ML20269A408
| ML20269A408 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 06/02/2020 |
| From: | Effinger T Dominion Energy Services, Virginia Electric & Power Co (VEPCO) |
| To: | Bryan J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, State of VA, Dept of Environmental Quality |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20269A409 | List: |
| References | |
| 20-298 | |
| Download: ML20269A408 (185) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:-1 Dominion Energy Services. Inc. 120 Tredegar Street, Richmond, VA 23219 Dominion Energy .com BY ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION June 2, 2020 Mr. Joseph B. Bryan Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Piedmont Regional Office 4949-A Cox Road Glenn Allen, VA 23060 joseph.bryan@deq.virginia.gov RE: Dominion Energy Surry Power Station VPDES Permit No. V A0004090: Application for Permit Reissuance -316(b) 40 CFR §§122.21(r)(2)-(13)
Dear Mr. Bryan:
Enclosed for Dominion Energy's Surry Power Station is the applicable information required to satisfy the 40 CFR § 122.21 (r) application requirements for facilities with cooling water intake structures. This information, in the form of submittals consistent with§§ 122.21(r)(2)-(13) of Part 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, is being timely submitted consistent with Special Condition I.E.3 of the subject Virginia Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit issued by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. Please note that Dominion Energy will be preparing an addendum to supplement the attached (r)(I3) submittal by providing additional responses and clarifications to comments made by the peer reviewers. The addendum will be submitted on, or before, the deadline for submittal of the permit renewal application and will also include revisions to the (r)(l 0)-(12) reports, as appropriate, based on the peer reviewer comments. Please feel to contact Ken Roller at kenneth.roller@dominionenergy.com or at (804) 273-3494 should you have any questions about this information. Sincerely, ~v\.f f f Thomas Effinger Director, Environmental Services
Enclosure:
Surry Power Station 40 CFR §122.21 (r)(2)-(13) Submittal Page 1 of 2
Serial No. 20-298 Dominion Energy Services. Inc. 120 Tredegar Street. Richmond VA 23219 Dominion Energy.com Ecc: Ray Fernald (DGIF, Manager, Environmental Programs): Rav .Femald@'dgif.virginia .gov Amy Ewing (DGIF, Manager, Fish & Wildlife Information Services) am,*.e,, ing(ll d2.if.,*ir2.inia.2.o, Bettina Rayfield (DEQ Environmental Impact Review Program Manager) benina.rayfield ~1deg ., ir2.inia.2.o, Tony Watkinson (VMRC ChiefofHabitat Management) TONY .\\'ATKJNSON w MRC.VIRGJNIA.GO\ ' Randy Owen (VMRC Environmental Engineer) RANDY .OWENICI MRC.V!RGINIA .GOV Rachael Peabody (VMRC Habitat Management Staff) RAC! IAEL.Pl:.ABODY (a MRC.\'IRGll\!A.GO\ ' Lyle Varnell (VIMS - Associate Director for Advisory Services) LMVARN (i1 \\'M.EDU Page 2 of 2
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 4 of 1631 Surry Power Station 40 CFR§122.21 (r)(2)- (13) Submittal June 2020 Certification Statement I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate. and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submittingfalse information. including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Fre Mladen, Site Vice President
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosu re 2, Page 5 of 1631 1-)~ Clean Water Act §316(b} Compliance Submittal §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Prepared for: Dominion Energy, Inc. Prepared by: HDR Engineering, Inc. February 15, 2019
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 6 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 4 2 Source Water Physical Data [§122.21 (r)(2)] .......................................................................................... 7 2.1 Description of Source Waterbody [§122.21 (r)(2)(i)] .................................................................. 7 2 .1.1 Dimensions and Other Physical Characteristics ................................................................. 7 2.1.2 Temperature and Salinity Regime ...................................................................................... 7 2.2 Characterization of Source Waterbody [§122.21 (r)(2)(ii)] ....................................................... 1O 2.2.1 Hydrology .......................................................................................................................... 10 2.2.2 Geomorphology ................................................................................................................. 12 2.2.3 Determination of Area of Influence ................................................................................... 12 2.3 Locational Maps [§122.21 (r)(2)(iii)] ......................................................................................... 18 3 Cooling Water Intake Structure Data [§122.21 (r)(3)] ............................................................................ 20 3.1 Description of CWIS Configuration [§122.21 (r)(3)(i)] .............................................................. 20 3.2 Latitude and Longitude of CWIS [§122.21 (r)(3)(ii)] ................................................................. 23 3.3 Description of CWIS Operation [§122.21 (r)(3)(iii)] .................................................................. 23 3.4 Description of Intake Flows [§122.21 (r)(3)(iv)] ........................................................................ 24 3.5 Engineering Drawings of CWIS [§122.21 (r)(3)(v)] ................................................................... 27 4 Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data [§122.21 (r)(4)] ............................................ 28 4.1 List of Unavailable Biological Data [§122.21 (r)(4)(i)] ............................................................... 28 4.2 List of Species and Relative Abundance in the vicinity of CWIS [§122.21 (r)(4)(ii)] ................ 28 4.2.1 Historical Entrainment Studies .......................................................................................... 36 4.2.2 Historical Impingement Studies ........................................................................................ 37 4.2.3 Historical Ambient Fish Sampling ..................................................................................... 38 4.2.4 Recent Entrainment Studies ............................................................................................. 42 4.2.5 Recent Impingement Studies ............................................................................................ 44 4.3 Identification of Species and Life Stages Susceptible to Impingement and Entrainment [§122.21 (r)(4) (iii)] ..................................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Identification and Evaluation of Primary Growth Period [§122.21 (r)(4)(iv)] ............................. 53 4.4.1 Reproduction ..................................................................................................................... 53 4.4.2 Larval Recruitment ............................................................................................................ 53 4.4.3 Period of Peak Abundance for Relevant Taxa .................................................................. 54 4.5 Data Representative of Seasonal and Daily Activities of Organisms in the Vicinity of CWIS [§122.21(r)(4)(v)] ..................................................................................................................... 56 4.6 Identification of Threatened, Endangered, and Other Protected Species Susceptible to Impingement and Entrainment at CWIS [§122.21 (r)(4)(vi)] ..................................................... 62 4.7 Documentation of Consultation with Services [§122.21 (r)(4)(vii)] ........................................... 74 Dominion Energy J i
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 7 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 4.8 Methods and QA Procedures for Field Efforts [§122.21 (r)(4)(viii)] .......................................... 74 4.9 Definition of Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data [§122.21 (r)(4)(ix)] ...... 74 4.10 Identification of Protective Measures and Stabilization Activities [§122.21 (r)(4)(x) ................ 75 4.11 List of Fragile Species [§122.21 (r)(4)(xi)] ................................................................................ 75 4.12 Information Submitted to Obtain Incidental Take Exemption or Authorization from Services [§122.21 (r)(4)(xii)] .................................................................................................................... 75 5 Cooling Water System Data [§122.21 (r)(5)] ......................................................................................... 76 5.1 Description of Cooling Water System Operation [§122.21 (r) (5)(i)] ......................................... 76 5.1.1 Operation of Cooling Water System ................................................................................. 78 5.1.2 Temporal Characteristics of Cooling Water System Operation ........................................ 78 5.1.3 Proportion of Design Flow Used in the Cooling Water System ........................................ 79 5.1.4 Distribution of Water Reuse .............................................................................................. 79 5.1.5 Description of Reductions in Total Water Withdrawals ..................................................... 79 5.1.6 Description of Cooling Water Used in Manufacturing Process ......................................... 79 5.1 .7 Proportion of Source Waterbody Withdrawn .................................................................... 80 5.2 Design and Engineering Calculations [§122.21 (r)(5)(ii)] ......................................................... 81 5.3 Description of Existing Impingement and Entrainment Reduction Measures [§122.21 (r)(5)(iii)]
................................................................................................................................................. 81 6 Chosen Method(s) of Compliance with Impingement Mortality Standard [§122.21 (r){6)] .................... 82 7 Entrainment Performance Studies [§122.21 (r)(7)] ............................................................................... 82 8 Operational Status [§122.21 (r)(8)] ........................................................................................................ 83 8.1 Description of Operating Status [§122.21 (r)(8)(i)] ................................................................... 83 8.1.1 Individual UnitAge ............................................................................................................ 83 8.1.2 Utilization for Previous 5 Years ......................................................................................... 83 8.1.3 Major Upgrades in Last 15 Years ..................................................................................... 83 8.2 Descriptions of Consultation with Nuclear Regulatory Commission [§ 122.21 (r)(8)(ii)] ........... 84 8.3 Other Cooling Water Uses for Process Units [§122.21 (r)(8)(iii)] ............................................. 84 8.4 Descriptions of Current and Future Production Schedules [§122.21 (r)(8)(iv)] ........................ 84 8.5 Descriptions of Plans or Schedules for Any New Units Planned within the Next 5 Years
[§122.21 (r)(8)(v)] ..................................................................................................................... 84 9 Entrainment Characterization Study [§122.21 (r)(9)] ............................................................................. 85 9.1 Entrainment Data Collection Method [§122.21 (r) (9)(i)] ........................................................... 85 9.1.1 Sampling Gear .................................................................................................................. 85 9.1.2 Sampling Location ............................................................................................................. 85 9.1.3 Sample Collection Period and Frequency ........................................................................ 87 9.1.4 Laboratory Analysis ........................................................................................................... 87 9.1.5 Identification of Species Susceptible to Entrainment ........................................................ 88 Dominion Energy I ii
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 8 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 9.1.6 Identification of Protected Species .................................................................................... 90 9.2 Biological Entrainment Characterization [§122.21 (r){9)(ii)] ..................................................... 90 9.2.1 Species Abundance .......................................................................................................... 91 9.2.2 Spatial Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 95 9.2.3 Temporal Characteristics .................................................................................................. 96 9.3 Analysis and Supporting Documentation [§122.21 (r)(9)(iii)] ................................................. 100 9.3.1 Representative Operational Flows .................................................................................. 100 9.3.2 Latent Mortality ................................................................................................................ 101 9.3.3 Total Entrainment. ........................................................................................................... 101 1O References ......................................................................................................................................... 112 List of Appendices Appendix A- Surry Power Station §122.21 (r)(2) - (9) Submittal Requirement Checklist ......................... A-1 Appendix B - Engineering Drawings of Cooling Water Intake Structures ................................................. 8-1 Appendix C - Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC) and State-Threatened or Endangered Species Query Results ............................................................................................................ C-1 Appendix D - Engineering Calculations of Through-Screen Velocity ....................................................... D-1 Appendix E - Surry Power Station 2015-2017 Entrainment Characterization Study Report .................... E-1 Dominion Energy I iii
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 9 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ list of Tables Table 1-1. Facility Flow Attributes and Permit Application Requirements .................................................... 4 Table 1-2. Summary of 40 CFR §122.21(r)(2)-{9) Submittal Reports ........................................................... 5 Table 2-1. Estimated Arc Radii (in feet) at Various Arc Angles for Threshold Velocities of 0.1 and 0.3 fps15 Table 3-1. Surry Power Station Cooling Water Intake Pump Characteristics ............................................. 20 Table 3-2. Surry Power Station Monthly Average Pump Run Times (in Days) by Unit during 2013-2017. 23 Table 3-3. Unit-combined Total Monthly Averaged Daily Withdrawal (MGD) of Surry Power Station from James River in 2013-2017 ........................................................................................................ 24 Table 3-4. Surry Power Station Monthly Averaged Daily Withdrawal (MGD) by Unit from James River in 2013-2017 ................................................................................................................................. 24 Table 4-1. Master Species List for Fish Taxa Collected During Impingement, Entrainment, and Ambient Studies Conducted at Surry Power Station ............................................................................... 29 Table 4-2. Initial Impingement Survival of each Assessed Individual by Taxa at Surry Power Project during 2015-2016 Impingement Sampling ................................................................................ 44 Table 4-3. Most Abundant Fish and Shellfish Species Collected by Unit at Surry Power Station during 2015-2016 Impingement Sampling (HOR 2018b) ..................................................................... 46 Table 4-4. Entrainment and Impingement Potential for Fish Taxa Known to Occur near the Surry Power Station ....................................................................................................................................... 51 Table 4-5. Seasonal and Daily Activities of Organisms in the Vicinity of the Surry Power Station Cooling Water Intake Structure .............................................................................................................. 59 Table 4-6. Federal and State-threatened and Endangered Species with the Potential to Occur within Surry Power Station Action Area ............................................................................................... 67 Table 5-1. Percent {%) of Surry Power Station Design Flow vs. Actual Intake Flow used in Cooling Water System during 2013-2017 ......................................................................................................... 79 Table 8-1. Capacity Factors at Surry Power Station during 2013-2017 ..................................................... 83 Table 8-2. Annual Gross Generation at Surry Power Station during 2013-2017 ........................................ 83 Table 8-3. Surry Power Station's Relicensing Status and Approved Uprates ............................................ 84 Table 9-1. Sampling Depths Relative to Mean Sea Level at Surry Power Station ..................................... 86 Table 9-2. Surry Power Station Entrainment Sampling Details, 2015-2017 ............................................... 87 Table 9-3. Master Species List of All Distinct Taxa Collected during Entrainment Sampling at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 .................................................................................................................... 88 Table 9-4. Total Number of Fish by Taxa and Life Stage Collected at Surry Power Station during 2015-2017 Entrainment Sampling ...................................................................................................... 92 Table 9-5. Monthly Density {#/100m 3) of Finfish and Shellfish by Depth Stratum Excluding lmpingeable Organisms at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 ......................................................................... 99 Dominion Energy I iv
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 10 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Table 9-6. Excluded lmpingeable Finfish and Shellfish at Surry Power Station based on 2015-2017 Entrainment Sampling Study ................................................................................................... 104 Table 9-7. Estimated Annual Entrainment Based on Year-specific Densities with Sampling Year-specific Flows and Rule-defined AIF .................................................................................................... 108 list of Figures Figure 2-1. Aerial Photo of Surry Power Station and its Environs ................................................................ 8 Figure 2-2. Monthly Average Specific Conductivity and Temperature Data during Entrainment Study at Surry Power Station, 2015-2016 ................................................................................................. 9 Figure 2-3. Monthly Average Specific Conductivity and Temperature Data during Entrainment Study at Surry Power Station, 2016-2017 ................................................................................................. 9 Figure 2-4. Location of Surry Power Station within the James River Watershed ....................................... 11 Figure 2-5. Illustration of Various Arc Angles at Different Tidal Phases and Extent of Entrainment AOI ... 17 Figure 2-6. Locational Map of Area near Surry Power Station ................................................................... 19 Figure 3-1. Plan View of Surry Power Station Low-level Intake Structure .................................................. 21 Figure 3-2. Typical Section View of Surry Power Station Low-level Intake Structure ................................ 21 Figure 3-3. Surry Power Station Ristroph Traveling Water Screen at Low-level Intake ............................. 22 Figure 3-4. Seasonal Variation of Surry Power Station Cooling Water Intake Flows Based on 2013-2017 Operation ................................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 3-5. Surry Power Station Water Balance Diagram .......................................................................... 26 Figure 4-1. Impingement Species Composition at Surry Power Station 197 4-1983 .................................. 37 Figure 4-2. Seasonal Impingement Variation for Top Ten Species ............................................................ 38 Figure 4-3. Historic Ambient Fish Sampling Locations ............................................................................... 39 Figure 4-4. Percent Composition Comparison of Two Sets of Seine Data Collected near Surry Power Station ....................................................................................................................................... 41 Figure 4-5. Percent Composition Comparison of Two Sets of Trawl Data Collected near Surry Power Station ....................................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 4-6. Depth-averaged Total Entrainment Density (#/100 m 3) for Finfish and Shellfish Life Stage Combined at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 .......................................................................... 55 Figure 4-7. Average(+/- Standard Error) Impingement Sample Density (#/100,000 m 3) of all Taxa by Sample Date .............................................................................................................................. 56 Figure 4-8. Service-Defined Action Area .................................................................................................... 63 Figure 4-9. Information, Planning, and Conservation Database Search Area ............................................ 64 Figure 4-10. Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information System Database Search Area .................................. 65 Figure 5-1. Simplified Flow Diagram of Steam-electric System of Generating Unit at Surry Power Station76 Figure 5-2. Simplified Flow Diagram of Heat Dissipating System at Surry Power Station ......................... 77 Figure 5-3. Illustration of Tidal Excursion Volume in CWA §316(b) Phase I Rule ...................................... 80 Dominion Energy Iv
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 11 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Figure 9-1. Entrainment Pump Sampling System Configuration ................................................................ 85 Figure 9-2. Design of Intake Piping for Entrainment Sampling at Surry Power Station ............................. 86 Figure 9-3. Entrainment Density (#/100 m3 or 0.0264 million gallons) by Depth Stratum Excluding lmpingeable Organisms at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 .................................................... 95 Figure 9-4. Average Entrainment Density during Four Diel Periods (0400, 1000, 1600 and 2200 hours) at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 ............................................................................................... 96 Figure 9-5. Average Entrainment Density (#/100 m3) During Four Diel Periods (0400, 1000, 1600 and 2200 hours) at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 ....................................................................... 97 Figure 9-6. Monthly Average Actual Intake Flows by Unit at Surry Power Station, during 2015-2017 Entrainment Sampling ............................................................................................................. 100 Figure 9-7. Summary of the Step-Wise Process Used to Estimate Entrainment based on the Rule and Existing Screens Installed at Surry Power Station .................................................................. 102 Dominion Energy I vi
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 12 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Acronyms and Abbreviations oc degrees Celsius AIF actual intake flow AOI area of influence BTA best technology available CFR Code of Federal Regulations cfs cubic feet per second cm centimeters CWA Clean Water Act CWIS cooling water intake structure DIF design intake flow Director National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit Director DPS Distinct Population Segment DO dissolved oxygen Dominion Energy Dominion Energy, Inc. El. elevation EPRI Electric Power Research Institute ESA Endangered Species Act feet msl feet above mean sea level fps feet per second gpm gallons per minute IPAC USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation System m meter MGD million gallons per day mm millimeter
µm micron µS microSiemens MW megawatt MWe megawatt electric MWt megawatt thermal NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NVE non-viable eggs Services U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service SPS Surry Power Station ppt parts per thousand QA quality assurance QA/QC quality assurance/quality control RAO/ radius of the area of influence Rule CWA Section 316(b) rule for existing facilities TWS traveling water screens Dominion Energy I vii
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 13 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey VAFWIS Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information System VDGIF Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries VEPCO Virginia Electric Power Company VPDES Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Dominion Energy I viii
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 14 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Executive Summary The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Final Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structure at Existing Facilities (the Rule), which became effective October 14, 2014, established requirements under the Clean Water Act (CWA) for existing power generating facilities that withdraw more than two million gallons per day (MGD) of water from Waters of the United States and use at least 25 percent of that water for cooling purposes. Those requirements, implemented through Natural Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, apply to the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures (CWIS) that reflect best technology available (BTA) for minimizing adverse environmental impacts. There are two main components of the Rule for existing facilities such as Surry Power Station (SPS). The first requires the owner or operator of the facility to choose from one of seven options for meeting BTA requirements for reducing impingement. The second component requires that the facility conduct site-specific studies and provide data to the permitting authority to aid in the determination of whether site-specific controls would be required to reduce entrainment and, more specifically, which controls, if any, would be necessary. This report addresses the submittal requirements at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §122.21 (r)(2)-(9)1. SPS is a two-unit nuclear generating facility located on the estuarine portion of the James River, approximately 44 miles southeast of Richmond, Virginia. Cooling water is drawn from the James River through a Low-level intake and continuously rotating Ristroph traveling water screens (TWS). The TWS have 1/8-inch by 1/2-inch smooth mesh panels with a fish bucket at the base of each screen panel and a low-pressure wash and fish return system to maximize survival of impinged organisms. The fish community that inhabits the James River reflects a highly variable estuarine environment with a mix of freshwater, diadromous, and estuarine species with some marine strays. The species that appear relatively consistently throughout the years in various studies as the most dominant species consist of Bay Anchovy (Anchoa mitchi/11), Atlantic Croaker (Micropogon undulatus), Atlantic Silverside (Menidia menidia), Naked Gaby (Gobiosoma base), and Spot (Leiostomus xanthurus). Blue Catfish (lctalurus furcatus) are a more recent addition to the fish population; this species was introduced as a sportfish in the James River from 197 4 through 1989 (VIMS 2017) and is characterized as an invasive species (MDNR 2018). 1 Refer to Appendix A for a summary of the specific requirements under each of the §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) and a checklist summary for how each is addressed in this report or why it is not applicable to SPS. The following submittal requirements are being developed and will be submitted separately from this report:
* §122.21 (r)(1 O) - Comprehensive Technical Feasibility and Cost Evaluation Study;
* §122.21(r)(11)- Benefits Valuation Study;
* §122.21 (r)(12) - Non-water Quality Environmental and Other Impacts Study; and
* §122.21 (r)(13) - Peer Review.
Dominion Energy I 1
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 15 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
The most current, representative data on the existing fish community in the vicinity of SPS were collected during Dominion Energy, lnc.'s (Dominion Energy) recent entrainment and impingement studies. A two-year entrainment study was conducted using a pump sampling system with 94 by 102-centimeter (cm), 335-micron (µm) mesh hoop plankton nets, and samples were collected at three depths (i.e., near-surface, mid-depth, and near bottom) twice a month for 24 consecutive months from August 2015 through July 2017. A total of 243,611 organisms were collected during the first year of entrainment sampling and included 61,272 fish (excluding non-viable eggs [NVE]) distributed among 23 distinct taxa and 182,339 shellfish distributed among 14 distinct taxa. The total number of organisms collected in entrainment samples during the second year was 557,882 and was comprised of 83,298 finfish (excluding NVE) distributed among 22 distinct taxa and 474,584 shellfish distributed among 14 distinct taxa. Entrainment densities were highest during late spring to summer months of May, June, and July. Samples were dominated by post-yolk sac larvae of Gobies (Naked Gaby and Naked/Seaboard Gaby [Gobiosoma sp.]) and post-yolk sac and juvenile Anchovies (Bay Anchovy and Common Anchovy [Anchoa spp.]). Winter finfish densities were dominated by spawning activities of Atlantic Croaker while early spring finfish entrainment densities were dominated by juvenile Atlantic Menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus). Shellfish entrainment densities were highest during late spring to late summer months of May through September and were dominated by Mud Crab (Panopeidae) and Fiddler Crab (Uca spp.) zoea and megalopae, Mysid Shrimp (Mysidae), and juvenile Tellin Clams (Tellinidae). Overall, mid-depth and near-surface samples accounted for the majority of entrained organisms; however, the contribution of each varied by year. Considering each group separately, finfish followed the trend of higher densities at mid-depth while shellfish were collected in higher densities in near-surface samples. Finfish entrainment densities were highest at night during the first year of sampling and highest at mid-morning followed by at night during the second year of sampling. Shellfish entrainment densities were highest at pre-dawn and at night and the pattern was consistent with depth. A one-year impingement monitoring study was conducted at SPS from August 2015 through July 2016 and samples were collected in the fish/debris return troughs of the TWS in front of the combined Unit 1 and 2 intakes twice a month for 12 consecutive months. The one-year impingement sampling effort resulted in the collection of a total of 316,163 organisms, comprised of 285,868 fish distributed among 61 distinct taxa, and 30,295 shellfish distributed among 6 distinct taxa. Bay Anchovy was the most common taxon in the samples accounting for 75 percent of all organisms collected during the study. Grass Shrimp (Pa/aemonetes) dominated the shellfish collection. Overall, collection densities were highest in October and lowest in November and December. To characterize inter-annual variability in entrainment, the two years of entrainment data were treated separately to estimate annual total entrainment based on specific intake flows as Year 1 (August 2015 - July 2016) or Year 2 (August 2016 - July 2017), as well as the Rule-defined actual intake flows (Al F) over the most recent five-year period (2013-2017). The estimated annual total entrainment based on the two years of entrainment data and the five years of actual intake flows ranged from 6.1 to 7.4 billion finfish and 20.5 to 49.1 billion shellfish. The estimated Dominion Energy I2
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 16 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal : §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ annual total impingement during actual 2015-2016 plant operations was 1.1 million fish and 0.4 million shellfish . Seven finfish and four shellfish taxa were identified as potentially susceptible to entrainment or impingement. The finfish taxa were Bay Anchovy, Atlantic Croaker, Gobies, Atlantic Silverside, Atlantic Menhaden, American Eel, and White Perch (Marone Americana) . The shellfish taxa were Mud Crabs, Palaemonid Shrimp, Blue Crabs and Fiddler Crabs. The susceptibility of these taxa to entrainment or impingement reflects their abundance in the James River in the vicinity of SPS, and in the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries as a whole. These taxa are among the most abundant organisms inhabiting Virginia 's tidal systems, and collectively accounted for 75.4 percent of the entrainment (2015-2017) and 79 .3 percent of the impingement (2015-2016) at SPS. Information on federally listed species and critical habitat under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) jurisdiction, as well as Virginia state-listed species either known to occur or with the potential to occur in the vicinity of SPS, was reviewed . The only federally listed aquatic species with the potential to occur in the Action Area , as defined by the USFWS and NMFS, were the Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus) and Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) . Both species are also state-listed as endangered . The potential for entrainment and impingement of both species is considered to be low because early life stages are not likely to occur in the Action Area . Further, direct and/or indirect effects to Atlantic Sturgeon critical habitat in the vicinity of the SPS CWIS from cooling water discharge are considered to be insignificant. Critical habitat has not been designated for Shortnose Sturgeon . Dominion Energy has reviewed the impingement mortality compliance alternatives in 40 CFR §125 .94(c) and proposes to implement §125.94(c)(5), modified traveling screens, as BTA for reduction of impingement mortality. In accordance with §125.94(b)(1), Dominion Energy's finalization of its chosen method for compliance with the impingement mortality BTA standard will be synchronized with the establishment of entrainment BTA and will be determined after issuance of a final NPDES permit that establishes the site-specific entrainment requirements for SPS under §125 .94(d) . Compliance with the establishment of the impingement mortality BTA standard will be accomplished thereafter as soon as practical. Dominion Energy I 3
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 17 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 1 Introduction Section 316(b) was enacted under the 1972 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Clean Water Act (CWA). which also introduced the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program . Certain facilities with NPDES permits are subject to §316(b) requirements, which mandate that the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures (CWIS) reflect best technology available (BTA) for minimizing adverse environmental impacts. Water entering a CWIS may contain early life-stage fish and shellfish, which are drawn into and through cooling water systems (entrainment), or juvenile or adult fish may become trapped against the screens at the opening of an intake structure (impingement). On August 15, 2014, the final §316(b) rule (the Rule) for existing facilities was published in the Federal Register. The Rule applies to existing facilities that withdraw more than two million gallons per day (MGD) from Waters of the United States, use at least 25 percent of that water exclusively for cooling purposes, and have an NPDES permit. The Rule became effective on October 14, 2014. Facilities subject to the Rule are required to develop and submit technical material, identified at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §122.21 (r)(2)-(13), that will be used by the NPDES permit Director (Director) to make a BTA determination for the facility. The actual intake flow (AIF) and design intake flow (DIF) at a facility determine which submittals will be required under the Rule. As shown in Table 1-1, facilities with an AIF of 125 MGD and less have fewer application submittal requirements and will generally be required to select from the impingement compliance options contained in the Rule. For such facilities, the Director must still determine BT A for entrainment on a site-specific basis and the applicant may supply information relevant to the Director's decision . Facilities with an AIF in excess of 125 MGD are required to address both impingement and entrainment and provide specific entrainment studies which may involve field studies and the analysis of alternative methods to reduce entrainment (40 CFR §122.21 (r)(9)-(13)). Table 1-1. Facility Flow Attributes and Permit Application Requirements Facility and Flow Attributes Pennit Application Requirements Existing facility with DIF of 2 MGD or less, or less than 25 Best Professional Judgment of Director percent of AIF used for cooling purposes Existing facility with DIF greater than 2 MGD and AIF less §122 .21 (r)( 2)-(B) than 125 MGD Existing facility with DIF greater than 2 MGD and AIF
§122.21 (r)(2)-(13) greater than 125 MGD Dominion Energy, lnc.'s (Dominion Energy) Surry Power Station (SPS) is subject to the Rule, and based on its current configuration and operation with an AIF of greater than 125 MGD, is required to develop and submit each of the 40 CFR §122.21 (r)(2)-(13) reports with its next permit renewal , in accordance with the Rule's technical and schedule requirements. The current Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) permit for SPS (Permit No.
VA0004090) is effective from March 1. 2016 and expires on February 28, 2021 . Special Dominion Energy I 4
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 18 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Condition I.E.3 of the VPDES permit requires submittal of the information described in 40 CFR §122.21 (r) no later than 270 days prior to the permit expiration date; therefore the SPS permit renewal application will be due June 3, 2020. The following sections of this report provide information under 40 CFR §122.21 (r)(2}-(9) (Table 1-2). The reports required by 40 CFR §122 .21(r)(10)-(13) are being developed separately from this report. Appendix A provides a checklist summary of the specific requirements under each of the 40 CFR §122.21 (r)(2}-(9) reports and documents how each is addressed in this report or why it is not applicable to SPS. Table 1-2. Summary of 40 CFR §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Submittal Reports Submittal Requirements Submittal Descriptions at §122.21(r) Source Water (2) Characterization of the source waterbody including intake structure area of influence. Physical Data Cooling Water Narrative description of the configuration of each CWIS and where it is located in the (3) Intake Structure waterbody and in the water column; includes drawings and narrative description of Data operation; water balance. Characterization of biological community in the vicinity of the intake structure (species or relevant taxa, relative abundance); life history summaries (primary periods of Source Water reproduction larval recruitment, peak abundance of relevant taxa, seasonal and daily Baseline activities); susceptibility to impingement and entrainment; must include existing data; (4) Biological identification of missing data and efforts made to identify sources of the data; Characterization threatened and endangered species, any pertinent consultations or field studies, and Data designated critical habitat summary for action area; identifies fragile fish and shellfish species list (<30 percent impingement survival) . Narrative description of the operation of the cooling water system and its relationship to Cooling Water CWIS; proportion of design flow used; water reuse summary; proportion of source (5) System Data waterbody withdrawn (monthly); seasonal operation summary; existing impingement mortality and entrainment reduction measures; flow/MW efficiency. Chosen Method of Provides facility's proposed approach to meet the impingement mortality requirement Compliance with (chosen from seven available options); provides detailed study plan for monitoring (6) Impingement compliance, if required by selected compliance option; addresses entrapment where Mortality Standard required. Entrainment Provides a summary of relevant entrainment mortality studies (latent mortality, (7) Performance technology efficacy); can be from the facility or elsewhere with justification; studies Studies should not be more than 10 years old without justification; new studies are not required. Provides operational status for each unit; age and capacity utilizations for the past five years; upgrades within last 15 years; descriptions of completed, approved, or (8) Operational Status scheduled uprates and NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) relicensing status for nuclear facilities; decommissioning and replacement of units plans; current and future operation as it relates to actual and design intake flow. Dominion Energy I 5
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 19 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station I Submittal Requirements Submittal Descriptions at §122.21(r) Provides complete documentation of the data collection period and frequency of entrainment characterization, and an identification of the organisms sampled to the lowest taxon possible; the data collection must be representative of the entrainment at Entrainment each intake; sufficiently characterize annual, seasonal, and diel variations in (9) Characterization entrainment. including variations related to climate, weather, spawning, feeding, and Study water column migration. Facilities may use historical data that are representative of current operation of the facility and conditions at the site with documentation regarding the continued relevance of the data . The study must include analysis of the data to determine total entrainment and entrainment mortality. Dominion Energy I 6
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 20 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 2 Source Water Physical Data [§122.21 (r)(2)] 2.1 Description of Source Waterbody [§122.21 {r)(2)(i)] SPS is located on the estuarine portion of the James River on the Hog Island peninsula in Surry County, Virginia, on a point of land called Gravel Neck which juts into the James River from the south approximately 25 miles upstream of the river's confluence with the Chesapeake Bay. SPS is located approximately 44 miles southeast of Richmond, 4.5 miles west-northwest of Fort Eustis, 7 miles south of Colonial Williamsburg, and 8 miles east-northeast of the town of Surry. Jamestown Island, part of the Colonial National Historical Park, is to the northwest of SPS on the northern shore of the James River. The two nuclear power-generating units at SPS use a once-through cooling water system . Cooling water for both units is withdrawn from the James River through a common Low-level CWIS oriented parallel to, and flush with, the western shore of the James River. The SPS Low-level CWIS for the two units is located on the east side of the peninsula . An aerial photograph of SPS and its environs is shown on Figure 2-1 . 2.1.1 Dimensions and Other Physical Characteristics The James River is approximately 3 miles wide at the SPS location. The land surface is generally flat with steep banks sloping down to the river. Land surface elevations at SPS range from sea level to approximately elevation {El.) 39 feet above mean sea level (feet msl) . Water elevations at SPS are affected by tides with a mean low tide water level of El. -1.0 feet and a high tide level of El. 1.1 feet msl, resulting in a mean tidal range of 2.1 feet and a mean spring tidal range of 2.5 feet. The average water depth in front of the SPS intakes is 26 feet. A navigation channel is maintained at a depth of 24.9 feet and generally courses through the middle of the river. In the vicinity of the SPS CWIS, the river has an abbreviated littoral or shoreline zone as a result of the steep bank gradient and the channelized river bottom. The river bed in the vicinity of SPS is composed of soft mud, clay, sand, and pebbles with no single bottom type predominating. 2.1.2 Temperature and Salinity Regime A two-year entrainment study was conducted at SPS to support entrainment-related determinations required by the Rule (HDR 201 Ba). As part of the entrainment study, water temperature and specific conductivity were monitored at entrainment sample locations (surface, mid-depth, and bottom depths) from August 2015 through July 2017 (HDR 201 Ba). The monthly average water temperature and specific conductivity collected at SPS during the two-year entrainment study are presented in Figures 2-2 and 2-3. During the first year of entrainment sampling, monthly average water temperatures ranged from 6.4 degrees Celsius (°C) (in February 2016) to 29.1 °C (in July 2016) . The lowest single temperature reading was 3.6°C in January 2016, while the highest was 32.0°C in July 2016. Monthly average specific conductivity ranged from a low of 2,816 microSiemens per centimeter (µSiem) in March 2016 to a high of 21 ,138 µSiem during September 2015 . Individual specific conductivity readings were as low as 273 µSiem and as high as 23,444 µSiem . Dominion Energy I 7
Enclosure 2, Page 21 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Source: Google Earth Retrieved 10/2/2018 Figure 2-1. Aerial Photo of Surry Power Station and its Environs Dominion Energy I8
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 22 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station
- . - Near-bottan _,. Mid-depth - - Near-surface 25 ~---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*--
0 +---
.kll-2015 Sep-2015 Nov-2015 Jan-2016 Mar-2016 May-2016 .kll-2016 35 -*--**---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*--------
30 .,. ____ __________ - ----- -- -- ---- --- -- -- -- ----- -- -------- - ---- ------ -- --- ----- -- -- --- -- -- ----- ------ - ----**-
~ 25 .._____ __________ - -------- --------- ---- ----- -------------- ---------------- ------------ --- ---- ------*-----
CD
!; 20 --*** ---- ------ ------- -- ----- ------ -------------------------------------- ------ --- -- ----- --- ---- ----*-
CD 15 -,.----------------------- - --------- --------------------------------- 1:&. -
....i 10 ...------------------------------------------- -- ,,------------ - - -------- --------------------------*-****
5 .._ ____ ______ --- ------ ---- -- --------- --------- ----- J. ------ - - ------ - - - ------ -- - -------- -- ------------- - -*--*- 0
.kll-2015 Sep-2015 Nov-2015 Jan-2016 Mar-2016 May-2016 .kll-2016 Figure 2-2. Monthly Average Specific Conductivity and Temperature Data during Entrainment Study at Surry Power Station, 2015-2016
- . - Near-bottan - . Mid-depth Near-surface 25 ------------*-****---**-**-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
f 20 ... ______ -* ------ ------- ------------ ----------------------*- -- ---------- ------- -- ----*- --- --- -- -- -- -- ----- 1$ ~ =
-6 ~ 15 .,. ______ - ----------- _:_ _______ * *-:.:;--- -- ~
C ,c gu ~E 10 ----- ----------------------------------------------------
!E u-=
g_ (I) 5 ----------- ---- ----- -------- ------ ----- ------- --------- ----- ------------ ------- -- -- ----- -- ---------***- (I) o----~----------~---~-----~--
.kl1-201s Sef>2016 Nov-2016 Jan-2017 Mar-2017 May-2017 .kll-2017 35 --******-**-***-*-****-*-****-*-********-**********************-****--********-***-***-*******************-
30 ...... __
~ 25 ....... _________ _
~ 20 ->---**-----------------*-- ---------------------------------------*------ ~ ---
!1:&.
