Building, Washington, D.C. 20503. I .}}

ML20202E080

Contents

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

= =

g e

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

ML20202E080

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

= =

g e

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search