15 ... ---- -------------------------- *--------- ------------- ~----------- -- - --- -------- -- -------------------
....i 10 ----- -------------------------------- - ------ _ ---- .z,,- -a 5 ....... _-- --------------- ------------- --- --- --- --- - ----------- ----------- ------ ---------- -------**-- ----***-
0 Jul-2016 Sep-2016 Nov-2016 Jan-2017 Mar-2017 May-2017 .kll-2017 Figure 2-3. Monthly Average Specific Conductivity and Temperature Data during Entrainment Study at Surry Power Station, 2016-2017 Dominion I 9
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 23 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Based on the specific conductivity data, salinity was estimated, and the monthly average surface salinity values ranged from 1.5 parts per thousand (ppt) in March 2016 to 12.5 ppt in September 2015 . Individual salinity data ranged from a low of 0.1 ppt (March 2016) to a high of 14.1 ppt (September 2015). During the second year of entrainment sampling, monthly average water temperatures measured at the sampling location ranged from 6.9°C (in January 2017) to 30.5°C (in August 2017). The lowest single temperature reading was 4.4°C in January 2017, while the highest was 32 .7°C in August 2017 . Monthly average specific conductivity ranged from a low of 4,231 µSiem in May 2017 to a high of 20,769 µSiem during September 2016. Individual specific conductivity readings were as low as 1,824 µSiem and as high as 22,659 µSiem . Monthly average surface salinity values ranged from 2.3 ppt in May 2017 to 12.3 ppt in September 2016. Individual readings ranged from a low of 1.0 ppt (May 2017) to a high of 13.6 ppt (September 2016) . 2.2 Characterization of Source Waterbody [§122.21 {r)(2)(ii)] 2.2.1 Hydrology The James River watershed encompasses approximately 10,000 square miles, which makes up almost 25 percent of the state of Virginia, and covers about one-third of the Chesapeake Bay drainage area in Virginia . The river flows approximately 340 miles from the Allegheny Mountains of western Virginia to the Chesapeake Bay. The watershed is comprised of three sections: the Upper James River watershed begins in Allegheny County and continues through the Allegheny and Blue Ridge Mountains to Lynchburg, Virginia; the Middle James River watershed extends from Lynchburg to Richmond ; and the Lower James River watershed stretches from Richmond to the Chesapeake Bay (Figure 2-4). SPS is located on the Lower James River section in the Coastal Uplands Physiographic Province. The James River is formed by the junction of the Cowpasture and Jackson Rivers in Botetourt County, Virginia, and flows easterly 340 miles before emptying into Hampton Roads at Newport News, Virginia . The flow of water in the James River near SPS consists of three components (NRC 2007) :
- 1. Fresh water discharge (unidirectional) from the James River watershed.
- 2. Flow (multidirectional) due to the ebb and flood of the tide.
- 3. Flow due to the circulation pattern caused by intrusion of saline water into the James River Estuary.
The drainage area of the James River above the SPS is 9,517 square miles. The drainage area above the nearest stream gage on the main stem of the James River near Richmond is 6,757 square miles. An additional 1,638 square miles of drainage area of tributaries between Richmond and the plant site is gaged, leaving 1,122 square miles ungaged (NRC 2007) . The 85-mile stretch of the James River between Richmond and the mouth of the river is subject to tidal cycles and is hence a tidal estuary. SPS is located in the transition region between the fresh water tidal river and the saline waters of the James River estuary. Dominion I 1O
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 24 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §1 22.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station James River Watershed Upper, Middle and Lower Roundtable Watershed Boundaries brf '>'
."' ~ ~
Lm1,cr James 40 0 40 80 120 160 Miles E3 Source: Middle James Roundtable 2018 Figure 2-4. Location of Surry Power Station within the James River Watershed The maximum James River flow at SPS is approximately 420,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) , with a monthly mean range of 857 cfs to 39,778 cfs . At a James River discharge of about 10,000 cfs, the upstream portion of the station is in a freshwater environment and the salinity at the downstream side of the SPS is about 1.0 ppt. For James River discharges less than 10,000 cfs, a condition occurring approximately 60 percent of the time (NRC 2007), based on flow records for the gaged tributaries below Richmond and estimated discharge flows from the ungaged areas, the water on both the upstream and downstream sides of the SPS intake has varying concentrations of ocean-derived salts, depending on river discharge. Within the estuary proper, the salinity decreases in a more or less uniform trend from the river mouth towards the station and at any location increases with depth. Superimposed upon the oscillatory tide, there is a net non-tidal circulation in which the upper, less saline layers of water move seaward, while the deeper, more saline layers of water move upstream in the estuary. The net non-tidal seaward-directed flow is stronger and, in the vicinity of the SPS, extends to greater depths on the southern side of the estuary (looking downstream) than on the northern side. The volume rate of flow associated with this net non-tidal circulation pattern, while small compared to the oscillatory tidal flows, is several-fold larger than the discharge of river flow. In general, the higher the salinity, the larger the ratio of the discharge of seaward flow in the surface layers to the fresh water discharge. Consequently, since the salinity at any given location increases with decreasing river discharge, the volume rate of flow associated with the net non-tidal circulation does not decrease directly with respect to the river discharge (NRC 2007) . Dominion Energy I 11
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 25 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal : §122.21(r)(2) -(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ The U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey tidal current tables show that the ebb current lasts longer and is stronger than the flood current near SPS at Hog Point in the James River. The average of maximum ebb currents is 1.3 knots (2.2 feet per second [fps]) and the average of maximum flood currents is 1.0 knots (1.7 fps). During spring tides, the ebb currents reach a maximum of 1.9 knots (3.2 fps) and the flood currents a maximum of 1.6 knots (2.8 fps) (NOAA 2014). 2.2.2 Geomorphology SPS lies wholly within the Coastal Plain on a peninsula of land bounded on the east and west by the James River, the south by the upland interior of Surry County, and the north by the marsh-wetlands complex of the Hog Island State Wildlife Refuge . In Virginia, the Coastal Plain has a stair-step character composed of a series of moderately flat plains or terraces that become successively lower (in elevation) from west to east and are separated from one another by scarps, which are gentle slopes of a few degrees. In the SPS vicinity, four plains are recognized . From the highest to the lowest they are the 120-foot plain, 90-foot plain, 70-foot plain, and 45-foot plain. Also, three prominent scarps are present; the Surry scarp, the Peary scarp, and the Chippokes scarp. The surface of the Coastal Plain slopes gently in an eastward-to-southeastward direction from about El. 200 feet msl at the Fall Line to the coast and continuing out onto the continental shelf. The average slope in the vicinity of the SPS is about 1.5 feet per mile. The ground surface at SPS is generally flat with steep banks sloping down to the river. Surface and near-surface soil types include brown and mottled brown sand, silty sand, silt, and clay. These soils are included in the Norfolk Formation, an estuarine deposit of Pleistocene age. 2.2.3 Determination of Area of Influence Reference to the "area of influence" (AOI) of a CWIS appears in three of the §122 .21 (r) sections of the Clean Water Act §316(b) Rule for existing facilities 2 :
* §122 .21 (r)(2) Source Water Physical Data requires information on "the methods used to conduct any physical studies to determine the intake's area of influence in the waterbody and the results of such studies. "
* §122.21 (r)(4) Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data says: "The study area should include, at a minimum, the area of influence of the cooling water intake structure."
* §122.21 (r)(11) Benefits Valuation Study says: "The study would also include discussion of recent mitigation efforts already completed and how these have affected fish abundance and ecosystem viability in the intake structure's area of influence."
Although the Rule does not provide a definition of AOI , the §316(b) Phase I Rule for new facilities states that: 2 http://www.gpo .gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014 15/pdf/2014-12164.pdf (Accessed 5/15/2015) Dominion Energy I 12
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 26 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
"The area of influence is the portion of water subject to the forces of the intake structure such that a particle within the area is likely to be pulled into the intake structure. "
While neither a formal definition of the AOI nor guidance for its estimation is provided within the Rule, AOI, for purposes of this report, is that area of the source waterbody from which organisms are potentially drawn into the intake structure and either entrained or impinged . Impingement AOI As a compliance option for impingement reduction, the Rule offers an intake through-screen velocity of 0.5 fps 3 or less based on the assumption that at velocities below this threshold most impingeable sized organisms can avoid impingement. Based on this assumption, a conservative definition of AOl 4 for impingement is the area encompassed by the 0.5 fps velocity contour at the CWIS. At this boundary and beyond it, the potentia l for impingement is approximately zero; within this boundary, the potential for impingement increases with increasing proximity to the intake. However, because juvenile and adult fish have differing swimming abilities and differing preferred habitats including those that involve velocities above 0.5 fps (Leonard and Orth 1988), the area contained by the 0.5 fps velocity threshold is not an area of direct impact. Because the CWIS is located at the shoreline, the radius of the impingement AOI (RAoi) for an arc angle of 180° (i.e. , a shoreline intake structure) is estimated from the continuity equation: Qi = TT x RAoi x d x V ............. ............................................................. Eq. 1 where, Qi= Intake Flow RArn = Radius of Area of Influence d = Water depth at RA01 V = Threshold velocity (i.e., 0.5 fps for impingement AOI) Rearranging terms in Eq. 1 gives: RA01 = Qi /(TT x d x V) ......................................................................... Eq. 2 Entrainment AOI The threshold velocity for entrainment should reflect the velocities induced by the intake that are greater than ambient velocities, such that plankton may be drawn into the intake rather than transported away in the ambient flow. Conservative threshold values can be developed for river and tidal river systems by basing them on minimum natural conditions found in a lake or at slack tide in a tidal system. Using the assumption that the wind induced surface drift velocities are typically 2 to 3 percent of the average wind speed (Wiegel 1964), the surface drift velocity would be 0.2 fps to 0.5 fps under conditions of a gentle breeze (average wind speed of 8-12 miles per hour) . The mean ambient velocity (i .e., velocity averaged over the water column) is less than the 3 As per the §316(b) Final Rule, the design through-screen velocity less than 0.5 fps meets the impingement mortality reduction standard through Compliance Alternative 2 (§125.94(c)(2)) . 4 This approach, in fact. was proposed to Ohio EPA by Dayton Power & Light in their Proposal for Information Collection for their Stuart Generating Station on the Ohio River. Their approach was accepted by Ohio EPA and also recommended as a model for other facilities on the Ohio River (EPRI 2007). Dominion Energy I 13
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 27 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ surface drift velocity (typically 40 to 60 percent of the surface drift) although the relationship may depend on the speed and duration of the wind and water depth. Hence. at a location where the intake induced velocity is less than 0.1 fps to 0.3 fps, the ambient wind-induced currents likely will dominate the flow patterns and the "hydraulic influence" of the intake will no longer be significant (Golder Associates 2005) . As a result. in the analysis that follows the entrainment AOI will be delineated by both the 0.1 and 0.3 fps velocity contours induced by the CWIS. These threshold values are consistent with those used in other AOI studies. For example, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) used threshold velocities of 1.0, 0.5, and 0.1 fps in their desktop analysis in "Cooling Water Intake Structure Area-of-Influence Evaluations for Ohio River Ecological Research Program Facilities" (EPRI 2007), and Golder Associates (2005) used 0.1 and 0.3 fps in their desktop analysis of AOI for the Crystal River Energy Complex. For an organism to become entrained, it must enter the entrainment AOI of a CWIS. Physical and temporal factors that influence the entrainment AOI of a CWIS include the (EPRI 2004a) : a) speed, direction, and distribution of flow in the waters that surround the CWIS; b) bathymetry of the waters that surround the CWIS; c) intake flow rate and variability of flow to the intake; and d) design of the intake. Other factors include the effect of predominant winds and the stratification of the surrounding water (i.e., salinity and temperature gradients) . For a condition where the ambient flow does not change with the time, the entrainment AOI can be determined by identifying streamlines of flow that enter the CWIS. However, when a CWIS is located on a waterbody where the direction of flow changes with time, as in the tidal environment of the SPS, the AOI of the CWIS can no longer be visualized with steady streamlines (EPRI 2004b) . One can gain insights into the characteristics of the AOI for tidal rivers from the results of Computational Fluid Dynamics modeling studies performed on freshwater rivers and tidally influenced rivers by EPRI (2004a and 2004b) . These studies indicated that most of the water containing entrainable organisms was withdrawn from the side of the river on which the intakes were located and the lateral extent of the AOI gradually increased with distance upstream from the CWIS when the river flows were in the downstream direction and vice versa when the direction of flow was reversed. Waterbody sampling and entrainment studies conducted by Marcy (2004) and Massengill (2004) on the Connecticut River also suggest that greater quantities of water are withdrawn from the side of the river where the CWIS is located, thus supporting the findings of EPRl's numerical modeling studies. For the purpose of this analysis, the three phases of tidal flow (ebb, flood, and slack) were considered independently when calculating the extent of the AOI assuming the river currents are steady at each tidal phase. Although the velocity field within the AOI of the CWIS changes continuously, the flow streamlines that enter the CWIS can be illustrated under the assumption that the current flow and direction are steady at any time during the tidal cycle. Based on the findings of EPRI (2004b) , in the case of the ebb and flood phases, the water entering the intake comes predominantly from a relatively narrow band of river width adjacent to the shore on which Dominion Energy I 14
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 28 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ the facility is located . During slack tide the ambient flows are no longer unidirectional and are influenced by other conditions such as wind, but for purposes of the AOI calculation flow can be considered to come from all directions with equal probability. The entrainment AOI during various tidal phases can be calculated based on the angle of the arc over which radial flow enters the CWIS. As shown in Figure 2-5, this angle restricts the incoming flow to a band along the shore, consistent with the findings of model and field studies discussed above. The radius of AOI (RA01) for various arc angles for a shoreline CWIS can be estimated from the continuity equation : Qi = n x RAOI x d x V x (9/180) ...................................... ..................... Eq. 3 where, Qi = Intake Flow RA01= Radius of Area of Influence d = Water depth at RA01 V = Threshold velocity (i.e. , 0.1 or 0.3 fps for entrainment AOI) 9 = Arc Angle (i.e., 15° for maximum running tides, 30° , 45 °, 90° for less than maximum running tides and 180° for slack tides) Rearranging terms in Eq. 3 gives: RAOI = QJ(TT x d x V x (9/180)) .......... ............ ................ ..................... Eq . 4 Figure 2-5 illustrates the arc angles at different tidal phases and shows the extent of the entrainment AOI. After the arc radius at various angles is obtained using Eq. 4, the longitudinal and lateral extent of entrainment AOI can be calculated as follows: Longitudinal extent of entrainment AOI = 2 x RAo1for tidal rivers ............... .. Eq . 5 Lateral extent of entrainment AOI = RAoi x sine (9) for 9 :s; 90° ...................... Eq. 6 Results At SPS, the design flow is 2,534.4 MGD (i.e. , 3,921.3 cfs) and water depth at the extreme low water elevation is 21 .14 feet. Based on the impingement AOI threshold velocity of 0.5 fps, the calculated radius of the impingement AOI is 118 feet. Applying these data, the impingement AOI can be represented as a semi-circle with a radius of 118 feet centered at the CWIS. As discussed above, the entrainment AOI was calculated at each tidal phase assuming the flow is steady during the running and slack tides. The intake flow would enter with approximately equal probability from all directions during slack tides; therefore, the arc angle would be 180°. For the maximum running tides, a minimum arc angle of 15° was used . Table 2-1 presents the calculated arc radius at various arc angles for threshold velocities of 0.1 and 0.3 fps. Table 2-1. Estimated Arc Radii (in feet) at Various Arc Angles for Threshold Velocities of 0.1 and 0.3 fps Arc Angle (degrees) >> Dominion Energy I 15
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 29 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Arc Radius (feet) Threshold 0.1 fps 7,085 3,543 2,362 1,181 590 Velocity 0 .3 fps 2,362 1,181 787 394 197 Dominion Energy I 16
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 30 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ ff:
//
I t Flow Clrec:1ion cluing Rood Tide
'b.
1..( . - - - . . . . - - ~ ) "!: C>
\ ...
\\
Lateral EatmtofEllll*-tADI Figure 2-5. Illustration of Various Arc Angles at Different Tidal Phases and Extent of Entrainment AOI Dominion Energy I 17
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 31 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ As shown in Table 2-1 , the maximum arc radius of the entrainment AOI is calculated to occur when flow entering the intake is limited to an arc angle of 15 °. Based on these results, for a threshold velocity of 0.1 fps, the overall entrainment AOI at SPS can be conservatively represented as a rectangular area 14,170 feet long (using Eq . 5) and 1,834 feet wide (using Eq .
- 6) centered at the CWIS. For a threshold velocity of 0.3 fps, the overall entrainment AOI at SPS can be conservatively represented as a rectangular area 4,723 feet long and 611 feet wide centered at the CWIS.
The above analysis provides conservative estimates of the AOI (i.e. , they err on the side of overestimating the size of the AOI) that can be used to support the specific requirements in the Rule . These AOI estimates should not be interpreted as the area of direct impact or the area in which organisms have a high probability of being withdrawn by the intake because actual entrainment and impingement at the facility will be the product of physical and biological factors that vary over space, time, and species. Based on the approach described above, the SPS AOls for impingement and entrainment were conservatively calculated as follows:
- AOI for Impingement was calculated based on a threshold velocity of 0.5 fps and can be conservatively represented as a semi-circle with a radius of 118 feet centered at the CWIS. The threshold velocity of 0.5 fps is associated with motile fishes, where it is generally assumed that fish subject to 0.5 fps and lower velocities are able to swim freely and avoid impingement. For example, the Rule assumes impingement is minimized at intakes with 0.5 fps through-screen velocities.
- AOI for Entrainment was calculated based on velocity thresholds of 0.1 fps and 0.3 fps.
At locations where the intake-induced velocity is less than 0.1 fps to 0.3 fps, the ambient wind-induced currents and/or tidal drift currents likely will determine the flow patterns and, thus, the movement of the non-motile and limited mobility life stages (e.g., eggs and larvae) . Under these assumptions, the overall AOI for entrainment is represented as a rectangular area ranging from:
~ 4,723 feet long and 611 feet wide centered at the CWIS using a velocity threshold of 0.3 fps;
~ 14,170 feet long and 1,834 feet wide centered at the CWIS using a velocity threshold of 0.1 fps.
2.3 Locational Maps [§122.21 {r)(2)(iii)] Figure 2-1 presents an aerial photo of SPS and its environs in Section 2.1. Figure 2-6 presents the locational map (U .S. Geological Survey [USGS] topographic map) in the vicinity of the SPS. Dominion Energy I 18
Enclosure 2, Page 32 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Source: USGS Topographic Map of Williamsburg. VA; Map ID #37076-Al -TB-100 Figure 2-6. Locational Map of Area near Surry Power Station Dominion Energy I 19
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 33 of 1631 §316{b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21{r)(2)-{9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 3 Cooling Water Intake Structure Data [§122.21 (r)(3)] 3.1 Description of CWIS Configuration [§122.21 (r)(3)(i)] Cooling water for both units is withdrawn through a common Low-level CWIS oriented parallel to, and flush with, the western shore of the James River on the east side of the peninsula (Figure 2-1 in Section 2.1). The Low-level CWIS is the §316(b) compliance point at SPS. The Low-level CWIS consists of eight reinforced-concrete screen bays (each 15.3 feet wide) and is equipped with eight Ristroph traveling water screens (TWS) . Each bay houses one of the eight circulating water pumps for the two units. These pumps are each rated 220,000 gallons per minute (gpm) (i.e., 316.8 MGD) at 28 feet total dynamic head when running at 220 rpm. Each pump is driven by a vertical, solid-shaft, 2000-horsepower, induction motor. The total maximum design capacity is 2,534.4 MGD (Table 3-1). One hundred percent of the flow withdrawn from the James River is used for cooling water purposes. Table 3-1. Surry Power Station Cooling Water Intake Pump Characteristics 11111 #of Pumps Pump Capacity Maximum Design Flow per Unit 1 4 316.8 MGD (220,000 gpm) 1,267.2 MGD (880,000 gpm) 2 4 316.8 MGD (220,000 gpm) 1,267.2 MGD (880,000 gpm) Surry Power Station Design Intake Flow 2,534.4 MGD (1,760,000 gpm) Plan and section drawings of the Low-level CWIS are provided on Figures 3-1 and 3-2, respectively. The exposed deck of the structure is at El. 12 feet msl. The invert of the intake structure is at El. -25.25 feet msl. Trash racks extend across each of the eight intake bays to prevent debris from entering the Low-level intake. Each trash rack has 1/2-inch-wide fiberglass reinforced plastic bars with 4.0-inch spacing, providing a 3.5-inch opening. The trash racks have a 1H:12V (horizontal: vertical) slope and are 18 feet wide. A curtain wall extends down to El. - 8.5 feet msl, approximately 3.8 feet below the minimum water level, approximately 6 feet downstream of each trash rack. The Ristroph TWS are located approximately 17 feet downstream from the bottom of each trash rack. The Ristroph TWS contain 2 foot-high and 14 foot-wide baskets with 1/8-inch by 1/2-inch rectangular smooth mesh openings with a low-pressure wash and fish return system to maximize impinged organism survival (Figure 3-3). The spray wash has 12 spray nozzles. Each screen basket has a steel fish bucket and the screens are designed for continuous operation. At times of high fish abundance or low river levels, the screens can be rotated at fast speed, reducing impingement time to approximately 1.5 minutes or less. A single return trough is located upstream of the screens that transports organisms and debris back to the James River approximately 1,000 feet south of the intake structure and approximately 300 feet from the shore. Returned organisms are therefore discharged away from the hydrodynamic zone of influence of the Low-level CWIS. Dominion Energy I 20
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 34 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
~ JAMES RIVER ~
HINGED GRATING (3 SECTIONS) (TYP.) it SLUICE FLUME~--+~ 0 +--~~,I itTRAVELING ~ SCREEN~---+~-t--~~......,.--r-i-~--1t--t-~--it-1t--~,t---t-~ -'t--t-~--1t--1t~~t--,t--~-t--t-~--i TO INTAKE SCALE IS APPROXJMATE CANAL MODIFIED FOM ALDEN 2003 Source: Provided by Dominion Energy Figure 3-1. Plan View of Surry Power Station Low-level Intake Structure
~ TRAVU "' G SCRE E.I< , __
nSk'IJE8RIS su,a I RAS>< SllACE
'El ,..._,
c...,.,
+-,l C lh~Ata:
iUH-
.--- n..25.90*
16 t tll't'l' T UOOIFIEll FROM Al.OU <2003 Source: Provided by Dominion Energy Figure 3-2. Typical Section View of Surry Power Station Low-level Intake Structure Dominion Energy I 21
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 35 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Source: VEPCO (1980) Figure 3-3. Surry Power Station Ristroph Traveling Water Screen at Low-level Intake Dominion Energy I 22
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 36 of 1631 §316(b) Complia nce Submittal : §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 3.2 Latitude and Longitude of CWIS [§122.21 (r)(3)(ii)] The latitude and longitude (in degrees, minutes, and seconds) of SPS cooling water intake structure are: Latitude 37° 9' 21.89" N Longitude 76° 40' 16.06" w 3.3 Description of CWIS Operation [§122.21 (r)(3)(iii)] SPS and its CWIS are intended for year-round, 24 hours/day operation, with the exception of down time for planned refueling outages. During refueling outages, intake flow is reduced but the Low-level intake structure is utilized to some degree at all times, particularly for safety related systems. Circulating water pump operation is seasonally variable in response to generation demand and maintenance activities. Unit refueling outages are generally scheduled for the winter, late fall. and/or spring months. Daily recording log of pump run time hours for all eight (four pumps per unit) circulating water pumps were obtained and processed for monthly total pump hours for each unit. Table 3-2 presents the monthly average pump run times in days by unit from 2013 through 2017. Table 3-2. Surry Power Station Monthly Average Pump Run Times (in Days) by Unit during 2013-2017 Monthly Average Number of Days in CWIS Pump Operations Month Unit 1 Unit2 January 24.9 27.4 February 20.1 24.8 March 24.4 26.7 April 23.7 23.8 May 22.1 22.1 June 29.3 27.2 July 30.8 30.2 August 30.8 29.4 September 30.0 28.4 October 27.8 21.6 November 22.3 20.8 December 27.0 25.8 Annual Total 313.2 308.2 As shown in Table 3-2, the number of days of circulating water pump operations by unit over the last five years ranged from 20 to 31 days each month during 2013-2017 . The pump operations during the summer (June to September) are closer to 24/7 operation and higher than the rest of Dominion Energy I 23
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 37 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ the year. Pump run times during April-May and October-November months are lower because of the typical planned unit refueling outage schedule. 3.4 Description of Intake Flows [§122.21(r)(3)(iv)] The monthly average flows from 2013 to 2017 are considered Al F, which is defined by the Rule as the average volume of water withdrawn on an annual basis by the CWIS over the previous five years for station permits that expire after October 14, 2019. Tables 3-3 and 3-4 present the daily actual withdrawal (two units combined) from the circulating water pumps and monthly average daily withdrawal by unit from 2013 through 2017, respectively. Table 3-3. Unit-combined Total Monthly Averaged Daily Withdrawal (MGD) of Surry Power Station from James River in 2013-2017 Year 2013-2017 Month 2017 Average January 1,971 .0 1,814.7 1,947.3 1,996.2 1,989.4 1,943.7 February 1,904.8 1,830.1 1,741 .4 1,792.9 1,907.1 1,835.2 March 1,955.1 1,846.0 1,895.3 1,900.4 1,903.2 1,900.0 April 1,874.6 1,674.3 1,724.1 1,892.9 1,946.9 1,822.6 May 1,974.9 1,568.4 1,408.3 1,901.0 1,348.7 1,640.3 June 2,207.6 2,197 .0 2,115.0 2,149.2 2,188.4 2,171.4 July 2,263 .5 2,296.3 2,189.8 2,304.0 2,277.1 2,266.1 August 2,093.4 2,254.0 2,272.0 2,274.3 2,288.3 2,236.4 September 2,214.8 2,220.9 2,289.6 2,254.2 2,242.1 2,244.3 October 1,746.5 1,970.7 1,663.7 1,858.2 1,934.3 1,834.7 November 1,528.8 1,777.3 1,094.8 1,867.6 2,001.9 1,654.1 December 1,821.5 1,997.4 1,914.7 2,089.7 1,989.6 1,962.6 Annual Average 1,963.0 1,953.9 1,854.7 2,023.4 2,001.4 1,959.3 Table 3-4. Surry Power Station Monthly Averaged Da ily Withdrawal (MGD) by Unit from James River in 2013-2017 Month Unit 1 (MGD) Unit2(MGD) Total (MGD) January 925.7 1,018.1 1,943.7 February 824.0 1,011.3 1,835.2 March 906.6 993.4 1,900.0 April 910.4 912.2 1,822.6 May 820.6 819.7 1,640.3 June 1,126.2 1,045.3 2,171.4 July 1,144.8 1,121 .3 2,266.1 August 1,143.0 1,093.4 2,236.4 September 1,152.0 1,092 .3 2,244.3 October 1,032.8 801 .9 1,834.7 Dominion Energy I 24
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 38 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Month Unit1 (MGD) Unit2 (MGO) Total (MGO) November 854.6 799.5 1,654.1 December 1,003.6 959.0 1,962.6 Annual Average 987.0 972.3 1,959.3 Figure 3-4 presents the average of monthly circulating water intake flows from 2013 to 2017 with monthly minimum and maximum flows. As shown on Figure 3-4, the water withdrawal during the summer (June to September) is higher than the rest of the year, and flows during April-May and October-November months are highly variable because of the typical planned unit refueling outage schedule. Figure 3-5 presents the water balance diagram for SPS. 2,500 2,000 ------------------------------------ ------------------------------ ---------- ------- 1,500 ------------------------------ -------------- --------------------------------- -------, 0 C)
~
3 0 ii: 1,000 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 500 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month Note: Vertical bars represent daily maximum and minimum .
Figure 3-4. Seasonal Variation of Surry Power Station Cooling Water Intake Flows Based on 2013-2017 Operation Dominion Energy I 25
Enclosure 2, Page 39 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ James River Low level Intake Settling Pond D U2 Reclrc Spray Swamp Heat Exchanger Gas Turbine Dike U2 Hlah Level Intake cw Intake Chemical Treatment
#4 Storm Drain Unit 1 Discharge Tunnel 001 981 MGO U1 HiQh Dl9charge #3 Storm Drain CC HX Level lnlake Canaf ------------..-----11 BC HX Subsurface Dewatering U1 Aecirc Spray Brid Stm Heat Exchanger Surry Power Station 11 Storm Drain
,~i 0.0216 MOD 104 Surry Power Station Waste Water Flow Diagram
- Only \Med -1ng Ol*9M U 1 (121) & U2 (122) Hydrollnoe James River ..No Dilcflerge In 2008, 2009, 2010 Figure 3-5. Surry Power Station Water Balance Diagram Dominion Energy I 26
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 40 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 3.5 Engineering Drawings of CWIS [§122.21 (r)(3)(v)] The engineering drawings of SPS CWIS showing plan and section views of eight intake bays with details of trash racks, traveling screens, and circulating water pumps are provided in Appendix B.
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9E: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 1 Mat Plan
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9F: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 2 Plan at Elevation -5' -6" & Misc. Details
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9G: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Intake Structure - Plan at Elevation 12'-0" & Misc. Details
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9J: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 5 Elevation West Wall & Sections
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9K: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Intake Structure, Trash Rack, Seal Plate & Details
- Drawing No. 11448-FM-SSA: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Arrangement of Intake Structure
- Drawing No. 11448-FM-55B: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Arrangement of Intake Structure Dominion Energy I 27
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 41 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 4 Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data [§122.21 {r)(4)] 4.1 List of Unavailable Biological Data [§122.21 (r)(4)(i)] The data needed to prepare 40 CFR §122 .21 (r)(4) are available. 4.2 List of Species and Relative Abundance in the vicinity of CWIS [§122.21 (r)(4)(ii)] Table 4-1 presents a master species list for entrainment. impingement, and ambient fish studies conducted at or near SPS. Methods and results from the individual studies are discussed in greater detail in the sections that follow. While recognizing that each study differed in scope and objectives, some general trends are evident. The fish community that inhabits the James River reflects a highly variable estuarine environment with a mix of freshwater, anadromous, and estuarine species with some marine strays. The species that appear relatively consistently throughout the years in various studies as the most dominant species consist of Bay Anchovy (Anchoa mitchil/J) , Atlantic Croaker (Micropogon undulatus) , Atlantic Silverside (Menidia menidia) , Naked Gaby (Gobiosoma base) and Spot (Leiostomus xanthurus) . Additional species that were commonly collected throughout most studies include American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) , Atlantic Menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) , Blueback Herring (Alosa aestivalis) , Gizzard Shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) , Hogchoker (Trinectes maculatus) , Silver Perch (Bairdiella chrysoura) , White Perch (Morone americana), Striped Bass (Marone saxitilis) , Weakfish (Cynoscion regalis) , Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus). and Inland Silverside (Menidia beryllina) . Blue Catfish (lctalurus furcatus) appear to be a more recent addition to the fish population in the James River; it was introduced as a sport fish in the James River (Schloesser et al. 2011) and is characterized as an invasive species (MDNR 2018) . The presence of Blue Catfish has rapidly expanded into nearly every major tributary in the Chesapeake Bay watershed (NOAA 2017) . Long-term monitoring data (since 1990) in Chesapeake Bay tributaries showed the first appearance of Blue Catfish in 1992 and numbers began to increase in 2005. Invasive species such as Blue Catfish are thought to negatively affect native fish and shellfish as predators or competitors for resources. Schloesser et al. (2011) found that periods of Blue Catfish peak abundance in 1996 and 2003 were concurrent with declines in abundance of native White Catfish (lctalurus catus) . Invasive catfish prey on native forage fish such as American Shad (Alosa sapidissima) , Blueback Herring, Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) , Atlantic Menhaden, and Blue Crab, and are likely to negatively affect these species (Schloesser et al. 2011 ; NOAA 2017) . Blue Catfish first appeared in fish sampling programs conducted for SPS in 2005-2006 when they accounted for 24 .4 percent of the ambient fish collections. Dominion Energy I 28
Enclosure 2, Page 42 of 1631
§31 6(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Table 4-1. Master Species List for Fish Taxa Collected During Impingement, Entrainment, and Ambient Studies Conducted at Surry Power Station 2005-2006 1970-1978 1976-1978 1974-1983 2005-2006 2005-2006 2015-2016 2015-2017 Ambient I Common Name Scientific Name Ambient Fish Entrainment Impingement Entrainment Ambient Fish Impingement Entrainment lchthyoplankton (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1985) (EA 2006) (EA 2006) (HDR 2018b) (HOR 2018a) (EA 2006) 1 Alosa Alewife X X X X X pseudoharengus Alosa Species Alosa spp. X X American Eel Anguilla rostrata X X X X X X X X American Sand Ammodytes X Lance americanus American Shad Alosa sapidissima X X X X Anchovy Species Anchoa spp. X Peprilus Atlantic Butterfish X X triacanthus Micropogonias Atlantic Croaker X X X X X X X X undulates Atlantic Cutlassfish Trichiurus lepturus X X Atlantic Menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus X X X X X X X X Atlantic Needlefish Strongylura marina X X X X Atlantic Silverside Menidia X X X X X X X X Chaetodipterus Atlantic Spadefish X X faber Scomberomorus Spanish Mackerel X X maculatus Acipenser Atlantic Sturgeon X oxyrhynchus Fundulus Banded Killifish X X X X diaphanous Bay Anchovy Anchoa mitchilli X X X X X X X X Dominion Energy I 29
Enclosure 2, Page 43 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
2005-2006 1970-1978 1976-1978 1974-1983 2005-2006 2005-2006 2015-2016 2015-2017 Ambient Common Name Scientific Name Ambient Fish Entrainment Impingement Entrainment Ambient Fish Impingement Entrainment lchthyoplankton (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1985) (EA 2006) (EA 2006) (HOR 2018b) (HOR 2018a) (EA 2006) Citharichthys Bay Whiff spilopterus X Pomoxis Black Crappie X X X X nigromaculatus Black Drum Pogonias cromis X Blackcheek Symphurus X X X X X X Tonguefish plagiusa Blennies Blenniidae X Blueback Herring Alosa aestivalis X X X X X X X Blue Catfish lctalurus furcatus X X Pomatomus Bluefish saltatrix X X X X Lepomis Bluegill X X X macrochirus Blue-spotted Enneacanthus X X X Sunfish gloriosus Bowfin Amia calva X Bridle Shiner Notropis bifrenatus X X Ameiurus Brown Bullhead X X X nebulosus Chain Pickerel Esox niger X X Channel Catfish lctalurus punctatus X X X X X Common Carp Cyprinus carpio X X X X X Common Shiner Luxilus comutus X Conger Eel Conger oceanicus X Rhinoptera Cownose Ray bonasus X Dominion Energy I 30
Enclosure 2, Page 44 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
2005-2006 1970-1978 1976-1978 1974-1983 2005-2006 2005-2006 2015-2016 2015-2017 Ambient Common Name Scientific Name Ambient Fish Entrainment Impingement Entrainment Ambient Fish Impingement Entrainment lchthyoplankton (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1985) (EA 2006) (EA 2006) (HOR 2018b) (HOR 2018a) (EA 2006) Semotilus Creek Chub X atromaculatus Crevalle Jack Caranx hippos X X Dorosoma Species Dorosoma spp. X Drums and Sciaenidae X X Croakers Syngnathus Dusky Pipefish X floridae Eastern Umbra pygmaea X Mud minnow Silvery Minnow Hybognathus X X (Eastern) regius Hypsoblennius Feather Blenny X X hentzi Centrarchus Flier X X macropterus Fourspine Stickleback Apeltes quadracus X Dorosoma Gizzard Shad X X X X X X X X cepedianum Gobies Gobiidae X X Goby Species Gobyspp. X Notemigonus Golden Shiner X X X crysoleucas Ctenopharyngodon Grass Carp X idella Gray Snapper Lutjanus griseus X X X Microgobius Green Goby thalassinus X X X X Harvestfish Peprilus alepidotus X X X X X Dominion Energy I 31
Enclosure 2, Page 45 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 2005-2006 1970-1978 1976-1978 1974-1983 2005-2006 2005-2006 2015-2016 2015-2017 Ambient Common Name Scientific Name Ambient Fish Entrainment Impingement Entrainment Ambient Fish Impingement Entrainment lchthyoplankton (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1985) (EA 2006) (EA 2006) (HDR 2018b) (HOR 2018a)
(EA 2006) Herrings and Clupeiformes X Anchovies Herrings Clupeidae X X X Hickory Shad Alosa mediocris X X X X Trinectes Hogchoker X X X X X X X X maculatus Inland Silverside Menidia beryllina X X X X X X Notropis lroncolor Shiner X chalybaeus Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum X Ladyfish Elops saurus X X X Petromyzon Sea Lamprey X X marinus Micropterus Largemouth Bass X X X salmoides Lepisosteus Longnose Gar X X X X osseus Lookdown Selene vomer X Fundulus Marsh Killifish X confluentus Minnow Cyprinidae X Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis X Fundulus Mummichog X X X X heteroclitus Naked Goby Gobiosoma bosc X X X X X X X Naked/Seaboard Gobiosoma sp. X X Goby Northern Pipefish Syngnathus fuscus X X X X X Dominion Energy I 32
Enclosure 2, Page 46 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
1974*1983 2005-2006 1970-1978 1976-1978 I 2005-2006 2005-2006 2015-2016 2015-2017 Ambient Common Name Scientific Name Ambient Fish Entrainment Impingement Entrainment Ambient Fish Impingement Entrainment lchthyoplankton (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1985) (EA 2006) (EA 2006) (HOR 2018b) (HOR 2018a) (EA 2006) Northern Searobin Prionotus carolinus X X Lagodon Pinfish X rhomboids Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus X X X Orange Filefish A/uterus schoepfii X Oncorhynchus Rainbow Trout X mykiss Rainwater Killifish Lucania parva X Redbreast Sunfish Lepomis auritus X X Redfin Pickerel Esox americanus X Rough Silverside Membras martinica X X X X X Diplectrum Sand Perch X formosum Cyprinella Satinfin Shiner X X analostana Searobin Species Prionotus spp. X Gobiosoma Seaboard Goby X X ginsburgi Sheepshead Cyprinodon Minnow variegatus X X X X Shorthead Moxostoma Redhorse macro/epidotum X X Silver Mullet Mugil curema X Bairdiel/a Silver Perch X X X X X X X chrysoura Silvery Minnow Hybognathus (Mississippi) nuchalis X Silverside Species Menidia spp. X X Dominion Energy I 33
Enclosure 2, Page 4 7 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports L.:),
Surry Power Station ~ , 2005-2006 1970-1978 1976-1978 1974-1983 2005-2006 JI " ' 2015-2016 2015-2017 Ambient Common Name Scientific Name Ambient Fish Entrainment Impingement Entrainment * - I Impingement Entrainment lchthyoplankton (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1985) (EA 2006) 11, (HOR 2018b) (HOR 2018a) (EA 2006) Silverside Family Atherinopsidae X Gobiesox Skilletfish X X X X strumosus Micropterus Smallmouth Bass dolomieui X Menticirrhus Southern Kingfish X X americanus Leiostomus Spot xanthurus X X X X X X X X Spotfin Killifish Fundulus /uciae X Eucinostomus Spotfin Mojarra X argenteus Spottail Shiner Notropis hudsonius X X X X Spotted Hake Urophycis regia X X Cynoscion Spotted Seatrout nebulosus X X X Striped Anchovy Anchoa hepsetus X X Striped Bass Morone saxitilis X X X X X X Striped Basses Morone spp. X Chasmodes Striped Blenny X X bosquianus Striped Killifish Fundulus maja/is X X Striped Mullet Mugil cephalus X X X Para/ichthys Summer Flounder X X X X X X dentatus Sunfish Species Lepomis spp. X Bass and Sunfish Centrarchidae X Dominion Energy I 34
Enclosure 2, Page 48 of 1631
§31 6(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
2005-2006 1970-1978 1976-1978 1974-1983 2005-2006 2005-2006 2015-2016 2015-2017 Ambient Common Name Scientific Name Ambient Fish Entrainment Impingement Entrainment Ambient Fish Impingement Entrainment lchthyoplankton (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1980) (VEPCO 1985) (EA 2006) (EA 2006) (HOR 2018b) (HOR 2018a) I (EA 2006) Swallowtail Shiner Notropis procne X Etheostoma Tesselated Darter X X X olmstedi Dorosoma Threadfin Shad X X X X petenense Three-spined Gasterosteus X X Stickleback aculeatus Tidewater Menidia peninsulae X X Silverside Warmouth Lepomis gulosus X Weakfish Cynoscion regalis X X X X X X White Catfish Ameiurus catus X X X X White Mullet Mugil curema X X White Perch Morone americana X X X X X X X Yellow Bullhead Ameiurus natalis X Yellow Perch Perea flavescens X X X X Dominion Energy I 35
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 49 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 4.2.1 Historical Entrainment Studies Virginia Electric Power Company (VEPCO) conducted ichthyoplankton entrainment sampling at SPS from January 1976 through December 1978 (VEPCO 1980). An additional year of entrainment sampling was conducted from 2005 to 2006 by EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc. (EA) (2006) . The results from these two studies are summarized in the following paragraphs. It should be noted that estimates of entrainment made as part of these studies were not adjusted for "converts". Converts are organisms that are entrainable through 1/4 x 1/2-inch or 3/8-inch square mesh, but would be impinged on finer mesh . As impinged organisms that are washed from the screens and returned to the source water, converts are not counted as entrained organisms under the Rule (see Section 9.3.3) . In the case of VEPCO (1980) , converts were not addressed because 3/8-inch mesh screens were in place at the time. In the case of EA (2006). the 3/8-inch mesh screens had been replaced with 1/8 x 1/2-inch mesh screen, however the concept of converts was not fully developed at the time . The 1976 to 1978 ichthyoplankton samples were taken by paired conical nets, 0.5-meter (m) diameter equipped with SOS-micron (µm) mesh. The nets were towed at three depths (surface, mid-water, and near bottom) in the low-level intake forebay and mid-channel in the discharge canal. Samples were collected at 1000, 1400, 1800, 2200, 0200, and 0600-hours each sample day. Tow duration was 10 minutes per depth at the low-level intake and 5 minutes per depth at the discharge canal. A total of 1,080 ichthyoplankton samples were collected , yielding 39 distinct taxa (see Table 4-1). The composition of the ichthyoplankton varied with environmental conditions such as salinity, and included freshwater species, estuarine species, and marine strays (VEPCO 1980). Eggs of 15 distinct taxa were collected . Bay Anchovy and Naked Gaby were the most abundant species collected during each sample year; together these two species comprised approximately 91 .1 percent of all ichthyofauna collected during the three-year study (VEPCO 1980). Entrainment data were also collected at SPS from June 2005 through June 2006 (EA 2006) . Sampling was collected with paired 0.5-m diameter plankton nets set from a boat anchored in front of the SPS CWIS. The sampling program included four sample periods in 24-hours and samples were collected at three depths (near bottom, mid-depth, and near surface) on a bimonthly schedule. Finfish comprised only 3.2 percent of the total entrainment estimate with 18 distinct taxa (Table 4-1 ). Four taxa accounted for 78.9 percent of the finfish component. Bay Anchovy eggs and Gaby spp. post-yolk sac larvae comprised 25.8 and 25.3 percent of the finfish component. respectively. Post-yolk sac larvae and juvenile Naked Gaby comprised 15.6 and 6.8 percent of the finfish component. respectively, and juvenile Atlantic Croaker comprised 5.4 percent of the finfish component. Invertebrates comprised 96.8 percent of the total entrainment estimate. Unidentified shrimp (66.5%) and unidentified crab zoea or megalopa (24%) were the most abundant taxa collected, together comprising 90.5 percent of total entrainment estimate. Unidentified shrimp are believed to be primarily mysid shrimp, since this was the only shrimp taxa identified to species. Other crab zoea (24%) and bivalves {5 .4%) were the only other invertebrate groups comprising more than 1 percent of the total entrainment estimate. Blue Crab mega Iopa (second stage larvae) and Blue Crab juveniles together comprised only 0.15 percent of the total invertebrate entrainment estimate. Dominion Energy I 36
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 50 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 4.2.2 Historical Impingement Studies Prior to 197 4, SPS had conventional traveling screens at the High-level intake structure and no screens at the Low-level intake structure. Starting in 197 4, the Low-level intake was fitted with modified Ristroph TWS with 3/8-inch mesh screen to maximize fish survival potential. Impingement studies were conducted at SPS from May 1974 to May 1983 (VEPCO 1985). Each unit's TWS were sampled for two consecutive five-minute periods by diverting screen wash water to an in-ground holding pool. Sampling took place in the holding pool by collecting fish in a D-frame dip net while the pool was drained. The total count was recorded by fish taxa and the data was extrapolated to daily, weekly, and annual estimates of impingement. A total of 76 distinct taxa were collected over the nine-year sampling period (Table 4-1). The estimated annual total number of fish impinged ranged from 1,338,280 in 1980 to 5,932,031 in 1975. The most abundant species collected were Spot, Atlantic Menhaden, White Perch, Bay Anchovy, Blueback Herring, and Threadfin Shad (Dorosoma petenense) ; together these six species comprised 76. 7 percent of all fish impinged (Figure 4-1). Of note, most alosid and shad species showed a strong trend of decreasing abundance during the nine- year sample period . Seasonal impingement rates varied with Spot and Atlantic Menhaden occurring in the samples primarily in summer and early fall, and White Perch, Blueback Herring, and Threadfin Shad primarily collected in the late fall and winter months (Figure 4-2). Bay Anchovy were dominant only in the spring while catfish were impinged at a relatively constant level throughout the year. Atlantic Croaker showed highest impingement rates between March and May. 6.000.DDO 1111 All others
- White catfish 5,000 ,000
- Atlantic croaker D Hogchoker 4,000,000 £J Gizzard shad 1
- Threadlin shad I
;: 3,000.000 0
D Blueba::k Hlning l::l.l Bay archovy I a White perch 2,000.000 DAllantic menhaCB!l D Spot 1,000,000 Year Source: Data Provided by Dominion Energy Figure 4-1. Impingement Species Co m posit ion at Surry Power Station 1974-1 983 Dominion Energy I 37
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 51 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station
.
- Ameiurus catus C
60%
!
- Micrqiogonias urd.Jlatus
&. C Trinectes maculatus E
8
- Dorosoma cepecianum C:
a Dorosoma petenense I 40%
- Alosa aestivalis 0 Anchoa nitchilli 0 Morone americana
- llrevoortia tyrannus 20%
- Leiostomus xanlhurus Month Source: Data provided by Dominion Energy Figure 4-2. Seasonal Impingement Variation for Top Ten Species 4.2.3 Historical Ambient Fish Sampling Information on the fish community in the vicinity of SPS is available from studies conducted from 1970 to 1978 (VEPCO 1980) and 2005-2006 (EA 2006) .
Ambient Fish Study, 1970-1978 Monthly haul seines and otter trawls were conducted starting in 1970. Additional special seine hauls were started in 1973 to supplement and enhance the existing data . Both programs continued into 1978. The objective of the fish sampling programs was to characterize the fish populations of the near shore littoral zone (beach seine hauls) and near bottom areas (otter trawls) of the James River in the vicinity of SPS in terms of species diversity and relative abundance and to relate the effects of the station's operation on these populations (VEPCO 1980). The additional seine hauls initiated in 1973 targeted fish populations inhabiting the shore zone waters between the power station intake and discharge. Seven beach seine sampling stations and six otter trawl sampling stations were established between Jamestown Island and slightly downstream of the low-level intake structure (Figure 4-3) . Dominion Energy I 38
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 52 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Legend
- Suny Power Station A Seine Stations
- Trawl Stations
- I t I * * - - 7*--:-..._
, " Hog Poinl Hog Pooni North '\ DiocharVe North / *~
- A.,' Intake North *1 *
~ -' I HogP0011w.11 j '* **, . 'I
-, ~~-' l Dlsct18flleM1ddle - . - - - '- - -- :. . .:.: ~..:..=.,.,. . ;,.~ - - ----l ~--
/
- I Miles
~\ i 0 0.5 1 2 SCALE IS APPROXIMATE
'r
- Source: Provided by Dominion Energy Figure 4-3. Historic Ambient Fish Sampling Locations A total of 70 distinct taxa were collected by the combined beach seine and otter trawl sampling program (Table 4-1) . Over nine years of sampling, the beach seine sampling resulted in a total of 133,382 fish with 63 distinct taxa and 27 families . Five species comprised 75 percent of the total number of fishes collected during the study; Atlantic Menhaden (26. 7%), Blueback Herring (14 .1%}, Tidewater Silverside (Menidia beryllina; 13.1 %}, Bay Anchovy (13 .1%}, and Spottail Shiner (Notropis hudsonius; 8.4%) (VEPCO 1980). Many species were collected at low levels of occurrence and/or infrequently; 11 species were represented by a single individual and 8 species were collected in only one year. Several species exhibited notable fluctuations in relative abundance. White Perch was most abundant in 1970 when it contributed 8.2 percent to the seine collection , but was collected at low numbers up through 1978. VEPCO (1980) noted that a major fish kill of White Perch occurred in the James River in 1971 , prior to the operational startup of the SPS. Blueback Herring and Alewife experienced several poor year-classes during this period that were unrelated to the operation of the SPS (Hoagman and Kriete 1977, as cited in VEPCO 1980).
Over the nine years of sampling by otter trawl, a total 37,332 fish were collected , with 44 distinct taxa and 22 families. Five species comprised 80.4 percent of the total collection and reflect a different fish capture selectivity, compared to seine hauls, with Hogchoker (26.9%), Spot (22 .3%), Channel Catfish (lctalurus punctatus; 13.4%), Atlantic Croaker (9.5%}, and Bay Anchovy (9.1%) as the most commonly collected taxa . Similar to the catch for the monthly haul seines. many species occurred in low abundance or infrequent occurrence with 8 species Dominion Energy I 39
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 53 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ represented by only 1 individual and 25 species collectively comprised approximately 1.0 percent of the total catch (VEPCO 1980). Similar to the seine data, several species exhibited large year to year fluctuations in abundance. Not evident in the seine data, the trawl collection data for White Perch indicate numbers were trending higher for the last three years of data (1976 to 1978). A number of species exhibited fluctuations in abundance associated with salinity levels. The Atlantic Silverside was generally more abundant during years of high salinities during sampling while Tidewater Silverside was more dominant during years of lower salinities (VEPCO 1980). Similarly, Channel Catfish exhibited a trend of higher abundance when salinities were low. The special seine haul program resu lted in the collection of 76,819 fish over nine years of sampling, representing 50 distinct taxa and 20 families. Collectively, five species comprised 83.0 percent of the total catch and consist of Atlantic Menhaden {49.6%}, Atlantic Silverside (12.9%), Bay Anchovy (7.8%), Spot {6.7%}, and Tidewater Silverside {6.0%) . Most species individually accounted for less than or equal to 0.1 percent of the total catch. Ambient Fish Study, 2005-2006 Quarterly sampling events in the James River were completed in 2005-2006 at sites upstream, adjacent to, and downstream of the SPS intake by otter trawl and beach seines (EA 2006) . A total of 1,800 individuals representing 25 distinct finfish taxa were collected over the four sampling efforts (September, November, January, and June) . The taxa list is presented in Table 4-1. The four most abundant species were Blue Catfish {24.4%) , Bay Anchovy (16.1 %), Atlantic Silverside (13. 7%), and Spot (11.1 %). Other common species collected consisted of Hogchoker (9.9%), Inland Silverside (7.5%). and White Perch (7.4%). Together these seven species comprised 90.1 percent of the total collection . Atlantic Silverside was the most dominant species collected by beach seine while Blue Catfish dominated the trawl samples. Dominant species collected by beach seine represent pelagic, forage fish that congregate along the shoreline in large schools. In comparison to historical fish data (197 4-1983), Blue Catfish have exhibited an increasing abundance. This trend is consistent with studies that have documented the increasing abundance of Blue Catfish following their successful introduction as a sport fish in the James, Rappahannock, and Mattaponi rivers from 197 4 through 1989, and decreasing abundance of White Catfish (Ameirus catus) and Channel Catfish (Connelly 2001; NOAA 2014). A comparison of historical (197 4-1983) and more recent (2005-2006) seine and trawl data was made using percent composition . For the seine data, 1O species showed similar catch levels (Figure 4-4). Blueback Herring and Atlantic Menhaden comprised a larger percentage of the 1974-1983 catch (6 .2% for Blueback Herring and 10.4% for Atlantic Menhaden) than they did in the 2005-2006 collections {0.2% for Blueback Herring and 0.0% for Atlantic Menhaden) . This comparison tracks with recent data compiled for these species by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission that also report recent reductions in abundance for these two species (ASMFC 1999; 2000; 2001). Additionally, the relative abundance of silversides (Inland and Atlantic Silversides) and Bay Anchovy increased substantially (Figure 4-4). Dominion Energy I 40
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 54 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 10.00 9.00 8.00 7.00 C 0 E 0 6.00 t 0 5.00 u i I:! G> 4.00 IJ 1970 - 1983 a.
*2005 -2006 300 2.00 Source: Data provided by Dominion Energy Figure 4-4. Percent Composition Comparison of Two Sets of Seine Data Collected near Surry Power Station Based on trawl data, Blue Catfish is a more recent addition to the catch (Figure 4-5) . This difference is apparently due to the successful introduction to Chesapeake Bay as a sportfish in the James, Rappahannock, and Mattaponi rivers from 1974 through 1989, and decreasing abundance of White Catfish (Ameirus catus) and Channel Catfish (Connelly 2001 ; NOAA 2014) .
Species exhibiting increased abundance consist of Bay Anchovy, Silver Perch, Atlantic Menhaden, and White Perch while species exhibiting declines consist of Channel Catfish and Atlantic Croaker (Figure 4-5) . Ambient lchthvoplankton Study, 2005-2006 lchthyoplankton sampling was conducted concurrent with entrainment sampling that was conducted from June 2005 to May 2006 at locations upstream, downstream, and adjacent to the CWIS (EA 2006) . Samples were collected with a single 0.5-m diameter plankton net fitted with 505-um netting. Plankton tows were made at mid-depth for 4.5 minutes. A total of 18 distinct finfish taxa were collected (see Table 4-1 ). Atlantic Croaker, Atlantic Silverside, Bay Anchovy and Naked Gaby dominated the finfish collection . In addition, four distinct shellfish taxa were recorded, Blue Crab, crab species, bivalve, and shrimp. Dominion Energy I 41
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 55 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 10.00 9.00 -
8.00 7.00 C 0
- 2 6.00 0
E 0 5 00 - - (.) C
.!:?
11. 4.00 I
- - [J 1970 - 1983
- 2005 -2006 3.00 l -
2.00 - - 1.00 - - - - - fl. r11 I J1.. - ,.
- l"tlJ
- rl - - rl -
Source: Data provided by Dominion Energy Figure 4-5. Percent Com position Com parison of Two Sets of Trawl Data Collected near Surry Power Station Recent Ambient Studies Virginia Institute of Marine Science biologists have conducted monthly juvenile fish trawl surveys in the lower Chesapeake Bay and select tributaries, including the James River, on an annual basis since at least the 1960's. In the 2016 to 2017 period, biologists documented below average abundance for America n eel, Bay Anchovy, Blue Catfish (James River) , Channel Catfish (James River) , Spot, Summer Flounder, Weakfish, White Catfish, and White Perch juveniles (James River) . Silver Perch exhibited above average abundances and average abundances were observed for Atlantic Croaker, Striped Bass, and White Perch young-of-year (James River) . The 2016 year class of Weakfish was the lowest recorded (Tuckey and Fabrizio 2017) . 4.2.4 Recent Entrainment Studies A two-year entrainment study was conducted at SPS from August 2015 through July 2017 . Pumped entrainment samples were collected in front of the trash racks at Unit 1 from three depth strata (i.e., near surface, mid-depth and near-bottom) twice a month for 24 months from July 2015 through June 2017 (HOR 201 Ba) . Each sampling event lasted 24 hours subdivided into four, 6-hour sampling periods. Sample duration was approximately 100 minutes per depth Dominion Energy I 42
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 56 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal : §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station per 6-hour sample (or the time required to collect a volume of 100 m3 of water per depth per 6-hour sample) . Please refer to Section 9 for more details. During the first year of sampling, and excluding non-viable eggs (NVE) , a total of 243,611 organisms were collected, consisting of 61,272 finfish distributed among 23 distinct taxa and 182,339 shellfish distributed among 14 distinct taxa. Table 4-1 presents the master list of fish species collected in this impingement study. Shellfish taxa dominated the entrainment collection, accounting for 75 percent of the total collection . Finfish taxa accounted for 25 percent of the total collection . After excluding NVE, the total number of organisms collected during the second year of sampling was 557,882 organisms, including 83,298 fish distributed among 22 distinct taxa and 474,584 shellfish distributed among 14 distinct taxa . Shellfish taxa dominated the entrainment collection for the second year as well, accounting for 85 percent of the total collection . Table 9-4 in Section 9.2 presents a list of the taxa and life stages collected each year of study. In general, the taxa lists were consistent during the two years of sampling with minor differences associated primarily with the variation that typically occurs when species are collected in small numbers (HOR 2018a) . The dominant life stage during both years of entrainment sampling consisted of shellfish zoea at 36 percent (Year 1) and 64 percent (Year 2). Post-yolk sac larvae (20% of the total). megalopae (4% of the total), and finfish juveniles (4% of the total) were the next most abundant life stages during the first year of sampling and shellfish juveniles (20% of the total) , and finfish post-yolk sac larvae (13% of the total) were the next most abundant life stage during the second year of sampling (HOR 2018a). Taken together as a group, the Gobiidae family (Gobies, Naked Goby, Naked/Seaboard Goby and Green Goby) dominated the finfish collection , accounting for 60 percent of finfish collected during the first year of sampling . This same trend continued during the second year of sampling with the Gobiidae family accounting for 71 percent of the finfish collected . The second most abundant finfish taxa group were the Anchovies (Bay Anchovy and Anchoa spp.) accounting for approximately 27 .5 percent of the during the first year of sampling and approximately 16 percent during the second year of sampling. Clupeiformes (Herrings and Anchovies and associated species) and Atlantic Croaker, accounted for six and three percent of the finfish entrained, respectively, during the first year of sampling and nearly four percent and 1.5 percent, respectively, during the second year of sampling. Additionally, during the second year of sampling, the group silversides (Atlantic Silverside, Inland Silverside, and Silversides [Atherinidae]) accounted for almost seven percent of the finfish collection . In comparison, this group accounted for nearly one percent of the finfish collection during the first year of sampling. No endangered or threatened species were collected . Mud Crab (Panopeidae) zoea (39% of shellfish) and juvenile Tellin Clams (Tellinidae) (35% of shellfish) were the most abundant shellfish taxon collected during the first year of entrainment sampling . Fiddler Crab zoea (39% of shellfish), Mud Crab (Panopeidae) zoea (33% of shellfish). and juvenile Mysid Shrimp (Mysidae) (13% of shellfish) were the most abundant shellfish taxon collected during Year 2 sampling. Overall, the entrainment taxa composition collected in 2015-2017 (HOR 2018a) compares well with the entrainment study data conducted in 2005-2006 (EA 2006) and described in Section Dominion Energy I 43
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 57 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
4.2 .1. The finfish component of both studies was dominated by Anchovies, Gobies, Atlantic Croaker (in 2015-2016), and silversides (in 2016-2017) . The peak seasonal abundances of finfish were similar for both studies, a reflection of the similar species compositions. The primary difference between the finfish collection between the two studies was the limited number of eggs collected in the current study compared to the high abundance of Bay Anchovy eggs collected in the previous study. As mentioned previously, Bay Anchovy abundance, and consequently egg production, is subject to wide annual fluctuation . Shellfish taxa dominated the entrainment collection in both studies, comprising 97 percent of the collection in 2005-2006 (EA 2006) compared to 75 percent in 2015-2016 and 85 percent in 2016-2017. The shellfish species composition varied, with shrimp and crab taxa dominating the 2005-2006 entrainment samples at 66.5 percent and 24 percent, respectively, compared to 18. 7 percent and 45.6 percent in 2015-2016 samples and 17 .5 percent and 73 .7 percent in 2016-2017 . Annual shellfish densities measured in the current study are generally much higher than those recorded in the 2005-2006 study. The reasons for the variation in densities could include sampling gear and net mesh differences between the two studies, as well as fish and shellfish abundance changes within the James River. 4.2.5 Recent Impingement Studies A one-year impingement monitoring study was conducted at SPS from August 2015 through July 2016 (HOR 201 Bb). Impingement samples were collected twice a month for 12 consecutive months for a total of 24 sampling events. Each sampling event lasted 24 hours with a target 30-minute sample collected every 4 hours. A minimum of 15 minutes was allowed if heavy debris loads and/or fish collections occurred . Impingement samples were collected in the fish/debris return troughs of the TWS in front of the combined Unit 1 and 2 intakes. The original Ristroph TWS were modified from a 3/8-inch square mesh opening to 1/8 by 1/2-inch rectangular mesh openings in the early 1990s. At times of high fish abundance or low river levels, the screens are rotated at fast speed to reduce impingement time to 1.5 minutes or less. Fish and shellfish were also assessed for condition to evaluate initial impingement survival rates. Eighteen taxa were classified as 100 percent alive and undamaged after initial impingement (Table 4-2) . These included a variety of sunfish, catfish, mackerel, and shrimp. In addition, another 50 percent or more of 25 taxa were undamaged after impingement. Table 4-2. Initial Impingement Survival of each Assessed Individual by Taxa at Surry Power Project during 2015-2016 Impingement Sampling Alewife" Taxon American Eel Live Undamaged (%) 80.0 100.0 Live Damaged (%) Finfish -20.0 Dead Decaying (%) Total Assessed 26 1 Gizzard Shad* 74.7 20.9 4.4 0.0 703 American Shad* 100.0 2 Atlantic Croaker 65.2 2.3 31.2 1.3 467 Dominion Energy I 44
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 58 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Taxon Atlantic Cutlassfish Atlantic Menhaden* Atlantic Needlefish Live Undamaged (%} 40.1 88.9 Live Damaged (%) 30.1 11 .1
-100.0 22.1 Dead Decaying
(%) 7.7 Total Assessed 4 557 5 Atlantic Silverside 64.8 0.3 29.6 5.4 648 Atlantic Spanish 100.0 Mackerel Bay Anchovy* 50.1 0.4 44.4 5.1 8,093 Black Crappie 100.0 1 Black Drum 50.0 50.0 2 Blue Catfish 62.8 34.7 2.5 153 Blueback Herring* 83.1 0.2 15.9 0.8 575 Bluegill 100.0 2 Brown Bullhead 100.0 2 Channel Catfish 100.0 2 Common Carp 100.0 1 Dusky Pipefish 50.0 50.0 2 Golden Shiner 100.0 1 Gray Snapper 100.0 5 Gray Trout 67.5 9.7 22.8 31 Harvestfish 91 .6 1.5 6.9 107 Hickory Shad* 100.0 1 Hogchoker 95.1 3.6 1.3 104 Inland Silverside 50.0 50.0 3 Largemouth Bass 100.0 1 Longnose Gar 100.0 1 Mummichog 100.0 1 Pumpkinseed 100.0 1 Silver Mullet 100.0 1 Silver Perch 82.5 1.6 15.9 28 Skilletfish 100.0 1 Southern Kingfish 100.0 1 Spot 85.2 2.3 12.2 0.3 383 Spottail Shiner 100.0 2 Spotted Seatrout 50.0 50.0 2 Striped Bass 87.5 3.0 6.7 2.7 164 Dominion Energy I 45
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 59 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Taxon Striped Mullet Summer Flounder Threadfin Shad Live Undamaged
(%) 100.0 100.0 66.7 Live Damaged (%) 33.3
- Dead Decaying
(%) Total Assessed 1 1 9 White Catfish 99.2 0.8 24 White Perch 93.9 2.6 2.7 0.8 1507 Yellow Perch 100.0 1 Shellfish Blue Crab 67.4 31.2 0.7 0.6 952 Grass Shrimp Species 97.1 0.4 0.4 2.1 113 Mud Crabs (Xanthoidea) 97.9 2.1 63 Northern White Shrimp 100.0 11 Sand Shrimp 100.0 1 Note:
- considered a 'fragile' species by USEPA.
A total of 316,163 organisms comprising 285,868 finfish distributed among 61 distinct taxa and 30,295 shellfish distributed among 6 distinct taxa were collected during 2015-2016 impingement sampling 5
- While Table 4-1 presents the master list of fish species collected in this impingement study, Table 4-3 presents the most abundant finfish and shellfish and relative abundance (percent of total impingement collection) . Bay Anchovy were the most abundant taxa, accounting for 75 percent of the total collected . Atlantic Croaker and White Perch were the next most abundant taxa, each accounting for 4 percent of the total collected . Grass Shrimp (Pa/aemonetes spp.) and Mud Crabs (Xanthoidea) were the most abundant shellfish collected, accounting for 36 percent and 28 percent of the shellfish total, respectively. The remaining taxa collected each accounted for 2 percent or less of the total catch .
Table 4-3. Most Abundant Fish and Shellfish Species Collected by Unit at Surry Power Station during 2015-2016 Impingement Sampling (HOR 2018b) Total Collected Percent(%) of Total Finfish Bay Anchovy 235,831 75 Atlantic Croaker 12,675 4 White Perch 11,250 4 Atlantic Silverside 7,093 2 5 One Diamondback Terrapin (Malactemys terrapin) was collected during the study, but was not included in further impingement analysis. Dominion Energy I 46
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 60 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Taxa Total Collected Percent(%) of Total Atlantic Menhaden 4.460 1 Blueback Herring 3,879 1 Gizzard Shad 2,550 1 Hogchoker 2.468 1 Striped Bass 2,211 1 Weakfish 1,081 <1 Shellfish Grass Shrimp 10,908 3 Mud Crabs (Xanthoidea) 8,385 3 Blue Crab 5,630 2 UID Shrimp 4,877 2 Mud Crabs (Panopeidae) 216 <1 Northern White Shrimp 147 <1 Sand Shrimp 128 <1 Brown Shrimp 4 <1 The impingement collection data were further evaluated to account for the mesh size employed at SPS. The TWS at Units 1 and 2 have a finer mesh opening than the USEPA used in their rulemaking (0.56-inch [14 .2-millimeter (mm)] diagonal mesh or 0.25 x 0.50-inch mesh) . Therefore , morphometric data was collected on a subsample of collected organisms to allow for quantification of those organisms that were small enough that they would have passed through (i.e., been entrained) the standard TWS assumed by USEPA6, but were impinged on the finer mesh used at Units 1 and 2. The percent of the measured individuals mea suring 14.2 mm maximum body depth (fish) or maximum body width (shellfish) was extrapolated to the total impingement collection to deduct those individuals impinged at Units 1 and 2 that were of entrai nable size but were impinged (i.e., converts) as a result of the finer mesh used on the Units 1 and 2 TWS. Based on the morphometric data, only 14 percent of the measured organisms were impingeable. After adjusting for converts. 21 taxa collected in impingement samples were determined to be entrainable by rule definition and not impingeable at Units 1 and
- 2. These include Bluegill, Bluefish, Inland Silverside, and Naked Gaby, and the more abundant taxon , Grass Shrimp Species. Other impinged species such as Atlantic Croaker, American Eel, Atlantic Silverside, and the most abundant taxa, Bay Anchovy, were largely converts .
6 EPA recognizes that 1/2 by V4-inch mesh is used in some instances and performs comparably to the 318-inch square mesh. Therefore, the Rule allows for facilities to apply a 1/2 by V4-inch sieve (diagonal opening of 0.56 inches) or a 318-inch sieve (diagonal opening of 0.53 inches) when discerning between impinged and entrained organisms - Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 158. Page 48321 . Dominion Energy I 47
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 61 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 4.3 Identification of Species and Life Stages Susceptible to Impingement and Entrainment [§122.21 (r)(4)(iii)] The withdrawal of cooling water from waterbodies has the potential to impact fishes and aquatic organisms through impingement and entrainment. The degree of vulnerability to impingement exhibited by adult and juvenile fish species depends upon biological and behavioral factors including seasonal fish community structure, swimming speed, spawning effects on distribution, habitat surrounding intake structures, high flow events, fish health, and attraction to the flow associated with the intake structures themselves. In addition, intake velocity, screen mesh size, trash rack spacing, and other intake design components will also affect the susceptibility of fishes to impingement and entrainment. For example, clupeids have high susceptibility to impingement based on multiple factors such as schooling behavior, distribution in the water column, negative rheotactic response to intake flows, and poor swimming performance in winter months due to lower water temperatures (Loar etal.1978) . Life history characteristics can influence the vulnerability of a fish species to entrainment. For example, broadcast spawners with non-adhesive, free-floating eggs can drift with water currents and may become entrained in a CWIS, while nest-building species or species with adhesive eggs are less susceptible to entrainment during early life stages. Further, some marine species spawn offshore where eggs would not be susceptible to entrainment but larvae drift inshore to estuarine waters with the currents. Susceptibility of larval life stages of fishes to entrainment depends on body size and swimming ability. Therefore, an organism will spend only a portion of its life cycle susceptible to entrainment, as larger juvenile and adult life stages are not likely to be entrained. The Rule assumes fish subject to 0.5 fps and lower velocities are able to swim freely and avoid impingement; thus impingement is minimized at intakes with 0.5 fps through-screen velocities. At SPS, as previously discussed, the impingement AOI can be represented as a semi-circle with a radius of 118 feet centered at the CWIS. For entrainment of non-motile and limited mobility life stages such as eggs and larvae, velocity thresholds of 0.1 fps and 0.3 fps were used to calculate AOI (Section 2.2.3). For a threshold velocity of 0.1 fps, the overall entrainment AOI at SPS can be conservatively represented as a rectangular area 14,170 feet long and 1,834 feet wide centered at the CWIS. For a threshold velocity of 0.3 fps, the overall entrainment AOI at SPS can be conservatively represented as a rectangular area 4,723 feet long and 611 feet wide centered at the CWIS. The potential for entrainment and impingement of species known to occur in the vicinity of SPS, based on species collected during recent entrainment and impingement studies conducted at SPS, was assessed based on life history characteristics and existing information of species collected in the 2015-2017 entrainment and 2015-2016 impingement studies conducted at SPS with a relative abundance equal to or greater than two percent of each study collection (Table 4-
- 4) .
Additional consideration was given to adjustments to entrainment and impingement data to account for the smaller screen mesh at SPS (described previously) . For example, one of the Dominion Energy I 48
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 62 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ more abundant species collected at SPS during the 2015-2016 impingement study, the Naked Goby, were smaller than impingeable size 7 based on the Rule-defined mesh size to distinguish between entrainable and impingeable organisms; therefore, they were assessed as unlikely to be impinged but likely to be entrained . Fish eggs and larvae are vulnerable to unfavorable conditions because they lack mobility and cannot respond to hazards. Therefore, the nature of the spawning site can dictate the impact of hazardous conditions (Wootton 1990). Pelagic or mid-water broadcast spawners were considered to be more susceptible to impingement and entrainment because their eggs can drift downstream in the current (i.e., possible potential for entrainment in Table 4-4) . After hatching, early larvae may be vulnerable until they make their way to nursery areas such as the margins of the river, backwaters, and side channels (Wootton 1990). Further, those species with migrating larvae from offshore spawning areas may be susceptible to entrainment as they move with the tidal currents. Fish that broadcast or scatter their eggs over vegetation or substrates were not considered likely to be entrained as eggs but may be vulnerable as larvae or older life stages. In addition to this life history information, species that were entrained or impinged during recent studies were considered to have potential for entrainment, based on HOR {2018a) or impingement based on HOR (2018b) . Many factors have affected finfish community structure in the James River over the years, including the introduction of species such as Blue Catfish with the potential to have negative effects and outcompete native species. Other factors also have affected the aquatic community over the years, including the fish kill that affected White Perch in 1971 (VEPCO 1980), improvements to water quality and aquatic habitat, and fish restoration efforts (e.g. Striped Bass and American Shad) . Thus, the recent study data conducted at SPS provides the most current available information on species and relative abundance in the vicinity of SPS as well as their relative susceptibility to entrainment and impingement. The potential risk of entrainment and impingement is also related to the relative abundance of susceptible species. The majority of the species listed in Table 4-4 are expected to occur in the vicinity of the SPS CWIS in low abundances. Fish species that are expected to be the most abundant (those that comprised at least 2 percent of the recent entrainment or impingement study collections) include species in the taxa Naked Goby, Bay Anchovy, Atlantic Silverside, Atlantic Croaker, and White Perch. Information on relative abundance of selected species that inhabit Chesapeake Bay and the James River was gleaned from the juvenile index survey (Tuckey and Fabrizio 2017), and site-specific studies conducted at Surry Power Station . Species comprising less than two percent of the total entrainment or impingement study collections were not considered to be susceptible and were assessed as not likely to be entrained or impinged . Based on this information, and as supported by data collected from recent entrainment and impingement studies, seven finfish and four shellfish taxa were found to be potentially susceptible to entrainment or impingement. These are identified in Table 4-4 . 7 Federal Register/ Vol. 79, No. 158. Page 48321 . Dominion Energy I 49
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 63 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Mud Crabs (Panopeidae and Xanthoidea), Tellin Clams, Mysid Shrimp, Fiddler Crabs, Grass Shrimp, and Palaemonid Shrimp are expected to be the most abundant shellfish taxa with potential risk of entrainment and impingement based on the results of the recent entrainment and impingement studies (those that comprised at least two percent of the study collections). Grass Shrim p species, Mud Crabs (Xanthoidea), and Blue Crab are expected to be the most abundant shellfish taxa with potential risk of impingement. Based on an assessment of impingement survival (HOR 2018b), greater tha n 60 percent of impinged Blue Crabs and greater than 97 percent of impinged Mud Crabs and Grass Shrimp survived to be returned to the source water. Dominion Energy I so
Enclosure 2, Page 64 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Table 4-4. Entrainment and Impingement Potential for Fish Taxa Known to Occur near the Surry Power Station Potential for Potential for Family Common Name Scientific Name Potential to Occur Near the Intake Entrainment of Impingement of Early Life Stages Adults and Juveniles Finfish Likely based on abundance in recent entrainment and Anchovy Bay Anchovy Anchoa mitchilli Likely Likely impingement studies. Likely - collected in recent impingement study in very low Catfish Blue Catfish lctalurus furcatus abundance (i.e., less than 2% of total collection). As cavity Unlikely Unlikely spawners early life stages have protection. Likely- spawning occurs offshore but larvae migrate Drum Micropogonias Atlantic Croaker inshore into estuaries; collected in recent entrainment and Likely Likely undulatus impingement studies. Likely - spawning occurs in the ocean, but larval form (elver) migrates up rivers; collected in recent entrainment Eel American Eel Anguilla rostrata and impingement studies. Nearly all individuals assessed Likely Unlikely in impingement study were converts, i.e. of entrainable sizes. Likely - eggs laid in oyster beds but larvae are free-swimming; collected in recent entrainment and Goby Naked Goby Gobiosoma bosc Likely Unlikely impingement studies. All individuals assessed impin~ement study were converts, i.e. of entrainable sizes. Likely - spawning occurs offshore, but larvae migrate Atlantic Menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus inshore to nursery areas; collected in recent entrainment Likely Unlikely and impingement studies. Likely - broadcast spawners; collected in recent Herring Blueback Herring Alosa aestivalis entrainment and impingement studies in very low Unlikely Unlikely abundance. Likely - broadcast spawners in shallow waters; collected in Dorosoma Gizzard Shad recent entrainment and impingement studies in very low Unlikely Unlikely cepedianum abundance. Likely - eggs laid in intertidal zone but larvae may be free swimming; collected in recent entrainment and Silverside Atlantic Silverside Menidia Likely Unlikely impingement studies. Nearly all individuals assessed in impingement study were converts, i.e. of entrainable sizes. Likely - eggs are broadcast and non-adhesive; collected in Striped Bass Morone saxatilis recent entrainment and impingement studies in very low Unlikely Unlikely abundance. Temperate Bass Likely - based on historical study data; collected in recent White Perch Morone americana entrainment (very low abundance) and impingement Unlikely Likely studies. Dominion I 51
Enclosure 2, Page 65 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
I Potential for Potential for Family Common Name Scientific Name Potential to Occur Near the Intake Entrainment of ' Impingement of I Early Life Stages Adults and Juveniles Butterfishes Likely - collected in recent impingement study in low Harvestfish Peprilus alepidotus Unlikely Unlikely abundance. Likely - collected in recent entrainment and impingement Soles Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus Unlikely Unlikely studies in very low abundance. Shellfish Likely - collected in recent entrainment (in very low Swimming Crabs abundance) and impingement studies. Many individuals Blue Crab Callinectes sapidus Likely Likely assessed in impingement study were converts. i.e. of entra inable sizes. Fiddler and Fiddler Crab Uca spp. Likely - collected in recent entrainment study. Likely Unlikely Ghost Crabs Mud Crabs Panopeidae Likely - collected in recent entrainment and impingement Mud Crabs Likely Likely Mud Crab Xanthoidea studies. Grass Shrimp Palaemonetes Likely - collected in recent entrainment and impingement Palaemonidae studies. All individuals assessed in impingement study Likely Unlikely Palaemonid Shrimp Palaemonidae were converts, i.e. of entrainable sizes. Likely - collected in recent entrainment study in very low Mytilidae Ribbed Mussel Geukensia demissa Unlikely Unlikely abundance. Likely - collected in recent entrainment study in very low Cyrenidae Asian Clam Corbicula fluminea Unlikely Unlikely abundance. Likely - collected in recent entrainment and impingement studies in very low abundance. Nearly all individuals Penaeid Northern White Shrimp Litopenaeus setiferus Unlikely Unlikely assessed in impingement study were converts, i.e. of entrainable sizes. Likely - collected in recent entrainment and impingement Crangon Crangonidae Sand Shrimp studies in very low abundance. All individuals assessed in Unlikely Unlikely septemspinosa impingement study were converts, i.e. of entrainable sizes. Likely - collected in recent entrainment study in very low Tellin Clams Tellin Clams Tellinidae Unlikely Unlikely abundance. Note: Assessment of potential for entrainment and impingement in this table is based on the Rule-defined mesh size, which is a 1/2 by V4-inch sieve (diagonal opening of 0.56 inches), when discerning between entra ined and impinged organisms (
Reference:
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 158. Page 48321). Dominion I 52
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 66 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 4.4 Identification and Evaluation of Primary Growth Period [§122.21 (r){4){iv)] The primary growth period for the majority of fishes directly follows the spring hatch. Growth rates are highest in early spring and tend to decline throughout the summer along with total fish abundance. The generally held view on seasonal variation in fish growth in North America is that growth is fastest in the spring and early summer, slows in the late summer and fall, and virtually stops in the winter (Gebhart and Summerfelt 1978). The majority of fishes have their highest densities shortly after the hatch occurs when larvae are concentrated. Feeding competition is especially important during late spring through early summer when the bulk of fish are in their early life stages. During this time, they are more susceptible to starvation (May 1974). This is a critical stage in development, where larval fish have a short time period to initiate exogenous feeding before starving (Ehrlich 1974; Miller et al. 1988). 4.4.1 Reproduction Fish species in the vicinity of the SPS utilize external fertilization, which is principally controlled by water temperatures. Fish reproduction has the potential to produce high yields; however, natural mortality rates are also high regardless of whether the fish reside in the James River or another estuarine environment. The number of eggs a female produces (fecundity) can vary depending on the life history of the species and individual size. Additionally, most fish spawn only once a year regardless of prior success. Based on data collected in recent (2015-2017) entrainment and impingement studies, fish and shellfish with the highest potential for entrainment or impingement are from taxon groups Anchovies, Gobies, Clupeids (Shad, Menhaden, and Herrings) , Atlantic Silverside, Atlantic Croaker, White Perch, Grass Shrimp Species, Blue Crab, Mud Crabs, Fiddler Crabs, and Tellin Clams. The fish species are primarily schooling species and broadcast spawners during spring months. Other fish species present near SPS consist of cavity nesters such as lctalurids (catfish} . Eggs and yolk sac larvae of these species are usually contained within the nest area, but post-yolk sac larvae and early stage juveniles may be vulnerable to entrainment during the period when they are moving from the nest or spawning areas in search of nursery habitat. 4.4.2 Larval Recruitment Peak larval recruitment for most James River fishes would be expected to occur during the spawning period, which, based on ambient fish collection data and entrainment data , generally occurs between May and July. As a result, peak larval fish entrainment would be expected to occur during the same period. Based on two years of entrainment data conducted at SPS from 2015-2017, peak entrainment densities occurred in May, June, and July and were attributed primarily to post-yolk sac larval gobies (Naked Goby and Naked/Seaboard Goby [Gobiosoma sp.]) and post-yolk sac and juvenile anchovies (Bay Anchovy and Common Anchovy) . Winter finfish densities were dominated by spawning activities of Atlantic Croaker while early spring finfish entrainment densities were dominated by juvenile Atlantic Menhaden. Dominion I 53
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 67 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
4.4.3 Period of Peak Abundance for Relevant Taxa Based on water quality data collected during the entrainment study (HOR 2018a) , SPS is in a tida lly influenced oligohaline (i.e., characterized by a range of salinities of 0.5 to 5 ppt) to mesohaline (5.0 to 18.0 ppt) zone of the James River, which is utilized by a number of species both separately and simultaneously as a spawning ground, nursery ground, and /or migration route (VEPCO 1980). Fish spawning is a direct function of water temperature, constraining most activity to the spring and early summer months. The majorities of the species found in the vicinity of SPS do not spawn in the area but rather occur as juveniles or adults. Coastal species such as Atlantic Croaker spawn in offshore waters and the larvae move into inshore bay and tributary nursery areas with coastal and tidal currents. This results in the influx of larval and juvenile fishes into the James River system drainage each year when water temperatures begin to rise. Peak abundance for most early life stage and juvenile fishes in the vicinity of SPS occurs between May and July depending on each species' unique spawning habits (HOR 2018a) . Based on results of Dominion Energy's 2015-2017 entrainment study, depth-averaged monthly entrainment densities (i.e., average of surface, mid-water, and near-bottom samples) for finfish were highest during spring to early summer months of May, June, and July (Figure 4-6). These spring entrainment densities were dominated by post-yolk sac larval gobies (Naked Gaby and Naked/Seaboard Gaby [Gobiosoma sp.]) and post-yolk sac and juvenile anchovies (Bay Anchovy and Common Anchovy) , with silversides contributing to the spring collection during the second year of sampling. Winter finfish densities were dominated by spawning activities of Atlantic Croaker while early spring finfish entrainment densities were dominated by juvenile Atlantic Menhaden. The lowest depth-averaged monthly densities generally occurred during winter and early spring months from November to March. Shellfish taxa depth-averaged monthly densities were highest during late spring to late summer months of April - September (Figure 4-6). High densities during the first year of sampling were attributed primarily to Mud Crab zoea and megalopae in July, August, and September, and juvenile Tellin Clams from May through August. Palaemonid Shrimp, Fiddler Crab (Uca spp.) zoea and Mysid Shrimp also contributed to summer entrainment densities in June, July and August, while Mysid Shrimp were collected throughout the year. During the second year of sampling, depth-averaged monthly entrainment densities were similarly highest April to September (Figure 4-6) . These higher densities were attributed primarily to Fiddler Crab and Mud Crab zoea and megalopae in June, July, and August, Mysid shrimp in April through September, and juvenile Tellin Clams in April and August. Palaemonid Shrimp and zoea also contributed to summer entrainment densities in June, July, and August. Dominion Energy I 54
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 68 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station I Finfish 10,000
.,_ 8,000 E
0
~ 6,000 -~ 4,000 C:
Cl) 0 2,000 0 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr
- _i[LL May Jun Jul
- Year 1 (2015-201 6)
- Year 2 (2016-2017)
Shellfish 10,000
...- 8,000 E
0
~ 6,000 ~
f C 4, 000 G) C 2,000 0 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
- Year 1 (2015-2016)
- Year 2 (2016-2017)
Figure 4-6. Depth -averaged Total Entrainment Density (#/1 00 m 3 ) for Finfish and Shellfish Life Stage Combined at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 Based on data collected for Dominion Energy's 2015-2016 impingement study, rates of impingement were episodic for finfish . Mean sample densities topped 400 organisms/100,000 m3 five times during the study; January 21 , 2016, February 16, 2016, March 1, 2016, April 5, 201 6, and May 17, 2016 (Figure 4-7) . Minimal impingement occurred during the late summer to early winter. Bay Anchovy was impinged throughout the year but peak densities occurred in December, March, and April. Atlantic Croaker were impinged primarily in winter months, while peak Atlantic Menhaden impingement occurred in May, Blueback Herring in February, and Striped Bass in June. Shellfish impingement was driven by Grass Shrimp species which occurred primarily in late October. Blue Crab and Mud Crabs (Xanthoidea) exhibited a secondary peak in August (Figure 4-7). Dominion Energy I 55
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 69 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 1,800 Finfish _ 1,600 e o 1,400 0 0 g... 1,200
~ 1.000
~
'iii C 800 a,
C ca, 600 E a, 400 Cl C
'ii 200
.§ 0
8/1/15 9/1/15 10/1/15 11/1/15 12/1/15 1/1/16 2/1/16 3/1/16 4/1/16 5/1/16 6/1/16 7/1/16 8/1/16 Sample Date 1,800 Shellfish _ 1,600 "e o 1.400 0 0
...g 1.200
~ 1.000
~
'iii C 800 a,
C ca, 600 E a, 400 Cl C
'ii 200 .§ 0
8/1/15 9/1/15 10/1/15 11/1/15 12/1/15 1/1/16 2/1/16 3/1/16 4/1/16 5/1 /16 6/1/16 7/1/16 8/1/16 Sample Date Figure 4-7. Average(+/- Standard Error) Impingement Sample Density (#/100,000 m3 ) of all Taxa by Sample Date 4.5 Data Representative of Seasonal and Daily Activities of Organisms in the Vicinity of CWIS [§122.21 (r)(4)(v)] Fish that occur near the vicinity of the CWIS depend on a variety of habitats for their daily activities, although some species might be dependent on a specific type of habitat. Pelagic species, such as clupeids, anchovies, and Harvestfish form large schools in mid-water column in the open water, while littoral species such as silversides form dense schools that move along the shoreline or in beds of underwater grasses. The typical habitat preferred by littoral zone species includes vegetated areas, submerged woody debris (roots, logs), boulders, rocks, and artificial structure such as docks and piers. Some predators (i.e., Striped Bass) may utilize both the littoral and pelagic zones. Dominion Energy I 56
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 70 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Daily migrations, such as diel vertical migration (or water column migration), are typical for fish species that inhabit a tidal riverine environment. During a daily cycle, zooplankton and fish exhibit synchronized movements up and down in the water column (Brierley 2014) . Diel vertical migration in freshwater fish is primarily triggered by the diel change in light intensity. Declining light at dusk triggers the ascent to the surface, and increasing light at dawn triggers the return to deeper water (Mehner 2012). This is the typical pattern for many species; however, reverse migration can also occur. Additional triggers for vertical migration include hydrostatic pressure and water temperature, which may guide fish into particular limnological zones at night particularly during the season of stratification (Mehner 2012). Pelagic (open water) organisms use diel vertical migration to balance the competing objectives of growing quickly and minimizing predation risk. Nearly all taxa and life stages were collected at all three depth strata during the two-year entrainment sampling study at SPS and there were few consistent trends of entrainment rates by depth, with high variability by taxa and by month to month within the same taxa and life stage. Overall, slightly more organisms were collected at the near-surface compared to mid-depth . Looking at each group separately, finfish followed the trend of higher densities mid-depth while shellfish were collected in higher densities at near-surface samples. A review of diel densities of all finfish taxa indicate entrainment occurred primarily in the night and mid-morning hours . In contrast, shellfish densities were highest during the pre-dawn and night hours, followed by mid-morning. The diel pattern for finfish and shellfish was similar for near-surface, mid-depth, and near-bottom samples. Entrainment data was also reviewed for tidal influences. Finfish entrainment densities were substantially higher during the flood phase when high densities of Naked Gaby and Naked/Seaboard Gaby were collected at night. Shellfish densities were also highest during flood phase. Tellin Clam densities were substantially higher in the flood phase, with very low densities collected during the ebb phase while Fiddler Crab and Mysid Shrimp densities occurred primarily during the ebb tide in near-surface and mid-depth strata . Mud Crab zoea were collected during both ebb and flood phases, but densities were highest during flood phase. Variation in seasonal behavior is primarily associated with spawning activities. The James River is a primarily oligohaline tidally influenced coastal river; thus, there are numerous diadromous and estuarine fish species that may occur seasonally. For example, the anadromous American Shad, Blueback Herring, and Striped Bass enter the river to spawn each spring. Additionally, freshwater resident species, such as White Perch, may undergo short or local migrations for spawning and/or overwintering. Additionally, marine/estuarine species such as in the drum family (Atlantic Croaker) spawn in offshore waters but whose larvae drift into the bay and tributaries such as the James River for nursery habitat. This information is summarized in Table 4-4 (Section 4.3) for the species that may be present in James River in the vicinity of SPS. Based on the recent entrainment study conducted at SPS (HOR 201 Ba). finfish densities were highest during late spring and early summer months (May, June and July) while shellfish densities dominated during late spring through summer months (April to August) . This can be attributed to spawning activities of the major taxa, specifically fish in the goby and anchovy families, in the spring and Mysid Shrimp, Fiddler Crab, and Mud Crabs in summer. Dominion Energy I 57
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 71 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Based on the impingement study conducted in 2015 to 2016 (HOR 2018b), peak impingement was episodic and occurred primarily from winter through early summer. Bay Anchovy was impinged throughout the year but peak densities occurred in December, March, and April. Atlantic Croaker were impinged primarily in winter months, while peak Atlantic Menhaden impingement occurred in May, Blueback Herring in February, and Striped Bass in June. Shellfish impingement occurred primarily in late October with a secondary peak in August. Information on seasonal and daily activities for fish species known to occur near SPS is presented in Table 4-5. Dominion Energy I 58
Enclosure 2, Page 72 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Table 4-5. Seasonal and Daily Activities of Organisms in the Vicinity of the Surry Power Station Cooling Water Intake Structure Common Family Scientific Name Seasonal Activities/Spawning Migration Dally Activities/Migration/Habitat Name Finfish Spawning occurs late in the evening from late April through Pelagic schooling species inhabiting lower September, with a peak in July. Females may spawn up to 50 freshwater and estuarine reaches of coastal rivers, Anchovy Bay Anchovy Anchoa mitchilli times each season, producing more than 1,000 eggs in each bays, sound, and high salinity near shore marine batch. Eggs typically hatch within 24 hours and growth occurs waters. It usually occurs in shallow waters. Feeds rapidly, with fish maturing a few months after hatching. mostly on zooplankton. A benthic species that prefers sandy or muddy Spawning occurs in oceanic over the continental shelf from areas in shallow or deep water. They move to Atlantic July to February, with a peak in August to October. Beginning Drum Micropogonias deeper parts of tidal rivers for the winter. Juveniles in August, young larvae drift into the Chesapeake Bay with Croaker undulatus leave the Chesapeake Bay with the adults the coastal currents and travel to low-salinity and freshwater following autumn. Feed on the bottom, consuming creeks. worms, crustaceans, and small fish. A catadromous species. spawning occurs in the Sargasso Sea during winter. Larvae are transported to the Atlantic In freshwaters, eels are mostly nocturnal where Eel American Eel Anguilla rostrata coast by Gulf Stream where they move into freshwaters for at they swim and feed at night. Eels can move over least 3 years maturing. Mature Eels migrate back out to the moist surfaces if water levels are low. ocean where they return to spawn in the Sargasso Sea. Spawning occurs May to November. Females lay bundles of small eggs inside of empty oyster shells and males Year-round residents of tidal rivers and areas in Goby Naked Goby Gobiosoma bosc aggressively guard the eggs until they hatch. Free-swimming Chesapeake Bay. larvae may migrate upstream and school over oyster reefs before settling. The majority of spawning occurs primarily offshore during Adult and juvenile menhaden form large, near-winter. Buoyant eggs hatch at sea, and larvae are carried into Atlantic Brevoortia surface schools, primarily in estuaries and near Herring estuarine nursery areas by ocean currents. Juveniles spend Menhaden tyrannus shore ocean waters from early spring through early most of their first year in estuaries, migrating to the ocean in winter. Menhaden are very efficient filter feeders. late fall. Prefer brackish or salty water, but can tolerate changes in salinity. In the summer, they are Spawn in intertidal areas during the highest spring tide, laying Atlantic generally found in dense schools along the Silverside Menidia eggs along the sandy bottom of intertidal zone. Larvae hatch Silverside shoreline or in beds of underwater grasses. In the during the next highest tide. winter, they swim in deeper waters to avoid low temperatures. Dominion Energy I 59
Enclosure 2, Page 73 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal : §122 .21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Common Family Scientific Name Seasonal Activities/Spawning Migration Daily Activities/Migration/Habitat Name I Inhabit brackish tidal rivers and streams and freshwater impoundments of formerly tidal waters. White Perch spawn in tributaries of larger water bodies in During most of the year this species is found in Temperate Morone White Perch April and May. They release their adhesive eggs randomly shallow and moderate depths; it occupies deep Bass americana into shallow water over gravel and rocky areas. water in winter. A schooling fish, tending to spend daylight hours in deep water, moving into the shallows at dusk to feed . SHELLFISH Spawn from May through October in brackish waters of the Highly tolerant to temperature and salinity changes, middle Chesapeake Bay. After mating, females migrate into using variable habitats during the course of its saltier waters of the lower Chesapeake Bay. Hatched larvae lifecycle, with distribution based on age, sex and (zoea) are released into the water after about two weeks and Swimming Callinectes season. May be abundant in shallow waters and_ Blue Crab undergo multiple moltings, eventually returning ~o the Bay Crabs sapidus bay grass beds during the warmer months but will and estuaries. Zoea eventually metamorphose into a post-hibernate in the deeper water in winter. Excellent larval form (mega lopa) that become benthic inhabitants swimmers with specially adapted hind appendages moving into the upper Bay and rivers and undergo further shaped like paddles. metamorphosis into immature crabs. Three species of fiddler crabs inhabit Chesapeake Bay, Red-Jointed Fiddler (Uca minax), Marsh Fiddler (Uca pugnax) , and Sand Fiddler (Uca pugilator) . Fiddler Crabs mate every Typically found in marshes, beaches, and mu~ ~ats, two weeks during the summer. Females incubate their eggs depending on the species and tolerance to sahn_1ty. on their abdomen for about two weeks followed by release They create burrows in the sand or mud for mating, Fiddler and into the water when they hatch into free-swimming larvae Fiddler Crab Uca spp. sleeping, refuge, and hibernating during winter. . Ghost Crabs (zoea). Zoea are carried with ocean currents out into Active during the day, Fiddler Crabs return to their estuaries where they undergo several moltings, burrow at night and during high tide, plugging the metamorphosing to megalopa stage. The megalopa larvae burrow entrance with mud or sand. migrate back into coastal areas, using flood currents, befor~ undergoing the final changes to the adult form and a benth1c existence. Reproduction can occur throughout the summer when Commonly inhabit the muddy or sandy bottoms of females carry large broods of eggs on their abdomen. The marshes, *swamps, or oyster beds, and are Panopeidae is a planktonic larvae undergo multiple metamorphos_es as zoea sometimes found on jetty rocks, shell or cobble bars Mud Crabs Mud Crabs group under and undergo vertical migration using inward-flowing bottom where they excavate shallow burrows. They are Xanthoidea currents. The larvae metamorphose into megalopa larvae found throughout estuaries and brackish waters before taking on a more benthic habitat as juveniles and above 10 ppt. adults. Dominion Energy I 60
Enclosure 2, Page 74 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Common I Family Scientific Name Seasonal Activities/Spawning Migration Daily Activities/Migration/Habitat Name Spawning can occur from February through October depending on location, and typically occurs in summer in A diverse group inhabiting variable freshwater, Chesapeake Bay. Mating occurs within seven hours of estuarine, and marine environments; most species molting with the female carrying her fertilized eggs on her prefer areas with aquatic vegetation, especially pleopods. Females molt again after spawning, thereby Palaemonidae Grass Shrimp eelgrass beds, tidal marshes, oyster reef habitats or Palaemonetes producing another brood. Larvae rapidly mature at other structures such as oyster shell, woody debris, approximately 1.5 to 2 months old and typically spawn late in and docks or pilings. Inhabit very shallow areas the fall of their first year as adults. Post larvae that survive fall near their margins, and have been reported at and winter spawn the following spring while older, depths as great as 15.2 meters (50 feet) . overwintering individuals usually spawn early in the year and die by the following winter. Sources: CBP 2018; MDNR 2018; VDGIF 2018a; Froese and Pauly 2018; NatureServe 201 7; USFWS 201 5; SMSFP 2009; Lippson and Lippson 2006; Epifania et al. 1988; Herman 1963 Dominion Energy I 61
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 75 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal : §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 4.6 Identification of Threatened , Endangered, and Other Protected Species Susceptible to Impingement and Entrainment at CWIS [§122.21 (r)(4)(vi)] The Rule requires that the permittee document the presence of federally listed species and designated critical habitat in the Action Area (see 40 CFR 125.95[f]). The USEPA consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (or together, the Services) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) during development of the Rule and the Services concluded that the Rule is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat (USFWS and NMFS 2014). The Rule requires that facilities identify all federally listed threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat that are or may be present "in the vicinity of impingement and entrainment at the cooling water intake structure" in §122.21(r)(4) . This section provides a review of listed species associated with SPS . The Rule states that the Action Area can "generally be considered the area in the vicinity of impingement and entrainment at the cooling water intake structure" (79 Federal Register 48363) (e.g ., an area analogous to the zone of hydraulic influence of the intake structure) . Under the ESA, the Action Area is defined more expansively, and in their Biological Opinion on the Rule (USFWS and NMFS 2014), the Services included areas indirectly affected by the CWIS. This document will use the Services' broader definition as the Action Area to identify the full set of federally listed species that might be directly or indirectly affected by the CWIS, including those which occur within the portions of the receiving water potentially affected by the thermal discharge, CWIS AOI, and the power station footprint/property boundary. This is consistent with the Action Area defined by Services' representatives at a §316(b)-focused conference held in 2014 (Figure 4-8; Tortorici and Ashfield 2014). Based on the Services' guidance, the SPS Action Area is conservatively defined as all areas potentially directly or indirectly affected by the SPS CWIS, and the CWIS AOI, the cooling water discharge and the facilities upland boundaries. These are described in the following paragraphs. The CWIS AOI has been calculated as a conservative zone of hydraulic influence (i.e., it errs on the side of overestimating the size of the AOI) and is used to define the Action Area but not necessarily the area of direct impacts on fish. Fish can occur in the AOI and avoid the CWIS or not be withdrawn by the facility. The AOI is calculated based on conservative assumptions including that ambient velocity is zero and low water depth, and thus represents the maximum areal extent associated with the evaluated thresholds velocities described below. Based on these conservative calculations, the impingement AOI can be represented as a semi -circle with a radius of 118 feet originating at the center of the CWIS (see Section 2.2.3) . The entrainment AOI of non-motile and limited mobility life stages such as eggs and larvae is represented as a rectangular area ranging from 4,723 feet long and 611 feet wide to 14,170 feet long and 1,834 feet wide, originating at the center of the CWIS (see Section 2.2.3) . Dominion Energy I 62
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 76 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal : §1 22 .21 (r)(2) -(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ ESA Aspects of the Rule Action Area Source: Tortorici and Ashfield 2014 Figure 4-8. Service-Defined Action Area The SPS circulating water system was designed with the optimum discharge, location, configuration, and exit velocity to facilitate rapid mixing with ambient estuarine waters and reduce the size of the thermal mixing zone. Five years of thermal monitoring (2 years pre-operational and 3 years post-operational) indicated the surface plume usually affected less than 30 percent of the river in the survey area adjacent to the discharge point and plume temperatures greater than 0.6°C above ambient never crossed the entire width of the river at its narrowest point (i.e. , at Hog Point). Further, NMFS (2012a) stated that:
"Based on the available information, the largest area measured with increased water temperatures extended 2,000 feet from the outfall and 6-feet down from the surface. "
A Section 316(a) thermal variance Type 1 demonstration study conducted from 1969 through 1976 (although sampling period varied for each trophic group of organisms) supported the conclusion that the heated effluent from SPS caused no appreciable harm to the aquatic ecosystem based on the following results (VEPCO 1977):
- Finfish communities remained stable throughout the sampling period but demonstrated natural variability.
- Thermal discharge was determined not to form a barrier for anadromous fish such as Blueback Herring (Alosa aestivalis) .
- Few eggs and larvae were collected in near SPS; centers of spawning are known to occur upstream and downstream of SPS.
- Eggs and larvae present were found not to be entrained in the thermal plume.
- Benthos and fouling organisms have not been harmed by the thermal effluent; fouling organisms show low species diversity and seasonal variability associated with this transitional zone.
Dominion Energy I 63
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 77 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Phytoplankton and zooplankton demonstrated seasonal shifts unrelated to the thermal plume. However, there was a slight shift in community structure in and directly outside the discharge canal. This was determined to be related to pumping operations across the peninsula . Based on this information, the area considered to be indirectly affected by the cooling water discharge is "2,000 feet from the outfall and 6-feet down from the surface. " (NMFS 2012a) The SPS property extends no more than 1.5 mile in any direction from the CWIS. Additionally, the Low-level cooling water intake is approximately 2 miles from the cooling water discharge overland or approximately 6 river miles (area of potential indirect effects). The area potentially affected by the cooling water discharge is defined by an increase in temperature over ambient conditions. Under VPDES Permit VA0004090, SPS has a thermal variance under Section §316(a) of the CWA. These provisions in the VPDES permit assure the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous community of shellfish, fish, and wildlife in the James River. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) (Undated) recommends a default listed species search area with a 2-mile radius centered at the point of action. Based on the three factors defining the Action Area above, the search area exceeds that default recommendation . The VDGIF Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information System (VAFWIS) and USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC) database search areas presented in Figures 4-9 and 4-10, respectively, were selected as representative of the action area for purposes of conducting the species search. The search areas encompass the thermal mixing zone, the AOI, and the SPS property boundaries. In order to encompass these areas, the listed species search radius was expanded from the 2-mile search radius recommended by VDGIF to 3 miles. II u1g1m~I GolCl1Jb I
--- Fo r Map Source: USFWS 2018b Note: Map not to scale. Search area is a circle with approximately a 3-mile radius around Surry Power Station.
Figure 4-9. Information, Planning, and Conservation Database Search Area Dominion Energy I 64
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 78 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Map Source: VDGIF 2018b Note: Map not to scale. Outer circle is a 3-mile radius around Surry Power Station. Figure 4-10. Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information System Database Search Area To develop a list of federally listed species and critical habitat under USFWS jurisdiction, known or likely to occur within the three-mile radius Action Area of the SPS CWIS described above, the USFWS IPAC System (USFWS 2018b) was consulted on October 9, 2018 (see Appendix C for the resulting report) (Table 4-6). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ESA Section 7 Mapper (NOAA 2018a) was consulted on October 19, 2018, to develop a list of federally listed marine species and critical habitat under NMFS jurisdiction that are known or likely to occur in the Action Area (NMFS 2018). The results were compared to scientific literature and other documents, including a NMFS Biological Opinion and Letter of Concurrence for projects proposed to occur near the vicinity of the CWIS, including those related directly to SPS (NMFS 2012a and NFMS 2012b). Those documents were used to confirm that marine species under the jurisdiction of NMFS were appropriately considered in Table 4-6. The VDGIF VAFWIS database (VDGIF 2018b) was consulted on October 9, 2018, to determine the state-listed species that have the potential to occur in the Action Area (see Appendix C) . In cases where the VAFWIS was more inclusive of federally listed species than the USFWS IPAC and NMFS queries, the USFWS and NMFS authorities were given priority. Available information on federally listed species that were included in the VAFWIS list, but not the US FWS or NMFS list, were further reviewed to determine if appropriate to include in Table 4-6. Species under USFWS oversight excluded for this reason include Red Cockaded Woodpecker, Piping Plover, and Red Knot. These species are not included on the USFWS threatened and endangered Dominion Energy I 65
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 79 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station species list for Surry County (USFWS 201 Bb) . Additionally, VDGIF (2018b) indicates that there are no confirmed observations of these species in the Action Area . Species under NMFS jurisdiction excluded for this reason include Loggerhead, Kemp's Ridley, and Leatherback sea turtles. NMFS (2012a) states, "Several species of listed sea turtles occur seasonally in Chesapeake Bay and may be present near the confluence of the James River; however, none of these species occurs in the Action Area. " VDGIF (2018b) also indicates that there are no confirmed observations of these species in the Action Area .
Note that only federally and state-threatened and endangered species were included in Table 4-
- 6. Federal species of concern and candidate species were omitted from the list (unless they were also state-threatened or endangered), because there are no requirements to address those species under the Section 7 of the ESA.
The following is a summary of the materials that were reviewed to develop the species list in Table 4-6:
- IPAC (http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/) (USFWS 2018b)
- VAFWIS (http://vafwis.org/fwis/) (VDGIF 2018b)
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ESA Section 7 Mapper (NOAA 2018a)
- Endangered and Threatened Species Under NMFS' Jurisdiction (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm) (NMFS 2018)
- Letter of concurrence, from Mr. D.M. Morris, NMFS, to Ms. Amy Hull, Nuclear Regulatory Commission that continued operation Surry Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 is not likely to adversely affect species listed by NMFS (NMFS 2012a)
- Biological Opinion of James River Federal Navigation Project: Tribell Shoal Channel to Richmond Harbor in Surry, James City, Prince George, Charles City, Henrico, and Chesterfield counties and the Cities of Richmond and Hopewell, Virginia (FINER/2012/01183) (NMFS 2012b)
Dominion Energy I 66
" " ' ' - ' ' 1',AI I*-* - - -VV Enclosure 2, Page 80 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Table 4-6. Federal and State-threatened and Endangered Species with the Potential to Occur within Surry Power Station Action Area Common Name Scientific Name 1111 Potential to Occur In the Action Area Fish Potential for Entrainment and/or Impingement Early life stages - Unlikely. spawning occurs in the Unlikely potential for impingement Atlantic Sturgeona,b Acipenser FE, SE, James River upstream of the AOI. or entrainment. See text for oxyrinchus CH Adults and Juveniles - Likel/ additional discussion. Critical habitat present Adults- There was a report of a single Shortnose Sturgeon in the James River RM (river mile) 30 in 2016. Unlikely potential for impingement This was the first reported occurrence in Virginia waters or entrainment. Available Shortnose Acipenser in the past 100 years aside from the two reports at the information indicates Shortnose Sturgeonb FE, SE brevirostrum mouth of the Rappahannock River noted previously Sturgeon are rare in the lower (Personal Communication Dr. Matt Balazik, VDGIF Chesapeake Bay and in the James 2018c). In 2018 a second Shortnose Sturgeon was River. reported from the James River RM 30 (NOAA 2018b) No - Freshwater species; only known to exist in the No potential for impingement or Blackbanded Enneacanthus Sunfisha SE Chowan River drainaged and not expected in the action entrainment impacts. chaetodon area. Reptiles No - habitat is interdunal ponds and sinkhole Eastern Chicken Deirochelys No potential for impingement or SE complexes that experience seasonal water Turtle8 reticularia entrainment impacts. fluctuationse. Canebrake No potential for impingement or Crotalus horridus SE II Preferred habitat is forested. Rattlesnakea entrainment impacts. Amphibians Eastern Tiger Ambystoma No - aquatic habitats include ditches, vernal ponds, and No potential for impingement or SE II Salamander8 tigrinum rarely, sluggish streams1. entrainment impacts. No - fish-free vernal ponds or ephemeral coastal plain Mabee's Ambystoma No potential for impingement or ST II sinkholes up to 1.5 meters deep, with surrounding Salamander8 mabeei entrainment impacts. forests9
- No - breeds in cypress ponds and bays, and in pine No potential for impingement or barren ponds; open canopied ponds; all Virginia Barking Treefroga Hy/a gratiosa ST II entrainment impacts.
breeding sites were found in graminoid dominated temporary pondsh. Dominion Energy I 67
Enclosure 2, Page 81 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal : §122 .21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
I Common Name Peregrine Falcon3 Scientific Name Falco peregrinus ST Potential to Occur In the Action Area Birds Terrestrial species that preys primarily on other birds and bats - no nexus with CWIS or thermal discharge. Potential for Entrainment and/or Impingement No potential for impingement or entrainment impacts. Suitable habitat includes short grasses and forbs Lanius interspersed with perching locations for hunting and No potential for impingement or Loggerhead Shrikea ST ludovicianus shrubs/small trees for nesting - no nexus with the entrainment impacts. CWIS or thermal discharge. This species inhabits large, fl at fields with no woody Ammodramus plants, and with tall, dense grass. a dense litter layer, No potential for impingement or Henslow's Sparrow" ST henslowii and standing dead vegetation - no nexus with the entra inment impacts. CWIS or thermal discharg e. Suitable habitat includes short grasses and forbs Lanius Migrant Loggerhead interspersed with perching locations for hunting and No potential for impingement or ludovicianus ST Shrikea shrubs/small trees for nesting - no nexus with the entrainment impacts. migrans CWIS or thermal discharge. Suitable habitat includes dry fields, brackish marshes Lateral/us and the drier parts of the salt marsh. rare in fresh water No potential for impingement or Black Rail 3 SE jamaicensis marshes - no nexus with the CWIS or thermal entrainment impacts. discharge. Mammals This species primarily flies through the understory of Northern Long- Myotis No potentia l for impingement or Eared Bata.c FT forested areas feeding on invertebrates - no nexus to septentrionalis entrainment impacts. the CWIS or thermal discharge. This species uses a wide range of habitats that often include use of human-made structures for resting and No potential for impingement or Little Brown Bat 3 Myotis lucifugus SE maternity sites. They also use caves and hollow trees' - entrainment impacts. no nexus to the CWIS or thermal discharge. This species roosts singly, in small clusters, or groups to 100 or more in hollow trees. under loose bark, Corynorhinus No potential for impingement or Rafinesque's Bat3 SE houses. unoccupied buildings. and culverts; feeds rafinesquii macrotis entrainment impacts. primarily on moths - no nexus with the CWIS or thermal discharge. Dominion Energy I 68
Enclosure 2, Page 82 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
I Common Name Tri-colored Bat8 Scientific Name Perimyotis subflavus SE Potential to Occur in the Action Area This species is associated with forested landscapes, where they forage near trees and along waterways. Maternity and summer roosts are in dead or live tree foliage; caves, .mines, and rock crevices may be used Potential for Entrainment and/or Impingement No potential for impingement or entrainment impacts. as night roosts' - no nexus with the CWIS or thermal discharge. FE = Federally Endangered l=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier I - Critical Conservation Need FT = Federally Threatened ll =VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier II - Very High Conservation Need SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened CH = Critical Habitat Source: 8 VDGIF 2018a, bNMFS 2018, cUSFWS 2018b, dKercher 2006, 0 VDGIF 201 4a, 1VDGIF 2014b, 9 VDGIF 201 4c, hVDGIF 2014d, and ;NatureServe 2017 Note: 1While not associated with the SPS CWIS, land clearing activities associated with construction and maintenance have the potential to impact this species and its habitat. if present in the Action Area. Dominion Energy I 69
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 83 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Most of the species listed in Table 4-6 are terrestrial species and (1) do not have a nexus with the CWIS or (2) occur in habitats that are not in the vicinity of the SPS CWIS and thus are not subject to potential entrainment or impingement at the facility or the thermal plume. Additional literature was reviewed to identify aquatic species that do not occur near the CWIS and therefore should be eliminated from further consideration; these documents are cited in Table 4-6. Based on this review, the only federally listed and state-listed species to potentially occur in the Action Area are the Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon . These species were retained for further analysis below. Atlantic Sturgeon. The risk of impingement and entrainment of Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus) at SPS is low. While Atlantic Sturgeon spawn in the James River, their spawning grounds are located at least 50 miles upstream of the SPS intake with a second area of seemingly suitable habitat located approximately 25 miles upstream (NMFS 2012a) . Atlantic Sturgeon originating from the New York Bight. Chesapeake Bay, South Atlantic and Carolina Distinct Population Segments (DPSs) are listed as federally endangered . Those originating from the Gulf of Maine DPS are listed as federally threatened. Atlantic Sturgeon from these five DPSs have the potential to occur in the James River and the vicinity of the SPS CWIS; however, the majority of the spawning adults are likely to originate from the Chesapeake Bay DPS. The marine range of all five DPSs extends along the Atlantic coast from Canada to Cape Canaveral, Florida (NMFS 2012a). The Chesapeake DPS of Atlantic Sturgeon includes all anadromous Atlantic Sturgeon that are spawned in the watersheds that drain into the Chesapeake Bay and into coastal waters from the Delaware-Maryland border on Fenwick Island to Cape Henry, Virginia (NMFS 2012a). The Atlantic Sturgeon is a long-lived, late-maturing, estuarine dependent, anadromous species. Adults spend most of their life in the marine environment but migrate upriver in the spring/early summer to spawn . Spawning is expected to occur during April through June (temperatures for spawning can range from 13-26°C); however, strong empirical evidence suggests that spawning also occurs in the fall (Balazik et al. 2012; Secor et al. 2000; Balazik and Musick 2015), and in October 2018 several young of year Atlantic Sturgeon were collected from the James River approximately 25 miles upstream of SPS (Lynn Lankshear, NMFS, personal communication) . Atlantic Sturgeon spawning is believed to occur in flowing water between the salt front and fall line of large rivers. where optimal flows are 46-76 cm/second with depths of 11-27 m. Atlantic Sturgeon likely do not spawn every year; multiple studies have shown that spawning intervals range from 1-5 years for males and 2-5 years for females. Sturgeon eggs are adhesive and demersal and occur only on the spawning grounds (Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928). Eggs typically hatch in 4 to 7 days depending on water temperature (Gilbert 1989; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928). At hatching, Atlantic Sturgeon larvae are large bodied (e.g. , 7 .8 mm total Dominion Energy I 70
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 84 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ length [Smith 1980 and 1981 as cited in NMFS 2012a]) and are assumed to undertake a demersal existence in the same areas where they were spawned (ASMFC 2012; Bath et al. 1981). Following yolk sac absorption, larvae move downstream to rearing grounds. During the day, larvae use benthic structure (e.g., gravel matrix) as refugia . During the latter half of migration when larvae are more fully developed, movement to rearing grounds occurs both day and night. Late-stage larvae transition into the juvenile phase as they move downstream into brackish waters and take up residence in estuarine waters (ASMFC 2012). Snyder {1988) reports that Atlantic Sturgeon complete yolk absorption by 13-14 mm standard length in 6-7 days. Larvae transition into the juvenile phase at approximately 30 mm total length (Bain 1997). Subadult Atlantic Sturgeon (greater than 50 cm but not yet sexually mature) swim among coastal and estuarine habitats, undergoing rapid growth. These migratory subadults, as well as adult sturgeon, are normally captured in shallow (10-50 m) nearshore areas dominated by gravel and sand substrate. Despite extensive migration in coastal waters, Atlantic Sturgeon return to their natal river to spawn as indicated from tagging records and the relatively low rates of gene flow reported in population genetic studies. Juveniles, sub-adults, and adults could occur in the Action Area (NMFS 2012a). Telemetry data and collection of ripe and running adults indicate that spring spawning occurs downstream of river mile (RM) 67 which is more than 40 miles from SPS. Additionally, empirical evidence suggests that spawning occurs in the fall upstream of RM 67 (Balazik et al. 2012; Balazik and Musick 2015) . Adults and subadults move through the action area as they move to spawning grounds upstream of SPS and overwintering habitat consisting of deep water areas located within and downstream of the action area (Hager et al. 2014). While Atlantic Sturgeon were not collected during the SPS impingement studies from 197 4 to 1983, entrainment studies from 1970-1978 or 2005-2006, 2005-2006 ambient ichthyoplankton study, or 2005-2006 trawl or seine study, four Atlantic Sturgeon were collected in the ambient trawl sampling from 1970-1978, indicating that juvenile or adult sturgeon have the potential to occur in the vicinity of the facility (VEPCO 1980). More recently, tracking studies by Hager (2011) and Balazik et al. (2012) indicate adult Atlantic Sturgeon may be in the vicinity of SPS from April through November. Impingement occurs when a fish cannot swim fast enough to escape the intake (e.g., the fish's swimming ability is overtaken by the velocity of water being drawn into the intake) . AOI calculations indicate that a threshold velocity for SPS CWIS of 0.5 fps can be conservatively represented as a semi-circle with a radius of 118 feet centered at the intake. In order for impingement to occur, a fish must be overcome by the intake or approach velocity. Shortnose Sturgeon, while not expected to occur in the vicinity of the SPS intake, are well studied and have swimming capabilities expected to be representative of Atlantic Sturgeon. Juvenile and adult Shortnose Sturgeon (body lengths greater than 58.1 cm) can avoid impingement at intakes with velocities as high as 3.0 fps (Kynard et al. 2005 as cited in NMFS 2012a). Shortnose Sturgeon with body lengths greater than 28 cm have been demonstrated to have the ability to avoid impingement at intakes with velocities of 1.0 fps (Kynard et al. 2005 as cited in NMFS 2012a). Assuming that Atlantic Sturgeon have swimming capabilities at least equal to Shortnose Sturgeon, Atlantic Sturgeon in the vicinity of the SPS, should also be able to avoid Dominion Energy I 71
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 85 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station becoming impinged on trash racks and intake screens. This is a reasonable assumption given that the Atlantic Sturgeon that would be present in the vicinity of the intake are at least of a similar size to the juvenile and adult Shortnose Sturgeon tested by Kynard et al. (2005 as cited in NMFS 2012b), and because these species have similar body forms. Based on the available data, impingement of Atlantic Sturgeon is unlikely and not expected to occur at SPS. Furthermore, as described in previous paragraphs, Atlantic Sturgeon have never been collected in impingement samples and no records of impinged sturgeon at SPS exist to date (VEPCO 1980). Critical habitat for all five DPSs was designated by NMFS on August 17, 2017 (82 FR 39239) . Within the Chesapeake Bay DPS and specifically the James River, critical habitat has been designated for the James River from Boshers Dam downstream to where the main stem river discharges at its mouth into the Chesapeake Bay at Hampton Roads (82 FR 39248) . Occupied critical habitat is designated based on the physical features essential to the conservation of the species that may require special management considerations or protections. Physical features within this boundary. which NMFS designated as essential for the conservation of Atlantic Sturgeon in the Chesapeake Bay (82 FR 39239) , include:
- Hard bottom substrate (e.g., rock, cobble, gravel. limestone, boulder, etc.) in low salinity waters (i.e .. 0.0- 0.5 ppt range) for settlement of fertilized eggs, refuge, growth, and development of early life stages;
- Aquatic habitat with a gradual downstream salinity gradient of 0.5 up to as high as 30 parts per thousand and soft substrate (e.g., sand, mud) between the river mouth and spawn ing sites for juvenile foraging and physiological development;
- Water of appropriate depth and absent physical barriers to passage (e.g., locks, dams, therma l plumes, turbidity, sound, reservoirs. gear, etc.) between the river mouth and spawning sites necessary to support: (i) Unimpeded movement of adults to and from spawning sites; (ii) Seasonal and physiologically dependent movement of juvenile Atlantic sturgeon to appropriate salinity zones within the river estuary; and (iii) Staging, resting, or holding of subadults or spawning cond ition adults. Water depths in main river channels must also be deep enough (e.g., at least 1.2 meters) to ensure continuous flow in the main channel at all times when any sturgeon life stage would be in the river;
- Water, between the river mouth and spawning sites, especially in the bottom meter of the water column. with the temperature, salinity, and oxygen values that. combined, support: (i) Spawning; (ii) Annua l and interannual adult. subadult. larval, and juvenile survival; and (iii) Larval, juvenile. and subadult growth, development, and recruitment (e.g., 13 to 26°C for spawning habitat and no more than 30°C for juvenile rearing habitat.
and 6 milligrams per liter (mg/L) or greater dissolved oxygen for juvenile rearing habitat) . NMFS (2012a) considered the potential for Atlantic Sturgeon to avoid the thermal plume at SPS and concluded that that Atlantic Sturgeon are likely to seek refuge in deep cool areas outside of the thermal plume and Action Area. Additionally, the thermal plume does not extend more than Dominion Energy I 72
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 86 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ halfway across the river, thereby allowing fish passage. NMFS (2012a) concluded that changes in behavior would not preclude Atlantic Sturgeon from "completing any essential behaviors such as resting, foraging or migrating or that the fitness of any individuals will be affected. Additionally, there is not expected to be any increase in energy expenditure that has any detectable effect on the physiology of any individuals or any future effect on growth, reproduction, or general health ." Therefore, direct and/or indirect effects to critical habitat in the vicinity of the SPS CWIS from cooling water discharge are considered insignificant. Shortnose Sturgeon. The risk of impingement and entrainment of Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) at SPS is low. In March 2016, a single Shortnose Sturgeon was collected from the James River at RM 30 (Balazik 2017) . This was the first verified occurrence of a Shortnose Sturgeon in the James River. The fish was collected as part of a Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) program monitoring Atlantic Sturgeon under NOAA endangered species permit No. 16547. Species identification was verified by genetic analysis by the USGS Leetown, West Virginia , Science Center (Balazik 2017) . In February 2018, a second Shortnose Sturgeon (a confirmed gravid female) was captured near RM 30 (NOAA 201 Bb) . This species is federally and state-listed as endangered . Critical habitat has not been designated for Shortnose Sturgeon (NOAA 201 Bc).Shortnose Sturgeon are similar in appearance to Atlantic Sturgeon, but can be distinguished by their smaller size, larger mouth, smaller snout shape, and scutes (Kynard et al. 2016) . The two species have a close lineage, are bottom-oriented, are morphologically similar, exhibit similar feeding behaviors, make spawning migrations, and spawn in similar habitats. The greatest distinction between the two is Atlantic Sturgeon make coastal migrations, whereas the Shortnose Sturgeon tend to remain restricted to its natal river. Kynard et al. (2016) details the life stages found and adult abundance in rivers throughout its range. Absent from Kynard 's discussion is the Chesapeake Bay drainage, which indicates that there is not a known reproducing population within Chesapeake Bay. The Shortnose Sturgeon captured from the James River in 2016 is hypothesized to have been a colonizing or roaming fish from the Potomac River (about 47 miles away) , or the Delaware River (about 220 miles away), that entered the system through the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal (Balazik 2017) . Shortnose Sturgeon are amphidromous fish . They live in their birth (natal) river, make short feeding or migratory trips into salt water, and then return to freshwater to feed and escape predation. When they do enter marine waters, they generally stay close to shore. In the spring, adults move far upstream and away from salt water to spawn . After spawning, the adults move rapidly back downstream to the estuaries, where they feed, rest, and spend most of their time (NOAA 201 Bb) . There is little evidence for spawning Shortnose Sturgeon populations within the Chesapeake Bay (Kynard et al. 2016) . Early life stage Shortnose Sturgeon are restricted to freshwater habitats. Yearling movements are not very well understood given the lack of telemetered fish studied . Shortnose Sturgeon at all life stages appear to follow the channel during any upstream or downstream migrations. The most suitable spawning habitat is considered to be the most upstream river reach used by Shortnose Sturgeon (Kynard et al. Dominion Energy I 73
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 87 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 2016) . Shortnose Sturgeon early life stages also are very intolerant to salinities of 5-1 O ppt until they are about 300 days of age. A number of factors indicate the risk of entrainment or impingement of Shortnose Sturgeon is low. There have only been two documented occurrences of Shortnose Sturgeon in the James River, despite regular and frequent fish collection surveys. The rarity of the fish alone indicates there is low probability for encounters. With regards to entrainment of early life stages, suitable spawning habitat for Shortnose Sturgeon is at least 50 miles upstream of SPS, and SPS occurs in a section of the James River with mixed salinity, which young fish would be expected to avoid. With regards to impingement, advanced juvenile and adult Shortnose Sturgeon are strong swimmers, and the previous discussion regarding their swimming ability with respect to the potential for Atlantic Sturgeon impingement indicates that it is unlikely a healthy sturgeon, of either species, would be impinged at SPS. 4.7 Documentation of Consultation with Services [§122.21 (r)(4)(vii)] The Nuclear Regulatory Commission initiated Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation with NMFS in 201 2, following the listing of the Chesapeake Bay DPS of Atlantic Sturgeon as endangered . NMFS (2012a) reviewed a variety of materials as part of the consultation, and concluded " ... based on information from NRC, Dominion Energy, and other sources, all effects to listed species will be insignificant or discountable. Therefore, the continued operation of SPS Units 1 and 2 is not likely to adversely affect any listed species under NMFS jurisdiction ." This conclusion was documented in a letter of concurrence, from Mr. D.M. Morris, NMFS, to Ms. Amy Hull, Nuclear Regulatory Commission that continued operation Surry Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 is not likely to adversely affect species listed by NMFS (NMFS 2012a) . Virginia Department of Environmental Quality initiated coordination with Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation on September 27, 2012 . OCR responded on October 22, 2012 stating that they do not anticipate that the permit reissuance will adversely impact natural heritage resources or state-listed threatened or endangered plant and insect species (VPDES Permit VA0004090) . 4.8 Methods and QA Procedures for Field Efforts [§122.21 (r)(4)(viii)] Methods and quality assurance (QA) procedures for the biological baseline characterization data referenced in Section 4 are documented in each of the relevant reports. 4.9 Definition of Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data [§122.21 (r)(4)(ix)] Data were provided to address §122 .21 (r)(4)(i) - (viii) and (x) - (xii} , and there is no required submittal under subsection §122.21 (r)(4)(ix) . Dominion Energy I 74
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 88 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 4.10 Identification of Protective Measures and Stabilization Activities [§122.21 {r)(4){x) Dominion Energy is not aware of any activities that have been pursued in the James River near SPS that might qualify as protective measures or stabilization activities. 4.11 List of Fragile Species [§122.21 {r)(4){xi)] In the Rule, USEPA identifies 14 species (§125.92(m)) as fragile or having post-impingement survival rates of less than 30 percent, including:
- Alewife
- American Shad
- Atlantic Herring
- Bay Anchovy
- Blueback Herring
- Bluefish
- Butterfish
- Gizzard Shad
- Grey Snapper
- Hickory Shad
- Menhaden
- Rainbow Smelt
- Round Herring
- Silver Anchovy Based on recent studies, eight species from the fragile species list are found in the James River in the vicinity of SPS, comprising Alewife, Blueback Herring, Butterfish, Atlantic Menhaden, Bay Anchovy, Gizzard Shad, Gray Snapper, and Hickory Shad. Additionally, Threadfin Shad, a closely related species to Gizzard Shad, is likely to have similar survival rates.
4.12 Information Submitted to Obtain Incidental Take Exemption or Authorization from Services [§122.21 {r)(4){xii)] The operation of SPS is not likely to result in adverse effects on federally listed species (see Section 4.7) (NMFS 2012a) . For this reason neither Dominion Energy nor the NRC have sought or obtained an incidental take exemption or authorization for SPS's CWIS from the USFWS or NMFS . Dominion Energy I 75
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 89 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 5 Cooling Water System Data [§122.21 (r){5)] 5.1 Description of Cooling Water System Operation [§122.21 (r){S){i)] SPS contains two identical nuclear powered steam electric units. Each unit includes a closed-cycle three-coolant-loop, pressurized light-water-moderated reactor nuclear steam supply system, a turbine generator, and auxiliary equipment. The heat generated by each reactor is transferred through three separate closed-cycle loops (the primary system) to three steam generators. The steam generators in turn utilize the heat from the primary system to produce steam . The steam is transferred though the closed-cycle secondary coolant loops to the steam turbines and drives the generators to produce electricity. After passing through the turbines, the spent steam is condensed with cooling water from the James River and return to the steam generator to repeat the cycle (Figure 5- 1). STEAM GENERATORS GENERATOR ] ELECTRICAL OUTPUT "s~~; l PRIMARY
- REACTOR FROM RIVER DISCHARGE TO ED PRIMARY COOLANT WATER RIVER llfl SECONDARY COOLANT WATER Im SECONDARY COOLANT STEAM CJ JAMES RIVER COOLING WATER Source: VEPCO 1980 Figure 5-1 . Simplified Flow Diagram of Steam-electric System of Generating Unit at Surry Power Station The once-through cooling water from the James River is used to dissipate waste heat from the turbine condensers and from the plant service water system (Figure 5-2) . The heat dissipating or circulating water system is designed to provide once-through cooling water for both units. The Dominion Energy I 76
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 90 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ cooling water system comprises a dredged river inlet channel, a Low-level intake structure consisting of eight traveling screens and eight circulating pumps, a High-level elevated intake canal. a High-level intake structure with eight conventional traveling screens per unit, a once-through condenser system for each unit a sea-level discharge canal, and a rock groin mixing structure extending into the James River. The water used for cooling is taken from the James River on the downstream side of the Low-level intake structure, pumped into the high-level canal, transported (by gravity) throughout the station condensers, and discharged into the James River on the upstream side. HIGH-LEVEL INTAKE STRUCTURE I I I I I I FROM RIVER t HIGH-LEVEL INTAKE CANAL t I I LEGEND I - - OPERATION I - - - SHUT DOWN I I I I I I I DISCHARGE CANAL f I I I
, UNIT 2 SO_!'lDENSERS TO RIVER HIGH-LEVEL INTAKE STRUCTURE Source: Modified from VEPCO 1980 Figure 5-2. Simplified Flow Diagram of Heat Dissipating System at Surry Power Station Dominion Energy I 77
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 91 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 5.1.1 Operation of Cooling Water System The circulating water is withdrawn from the James River through the Low-level intake structure. The circulating water system at SPS provides cooling water for the main condensers and the service water systems of both units. Each unit requires 840,000 gpm of river water to supply condensing and service water needs. To provide operational flexibility, system reliability, and station economy, the water requirement for each unit is supplied by four 220,000-gpm pumps. Each circulating water pump discharge line is a 96-inch diameter steel pipe that conveys the water over the embankment of and into the High-level intake canal. The High-level intake canal is about 1.7 miles long and is designed to convey the circulating water flow to the station. The canal is paved with 4.5 inches of reinforced concrete to allow velocities that would otherwise erode the earthen materials through which the canal is constructed . A reinforced -concrete, High-level intake structure is located in the High-level intake canal at each unit. Each structure contains four bays, and each bay contains a trash rack, a conventional traveling screen, and an inlet to a 96-inch-diameter condenser intake line. The circulating water flows by gravity from the High-level intake canal through four buried parallel lines to each condenser and then through four separate lines to a concrete tunnel for each unit. The tunnels terminate at seal pits located at the edge of the circulating water discharge canal, which is common to both units. Service water system taps are made in the steel portion of these lines. Electric motor-operated butterfly valves are provided at the condenser inlets and outlets. The discharge lines terminate at the reinforced-concrete discharge tunnel. which then carries the water to the common circulating water discharge canal. This tunnel is 12 foot-6 inch by 12 foot-6 inch in cross section. The circulating water system total energy gradient in the discharge system is maintained at proper elevation to ensure a full condenser discharge water box by a seal weir at the termination of the discharge tunnel. 5.1.2 Temporal Characteristics of Cooling Water System Operation The generating units at SPS are base-load units and intended for year-round, 24 hours/day operation, with the exception of down time for planned refueling outages. The operation of the generating units and cooling water system result in cooling water demand and, consequently, operation of circulating water pumps. As presented in Table 3-2 in Section 3.3, the average number of days of circulating water pump operations by unit over the last five years ranged from 20 to 31 days each month during 2013-2017. Based_on the pump run time data, the cooling water system operates close to 24/7 during the summer (June to September) and at relatively lower levels during April-May and October-November months because of the typical unit refueling outage schedule. During the refueling outages, intake flow is reduced but the cooling water system is utilized to some degree at all times, particularly for safety related systems. Dominion Energy I 78
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 92 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 5.1.3 Proportion of Design Flow Used in the Cooling Water System One hundred percent of the water withdrawn is used for non-contact cooling purposes at SPS. The proportion of the design flow used in the cooling system was calculated based on monthly average daily intake flows during 2013-2017 (refer to Table 3-2) . The 2013-2017 Al F withdrawn from James River on a monthly basis was compared with the maximum DIF of 2,534.4 MGD (see Table 3-1). The proportion of the maximum design flow used in the cooling system ranged from 64 .7 percent to 89.4 percent with an average of 77.3 percent on a monthly basis during 2013-2017 (Table 5-1). Table 5-1. Percent (%) of Surry Power Station Design Flow vs. Actual Intake Flow used in Cooling Water System during 2013-2017 Year 2013-2017 Month Average January 77 .8 71.6 76.8 78.8 78.5 76.7 February 75.2 72.2 68.7 70.7 75.2 72.4 March 77.1 72.8 74.8 75.0 75.1 75.0 April 74.0 66.1 68.0 74.7 76.8 71.9 May 77.9 61 .9 55.6 75.0 53.2 64.7 June 87.1 86.7 83.5 84.8 86.3 85.7 July 89.3 90.6 86.4 90.9 89.8 89.4 August 82.6 88.9 89.6 89.7 90.3 88.2 September 87 .4 87.6 90.3 88.9 88.5 88.6 October 68.9 77.8 65.6 73 .3 76.3 72.4 November 60.3 70.1 43.2 73.7 79.0 65.3 December 71.9 78.8 75.5 82 .5 78.5 77.4 Annual 77.5 77.1 73.2 79.8 79.0 77.3 Average 5.1.4 Distribution of Water Reuse The cooling water is not reused at SPS. This sub-section is not applicable for SPS. 5.1.5 Description of Reductions in Total Water Withdrawals SPS has not made changes to operations resulting in withdrawal reductions in the last five years. This sub-section is not applicable for SPS. 5.1.6 Description of Cooling Water Used in Manufacturing Process SPS is not a manufacturing facility. This sub-section is not applicable for SPS. Dominion Energy I 79
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 93 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 5.1.7 Proportion of Source Waterbody Withdrawn For estuaries or tidal rivers, the proportion of source water body withdrawn can be estimated using the concept of tidal excursion volume as illustrated in the CWA's §316(b) Phase I Rule (Figure 5-3). 65336 Federal Register /Vol. 66. No. 243/Tuesday. December 18, 2001 / Rules and Regulations Appendix 3 to The Preambl&-Exampla of Areu and Volumes Defined in Estuaries or Tidal Rivers By The Tidal Excunion Distance I I I C. CVl'IS "' ~"'"""" I
~-j '------
Figure 5-3. Illustration of Tidal Excursion Volume in CWA §316(b) Phase I Rule The tidal excursion volume is defined as the volume of the water column in the area centered about the opening of the intake with a radius defined by the length of one tidal excursion at the mean low water level. Based on a sinusoidal tidal function, one tidal excursion can be calculated using the equation below: Tidal Excursion= 2/TT*(UmaxHT mi/2) Eq. 7 where, Umax = Average Maximum Tidal Velocity Tm2 = Tidal Period of M2 Tide. Dominion Energy I 80
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 94 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal : §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Typical maximum average ebb and flood current velocity values at SPS are approximately 2.0 fps and M2 tide period (T m2) is 12.42 hrs. Using Eq. 7, the calculated the tidal excursion is 5.4 miles on each tidal phase and the combined excursion for both phases is 10.8 miles. Assuming the mean low water depth of the waterbody in the vicinity of SPS CWIS is 20 feet 8 and the river width is 3 miles, the calculated total tidal excursion volume bounded by the river width (as shown in Example A of Figure 5-3 for a shoreline CWIS in a narrow reach) is approximately
- 1. 71x10 10 cubic feet. The calculated design intake water volume over one tidal period of 12.42 hours is 1.75x108 cubic feet. Therefore, at design flow, the SPS CWIS withdraws approximately 1.0 percent of the James River tidal excursion volume in the vicinity of SPS.
5.2 Design and Engineering Calculations [§122.21 (r)(5)(ii)] The engineering calculations of through-screen velocity for the traveling screen design prepared by a qualified professional are provided in Appendix D. 5.3 Description of Existing Impingement and Entrainment Reduction Measures [§122.21 (r)(5)(iii)] SPS has Ristroph TWS with 1/8-inch by 1/2-inch rectangular smooth mesh openings with a low-pressure wash and fish return system to maximize impinged organism survival. Each screen basket has a steel fish bucket and the screens are designed for continuous operation. At times of high fish abundance or low river levels, the screens can be rotated at a fast speed, reducing impingement time to approximately 1.5 minutes or less. A single return trough is located upstream of the screens that transports organisms and debris back to the river approximately 1,000 feet south of the intake structure and approximately 300 feet from the shore. While the generating units at SPS are intended for year-round, 24 hours/day operation, the cooling water system operates at relatively lower levels during April-May and October-November months compared to other months because of typical planned refueling outages, resulting in reduction in circulating water pump operation . Additionally, as shown in Table 5-1 in Section 5.1.3, the proportion of the maximum design flow used in the cooling system ranged from 64 .7 percent to 89.4 percent with an average of 77 .3 percent on a monthly basis during 2013-2017 . Since reductions in impingement and entrainment are assumed to be commensurate with reductions in flow, SPS is assumed to have reduced potential impingement and entrainment by 10.6 to 35 .3 percent from the maximum design flow conditions on a monthly basis during 2013-2017. 8 The average water depth of 20 feet at MLW in the general area of SPS was assumed based on NOAA Chart
#12248.
Dominion Energy I 81
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 95 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 6 Chosen Method(s) of Compliance with Impingement Mortality Standard [§122.21 (r)(6)] Dominion Energy has reviewed the impingement mortality compliance alternatives in 40 CFR §125.94(c) and proposes to implement §125.94{c)(5), modified traveling screens, as BTA for reduction of impingement mortality. In accordance with §125.94(b)(1 ), Dominion Energy's finalization of its chosen method for compliance with the impingement mortality BTA standard will be synchronized with the establishment of entrainment BTA and will be determined after issuance of a final VPDES permit that establishes the site-specific entrainment requirements for SPS under §125 .94(d) . Compliance with the establishment of the impingement mortality BTA standard will be accomplished thereafter as soon as practical. SPS will operate modified traveling screens, that, after review of the information required in the impingement technology performance optimization study at 40 CFR §122.21 (r)(6)(ii), the VPDES permit Director determines is the BTA for impingement reduction at the SPS CWIS . As the basis for the Director's determination, Dominion Energy will demonstrate that the modified traveling screens have been optimized to minimize impingement mortality of non-fragile species. Both operating units at SPS have Ristroph-type TWS, which are described in Section 3.0 and Section 5.3 of this document. In addition, as described in Section 4.2.5, a one-year impingement monitoring study was conducted at SPS from August 2015 through July 2016 (HOR 2018b) . Impingement samples were collected twice a month for 12 consecutive months for a total of 24 sampling events. Each sampling event lasted 24 hours with a target 30-minute sample collected every 4 hours. A minimum of 15 minutes was allowed if heavy debris loads and/or fish collections occurred . Impingement samples were collected in the fish/debris return troughs of the traveling water screens in front of the combined Unit 1 and 2 intakes. The original Ristroph TWS were modified from a 3/8-inch square mesh opening to 1/8- by 1/2-inch rectangular mesh openings in the early 1990s. At times of high fish abundance or low river levels, the screens are rotated at fast speed to reduce impingement time to 1.5 minutes or less. Fish and shellfish were also assessed for condition to evaluate initial impingement survival rates. Eighteen taxa were classified as 100 percent alive and undamaged after initial impingement (see Table 4-2). These included a variety of sunfish, catfish, mackerel, and shrimp. In addition, another 50 percent or more of 25 taxa were undamaged after impingement. 7 Entrainment Performance Studies [§122.21 (r)(7)] There have been neither site-specific entrainment performance studies conducted at SPS nor have relevant studies from other facilities been identified for inclusion in this report. Dominion Energy I 82
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 96 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 8 Operational Status [§122.21 (r){8)] 8.1 Description of Operating Status [§122.21 (r)(B)(i)] SPS has two base-load nuclear power generating units (Units 1 and 2) with a combined generating capacity of 1,741 megawatts (MW) . The net generation of each unit is seasonally variable where the net electric output of 838 megawatts electric (MWe) is required to be met by each unit in the summer and 875 MWe is required to be met by each unit in the winter. Normally, the lower value of 838 MWe is reported as net generation output. 8.1.1 Individual Unit Age SPS is Dominion Energy's first nuclear station, consisting of two nuclear power-generating units (Units 1 and 2) . Unit 1 began commercial operation in December 1972 and Unit 2 began operating in May 1973. In 2003 , the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) extended the operating licenses for both reactors from 40 to 60 years. 8.1.2 Utilization for Previous 5 Years Table 8-1 presents monthly capacity factors from 2013 to 2017 . The annual gross generation for 2013 to 2017 is shown in Table 8-2 . Table 8-1. Capacity Factors at Surry Power Station during 2013-2017 Capacity Factor (%) 2013 89.3 2014 94.2 2015 77.3 2016 95.8 2017 94.6 Table 8-2. Annual Gross Generation at Surry Power Station during 2013-2017 Annual Gross Generation (megawatt-hours) 2013 13,614,600 2014 14,404,590 2015 11 ,789,706 2016 14,610,520 2017 14,427,648 8.1.3 Major Upgrades in Last 15 Years Each reactor unit was initially operated at a licensed power output of 2,441 megawatt thermal (MWt) with a gross electrical output of 822.6 megawatt electric (MWe) . In 1995, both units were uprated to the design values that correspond to a core power output of 2,546 MWt with an Dominion Energy I 83
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 97 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ expected gross electrica l output of 855.4 MWe (NRC 2018a) . In 2010, both units were again uprated to a core power output of 2,587 MWt with each expected gross electrical output of 870.5 MWe. 8.2 Descriptions of Consultation with Nuclear Regulatory Commission [§122.21 (r)(8)(ii)] SPS operations are regulated by the NRC. The NRC licenses for Units 1 and 2 were renewed on March 20, 2003. Each unit has had a stretch power uprate approved on August 25, 1986 and a measurement uncertainty recapture power uprate on October 22, 2009. Table 8-3 includes information for the SPS Relicensing Status and Approved Uprates. Table 8-3. Surry Power Station 's Relicensing Status and Approved Uprates Unit 1 Unit2 Docket Number 50-280 50-281 Operation License Date May 25, 1972 January 29, 1973 Renewed License Date March 20, 2003 March 20, 2003 License Expiration May 25, 2032 January 29, 2033 Approved: August 3, 1995 Approved: August 3, 1995 Percent Stretch Power Uprate Percent Uprate(%) : 4.3 Uprate (%): 4.3 Megawatt Thermal Megawatt Thermal Increase: 105 Increase: 105 Measurement Approved: September 24, 201 O Approved : September 24, 2010 Uncertainty Recapture Percent Uprate (%): 1.6 Percent Uprate (%): 1.6 Power Uprate Megawatt Thermal Increase: 41 Megawatt Thermal Increase: 41 Source: NRC 2018b, NRC 2018c, NRC 2018d 8.3 Other Cooling Water Uses for Process Units [§122.21 (r)(8)(iii)] SPS does not use cooling water for process units. This sub-section is not applicable. 8.4 Descriptions of Current and Future Production Schedules [§122.21 (r)(8)(iv)] SPS is not a manufacturing facility. This sub-section is not applicable. 8.5 Descriptions of Plans or Schedules for Any New Units Planned within the Next 5 Years [§122.21(r)(8)(v)] There are no plans for decommissioning. replacing. or adding of new units at this plant over the next five years. Dominion Energy I 84
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 98 of 1631 §31 6(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)*(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 9 Entrainment Characterization Study [§122 .21 (r)(9)] 9.1 Entrainment Data Collection Method [§122.21 (r)(9)(i)] 9.1.1 Sam pling Gear Pumped entrainment samples were collected using 94-cm by 102-cm, 335-µm mesh hoop plankton nets with a PVC cod-end bucket (Figure 9-1) . Intake water from three depths (near-surface, mid-depth, and near-bottom) was pumped through the separate nets using gas-powered 4-inch-diameter centrifugal trash pumps and 4-inch PVC pipelines. To minimize organism damage, the water was pumped into 200-gallon polyethylene water-filled sample buffering tanks (one for each depth) , where the plankton net was suspended . The samples were collected concurrently using three pairs of pumps and buffering tanks (Figure 9-1 ). The sample duration was approximately 100 minutes per depth or the time required to sample a minimum of 100 m 3 (0.0264 million gallons) of water. JOINT MUST SWIVEL ---<'\--I APPROX 90* (POSSIBLY MORE) SAAIPLE FLOW RATE 250-260 GPM c* 0 ADAPTER SOCKET WOODEN CRADLES (typ. 2) c* 0 OVERFLOW DRAIN STAINLESS STEEL BANOS (typ. 2) 33Silm ICHTHYo-NET INLINE I FLOW TOTALIZING METER (PVC SADOlE MOUNT) 33Si,m coo ENO {BJD t.. 200 gel POLYETHYLENE TANK '1 4"0PVC (PASSIVE DISCHARGE) SAMPLER BUCKET FLOW"' c* 0 PVC NIPPLE 4'0PVC (DISCHARGE THROUGH NET) c* 0 QUICK-CONNECT NOT TO SCALE Figure 9-1. Entrainment Pump Sampling System Confi guration 9.1 .2 Sam pling Location Total volume of water withdrawal was similar between Unit 1 and Unit 2. Unit 1 was selected as the primary sampling location, while Unit 2 was used as the secondary location in the event that Unit 1 was not operating . Entrainment samples were collected from intake piping installed along the front of the bar racks at Unit 1 from near-surface, mid-depth, and near-bottom depths. Dominion Energy I 85
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 99 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Table 9-1 presents the sampling depths for SPS relative to mean sea level. Figure 9-2 presents the design of intake piping for entrainment sampling at SPS. Table 9-1 . Sampling Depths Relative to Mean Sea Level at Surry Power Station Sampling Depth Relative Sampling Depth from Intake Sampling Location to Mean Sea Level (MSL) , Deck Level (+12 feet MSL) Near-surface (Mean Low Water - 3 feet) -4.3 -16.3 Mid-depth (Mid-point of Mean Sea Level
-13.0 -25.0 and bottom of intake)
Near-bottom (Bottom of Intake + 3 feet) -23.0 -35.0 TO PUMPS/ COLLECTI ON INTAKE PIPES INSTALLED ON CENTER SECTION OF TRASH (BAR) RACK 0 C I :s:
~0 I
I DECK m (')
--1 6
z MSL MLw
~
-3 ft 1 ,ii NEARSURFACE SAMPLE 1 FLOW DIRECTION MID MID-DEPTH SAMPLE 2 NEAR BOTTOM
-3 ft ~
NEARBOTIOM SAMPLE 3 I [111 11 SIDE VIEW FRONT VIEW NOTES 1 Based on Mean Low Water (MLW) elevation. SCHEMATIC
- NOT TO SCALE 2 Based on Mean Sea Level (MSL) elevation.
' If it is determined the bottom sediments are soft and being pulled in with the samples the intake may need to be pulled up enough to avoid pulling up the bottom sediments.
Figure 9-2. Des ign of Intake Piping for Entrainment Sampling at Surry Power Station Dominion Energy I 86
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 100 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 9.1.3 Sample Collection Period and Frequency Entrainment sa mples were collected twice a month (within the first and third week of each month, as possible) for 24 consecutive months from August 2015 through July 2017, for a total of 48 sampling events. Each sampl ing event lasted 24 hours subdivided into four, six-hour subsa mpling periods. Sample duration was approximately 100 minutes per depth per six-hour sa mple (or the time requ ired to sample 100 m 3 per depth per six-hour sample). Specific details of the 2015-2017 entrainment sampling program are presented in Table 9-2. Table 9-2. Surry Power Station Entrainment Sampling Details, 2015-2017 Entrainment Details Units to be Sampled Unit 1 (Primary Location) and Unit 2 (Secondary Location) Twice per month sampling events (within the first and third week August 2015 - July 2017 of each month) for 24 months (2/month x 24 months = 48 Sampling Events sampling events) Samples collected every 6 hours in a 24-hour period (4 Daily Collection Schedule collections/ 24-hour period) Targeted Organisms Fish eggs, larvae, and juveniles; shellfish life stages Depths Near-surface, mid-depth, near-bottom for a total of 3 depths 1 sample per depth by pumping water through a 335-µm net Number of Samples Collected per suspended in a buffering tank (to minimize potential damage to Depth the collected organisms, the sampling net was emptied three times per sample collection period)
- 100 minutes per depth strata per 6-hour sample (or time Sample Duration required to get 100 m3 per depth per 6-hour sample)
Proposed Number of Samples per 4 collections/survey x 3 depths/collection x 1 sample/depth = 12 Sampling Event samples/survey 12 samples/survey x 2 surveys/month x 24 months = 576 Proposed Total Number of Samples samples Temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, salinity, and conductivity approximately every six hours in the entrainment Water Quality Measurements sampling buffering tanks for near-surface, mid-depth, and near-bottom depths. DO was also collected just north of the intake structure from a loading dock at mid-depth. 9.1.4 Laboratory Analysis After sample collection , each sa mple was washed through a 335-µm sieve in the laboratory to remove the excess formal in that was used in the field to preserve the sample. Each sample was then sorted in a glass sorti ng tray, which was placed on a light box. The aquatic fauna was sorted into groups of fish eggs, larvae, and later life stages. Each group was preserved in 5 percent formalin, placed in separate, labeled glass vials, and stored . Dominion Energy I 87
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 101 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §1 22.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station After sorting, the fish eggs, larvae, and later life stages were identified to the lowest practical taxon and enumerated. All ichthyoplankton was assigned a life stage: viable egg, non-viable egg (NVE), yolk sac larvae, post-yolk sac larvae, juvenile, or unidentified larval stage. Also, morphometric data (such as minimum and maximum egg diameter; total length and notochord length, maximum body depth and width, head capsule depth and width for each fish taxon and life stage) were collected and recorded for each life stage of fish. Organisms subject to the morphometric evaluation were selected at random from within each taxonomic category (i.e.,
each taxon and life stage) . 9.1.5 Identification of Species Susceptible to Entrainment A total of 244,210 organisms were collected during the first year of entrainment sampling and included 61 ,871 fish distributed among 23 distinct taxa and 182,339 shellfish distributed among 14 distinct taxa . A number of fish eggs (599) collected primarily in May, were considered non-viable (e.g., unfertilized or dead/decaying); therefore, they would not have contributed to future fish populations. As such, these NVE were excluded from further entrainment analysis. Removing the total number of NVE reduced the total number of finfish collected in entrainment samples to 61 ,272 and the total number of organisms collected in entrainment samples to 243,611 during Year 1 entrainment sampling. During the second year of entrainment sampling, after removing the total number of NVE eggs (248) which were collected primarily in April, the total number of finfish collected in entrainment samples during the second year to 83,298, and the total number of organisms collected in entrainment samples during the second year to 557,882. Table 9-3 presents the complete list of species collected by common name and scientific name. Overall, taxonomic diversity was low in entrainment samples with the number of distinct taxa ranging from monthly lows of 1O in January, 2017 and nine in February, 2016 of each year to highs of 22 in June 2016 and 21 in September 2016. The most taxa were collected in late spring, summer, and into fall, and the fewest taxa were collected in winter. Table 9-3. Master Species List of All Distinct Taxa Collected during Entrainment Sampling at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017
- Common Name American Eel Atlantic Croaker Atlantic Menhaden Scientific Name Anguilla rostrata Micropogonias undulatus Brevoortia tyrannus Year1
{Aug 2015 - Jul 2016) X X X Year2 (Aug 2016 - Jul 2017) X X X Atlantic Silverside Menidia menidia X X Bay Anchovy Anchoa mitchilli X X Blackcheek Tonguefish Symphurus plagiusa X X Finfish Blennies Blenniidae X X Blueback Herring Alosa aestiva/is X X Common Anchovies Anchoaspp. X X Conger Eel Conger oceanicus X X Dominion Energy I 88
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 102 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station
- Common Name Drums and Croakers Gizzard Shad Gobies Scientific Name Sciaenidae Dorosoma cepedianum Gobiidae Year1 (Aug 2015 - Jul 2016)
X X X Year2 (Aug 2016 - Jul 2017) X X X Gray Trout Cynascian regalis X X Green Goby Microgabius thalassinus X X Herring and Anchovies Clupeiformes X X Herrings Clupeidae X X Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus X X Inland Silverside Menidia beryllina X Minnow Cyprinidae X X Naked Goby Gabiasama base X X Naked/Seaboard Goby Gabiasama sp. X X Non-Viable Egg Not Applicable X X Northern Pipefish Syngnathus fuscus X X Finfish Silver Perch Bairdiella chrysoura X X Silvers ides Menidia spp. X X Skilletfish Gabiesax strumasus X X Southern Kingfish Mentricirrhus americanus X X Spot Leiastamus xanthurus X X Striped Bass Marone saxatilis X X Striped Basses Marone spp. X X Summer Flounder Para/ichthys dentatus X Unidentified Egg Unidentified X Unidentified Finfish Unidentified X X White Perch Marone americana X X Asian Clam Carbicula fluminea X Blue Crab Callinectes sapidus X X Blue Mussel Mytilus edulis X Crangonid Shrimp Crangonidae X X Dark Falsemussel Mytilapsis /eucophaeata X X Dwarf Surfclam Mulinia lateralis X Shellfish Fiddler Crab Uca spp. X X Grass Shrimp Palaemonetes spp. X X Lady Crab Ovalipes spp. X Lucifer Shrimp Lucifer faxani X X Mud Crabs Panopeidae X X Mysid Shrimp Mysidae X X Dominion Energy I 89
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 103 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Ill Common Name Palaemonid Shrimp Scientific Name Palaemonidae Year1 (Aug 2015 - Jul 2016)
X Year2 (Aug 2016 - Jul 2017) X Pea Crabs Pinnotheridae X X Penaeid Shrimp Penaeidae X X Ribbed Mussel Geukensia demissa X X Sand Shrimp Crangon septemspinosa X Sea Mussel Mytilidae X X Sergestid Shrimp Sergestidae X Tellin Clams Tellinidae X X White Shrimp Litopenaeus setiferus X Unidentified Shellfish Unidentified X 9.1.6 Identification of Protected Species There were no protected species identified under federal. state, or tribal law, including threatened or endangered species, collected as part of the 2015-2017 entrainment sampling . 9.2 Biological Entrainment Characterization [§122.21 (r)(9)(ii)] During the first year, the total entrainment sample collection consisted of approximately three times more shellfish (75%) than finfish (25%). The entrainment sample collections were dominated by zoea (36% of the finfish and shellfish combined total) , shellfish juveniles (35% of the total) , post-yolk sac larvae (20% of the total) , megalopae (4% of the total) , and finfish juveniles (4% of the total) . Very few yolk sac larvae, eggs, or adult fish were collected, with each comprising less than one percent of the total collection. The total entrainment collection for the second year of sampling resulted in approximately six times more shellfish (85%) than finfish (15%). Similar to the first year of entrainment sampling, the entrainment sample collections for the second year were dominated by zoea (64% of the total), shellfish juveniles (20% of the total) , and post-yolk sac larvae (13% of the total) . Very few yolk sac larvae, eggs, juvenile or adult fish were collected , with each comprising no more than one percent of the total collection. Refer to Appendix E (Surry Power Station 2015-2017 Entrainment Characterization Study Report) of this document for more details. Dominion Energy I 90
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 104 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 9.2.1 Species Abundance Table 9-4 presents the total number of organisms collected by taxa and life stage for the first and second year of entrainment sampling. The percentages presented in Table 9-4 are based on finfish and shellfish groups separately. Naked/Seaboard Gaby {30% of finfish) and Naked Gaby (24% of finfish) post-yolk sac larvae, and Bay Anchovy juveniles {13% of finfish) were the most abundant fish taxa collected during the first year of entrainment sampling (Table 9-4) . Bay Anchovy (8% of finfish), Gobies {6% of finfish) , and Common Anchovies {5% of finfish) post-yolk sac larvae were collected in relatively low abundance during the first year. The remaining fish taxa each accounted for three percent or less of the total finfish catch . Mud Crab (Panopeidae) zoea {39% of shellfish) and juvenile Tellin Clams (Tellinidae) (35% of shellfish) were the most abundant shellfish taxon collected during the first year of entrainment sampling (Table 9-4). Juvenile Mysid Shrimp (Mysidae) (9% of shellfish), Palaemonid Shrimp (Palaemonidae) zoea {6% of shellfish), and Mud Crab megalopae (5% of shellfish) were collected in relatively low abundance, while all remaining shellfish taxa collected accounted for two percent or less of the total shellfish catch during the first year. During the second year of entrainment sampling, Naked/Seaboard Goby (51 % of finfish) and Naked Gaby (14% of finfish) post-yolk sac larvae were also the most abundant fish taxa collected (Table 9-4) . Silverside post-yolk sac larvae (7% of finfish) , Bay Anchovy juveniles {6% of finfish) and post-yolk sac larvae (4% of finfish) , and post-yolk sac larvae Gobies (5% of finfish) were collected in relatively low abundance during the second year. The remaining fish taxa each accounted for four percent or less of the total finfish catch in Year 2. Fiddler Crab zoea {39% of shellfish), Mud Crab (Panopeidae) zoea {33% of shellfish) , and juvenile Mysid Shrimp (Mysidae) (13% of shellfish) were the most abundant shellfish taxon collected during the second year of entrainment sampling (Table 9-4) . Juvenile Tellins Clams (Tellinidae) {8% of shellfish) and Palaemonid Shrimp (Palaemonidae) zoea {3% of shellfish) were collected in relatively low abundance, while all remaining shellfish taxa collected accounted for one percent or less of the total shellfish catch during the second year of entrainment sampling. Blue Crabs accounted for less than one percent of the shellfish collected in both years. Dominion Energy I 91
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 105 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Table 9-4. Total Number of Fish by Taxa and Life Stage Collected at Surry Power Station during 2015-2017 Entrainment Sampling Year 1 (Aug 2015 - Jul 2016) Year 2 (Aug 2016 -Jul 2017)
Naked/Seaboard Goby Naked Goby PYS PYS Total Number of Organisms Collected Finfish 18,113 14,877 Im 30 24 Total Number of Organisms Collected 42,608 11,294 51 14 Bay Anchovy Juv 7,703 13 5,267 6 Bay Anchovy PYS 5,196 8 3,384 4 Gobies PYS 3,704 6 4,094 5 Common Anchovies PYS 3.223 5 1,185 1 Atlantic Croaker PYS 1,810 3 1,188 1 Herring and Anchovies UIDL 1,784 3 Atlantic Menhaden Juv 897 1 643 1 Herring and Anchovies PYS 740 1 2,507 3 Bay Anchovy Adult 719 1 3,213 4 Silversides PYS 381 <1 5,534 1 Gray Trout PYS 377 <1 34 <1 Hogchoker PYS 177 <1 1 <1 Unidentified Finfish UIDL 156 <1 586 1 Hogchoker Juv 142 <1 4 <1 Herrings PYS 140 <1 12 <1 Atlantic Croaker Juv 94 <1 51 <1 Naked Goby Juv 80 <1 983 1 White Perch Juv 76 <1 31 <1 Striped Bass Juv 69 <1 77 <1 Spot PYS 67 <1 167 <1 Drums and Croakers PYS 66 <1 1 <1 Northern Pipefish PYS 64 <1 1 <1 Unidentified Egg Egg 60 <1 Silversides Egg 58 <1 25 <1 Gray Trout Juv 46 <1 1 <1 Atlantic Silverside PYS 44 <1 16 <1 White Perch PYS 43 <1 58 <1 Atlantic Silverside Juv 40 <1 American Eel Juv 32 <1 15 <1 Striped Bass PYS 32 <1 14 <1 Spot Juv 31 <1 5 <1 Atlantic Silverside vs 29 <1 5 <1 Striped Basses PYS 26 <1 5 <1 Atlantic Menhaden PYS 19 <1 3 <1 White Perch Adult 17 <1 28 <1 Atlantic Silverside Adult 16 <1 6 <1 Silver Perch PYS 14 <1 1 <1 Dominion Energy I 92
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 106 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Year 1 (Aug 2015 - Jul 2016) Year 2 (Aug 2016 - Jul 2017) II
- Taxa Total Number of Total Number of Organisms Collected Organisms Collected Blackcheek Tonguefish 14 <1 7 <1 Silversides vs 13 <1 104 <1 Green Goby PVS 13 <1 2 <1 Blueback Herring Juv 12 <1 9 <1 Northern Pipefish Juv 10 <1 5 <1 Blennies PVS 7 <1 35 <1 Hogchoker Adult 6 <1 3 <1 Southern Kingfish PVS 5 <1 12 <1 Skilletfish PVS 5 <1 7 <1 Gizzard Shad Adult 2 <1 Naked Goby Adult 2 <1 Silversides UIDL 2 <1 Southern Kingfish Juv 2 <1 3 <1 Summer Flounder Juv 2 <1 Unidentified Finfish Juv 2 <1 Unidentified Finfish PVS 2 <1 16 <1 Atlantic Silverside Egg 1 <1 5 <1 Atlantic Silverside UIDL 1 <1 Bay Anchovy UIDL 1 <1 Common Anchovies Adult 1 <1 Conger Eel Juv 1 <1 1 <1 Gizzard Shad Juv 1 <1 Inland Silverside PVS 1 <1 Naked Goby Egg 1 <1 Spot Adult 1 <1 Striped Bass vs 1 <1 Striped Basses vs 1 <1 Blackcheek Tonguefish Adult 2 <1 Blueback Herring Adult 1 <1 Gizzard Shad vs 8 <1 Minnow PVS 4 <1 Silver Perch Juv 9 <1 Shellfish Mud Crabs (Panopeidae) Zoea 70,588 39 158,894 33 Tellin Clams Juv 63,658 35 38.467 8 Mysid Shrimp Juv 17.137 9 62,986 13 Palaemonid Shrimp Zoea 10,173 6 14,561 3 Mud Crabs (Panopeidae) Mega 8,622 5 6,234 1 Fiddler Crab Zoea 3,596 2 182,992 39 Grass Shrimp Juv 3,182 2 4,496 1 Mysid Shrimp Zoea 3,124 2 Ribbed Mussel Juv 1,385 1 3,254 1 Dominion Energy I 93
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 107 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station I
Year 1 (Aug 2015 - Jul 2016) I Year 2 (Aug 2016 - Jul 2017} I Taxa Mysid Shrimp Total Number of Organisms Collected 201 Ill <1 Total Number of Organisms Collected 1 Blue Crab Juv 185 <1 655 <1 Palaemonid Shrimp Juv 163 <1 748 <1 Crangonid Shrimp Juv 109 <1 10 <1 Mud Crabs (Panopeidae) Juv 61 <1 29 <1 Unidentified Shellfish Zoea 51 <1 Blue Crab Mega 37 <1 1,151 <1 Unidentified Shellfish Mega 20 <1 Asian Clam Juv 9 <1 Dark Falsemussel Juv 7 <1 79 <1 Dwarf Surfclam Juv 7 <1 1 <1 Sea Mussel Juv 5 <1 1 <1 Lady Crab Zoea 4 <1 Pea Crabs Zoea 4 <1 Unidentified Shellfish Juv 4 <1 Blue Mussel Juv 3 <1 Sand Shrimp Juv 2 <1 Lucifer Shrimp Juv 1 <1 6 <1 Penaeid Shrimp Juv 1 <1 6 <1 Blue Crab Adult 2 <1 Palaemonid Shrimp Mega 4 <1 Pea Crabs Juv 1 <1 Sergestid shrimp Juv 1 <1 White Shrimp Adult 8 <1 Finfish Total 61,272 25 83,298 15 Shellfish Total 182,339 75 474,584 85 Grand Total 243,611 100 557,882 100 Note:
- Percent Total is calculated separately for finfish and shellfish groups in this table.
YSL = Yolk Sac Larvae; PYSL = Post-yolk Sac Larvae; UIDL = Unidentified Life Stage Larvae; Juv = Juveniles; Mega = Megalopae; NA = Not Applicable Dominion Energy I 94
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 108 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 9.2.2 Spatial Characteristics The entrainment densities were evaluated for trends associated with depth strata, which varied by year, taxa, and month. During the first year of sampling, more organisms were collected mid-depth (44%) compared to near-surface (32%) or near-bottom (24%), with finfish and shellfish showing similar trends. This trend was not as strong during the second year of sampling . Overall, slightly more organisms were collected at the near-surface (45%) compared to mid-depth (44%) . Looking at each group separately, finfish followed the trend of higher densities mid-depth (52%) while shellfish were collected in higher densities at near-surface samples (47%) (Figure 9-3). 1,200
- Year1
- Year2 1,000 800 f
Cl Cl
!!. 600 ~
Ill C GI C 400 200 0 Near-surface Mid-depth Near-bottom Near-surface Mid-depth Near-bottom Finfish Shellfish Depth Stratum by Group Note: The numbers reported in this figure do not include organisms that would potentially be retained on 1/8 x 1/2-inch mesh screens installed at Surry Power Station. Figure 9-3. Entrainment Density (#/100 m3 or 0.0264 million gallons) by Depth Stratum Excluding lmpingeable Organisms at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 For finfish, post-yolk sac and juvenile Bay Anchovy and Naked Goby (including the Naked/Seaboard Goby) were collected at highest densities mid-depth, followed by near-surface, and with the near-bottom densities at substantially lower levels. This trend was consistent during both sample years. In contrast. the highest densities for Atlantic Croaker were variably collected near the surface (January), mid-depth (December), or near the bottom (September). During the second year of sampling, Atlantic Croaker were collected at higher densities near the bottom in November then near the surface in December and at similar densities at mid-depth and near the surface in September and October. For shellfish, Mud Crab zoea, which were generally the most abundant among all taxa and life stages, were collected at highest densities at mid-depth followed closely by near-surface depths. In contrast. Mud Crab megalopae were collected at higher densities in mid-depth samples during the first year of sampling but at surface samples during the second year of Dominion Energy I 95
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 109 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ sampling. When juvenile Tellin Clams occurred at their highest densities, in May and June of the first year sampling, and April and August of the second year sampling, they were collected primarily in near-bottom samples, followed by near-surface samples. However, when their densities were lower, though still abundant, they occurred at nearly equal densities at each depth or were more abundant at mid-depth. 9.2.3 Temporal Characteristics During the first year of sampling entrainment (excluding impingeable organisms on the SPS screens) densities of finfish were higher at night (2200 hours). In contrast, entrainment of finfish during the second year of sampling was greatest at mid-morning (1000 hours) followed by at night. Late afternoon (1600 hours) and pre-dawn hours (0400 hours) had similar finfish entrainment densities during both sampling years that were generally lower than night (2200 hours) entrainment densities (Figure 9-4). 1.400
- Year 1
- Year2 1,200 1,000 f
c:, 800 c:, i
~ 600 iii C
GI 0 400 200 0 0400 1000 1600 2200 0400 1000 1600 2200 Finfish Shellfish Diel Periods by Group Note: The numbers reported in this figure do not include organisms that would potentially be retained on 1/8 x 1/2-inch mesh screens installed at Surry Power Station. Figure 9-4. Average Entrainment Density during Four Diel Periods (0400, 1000, 1600 and 2200 hours) at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 The diel pattern of entrainment was also evaluated by depth strata. For finfish, the diel pattern was similar for the near-surface, mid-depth, and near-bottom samples. For shellfish, the highest densities were collected at pre-dawn (0400 hours) and at night (2200 hours), followed by mid-morning (1000 hours) (Figure 9-5). The highest densities at pre-dawn hours (0400 hours) were especially evident during the second year of sampling. Late afternoon (1600 hours) had substantially lower entrainment densities during both sampling years (Figure 9-5) . Dominion Energy I 96
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 110 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 2,500 Near-surface 1 *Year1
- Year2 !
2,000 l 1.500 c:, c:, i f C 1.000 500 0400 1000 1600 2200 0400 1000 1600 2200 Finfish Shellfish 2,500 Mid-depth I
- Year1
- Year2 1 2,000
'f 1.soo g
i f 1,000 C Q* 500 0 0400 1000 1600 2200 0400 1000 1600 2200 Finfish Shellfish Near-bottom *Year1
- Year2 2,000 l
c:, 1,500 c:, i i 1,000 C Q* 0 .___ __. __ _ 0400 1000 1600 2200 0400 1000 1600 2200 Finfish Shellfish Note: The numbers reported in this figure do not include organisms that potentially would be retained on 1/8 x 1/2-inch mesh screens installed at Surry Power Station. Figure 9-5. Average Entrainment Density (#/100 m3 ) During Four Diel Periods (0400, 1000, 1600 and 2200 hours) at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 Dominion Energy I 97
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 111 of 1631
§316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
Entrainment densities of both finfish and shellfish were evaluated for trends associated with seasonal variations. In general, the two years of sampling exhibited similar trends for finfish entrainment, with the second year of sampling having higher overall entrainment densities. The depth-averaged entrainment densities for finfish were highest during late spring to early summer months of May, June and July (Table 9-5). Consistent with the first year of sampling, the highest densities for finfish occurring in June and July were attributed primarily to post-yolk sac larval Gobies (Naked Goby and Naked/Seaboard Gaby [Gobiosoma sp.]) and post-yolk sac and juvenile Anchovies (Bay Anchovy and Common Anchovy) . The lowest depth-averaged monthly densities generally occurred during winter and early spring months from November to March. Winter finfish densities were dominated by spawning activities of Atlantic Croaker while early spring finfish entrainment densities were dominated by juvenile Atlantic Menhaden. Bay Anchovy was the only finfish species collected in every month of the year. For shellfish, the depth-averaged monthly entrainment densities during the first year of sampling were highest during late spring to late summer months of May - September (Table 9-5) . These high densities were attributed primarily to Mud Crab zoea and megalopae in July, August, and September, and juvenile Tellin Clams from May through August. Palaemonid Shrimp, Fiddler Crab (Uca spp.) zoea and Mysid Shrimp also contributed to summer entrainment densities in June, July and August. while Mysid Shrimp were collected throughout the year. The lowest depth-averaged monthly shellfish densities occurred in February (0.8 organism/100 m3). During the second year of sampling, depth-averaged entrainment densities were similarly highest May
- September. These higher densities were attributed primarily to Fiddler Crab and Mud Crab zoea and megalopae in June, July, and August. Mysid shrimp in April through September, and juvenile Tellin Clams in April and August. Palaemonid Shrimp and zoea also contributed to summer entrainment densities in June, July, and August. Mysid Shrimp, Ribbed Mussels, and Tellin clams were collected throughout the year. The lowest depth-averaged monthly shellfish densities again occurred in February (16.5 organisms/100 m3).
Dominion Energy I 98
Enclosure 2, Page 112 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Table 9-5. Monthly Density (#/100m 3 ) of Finfish and Shellfish by Depth Stratum Excluding lmpingeable Organisms at Surry Power Station, 2015-2017 Month>> mmmmm+Mi+ Year 1 (2015-2016) Near-surface 13.0 9.7 8.9 5.8 4.5 48.4 12.6 16.3 33.5 179.7 1,569.5 736.6 Mid-depth 53.5 14.5 19.3 14.9 38.5 34.4 7.2 21.9 22.6 111 .8 1,613.0 1,819.2 Finfish Near-bottom 19.7 33.2 10.8 6.3 6.0 20.4 2.1 1.1 3.2 13.8 622.7 150.0 Depth-Averaged Finfish Total 28.7 19.1 13.0 9.0 16.4 34.4 7.3 13.1 19.8 101.8 1,268.4 901 .9 Near-surface 1,351 .7 772.0 54.7 34.7 19.6 5.8 0.5 28.9 163.0 1,186.1 1,286.7 2,937 .3 Mid-depth 2,397 .3 744.2 202.4 54.4 11.8 8.6 0.8 28.1 180.6 728.0 791 .5 5,122.7 Shellfish Near-bottom 951 .6 339.4 164.1 35.9 17.6 12.7 1.1 56.4 159.5 2,818.4 1.465.3 902.8 Depth-Averaged Shellfish Total 1,566.9 618.5 140.4 41 .7 16.4 9.0 0.8 37 .8 167.7 1,577.5 1,181.2 2,987.6 Year 2 (2016-2017) Near-surface 34.7 20.2 14.7 12.4 23.2 14.6 26.2 14.7 14.8 823.7 1,704.2 189.4 Mid-depth 85.9 40.1 41.6 22.2 18.2 12.4 23.8 12.5 14.8 889.0 3,426.9 366.1 Finfish Near-bottom 20.9 17.3 14.7 13.8 10.5 6.6 7.4 2.5 1.6 391 .7 1,052.8 106.0 Depth-Averaged Finfish Total 47.2 25.9 23.7 16.1 17.3 11.2 19.1 9.9 10.4 701.5 2,061.3 220.5 Near-surface 2,188.9 909.0 221.5 10.4 36.4 6.0 7.8 256.5 1,139.1 943.1 6,921 .1 14,771 .7 Mid-depth 2,286.1 1,027.1 204.6 32.4 36.8 36.2 11.4 192.4 1,418.2 1,589.3 6,135.0 11,769.7 Shellfish Near-bottom 1,892.8 754.3 165.3 59.1 78.9 76.1 30.1 134.8 1,378.3 605.2 390.3 696.1 Depth-Averaged Shellfish Total 2,122.6 896.8 197.1 33.9 50.7 39.4 16.5 194.6 1,311.9 1,045.9 4,482.1 9,079.1 Note: Entrainment density for shellfish may include some impingeable-sized organisms because the morphometric measurements were performed only for Blue Crab; therefore, the percent exclusions for other shellfish species were not calculated or applied. Dominion Energy I 99
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 113 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2) -(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 9.3 Analysis and Supporting Documentation [§122.21 (r)(9)(iii)] 9.3.1 Representative Operational Flows Using pump run time data, the monthly average AIF was calculated by unit for each month. Throughout the two-year entrainment study, the AIF at Units 1 and 2 was higher during summer months (June to September), but slightly lower during April-May and October-November months (Figure 9-6). 1,200 1,100 --------~ ,:..;; ----- ---- ---- 1,000 900 800 700 c CJ
- Ii!:
3::
..2 600 500 lL 400 300 200 --------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------~------ '
100
- - unit 1 (Year 1) - - unit 2 (Year 1) -+- Unit 1 (Year 2) .... Unit 2 (Year 2) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month Figure 9-6. Monthly Average Actual Intake Flows by Unit at Surry Power Station, during 2015-2017 Entrainment Sampling By comparing the flows during the latest five years from 2013 to 2017 (see Tables 3-3 and 3-4 in Section 3.4), the two-year average total intake flow of 1,961.5 MGD during the sampling years (August 2015-July 2017) is comparable to that during the latest five years (1,959.3 MGD) .
Therefore, the current 2015-2017 entrainment data were collected during periods of representative operational flows for the CWIS. Dominion Energy I 100
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 114 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 9.3.2 Latent Mortality The latent mortality for all taxa and life stages of organisms entrained was assumed to be 100 percent. which is conservative based on a review of entrainment survival studies with a total of 36 discrete entrainment survival studies conducted at 21 power stations from 1970 to 2000 9
- 9.3.3 Total Entrainment This sub-section documents all assumptions and calculations used to determine total entrainment for SPS together with all methods and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures for data collection and data analysis.
Assumptions Non-viable Eggs (NVE) A large number of fish eggs collected primarily in April of the first year sampling, with smaller numbers in May of the second year sampling, were identified as NVE and therefore would not have contributed to future fish populations. As such, NVE were excluded from further entrainment analysis. Even though NVE were excluded from entrainment estimates, they would continue to contribute to forage base after being returned to the source waterbody . Exclusion Fraction The entrainment sampling at SPS used pumped samplers withdrawing water directly from in front of the trash rack. The orifices of the sample pipes were much larger than existing intake screen mesh openings at SPS. As a result, during sampling, impingeable-sized organisms were collected in the entrainment samples. The maximum opening allowed by the USEPA in discerning between impingement and entrainment, which is called "baseline screen" in Figure 9-7, is 0.56 inches1°, however, the TWS's at SPS have a finer sized 1/8-inch by 1/2-inch mesh screen. Therefore, there is potential for some organisms to pass through the baseline screen, but be retained on the finer SPS screen, i.e. organisms may be retained rather than entrained . Organisms that are retained by the SPS screen but would have been entrained (pass through) based on the Rule's mesh size (1/4- x 1/2-inch) are termed 'converts' . Organism limiting morphometrics sized at 3.2 mm correspond to exclusion on the 1/8-inch mesh of the SPS screens. The majority of the converts at SPS are later life stage organisms (i.e., juveniles and adults) and many of which are expected to be returned to the source waterbody alive due to the fish friendly screens and fish return system at SPS. Figure 9- 7 illustrates the process of estimating entrainment based on the exclusion method described below. 9 The entrainment survival studies were primarily done in the 1970s, with several in the 1980s and 1990s. The majority of the studies were done at estuarine sites in the northeast, primarily in the Hudson River. Larvae of Striped Bass and White Perch frequently exhibited a high rate of survival (>50 percent), but fragile species such as Herring and Anchovies had relatively low survival rates (-25 percent) . Macroinvertebrates, which are important in the food chain, experienced very high survival, averaging in the 70 to 90 percent range (EPRI 2000). 1°Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 158. Page 48321 . Dominion Energy I 101
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 115 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)*(9) Reports Surry Power Station L ntrainment Data Collectioj in Front of Bar Rack on the River Side pass through
~onverts]
pass through I Actual
~ntrainmej l
entrainable organisms entrainable organisms
... -4 Entrainable organisms excluding
,-4 .. ' .
impingeable finfish and Blue Crab Entrainable organisms excluding based on oonceptual baseline impingeable finfish and Blue Crab saeen mesh; impingeable organisms based on actual screen mesh; on the actual saeen mesh openings actual entrainment at the station. (% x %-inch) after passing through the conceptual baseline screen mesh openings are called *converts*. Y. x ~ inch mesh or% inch square mesh defined by Ya x %-inch mesh screens the Rule in differentiating entrainable from impingeable that are installed at the Note: organisms (conceptual baseline screen)* station**
- Exclusion threshold for the conceptual baseline screens is finfish and Blue Crab with body depth and body width greater than 14.2 mm. respectively.
** Exclusion threshold for the actual screens installed at the station is finfish and Blue Crab with head capsule width and body depth greater than 3.2 mm. respectively.
Figure 9-7. Summary of the Step-Wise Process Used to Estimate Entrainment based on the Rule and Existing Screens Installed at Surry Power Station Because very few, if any, of these larger organisms would be entrained through the 0.56-inch opening, exclusion methods were developed to separate these impingeable-size organisms from the others in the data and then exclude them from the calculation of densities and numbers entrained. To account for the different screen mesh sizes and to provide an accurate estimate of entrainment, several calculations were performed based on morphometric data collected on the sampled organisms as follows.
- Organisms with body depth and body width greater than 14.2 mm (0.56 inch) for finfish and Blue Crab, respectively, are excluded from the raw entrainment data as these organisms would be impinged, and not entrained by the USEPA rule mesh size.
- Organisms with body depth and body width less than 14.2 mm for finfish and Blue Crab, respectively, represent entrainable-sized organisms consistent with the USEPA rule mesh size (organisms that could pass a 14.2 mm (0.56 inch) opening) .
- lmpingeable organisms on the USEPA rule mesh size are primarily juveniles and adults, which have well developed skeletal and muscular systems (as compared to larvae), so that the body depth (for finfish) and body width (for Blue Crab) would be the limiting dimensions; however, SPS has a unique finer mesh size, such that head capsule width (for finfish) and body depth (for Blue Crab) would be limiting in estimating exclusion from the current SPS mesh size.
Dominion Energy I 102
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 116 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122 .21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
- Organisms with body depth and body width less than 14.2 mm for finfish and Blue Crab, respectively, but organisms with head capsule width and body depth for finfish and Blue Crab, respectively, greater than 3.2 mm (a.k.a., converts), are organisms that are impinged by the SPS screens but are considered entrainable by the Rule.
- Organisms with head capsule width and body depth for finfish and Blue Crab, respectively, less than 3.2 mm represent actual entrainment with the current SPS mesh size.
These adjustments were carried out for consistency with the Rule (which defines an entrainable organism as one that would pass a 0.56-inch sieve opening). Table 9-6 presents the percentage of each species/life stage excluded from the study results. Dominion Energy I 103
Enclosure 2, Page 117 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Table 9-6. Excluded lmpingeable Finfish and Shellfish at Surry Power Station based on 2015-2017 Entrainment Sampling Study Percent Exclusion (%) based on maximum opening Percent Exclusion (%) based on Surry Power Station's Actual dimension of 0.56 Inches (14.2 mm; a diagonal opening Taxa Screen Mesh Size of 1/8 x 1/2 inch2 of 1/4 x 1/2 inch mesh - Baseline Screen1 Post-Yolk Sac Larvae 11MYIM14iihii Post-Yolk Sac Lal'Vae American Eel 6 Atlantic Croaker 9 5 99 Atlantic Menhaden 2 6 6 Atlantic Silverside 17 100 Bay Anchovy 5 82 Blackcheek Tonguefish 50 69 100 Blue Crab 7 100 8 100 Blueback Herring 29 100 100 100 Gizzard Shad 3 100 100 100 100 Gray Trout 44 15 100 Hogchoker 100 100 6 100 100 Naked Goby 5 100 Silver Perch 50 Southern Kingfish 25 50 Spot 13 100 19 100 100 Striped Bass 14 41 100 Summer Flounder 100 Unidentified Finfish 9 5 5 36 White Perch 63 100 43 100 100 Note: Blank cells have a value of zero exclusion.
- 1. Organisms with body depth and body width greater than 14.2 mm (0.56 inch) for finflsh and Blue Crab, respectively are excluded from the raw entrainment data as these organisms would be impinged, and not entrained by the EPA rule mesh size.
- 2. Organisms with head capsule width and body depth for finfish and Blue Crab, respectively less than 3.2 mm represent actual entrainment with the current SPS mesh size
- 3. If juveniles had 100% exclusion, then adults collected for that species, but not measured, were assumed to be 100% excluded.
- 4. UIDL
- Unidentified Life Stage Larvae Dominion Energy I 104
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 118 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Calculation Methods Monthly Density Monthly densities (Dem,h) of entrainment accounting for exclusion and expressed as number per 100 m 3 , are calculated as the average of all 6-hour interval sample densities (01,h) in each calendar month for each species and life stage for the relevant stratum (h) multiplied by the fraction of organisms not excluded, i.e., the fraction of organisms projected to pass through the intake screens. nm Dem,h = n1 _L{Dt,hU) * (1- Fe)} m j=l where: Dem,h = monthly density {#/100 m3) for the h1h stratum with exclusion 0 1,hU) = Jh six-hour sample density within a calendar month for the h1h stratum nm = total number of six-hour samples within a calendar month (e.g ., typically 8 valid samples) for the h1h stratum m = calendar month h = stratum (e.g ., near-surface. mid-depth or near-bottom) Fe = fraction excluded where:
- Fe = Fei (FF) for each identified finfish species and life stage
[
- Fe= Feu10L (FF) for unidentified life stage larvae of an identified finfish species
- Fe= Feuio (FF) for unidentified finfish species Annual Total Entrainment Monthly entrainment densities are used to estimate the year- specific total number of organisms entrained (Eai) for each species and life stage under actual flow rates as:
where: Eai = annual entrained for the i1h species and life stage under actual intake flows DemAi) = monthly density {#/100 m3) for the h1h stratum with exclusion for the i1h species and life stage Va,m = monthly total volume {m 3) of water withdrawn by the station based on actual operations h = stratum (e.g., near-surface, mid-depth or near-bottom) H = total number of strata sampled (e.g., 3 for SPS) m = calendar month M = total number of months in a year Dominion Energy I 105
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 119 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ The yearly total number of organisms entrained (Ea) is then estimated by summing the total numbers of organisms entrained (EaJ for all species and life stage under actual flow rates as: NN Ea= L Eai i=l where: Ea = annual entrained of all species and life stage under actual intake flows Ea; = annual entrained for the i1h species and life stage under actual intake flows NN = total number of all species and life stages collected . Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures Adherence to sample collection and lab analysis Standard Operating Procedures was observed and documented through regular technical assessments/audits. These technical assessments/audits were conducted by a QA officer, who was independent of those individuals collecting and generating the data during the study and had experience in performing QA/QC programs for aquatic monitoring surveys. For QA/QC procedures for the laboratory analysis of entrainment samples, quality control methods for split, sort and identification of ichthyoplankton were checked using a continuous sampling plan to assure an Average Outgoing Quality Limit of 0.1 (.::90% accuracy) . Specific methods for quality control were provided in the Standard Operating Procedures developed by the party performing the work. Quality control checks were recorded on appropriate datasheets and these records were maintained for review. Annual Total Entrainment Monthly entrainment densities were used to estimate the year-specific total number of organisms entrained for each species and life stage. The two-year entrainment sampling study was conducted during August 2015 - July 2016 (Year 1) and August 2016 - July 2017 (Year 2). To characterize inter-annual variability in entrainment the two years of entrainment data were treated separately to estimate annual total entrainment based on sampling year specific intake flows as Year 1 (August 2015 - July 2016) or Year 2 (August 2016 - July 2017) as well as AIF as defined by the Rule 11, which is the average volume of water withdrawn by the CWIS over the previous five years from 2013 to 2017 (see Table 3-4) for SPS. Table 9-7 presents estimated annual entrainment based on year-specific densities with sampling year-specific flows and Rule-defined AIF. The estimated annual total actual entrainment, based on the current SPS mesh size, ranged from 6.0 to 7 .4 billion finfish and 20.5 to 49.1 billion shellfish organisms over the study period . The estimated annual total converts ranged from 151.0 to 293.3 million finfish and 0.4 to 1.0 million Blub Crabs, many of which are expected to be returned to the source waterbody alive and undamaged due to the fish friendly 11 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 158. Page 48431 . Dominion Energy I 106
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 120 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ screens and fish return system at SPS based on the initial impingement survival data collected during 2015-2016 impingement study (HOR 201 Bb). Dominion Energy I 107
Enclosure 2, Page 121 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Table 9-7. Estimated Annual Entrainment Based on Year-specific Densities with Sampling Year-specific Flows and Rule-defined AIF I Sampllng Year 1 Density and Rule- Sampllng Year 2 Density and Sampling Year 1 Density and Flow Sampllng Year 2 Density and Flow defined AIF Rule-defined AIF Taxon Actual Actual Actual Actual Converts Converts Converts Entrainment Entrainment Entrainment Entrainment Flnflsh American Eel JUV 2,936,705 172,747 1,274,020 74,942 2,849,497 167,617 1,250,333 73,549 Atlantic Croaker PVS 168,224,815 9,496,562 107,440,944 6,065,214 172,688.387 9,748,538 104,034,985 5,872.943 JUV 138,709 8,461,233 69,318 4,228,391 138,059 8,421,620 67,430 4,113,245 Atlantic Menhaden PVS 1,064,835 66,552 258,819 16,176 1,385,266 86,579 252,252 15,766 JUV 75,979,740 3,303,467 53,460,677 2.324,377 73,359,019 3,189,523 52,762,961 2,294,042 Atlantic Silverside Egg 89,035 454,814 85,727 425,765 vs 2.493,622 457,814 2,400,987 428,574 PVS 3,920.482 1,306,935 3,780,168 1,385.400 UIDL 89,022 85,715 JUV 3,340,141 668,028 3,371,006 674,201 Adult 1,747,954 622.429 1,719,234 608,018 Bay Anchovy PVS 553,964,589 334,628,34 1 553,425,3 18 338,193,342 UIDL 172.844 169,427 JUV 752,840,707 43,769,809 518,845,788 30,165,453 748,321,801 43,507,082 513,074,428 29,829,909 Adult 11,733,621 54,883,060 48,349,41 2 226,150,461 11 ,755,613 54,985,928 46,423,913 217,144,093 Blackcheek JUV 454,950 1,000,890 189,682 417,301 448,449 986,588 194,745 428,438 Tonguefish Adult 88,899 83,333 Blennies PVS 828,692 3,066,202 824,882 3,231,757 JUV 766,171 582,504 776,286 551,451 Common Anchovies PVS 325,262,898 112,112,430 327,857.499 116,202.409 Adult 221,283 217,817 Conger Eel JUV 89,236 92,866 85,921 92,712 Drums and PVS 6,961,803 101,081 6,941,668 100,299 Croakers Gizzard Shad vs 820,288 813,938 Gobies PVS 357,547,228 376,860.376 331,618,559 390,142,377 Dominion Energy I 108
Enclosure 2, Page 122 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ I Sampling Year 1 Density and Rule- Sampling Year 2 Density and Sampling Year 1 Density and Flow Sampling Year 2 Density and Flow defined AIF Rule-defined AIF Taxon Actual Actual Actual Actual Converts Converts Converts Entrainment Entrainment Entrainment Entrainment Gray Trout PVS 32,991,575 5,688,203 3,053.484 526,463 33, 186,002 5,721 ,725 3,017,491 520,257 JUV 2,860,380 425,798 2,828,542 420,859 Green Goby PVS 1,196,007 178,783 1,230,812 167,538 Herring and PVS 74,413,270 234,010,808 75,087,377 242,039,825 Anchovies UIDL 178,314,090 179,903,617 Herrings and Shad PVS 13,840,169 1,083,179 13,94 2,207 1,133,652 Hogchoker PVS 16,847,244 1,123,150 707,482 47,165 16,992,737 1,132,849 698,945 46,596 Inland Silverside PVS 216,788 213,392 Minnow PVS 412,665 409.471 Naked Goby Egg 111,557 109,724 PVS 1,552.109,401 1,157,842,587 1,550,260,335 1.150,705,614 JUV 7,736,620 407,191 95,767,455 5,040,392 7,811,323 411 ,122 95,024,870 5,001,309 Adult 180,431 198,973 Naked/Seaboard PVS 1,913,179,168 3,912.108,409 1,905,099,296 4,054,824,074 Goby Northern Pipefish PVS 6,292,722 90.434 6,357,792 89,288 JUV 1,158,370 454,991 1,174,981 436,486 Silver Perch PVS 1,388,794 753,393 1,403,155 749,158 JUV 491,999 491,999 488,829 488,829 Silversides Egg 5,574,690 2,216,079 5,157,031 2,295,941 vs 1,214,636 7,272,175 1,077,963 8,306.462 PVS 18,673,955 211,026.462 17,951,059 237,852,425 UIDL 185,607 160,147 Skilletfish PVS 476, 135 480,935 440,764 584,888 Southern Kingfish PVS 521,322 1,320,264 526,712 1,313,980 JUV 127,197 63,599 166,518 83,259 124,842 62.421 165,058 82,529 Spot PVS 4,902,110 1,114,116 10,602,652 2,409,693 4,515,609 1,026,275 11,210,337 2,547,804 JUV 2,517,129 376,951 2,171,851 399,522 Striped Bass VS 92,618 79,913 Dominion Energy I 109
I §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Enclosure 2, Page 123 of 1631 I Sampllng Year 1 Density and Rule- Sampling Year 2 Density and Sampling Year 1 Density and Flow Sampling Year 2 Density and Flow defined AIF Rule-defined AIF Taxon Actual Actual Actual Actual Converts Converts Converts Entrainment Entrainment Entrainment Entrainment PYS 1,855.447 1,298,813 646,120 452,284 1,810,332 1,267,232 709,740 496,818 JUV 6,266,567 6,766,174 6,244,317 6,711.449 Striped Basses vs 86,922 83,693 PYS 2,603,561 350,825 2,616,948 426,655 Summer Flounder JUV 184,146 184,104 Unidentified Egg Egg 5,508,620 4,767,813 Unidentified Finfish PYS 192.418 9,700 975,592 49,178 199,689 10,066 1,186.464 59,808 UIDL 14,903,783 710,619 47,195,438 2,250,298 15,054,206 717,791 50,722,792 2,418,484 JUV 204,376 85,994 200,336 84,294 White Perch PYS 2.423.141 1,817,356 3,328,199 2.496,149 2.424,994 1,818,746 3,323,531 2.492,649 JUV 2,887,601 1,113,984 2,859,683 1,102,209 Shellfish Asian Clam JUV 882,657 893,148 Blue Crab Mega 4,742,738 123,492,226 4,777.533 121,868,879 JUV 28,249,507 421,634 64,358,725 960,578 27,992.779 417,803 63,276,507 944.425 Blue Mussel JUV 393,943 386,156 Crangonid Shrimp JUV 11,735,959 928,516 11,506,273 893,771 Dark Falsemussel JUV 752,278 8,227,363 739,918 8,110,805 Dwarf Surfclam JUV 787,272 110,057 774,337 108,223 Fiddler Crab Zoea 413,177.343 19.468.128,386 41 o. 790,854 19,349,320,340 Grass Shrimp JUV 324,491,862 445,141,903 325,701,191 448,777,322 Lady Crab Zoea 887,140 873,245 Lucifer Shrimp JUV 51,572 654,133 77,914 641,602 Mud Crabs Zoea 8,980,372,296 17,102,992,590 8,840,612,694 17,012,249,656 (Panopeidae) Mega 1,233.192, 783 673.173, 773 1,214.155,510 667,367,768 JUV 7,075,705 2,785,656 7,067.419 2,701,337 Mysid Shrimp Zoea 385,254 .908 390,878,756 JUV 1,782,066,783 5,632,201 ,791 1,765,325.680 5,832,480,898 Adult 36,857,546 36.468,014 Palaemonid Shrimp Zoea 1,324,272,662 1,462,486,579 1,302,805,201 1,478,903,632 Dominion Energy I 110 [ _
Enclosure 2, Page 124 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ I Sampllng Year 1 Density and Rule- Sampllng Year 2 Density and Sampllng Year 1 Density and Flow S1mpllng Year 2 Density and Flow deflned AIF Rule-defined AIF Taxon Mega Actual Entrainment Converts Actual Entrainment 412,915 Converts Actual Entrainment Converts Actual Entrainment 409,718
++i:thi JUV 20,085,364 74,808,832 19,900,530 75,751,330 Pea Crabs Zoea 637,697 625,093 JUV 90,755 89,605 Penaeid Shrimp JUV 51 .119 503,787 77,230 488,464 Ribbed Mussel JUV 130,340,490 288,892.196 117,487,782 280,260,715 Sand Shrimp JUV 177.088 195,286 Sea Mussel JUV 546,415 101 ,706 540,070 95,519 Sergestid shrimp JUV 88,689 87,566 Tellin Clams JUV 6,39 2, 625,346 3,752,013,616 5, 958,027,082 3,597,343,593 Unidentified Zoea 10,856,106 10,686,062 Shellfish Mega 3,874.417 3,812,569 JUV 790,641 778,256 White Shrimp Adult 713,383 689,219 Flnfish Total 6,127,697,270 151,551,467 7,252,326,736 293,265,939 6,091 ,775,587 151 ,003,187 7,436,961 ,131 283,803,908 Shellfish Total 21,095,229,638 421,634 49,102,307,575 960,578 20,453,956,585 417,803 48,941,916,473 944,425 Note:
YSL = Yolk Sac Larvae; PYSL a Post-yolk Sac Larvae; UIDL =Unidentified Life Stage Larvae; JUV =Juveniles; Mega a Megalopae Dominion Energy I 111
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 125 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ 10 References Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) . 1999 . Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Shad and River Herring. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, Fishery Management Report No. 35 . Washington, DC. _ _ _ _ . 2000. Technical Addendum I to Amendment 1 of the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Shad and River Herring . Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, Prepared by Heather Stirratt. Washington, DC. 6p. _ _ _ _ . 2001 . Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Menhaden. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, Fishery Management Report No. 37 . 127p. _ _ _ _ . 2012 . Habitat Addendum IV to Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Sturgeon. Bain, M.B. 1997. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeons of the Hudson River: Common and divergent life history attributes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48 : 34 7-358. Balazik, M. 2017 . First verified occurrence of the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) in the James River, Virginia . Fisheries Bulletin 115:196-200 (2017) . Available online: https://www.st.nmfs.noaa .gov/spo/FishBull/1152/balazik.pdf. Accessed on February 11 , 2019. Balazik, M.T., G. C. Garman, J .P. Van Eenennaam, J. Mohler, and L.C . Woods Ill. 2012. Empirical Evidence of Fall Spawning by Atlantic Sturgeon in the James River, Virginia . Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 141 : 1465-14 71. Balazik, M.T. and J.A. Musick. 2015 . Dual Annual Spawning Races in Atlantic Sturgeon . PLoS ONE 10(5) : e0128234 . doi:10.1371aournal.pone.0128234. Bath, D.W., J.M. O'Conner, J .B. Alber, and L.G . Arvidson . 1981 . Development and identification of larval Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus) and shortnose sturgeon (A. brevirostrum) from the Hudson River estuary, New York. Copeia 1981 : 711-717 . Brierley, A. S. 2014. Diel vertical migration, Curr. Biol. , 24(22), R107 4-R1076, doi :10.1016a.cub.2014.08.054. Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) . 2018. Field Guide - Fish. Accessed March 2018. Available online : https://www.chesapeakebay.net/discover/field-guide/all/fish/all Connelly, W.J. 2001 . Growth patterns of three species of catfish (lctaluridae) from three Virginia tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay. Master's Thesis. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 153p. EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc. (EA) . 2006 . Entrainment Characterization Report Surry Power Station June 2005 - May 2006. Prepared for Dominion Resources Services, Inc., Gen Allen, Virginia . 58p. Ehrlich, K. F. 197 4. Chemical Changes during Growth and Starvation of Herring Larvae. Pages 301 -323 in J. H. S. Blaxter, editor. The Early Life History of Fish . Springer-Verlag, New York. Dominion Energy I 112
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 126 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Epifanio, C.E, K. T. Little, and P.M. Rowe. 1988. Dispersal and recruitment of fiddler crab larvae in the Delaware River estuary. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 43:181 -188. EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) . 2000. Review of Entrainment Survival Studies: 1970-2000. Final Report, December 2000. 1000757. EPRI , Palo Alto, CA. _ _ _ . 2004a . Technical Evaluation of the Utility of Approach Velocity as an Indicator of Potential Adverse Environmental Impact under Clean Water Act Section 316(b) . 1000731 . EPRI, Palo Alto, CA. _ _ _ . 2004b. Using Computational Fluid Dynamics Techniques to Define the Hydraulic Zone of Influence of Cooling Water Intake Structure. 1005528. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA. _ _ _ . 2007 . Cooling Water Intake Structure Area -of-Influence Evaluations for Ohio River Ecological Research Program Facilities. 101 5322. EPRI , Palo Alto, CA. Froese, R. and D. Pauly (Editors) 2018. FishBase World Wide Web electronic publication. www.fishbase .org Gebhart, G.E. and R.C . Summerfelt. 1978. Seasonal Growth of Fishes in Relation to Conditions of Lake Stratification . Oklahoma Cooperative Fishery Research Unit 58 (1 978) : 6-10. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma . Gilbert, C.R. 1989. Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (Mid-Atlantic Bight)--Atlantic and shortnose sturgeons. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep . 82 (1 1.122). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers TR EL82-4. 28 pp. Golder Associates . 2005 . Crystal River Energy Complex Proposal for Information Collection . NPDES Permit No. FL0000159. Prepared for Progress Energy. Hager, C. 2011 . Final Report: Atlantic Sturgeon Review: Gather data on reproducing subpopulation on Atlantic Sturgeon in the James River. Hager, C., J. Kahn, C. Watterson, J. Russo, and K. Hartman. 2014. Evidence of Atlantic Sturgeon Spawning in the York River System, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 143:5, 1217-1219, DOI : 10.1080/00028487 .2014.925971 . Herman, S.S. 1963. Vertical migration of the opossum shrimp, Neomysis americana Smith . Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography. Vol 8(2) :228-238 . Hildebrand, S.F. and W.C. Schroeder. 1928. Fishes of Chesapeake Bay. Department of Commerce, Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Fisheries, Volume XLIII. HOR Engineering, Inc. (HOR) . 2018a . Draft (Final) 2015 -2017 Entrainment Characterization Study. Prepared for Dominion Energy, Inc. _ _ _ . 2018b. Draft (Final) 2015-2016 Impingement Characterization Study. Prepared for Dominion Resources Services, Inc. Dominion Energy I 113
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 127 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Kercher, D.M . 2006. Genetic Assessment of Rare Blackbanded Sunfish (Enneacanthus Chaetodon) Populations in Virginia . M.S. Thesis. Virginia Commonwealth University. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) . 2015 . Endangered and Threatened Marine Species under NMFS' Jurisdiction. Updated on April 27, 2015 . Available online: http://www.nmfs.noaa .gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm. Accessed : June 17, 2015 . Kynard, B. , S. Bolden, M. Keiffer, M. Collins, H. Brundage, E.J . Hilton, M. Litvak, M.T. Kinnison , T. King and D. Peterson . 2016. Life History and Status of Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum Lesueur, 1818). Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 32:208-248. Lankshear, L. 2018. Personal communication with Dominion Energy. Leonard, P. M. and D.J . Orth. 1988. Use of Habitat Guilds of Fishes to Determine lnstream Flow Requirements. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 8: 399-408p. Lippson, A.J . and R.L. Lippson. 2006. Life in the Chesapeake Bay: An illustrated guide to the Fishes, Invertebrates, Plants, Birds, and other Inhabitants of the Bays and Inlets from Cape Cot to Cape Hatteras. 3rd Edition. Loar, J.M., J.B. Griffith, and K.D. Kumar. 1978. An analysis of factors influencing the impingement of Threadfin Shad (Dorosoma pretenense) at Power Plants in the Southeastern United States. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Online. Accessed April 6, 2018. https://www.nrc .gov/docs/ML 1802/ML18023A192.pdf Marcy, B.C., Jr. 2004. Planktonic fish eggs and larvae of the lower Connecticut River and the effects of the Connecticut Yankee plant including entrainment. P.M. Jacobson, D.A. Dixon, W.C. Leggett, B.C. Marcy, Jr., and R.R. Massengill, editors. The Connecticut River Ecological Study (1965-1973) revisited : ecology of the lower Connecticut River 1973-2003. American Fisheries Society, Monograph 9, Bethesda, Maryland . (Originally published in 1976). Massengill, R.R. 2004 . Entrainment of zooplankton at the Connecticut Yankee plant. P.M. Jacobson, D.A. Dixon, W.C. Leggett, B.C. Marcy, Jr., and R.R. Massengill, editors. The Connecticut River Ecological Study (1965-1973) revisited : ecology of the lower Connecticut River 1973-2003. American Fisheries Society, Monograph 9, Bethesda, Maryland . (Originally published in 1976). May, R.C . 197 4 Larval mortality in marine fishes and the critical period concept. Pages 3-19 in J.H.S. Blaxter, editor. The early life history of fish . Springer-Verlag, New York. Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) 2018 . Maryland Fish Facts. Available online. Accessed August 6, 2018. http://dnr.maryland.gov/Fisheries/Pages/fishfacts-index.aspx. Mehner, T. 2012 . Diel vertical migration of freshwater fishes - proximate triggers, ultimate causes and research perspectives. Freshwater Biology (2012) 57, 1342-1359. Middle James Roundtable. 2018. Virginia's Watershed . Accessed October 8, 2018. Available online: http://www.mjrt.org/middle-james-watershed .html Miller, T.J ., L.B. Crowder, J.A. Rice, and E.A. Marshall. 1988 Larval Size and Recruitment Mechanisms in Fishes: Toward a Conceptual Framework. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 45 :1657-1670p. Dominion Energy I 114
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 128 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2018. Endangered and Threatened Species Under NMFS' Jurisdiction. Accessed October 10, 2018. Available online: https://www.fisheries .noaa .gov/species-directory/threatened-endangered _ _ . 2012a. Letter of concurrence, from Mr. D.M. Morris, NMFS, to Ms. Amy Hull, Nuclear Regulatory Commission that continued operation Surry Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 is not likely to adversely affect species listed by NMFS . _ _ . 2012b. Biological Opinion of James River Federal Navigation Project: Tribell Shoal Channel to Richmond Harbor in Surry, James City, Prince George, Charles City, Henrico, and Chesterfield Counties and the Cities of Richmond and Hopewell, Virginia (FINER/2012/01183) . National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2014. Tidal Current Tables 2015. Atlantic Coast of North America. Issued 2014 . Accessed November 1, 2018. Available online: https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/tidetables/2015/acct2015book.pdf 2017 . Cheasapeake Bay Office Invasive Catfish . Retrieved from https ://chesapeakebay .noaa.gov/fish-facts/invasive-catfish (accessed February 7, 2019). _ _ _ . 2018a. Section 7 Mapper. Greater Atlantic Region . Accessed October 19, 2018. Online: http://noaa.maps .arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id= 1bc332edc5204 e03b2 Oac11f9914a27 _ _ _ . 2018b. Greater Atlantic Fisheries Office Master ESA Species Table. September 17, 2018. Accessed December 19, 2018. Available online: https ://www .greateratla ntic.fisheries.noaa .gov/protected/section 7/listing/garfo master es a species table - shortnose sturgeon 09172018.pdf NOAA. 2018c. Greater Atlantic Region, The ESA and Recovery of Shortnose Sturgeon . Accessed December 19, 2018. Available online: https ://www.greateratla ntic.fisheries .noa a.gov/protected/snsturgeon/recovery/i ndex .htm I NatureServe. 2017 . NatureServe Explorer: An Online Encyclopedia of Life. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia . Web application . [1] Accessed: March and October 2018. Schloesser, R.W., M.C, Fabrizio, R.J . Latour, G.C Garman, B. Greenlee, M. Groves, and J. Gartland . 2011. Ecological role of Blue Catfish in Chesapeake Bay communities and implications for management. Am. Fish. Soc. Symposium 77:369-382. Secor, D. H., E. J. Niklitschek, J. T. Stevenson, T. E. Gunderson, S. P. Minkkinen, B. Richardson, B. Florence, M. Mangold, J. Skjeveland, and A. Henderson-Arzapalo . 2000. Dispersal and growth of yearling Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrinchus, released into Chesapeake Bay. Fishery Bulletin 98: 800-810. Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce (SMSFP) . 2009. Species Inventory- Panopeus herbstii: Atlantic Mud Crab. Available online: http://www.sms .si.edu/lRLSpec/Panope herbsti .htm Dominion Energy I 115
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 129 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station Snyder, D. E. 1988. Description and Identification of Shortnose and Atlantic Sturgeon Larvae. American Fisheries Society Symposium 5: 7-30. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF} . 2015 . Tortorici, C. and P. Ashfield . 2014 . 316(b) and the Endangered Species Act. EUCI Conference: EPA 316(b) Fish Impingement in Power and Industrial Plants. Providence, RI. October 8-9, 2014 . Tuckey, T.D. and M.C. Fabrizio. 2017 . 2017 Annual Report - Estimating Relative Juvenile Abundance of Ecologically Important Finfish in the Virginia Portion of Chesapeake Bay (1 June 2016 - 30 June 2017). Virginia Institute of Marine Science Project Number: F-104-R-21 . Submitted to Virginia Marine Resources Commission. Newport News, VA. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) . 2015 . Asian Clam (Corbicula fluminea) Ecological Risk Screening Summary. https://www.fws .gov/fisheries/ans/erss/highrisk/Procambarus-clarkii-E RSS-revision-May2015 .pdf _ _ _ _ . 2018a. Candidate Species, Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act. Accessed on June 7, 2018 at: https://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/candidate species.pdf. _ _ _ _ . 2018b. IPAC Trust Resource Report [for the area surrounding Surry Power Station in Louisa and Spotsylvania counties, Virginia] . Accessed October, 9 2018. https://ecos .fws .gov/ipac/ USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (USFWS and NMFS) . 2014. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation, Programmatic Biological Opinion on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Issuance and Implementation of the Final Regulations Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Accessed June 7, 2018. https://www.epa .gov/sites/production/files/2015-04/documents/final 316b bo and appendices 5 19 2014.pdf. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2007 . Surry Power Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. Revision 39-09/27 /2007. _ _ _ _ . 2018a . Application for Renewed Operating Licenses. Available online. https ://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/northanna-surry/s lra .pdf Accessed 31 October 2018. _ _ _ _ . 2018b. Approved Applications for Power Uprates. Available online. Accessed 31 Oct 2018. https://www .nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/status-power-apps/approved -applications.html . _ _ _ _ . 2018c. Surry Power Station, Unit 1. Availa ble online. Accessed 31 Oct 2018. https://www.nrc .gov/info-finder/reactors/sur1 .html . _ _ _ _ . 2018d. Surry Power Station, Unit 2. Available online. Accessed 31 Oct 2018. https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactors/sur2 .htm1 . Dominion Energy I 116
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 130 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Virginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO) . 1977. 316(a) Demonstration (Type 1) Surry Power Stations Units 1 and 2. _ _ _ _ . 1980. Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 Cooling Water Intake Studies. Environmental Services Department, Richmond , Virginia . _ _ _ _ . 1985. Impingement and Entrainment Studies for Surry Power Station 1978-1983. Virginia Power Water Quality Department. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) . 2014a . Eastern chicken turtle (Deirochelys reticularia reticu/aria) . Available online. Retrieved September 7, 2014. http://www.dgif.virginia .gov/wildlife/information/?s=030064 _ _ _ _ . 2014b. Eastern tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum tigrinum) . Available online. Retrieved September 7, 2014 . http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/information/?s=020052 _ _ _ _ . 2014c. Mabee's salamander (Amybstoma mabee1) . Available online. Retrieved September 7, 2014. http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/information/?s=020044 _ _ _ _ . 2014d. Barking treefrog (Hy/a gratiosa). Available online. Retrieved September 7, 2014 . http://www.dgif.virginia .gov/wildlife/information/?s=020002 _ _ _ _ . 2016 . Virginia Wildlife and Information Service Search Report [for a 2-mile radius surrounding Surry Power Station] . Accessed June 2, 2016. https ://vafwis .dgif.virginia .gov/fwis/?Menu= Home 2018a. Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VaFWIS) . Web. [2] . Accessed March 28, 2018. _ _ _ _ . 2018b Virginia Wildlife and Information Service Search Report [for an area surrounding Surry Power Station] . Accessed April 12, 2018. https://vafwis.dgif.virginia .gov/fwis/?Menu=Home _ _ _ _ . 2018c. Taxonomy Chapter for Shortnose Sturgeon . Available online: http://vafwis .org/fwis/booklet.html?Menu= .All+Chapters&bova =010031 &version =17833. Accessed on October 29, 2018. _ _ _ _ . Undated. VaFWIS Coordination Recommendations. Accessed June 27, 2015. http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/environmental-programs/files/VaFWIS-Coordination-Recommendations .pdf Virginia Institute if Marine Science (VIMS) . 2017 . 2017 Annual Report. Estimating Relative Juvenile Abundance of Ecologically Important Finfish in the Virginia Portion of Chesapeake Bay. Wiegel , R.L. 1964. Oceanographic Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, NJ . Wootton , R.J . 1990. Ecology of Teleost Fishes. London; New York: Chapman and Hall, 1990. 404 pp. Dominion Energy I 117
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 131 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Appendix A Surry Power Station
§122 .21 (r)(2) - (9)
Submittal Requirement Checklist Dominion I A-1
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 132 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
* . Provided in Requirement Report?
15 (2)(i) Narrative description and scaled drawings of source waterbody Yes
.2
~
..r:::
a.. Yes; note that no Identification and characterization of the source waterbody's hydrological and physical studies geomorphological features, as well as the methods you used to conduct any (2)(ii) were conducted to physical studies to determine your intake's area of influence within the waterbody determine the area and the results of such studies of influence (2)(iii) Locational maps Yes Narrative description of the configuration of each Cooling Water Intake Structure (3)(i) Yes (CWIS) and where it is located in the waterbody and in the water column (3)(ii) Latitude and Longitude of CWIS Yes (3)(iii) Narrative description of the operation of each CWIS Yes (3)(iv) Flow distribution and water balance diagram Yes (3)(v) Engineering drawing of CWIS Yes Yes, but not A list of the data in paragraphs (r)(4)(ii) through (vi) of this section that are not applicable because (4)(i) available and efforts made to identify sources of the data all data are available A list of species (or relevant taxa) for all life stages and their relative abundance in (4)(ii) Yes the vicinity of CWIS Identification of the species and life stages that would be most susceptible to (4)(iii) Yes impingement and entrainment Identification and evaluation of the primary period of reproduction, larval (4)(iv) Yes recruitment, and period of peak abundance for relevant taxa Data representative of the seasonal and daily activities of biological organisms in (4)(v) Yes the vicinity of CWIS Identification of all threatened, endangered, and other protected species that (4)(vi) might be susceptible to impingement and entrainment at your cooling water intake Yes structures Documentation of any public participation or consultation with Federal or State (4)(vii) Yes agencies undertaken in development of the plan (4)(viii) Methods and QA procedures for any field efforts Yes In the case of the owner or operator of an existing facility or new unit at an existing Yes, noted in report (4)(ix) facility, the Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data is the that (i) through (xii) information in (i) through (xii) provided Identification of protective measures and stabilization activities that have been (4)(x) implemented, and a description of how these measures and activities affected the Yes baseline water condition in the vicinity of CWIS (4)(xi) List of fragile species as defined at 40 CFR 125.92(m) at the facility Yes Information submitted to obtain Incidental take exemption or authorization for its (4)(xii) cooling water intake structure(s) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the Yes National Marine Fisheries Service Dominion I A-2
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 133 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §1 22.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
* . Provided in Requirement Report?
Narrative description of the operation of the cooling water system and its (5)(i) Yes relationship to the CWIS (5)(i) Proportion of the design intake flow that is used in the system Yes Number of days of the year the cooling water system is in operation and seasonal (5)(i) Yes changes in the operation of the system Proportion of design intake flow for contact cooling, non-contact cooling, and
~ (5)(i) Yes ro process uses 0
E
.s Distribution of water reuse to include cooling water reused as process water, Yes, but not
!e. (5)(i)
Cl) process water reused for cooling, and the use of gray water for cooling applicable I
- s: (5)(i)
Description of reductions in total water withdrawals including cooling water intake Yes C> flow reductions already achieved through minimized process water withdrawals
.5 8
(..) Description of any cooling water that is used in a manufacturing process either Yes, but not (5)(i) e before or after it is used for cooling, including other recycled process water flows applicable (5)(i) Proportion of the source waterbody withdrawn (on a monthly basis) Yes Design and engineering calculations prepared by a qualified professional and (5)(ii) supporting data to support the description required by paragraph (r)(5)(i) of this Yes section Description of existing impingement and entrainment technologies or operational (5)(iii) Yes measures and a summary of their performance
=
c::'o 'l!Ec~
-e ~u,~~1§ .c =g- 55 & (/)
(.) = =a_ .5 ~ Identification of the chosen compliance method for the entire CWIS or each CWIS at its facility. Yes
§:~ § f?"li!
(..)-~ Yes; note that no Site-specific studies addressing technology efficacy, through plant entrainment site-specific studies (7)(i) survival, and other impingement and entrainment mortality studies were conducted at this facility Yes; note that studies at other Studies conducted at other locations including an explanation of how they relevant (7)(ii) locations were not and representative determined to be relevant Studies older than 10 years must include an explanation of why the data are still (7)(iii) Not applicable relevant and representative Description of individual unit age, utilization for previous 5 year, major upgrades in (8)(i) Yes last 15 years Descriptions of completed, approved, or scheduled upgrades and Nuclear (8)(ii) Yes Regulatory Commission relicensing status of each unit at nuclear facilities Other cooling water uses and plans or schedules for decommissioning or (8)(iii) Yes replacing units For all manufacturing facilities, descriptions of current and future production Yes, but not (8)(iv) schedules applicable Dominion I A-3
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 134 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~
* . Provided in Requirement Report?
Descriptions of plans or schedules for any new units planned within the next 5 Yes, but not {B){v) years applicable {9){i) Entrainment Data Collection Method Yes (9)(ii) Biological Entrainment Characterization Yes {9)(iii) Analysis and Supporting Documentation Yes Dominion I A-4
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 135 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Appendix B Engineering Drawings of Cooling Water Intake Structures Dominion I B-1
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 136 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ The engineering drawings of SPS CWIS showing plan and section views of eight intake bays with details of trash racks, traveling screens and circulating water pumps are provided in Appendix B.
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9E: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 1 Mat Plan
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9F: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 2 Plan at Elevation -5' -6" & Misc. Details
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9G: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Intake Structure - Plan at Elevation 12'-0" & Misc. Details
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9J: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 5 Elevation West Wall & Sections
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9K: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Intake Structure, Trash Rack, Seal Plate & Details
- Drawing No. 11448-FM-55A: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Arrangement of Intake Structure
- Drawing No. 11448-FM-55B: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Arrangement of Intake Structure Dominion I B-2
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 137 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Appendix C Information for Planning and Consultation {IPAC) and State-Threatened or Endangered Species Query Results Dominion I C-1
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 138 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21 (r)(2)-(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Appendix D Engineering Calculations of Through-Screen Velocity Dominion I D-1
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 139 of 1631 §316(b) Compliance Submittal: §122.21(r)(2) -(9) Reports Surry Power Station 1-)~ Appendix E Surry Power Station 2015-2017 Entrainment Characterization Study Report Dominion I E-1
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 140 of 1631 Appendix A Surry Power Station §122 .21 (r)(2) - (9) Submittal Requirement Checklist
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 141 of 1631
- . Provided in Requirement Report?
(2)(i) Narrative description and scaled drawings of source waterbody Yes Yes; note that no Identification and characterization of the source waterbody's hydrological and physical studies geomorphological features, as well as the methods you used to conduct any (2)(ii) were conducted to physical studies to determine your intake's area of influence within the waterbody determine the area and the results of such studies of influence (2)(iii) Locational maps Yes Narrative description of the configuration of each Cooling Water Intake Structure (3)(i) Yes (CWIS) and where it is located in the waterbody and in the water column (3)(ii) Latitude and Longitude of CWIS Yes (3)(iii) Narrative description of the operation of each CWIS Yes (3)(iv) Flow distribution and water balance diagram Yes (3){v) Engineering drawing of CWIS Yes Yes, but not A list of the data in paragraphs (r)(4)(ii) through (vi) of this section that are not applicable because (4)(i) available and efforts made to identify sources of the data all data are available A list of species {or relevant taxa) for all life stages and their relative abundance in {4){ii) Yes the vicinity of CWIS Identification of the species and life stages that would be most susceptible to (4)(iii) Yes impingement and entrainment Identification and evaluation of the primary period of reproduction, larval (4)(iv) Yes recruitment, and period of peak abundance for relevant taxa Data representative of the seasonal and daily activities of biological organisms in (4)(v) Yes the vicinity of CWIS Identification of all threatened, endangered, and other protected species that (4)(vi) might be susceptible to impingement and entrainment at your cooling water intake Yes structures Documentation of any public participation or consultation with Federal or State (4)(vii) Yes agencies undertaken in development of the plan (4){viii) Methods and QA procedures for any field efforts Yes In the case of the owner or operator of an existing facility or new unit at an existing Yes, noted in report (4)(ix) facility, the Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data is the that (i) through (xii) information in (i) through (xii) provided Identification of protective measures and stabilization activities that have been {4)(x) implemented, and a description of how these measures and activities affected the Yes baseline water condition in the vicinity of CWIS (4)(xi) List of fragile species as defined at 40 CFR 125.92(m) at the facility Yes Information submitted to obtain Incidental take exemption or authorization for its (4)(xii) cooling water intake structure(s) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the Yes National Marine Fisheries Service
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 142 of 1631
* . Provided in Requirement Report?
Narrative description of the operation of the cooling water system and its (5)(i) Yes relationship to the CWIS (5)(i) Proportion of the design intake flow that is used in the system Yes Number of days of the year the cooling water system is in operation and seasonal (5)(i) Yes changes in the operation of the system Proportion of design intake flow for contact cooling, non-contact cooling, and .s (5)(i) Yes cu process uses Cl i>-
<I)
(5)(i) Distribution of water reuse to include cooling water reused as process water, Yes, but not CJ) process water reused for cooling, and the use of gray water for cooling applicable .S:l cu Description of reductions in total water withdrawals including cooling water intake
- s: (5)(i) Yes
- 0) flow reductions already achieved through minimized process water withdrawals
~ (5)(i) Description of any cooling water that is used in a manufacturing process either before or after it is used for cooling, including other recycled process water flows Yes, but not applicable ~ (5)(i) Proportion of the source waterbody withdrawn (on a monthly basis) Yes Design and engineering calculations prepared by a qualified professional and (5)(ii) supporting data to support the description required by paragraph (r)(5)(i) of this Yes section Description of existing impingement and entrainment technologies or operational (5)(iii) Yes measures and a summary of their perfonnance Identification of the chosen compliance method for the entire CWIS or each CWIS at its facility. Yes
~ Yes; note that no
'6 Site-specific studies addressing technology efficacy, through plant entrainment site-specific studies
- s u5 (7)(i)
Q) survival, and other impingement and entrainment mortality studies were conducted at u this facility C: cu E Yes; note that .g Q) studies at other c.. Studies conducted at other locations including an explanation of how they relevant C: (7)(ii) locations were not Q) and representative E detennined to be C: relevant ~C: w Studies older than 10 years must include an explanation of why the data are still 5: (7)(iii) Not applicable relevant and representative Description of individual unit age, utilization for previous 5 year, major upgrades in (8)(i) Yes last 15 years Descriptions of completed, approved, or scheduled upgrades and Nuclear (B)(ii) Yes Regulatory Commission relicensing status of each unit at nuclear facilities Other cooling water uses and plans or schedules for decommissioning or (B)(iii) Yes replacing units For all manufacturing facilities, descriptions of current and future production Yes, but not (8)(iv) schedules applicable
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 143 of 1631
- . Provided in Requirement Report?
Descriptions of plans or schedules for any new units planned within the next 5 Yes, but not {8){v) years applicable {9){i) Entrainment Data Collection Method Yes {9)(ii) Biological Entrainment Characterization Yes (9)(iii) Analysis and Supporting Documentation Yes
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 144 of 1631 Appendix B Engineering Drawings of Cooling Water Intake Structures
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 145 of 1631 The engineering drawings of SPS CWIS showing plan and section views of eight intake bays with details of trash racks, traveling screens and circulating water pumps are provided in Appendix B.
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9E: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 1 Mat Plan
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9F: Surry Power Station Intake Structu re - Sheet 2 Plan at Elevation -5' -6" & Misc. Details
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9G: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Intake Structure - Plan at Elevation 12'-0" & Misc. Details
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9J: Surry Power Station Intake Structure - Sheet 5 Elevation West W all & Sections
- Drawing No. 11448 FC-9K: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Intake Structure, Trash Rack, Seal Plate & Deta ils
- Drawing No. 11448-FM-55A: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Arrangement of Intake Structure
- Drawing No. 11448-FM-558: Surry Power Station Unit 1 Arrangement of Intake Structure
"'--'tl'-.41 t'IV. &...V &-V'-'
Enclosure 2, Page 146 of 1631 36-J.cl 8t,t,II Jt IUTAN.a STAUCTl.,,Q.11£ I 0'*'2,_' _ _ __ 11'
*.. ,. '"*-**-. .I
~
*'"1"' . >'*L --"-'*Yc_
l1'*1'!9v!I
' _ _..i:.!......-.J=,
- _..,*ec**_
'-oc... '_ ~ SMli'flP1L1"'4
'CC-'J$;
j@l
----- ,-FQA e0ur.lsa1 TYD I
~
*..:~*l()A i".....
j8 D [!J
- 1
- -- ~-
1- -- -- .;:
)_~...-
~ i..~ - *+ le
~
~ : : :* ~00:l'T'tP) .. ~. i1. ' -.. ..
---t-*. Jg t ~
~-J1~-- - - -- -----_-_ -.!.1_-.,,-~-===~-;,,-=-=*=_='J= ==*=-=~=.c.=
- ~=-*=*=-=*=*=*=*=-====d::;;,,..b===-....:.__ ___-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ -.:. ~-__-_-_-_-_-_-_ L__________J______________~::::Ji:::i==nsi:r~_ji
~.
-f,_~*i'::;'"
....-~- ?,.__,~.. : . S!>.J sq..J
- ~-~
*1ei-1*.i
***tl'O*"*
uo~._,;, s:u .ll, t*'* l'*o' u.: .. Cl ............ ~Qfl.*
*~-& -..'OflC).
i,c.,.
,-**.,,.. "'ell O" .I..LL WA.LL COWi.Li, 'IQ N al.,*t('***_(.-";,-..._.,
l:l -,~*-,*
~ . (-~ '.
\
s -!>
..*.,._,.. ;vp SPLIC .. O!TA.I_
- ~ .... ""
S*<o
~-r-;Jog--,;:~*
- n.- -z~*- s*-
*! ~~--,
- 11tJ' OW'UP10"""U'G,
. {~~*L**U--*CI'
~~-,u.iu,- _......,_ ..
_.,. .,. --*-Tl_,_ ...lt-_--. INTAKE STRUCTURE* S1£ET I MAT PLAN 11.."'7'-"-f*-*""I\M'I-
--*n.WN:a-=a.
su,un
~WCR STATIO" VHIGI PIIIA lllCTIIIC ANO POW£~ COMPAN
<<T0."11:6 *-.:iMTUC.'C~OCOltl'OtlA'T10:'I 11448 FC-9£
(,1)-- *'.'"--, ..
Enclosure 2, Page 147 of 1631
.:1 6* ) .:l 817171 1 56~
... I. - - I - "!vO:C*~
'10'-t' 1"'
J
~ .,,
"1'd r{J~
!:!l -
'.*1,or.-. 1
~
-- - + - - - I--. -- - - -
S4c:;.,p;
\
[] I_,.,,w I C'l,n,,111:tc~
- o -~
l!
,._ ~l;~,~~.J\f!i*!~,5r:'
I I OllT ... ' I . ~
- I J@
oz '* ' I
---t,-. - . - ~~ I *- I I . '(: I o .. sf.~'t.;.:, I
_::,=
-
- a*11:" (T'VP.l
- -_ .:i:.-- - 7
.. JJ. 11'.'lVA) -ii,:'*.~.~7ffYA; ~;l~~ ~,~ "L ~ ~
-~ ~T- ~--~*!\~. 11,UM::>
l!L
- 7'- 0 '{ TT:OJ
~
PLAU '°'BOVE EL.-5'* G,"
,:f.<~-
Je INTAKE STFLCTLR~ 9-EET 2 PUMD SOL~~ PLAN AT EL.-5'*6' & MISC.DETA*LS D1ST... 1L B SU~AY l"OWlt" STATION VIRGINIA. ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY {,)!~~) sro:n*~~(JO,n,(IIIJ,.'TIO.'t A -* 11446 FC*9F
- * @ * ' !.! I
£ !:lb-J.,-s,,11 A B C D E F G H
'Oll'.1!11-CJ 1'2 ~ ,. 1'2'*1 ..
qo'*'Z'
'21.'-1:" '2'2'-"i:" H'*I'*
'IUTAKE. STRUCTURE.
lf'. j " 1.1 ~ '2" '21.'*'2' !'.1'*7' S8 4J! 3'*7" ea~ ~101i.,-:1 L~ 6'.'JIC* 4 wo:rtu*a
- S * .iMk * ;:'-l*&!SA 2 2 S*IC j.
5 5 6 IHTA,C,E T~AllS'F. ~~
~ -~ - ~ ~- . , L _ _ ~ - ~_.~*-"-""--~
- }t::~f~~~~';:
8 8 VIRGI NI A POWER 0 NORTH CAROLI NA PO WER NUCUi Alt E NOINE.EIUMO SERVICES RICH MOND.Y 11tQINIA PLAN*T~).!'>14 FLU,'1E: INTAKE STRUCTURE 1o1.'
- t'*o*
PLAN AT EL 12' *0' & MISC DETAILS SURRY POWER STATION - UNIT I Pi YI S(tlf(R[ l'l'lffll .
,ctt**
- Tfl1 ll448-FC-9G CISCM WW SLIII.C c )f:l'* l' *t' C G H ~:,u: , .,,
WOO.ES c,, ..... ,.,,~,...,...,1 2'*JU~*MU '1u) PRIOR TO USI'(;; ::,:i CE.SIGN WCAK Cl-f:Ck CHIS FJR l o'\)l)( FEt-.t:ta::
Enclosure 2, Page 149 of1631 P6*'.l.:l gt,t,11
~ ILJ7,1,,.l(E. S.TR.UCTUAS 1,:,*
C.U'!!L_ (F:::*3G) ',. l - - - - - - - EL-*'3~c* t'. ;'~~le~ ,c--------; ti\, r- -----~
. -\ \_Jl:~~---1-~=1[-i 1_...__j=SiJJ-rr,J - ---- '----------- -- *, _____ *--------------I
----*--**---.-** ;----- ----------- .- --1. r Z'\.'~-i.i.'"1,-;
~ - I L = = = = - ~ - ~ --=---=-=-=-J*i,. .**;;.~e:,'.",,"'--°'1-11"'--"c---===~===~==="T-=-=-=-=-=-~-_.\_=-=-..,,*=-=------=-=--=-=-=-=-=--=-='--=----=-=-=-~-~--=-=-=-=-=-=--=='=-!
__,.i,,_=----=-=-=-~-=--=-=----'"--=a#-~.ea_;;:_; :_; :_::;-~-~-"=-=-=--=~~----=-~--=----*oc>:,c: 51:Al.... WATER fi)iri?
,1.,1*-a*
ZR.EQtJIRl;V
... ~.;-a:i.o*
,.. ~-"'-~L..*1-;!'
!.L".:'_t:..~.a*
~S!"....u-,,.,.~*-::o*
GttJr:~i..:on,:s.,c-zs INTAKE STRlCTLlE-51-!TT 5 ELEVATION WEST WALL & SECTIONS
/ SURAT POWER STATION VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY lin:>SB 4 WE88T1lR l!:l'IGD'IUmll'G OORl'OR.l.'Z'IO.~
~ =.;;-'1144s FC-9J
©-
I SJ 1 HS 03lO'I lSIN:IJ11D S'Snn 9 ~b-J,-8~~! l "CJ1~1~ A C H I---*-. j l..~!.f?}~... ~~!!. 1,.r,,u:ft,:.1.1EL~
">To.JD(,4 "-ED'o-
=~:~,r.J~-...r1;~""" . . ,.P .,... b 1 ,.i: co,,..u.) ,
~.
C 1 U*&OLT 51:Al -it-.. ;.. 4!._ 4 "~ 1::..-~"E;=;.:;==-==~~t 4~gr.--~~~ 2
'*fl?.
1::EY ?;...~1-J 11"*, 1~0" f,1CE'OfCOIJC *
. WALL--,__.
5 5 DE-TAI L-L
----2.:L I.JO tCt\~E--
' ""'" ;--<*""*"'Li--- *1 :!:;~;~tl:~.!.
--!------ ---+~ I
'I 1--~i,---- ,: tJO'KALE-1 --*------- N9J'='::I:
*J,'OO!H>1Ce. ~-,-. (;E.N~:I.AL "-0:'::,
,..1i_,.,,: ==-a-.. ~ ,._, '!o'!.C:'<t. o.a c.:>Nj.o,.,;T" ; . . . ~.~"-. "'!> & .. .._., J'!o.
' I i .,. ;;:...-, ~*Dt ., *\L ~ '"'F"' ... ,,_~,~ .;. *u: ~ ,.._ ..... -:.'!,,. ~" g;.l.c:i..1
!'>EA~ PLATE-UIJJT
(-4*2.liO;o.)
~
r,fe1to* 7 7 8 8 VIRGINIA POWER DE-TAIL-B
- NORTH CAROLINA POWER i - - ,...u"'c"LE"A"R'E'-N'"**"'**"*"'*'"**"***;;;*-;;*v",c"'*"s-"1-----I RICHMOND .VIRGINIA DETAIL-A 11'1TAKE STRUCTURE 0,10 ~C:AL5-TRASH RACK, SEAL PLATE & DETAILS SURRY POWER STATION - UNIT I lAES'iDIHERIIIS.: l(ITEI] 911 CJ' I 03*'1AR*l~'l'l 13,23 c,,,,~,\4gnVll'HY8lc:l P.=l[J=l TJ JSING FOO 0£S.IGtJ 'rlCRK CHECK J'.~IS FOR I'IQRK PEt-lOUIG
.....11 ~gg-w~-01,1,11 "1>1:Wlft\ll:II 8 En losure 2,2 Page "A W*l' ll'*L' *~ F Hll((;'EO :;im:t.J OSECTJOIISl(T'l'F'I i.P. ltUE'll EL.<>*-q*
- T'UISIIFLUM£SSLuJ:Ert.l1Ml;:
<"'C:I.151
/
~---+---l 3'SLl0!NG t-51IHlSO
~. ~~ ~::~;.\~':~ ~!L~~lll
.,, MJSSILE i ~5* l!E"o'E... FOR
'~""'"" OOJR DETAIL - A SCALEl18', 1'*3" D
~-A ffH-~.C-&:
il SCll:.EN jUIC/ES ") __ { TRIWEL:t:G _1*- ----- ,- S:REENS +----;----; Ml"ES* HOS:LE lARC (~AN:. "J SE JSEO ~OR LIFTJJiG TP~~ELl'IG 11,'ITER SO:~E'::t.S, :.*. ~~FSA ~£,'IL PLAT;" c-c t,'.L CHECUPEO F,..H[ &. G~TINI, "O 6E P.EMl'~AIIL:. ffi Mlf-llHUM IH:CrnEsS ~Ofi TC~t"'1DO 1-1:ss:LE lIOECl:Cq,, I ' B*B S(t,LE J/P, l'*O" I
' ~N.E 114' I ' P.[fEBICEOWfi
~RP.GT lt/TA(E Sl~UCTUR£ fM-~S8 I
I s:i;:: ~uu. CIP.CW1fiL1t.£S 5':RY'*rRLINE5 fY*IC rr-;:Ql FP*.ff
~ ff
+ I
[L£(.[Q!J/f'U£til tP.A'5H P~C<. SEAL PL ,1, OETA'.LS f[*53Ai6 r:-q* B I I I iEL-22'*3" _____ _,I _____ _ i{C.ol,fLMH~-- ----- --- a - ------- r-------- I II ! i VIRGINIA POWER NORTH CAROLINA POWER
!' ~
\ [--2-tw*P*LB NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SERVICES
~*-t*--µ..1-~-1-~~J-Y- RICHMOHD.VIRQIHIA A
ilSCF(EII & f'J"P -'i 22'*2'(1YP) PART PLAN P lq_ l*Stt*P-18 \__ ll*SW*P*I: ARRGT I NT AKE STRUCTURE PCiRT ::>_CJN 1PltPOOO:L STOP.P'.iEROC": El-22'*~' ~-2':,*-3* TH:M~E SIZES S. LO:ATllH SURRY POWER STATION - UNrT OS<J< CADHO, (1\,,0,\"9'>\~l.()GN*Zl DMWlNG NO,
'""' 11448-FM-55A 11 IJ!O..ESSDTHERWISENOlED SHI fFI 7
MIOR TO LSJN'., ;-CR [iESIG'~ WC::i.t:'. CHECK 0115 FJfi WORK PEUOING
b
- .a.
a99-W,i-0H11 8 5 3 Enclosure 2-;;-Page 15 of'f63'1 1 [l"OS~[:Ct(. \ F FIOCl'"ELH'*G" \
~~-----
)\'.~.,.,..: *:*
~* SLIDltlG tCSSILE "
c-:
~ALE - 1 1/Z"*:*-~*
\" ,..,."\.
'l>Lll.3*
n.*,-1.:r D lll(tl)-1 _ [_ _1:r-,---,,,;:,ff'~==S==='='l"',ii'r{~'-'t"'ft'it / JI L.,..1R TIGHT 'IO.r..1;uc;
\-=-=-=~l;;;~~~-1,(
D*C
!===-"""1(-Ln S&l..PttllE ll<tlf.t.ltlPlr.C:El sc,u-1:12-*l*-0*
~n-22*-3* ..-*-r**,; ! (;:;?~tLYING
<*::-!.-_./.1 A :':,/r~~:; ~i~tlG
-...JL...__..:,"'Fc.___:_--1._ _ _.,.,=,.,..."~.:::l....,l--'l!ls!-=='=';~------;:,
n*2s*-11 "** C~'IIA:EA[I.~ ~'IP..../' . A-A 1FN-S'S.~,F-S1 B VIRGINIA POWER NORTH CAROLINA POWER NUCLEAR ENGINEEAIMG SERVICES RICl1MOND,V1RGINIA A ARR GT INTAKE STRUCTURE SURRY POWER STATION - UNIT l 1448-FM-55B ~ Vl'O..ES ?RICR TO USING FJR CESI~ .....:.u: [~ECK D"'l5 FCR iri'CRX FO.OHIG 2il*.U.*le2102,J4 C:\uor'uoqn\':.5eOC-ffo,-I
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosu re 2, Page 153 of 1631 Appendix C Information, Planning, and Consultation and State-Threatened or Endangered Species Query Results
Enclosure 2, Page 154 of 1631
°LV:KERm Drawn Action Area & overlapping S7 Consultation Areas Area of Interest (AOI) Information Area : 18,091.45 acres Oct 19 2018 1:52:40 Eastern Daylight Time I 1,t El.all Nowpo,1 Nows Elb- 1un O-nd11 n 1:288,8915 2 4 8ml
.,. ........ ,-1 ......... J J 6 IHm
Enclosure 2, Page 155 of 1631 Summary Name Count Area(acres) Lenglh(mi) Atlantic Sturgeon 6 65,049.14 NIA Shortnose Sturgeon 1 12,932.21 NIA Atlantic Salmon 0 0 NIA Sea Turtles 0 0 NIA Atlantic Large Whales 0 0 NIA In or Near Critical Habitat 1 12,665.77 NIA Atlantic Sturgeon 6 65,049.14 NIA Shortnose Sturgeon 1 12,932.21 NIA Atlantic Salmon 0 0 NIA Sea Turtles 0 0 NIA Atlantic Large Whales 0 0 NIA In or Near Critical Habitat 1 12,665.77 NIA Atlantic Sturgeon 6 62,340.28 NIA Shortnose Sturgeon 1 12,702.45 NIA Atlantic Salmon 0 0 NIA Sea Turtles 0 0 NIA Atlantic Large Whales 0 0 NIA In or Near Critical Habitat 1 12,479.58 NIA Atlantic Sturgeon
# Feature ID Species Life Stage Behavior Zone From Until From (2) Until (2) Area(acres)
ANS JAM SU Atlantic Migrating & 1 B_MAF - Subadult James River 03115 11130 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM JU Atlantic Migrating & 2 V_MAF - Juvenile James River 01101 12131 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM AD Atlantic 3 U_STG - Adult Staging James River 05101 11130 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon ANS JAM AD Atlantic Migrating & 4 U_MAF - Adult James River 03115 11130 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM YO Atlantic Migrating & 5 Y_MAF - Young of year James River 01101 12131 NIA NIA 6 ,660.15 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM PY Atlantic Post Yolk-sac Migrating& 6 l_MAF - James River 03115 07/15 811 1131 6,660.15 sturgeon Larvae Foraging Shortnose Sturgeon
- FNturelD SNS JAM AD Specl*
Shortnose Life Stage Behavior Migrating & Zone From Until From(2) Untll(2) A-(acrea) 1 u MAF - Adult James River 01/01 12131 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging In or Near Critical Habitat
- Atlantic Sturgeon Specl* In or near Crttlcal Habitat Unit Chesapeake Bay Unit 5: James River 12,665.77 Area(acree)
Enclosure 2, Page 156 of 1631 Atlantic Sturgeon
# Feature ID Species Life Stage Behavior Zone From Until From(2) Until (2) Area(acres)
ANS JAM SU Atlantic Migrating & 1 B_MAF - Subadult James River 03115 11130 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM JU Atlantic Migrating & 2 V_MAF - Juvenile James River 01/01 12131 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM AO Atlantic 3 u_sfo - Adult Staging James River 05101 11130 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon ANS JAM AO Atlantic Migrating & 4 U_MAF - Adult James River 03115 11130 NIA NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM YO Atlantic Migrating & 5 Y_MAF - Young of year James River 01/01 12131 NIA NIA 6,660.15 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM PY Atlantic Post Yolk-sac Migrating & 6 L_MAF - James River 03115 07115 811 1131 6,660.15 sturgeon larvae Foraging Shortnose Sturgeon
# Feature ID Species Life Stage Behavior Zone From Until From (2) Untll(2) Area(acres)
SNS JAM AD Shortnose Migrating& 1 U_MAF - AduH James River 01/01 12/31 N/A NIA 12,932.21 sturgeon Foraging In or Near Critical Habitat
- Atlantic Sturgeon Species Chesapeake Bay Unit 5: James River 12.ees.n Atlantic Sturgeon
# Feature ID Species Life Stage Behavior Zone From Until From (2) Until (2) Area(acres)
ANS JAM SU Atlantic Migrating & 1 B_MAF - Subadult James River 03115 11130 NIA NIA 12,702.45 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM JU Atlantic Migrating & 2 V_MAF - Juvenile James River 01101 12131 NIA NIA 12,702.45 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM AO Atlantic Migrating & 3 U_MAF - Adult James River 03115 11130 NIA NIA 12,702.45 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM AO Atlantic 4 u_sfo - sturgeon Adult Staging James River 05101 11130 NIA NIA 12,702.44 ANS JAM YO Atlantic Migrating & 5 Y_MAF - Young of year James River 01/01 12/31 N/A N/A 5.765.24 sturgeon Foraging ANS JAM PY Atlantic Post Yolk-sac Migrating & 6 l_MAF - James River 03/15 07115 8/1 1/31 5,765.24 sturgeon larvae Foraging Shortnose Sturgeon
- Feature ID SNS JAM AO Species Shortnose Life Stage Behavior Migrating &
Zone From Until From (2) Untll(2) Area(acres) 1 U_MAF - Adult James River 01/01 12131 N/A NIA 12,702.45 sturgeon Foraging In or Near Critical Habitat
- Atlantic Sturgeon Species Chesapeake Bay Unit 5: James River 12,479.58
Enclosure 2, Page 157 of 1631 DISCLAIMER: Use of this App does NOT replace the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 consultation process; It is a first step in detenninlng if a proposed Federal action overlaps with listed species or critical habitat presence. Because the data provided through this App are updated regularly, reporting results must include the date they were generated. The report output! (map/tables) depend on the options picked by the user, including the shape and size of the action area drawn. the layers marked as visible or selectable, and the buffer distance specified when using the "Draw your Action Area" function.
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 158 of 1631 IPaC Information for Planning and Consult at ion u.s. Fish & Wildlife service IPac resource list This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources') under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information. Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section. Project information NAME Surry Power Station LOCATION Virginia r
~',1\-
Local offi ce Virginia Ecological Services Field Office
\. (804) 693-6694 Iii (804) 693-9032 6669 Short Lane Gloucester, VA 23061 -441 O
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 159 of 1631 http://www. fws. gov/northeast/virgin iafie Id/
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 160 of 1631 Endangered species This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts. The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population, even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site-specific and project-specific information is often required. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this cequlrement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly. For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list by doing the following:
- 1. Log in to IPaC.
- 2. Go to your My Projects list.
- 3. Click PROJECT HOME for this project.
- 4. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed species 1 and their crittcal habitats are managed by the Ecoloiical Services Proiram of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheriesl). Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA fisheries for species under theirjurjsdiction.
- 1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information.
- 2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 161 of 1631 Mammals NAME STATUS Northern long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws. govI ecp/ species/9045 Critical habitats Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves. THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION. Migratory birds Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act 1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Actl . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow <<ippropr1ate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as lescrit,ed below.
- 1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
- 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
- Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
- Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/ managementlproject-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservatioo-measures.php
- Nationwide conservation measures for birds The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conserva ti on Conce rn (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip:
enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 162 of 1631 species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below. For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY
at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. NAME BREEDING _SEASON. (I_F_A BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED FOR_A_BIRD ON__ YOUR_ LIST,_THE BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR P..~QJ.~Q ~~-~ .?..C?.~ ~I~-~ \f\/lT_~I~ THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED, Y.\.'.~.1-~ t! .1?..~.Y.E.~Y. ~I-~-~~
-~-~!.!~~!~.9..~.!.~~ OA1£5 !.~ i~
WHICH THE
................... BIRD
********"'****** BReE&S~ROSS
...... ENJIRe'iANGE.
ITS .. "B~EEDS .......... . EL~HE~1"01CATE5
.... THAT THE.
BIRD~~~ ~OT_~l-~ELY __BREEq IN YO~ PROJECT AREA) Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Oct 15 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 Black-billed Cuckoo ~~ erythropthalmus Breeds May 15 to Oct 10 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399 Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus Breeds May 20 to Jul 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Bonaparte's Gull Chroicocephalus philadelphia Breeds elsewhere This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 163 of 1631 Brown Pelican Pelecanus occidentalis Breeds Jan 15 to Sep 30 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos .fws.gov Iecp/species/6034 Buff-breasted Sandpiper Calidris subruficollis Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos. fws. gov/ecp /species/9488 Clapper Rail Rallus crepitans Breeds Apr 10 to Oct 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Common Loon gavia immer Breeds Apr 15 to Oct 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4464 Common Tern Sterna hirundo Breeds May 1O to Sep 10 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4963 Double<rested Cormorant phalacrocorax auritus Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/speci es/3478 Dunlin Calidris alpina arcticola Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus Breeds Apr 15 to Aug 20 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 164 of 1631 Herring Gull Larus argentatus Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 20 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. King Rail Rallus elegans Breeds May 1 to Sep 5 Th is is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https:// ecos. fws.gov/ ecplspeci es/8936 Least Tern Sterna antillarum Breeds Apr 20 to Sep 10 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679 Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemaJ.!.s Breeds elsewhere This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern {SCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagte Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activiti es. https:11ecos. fws. gov/ecp/species/7238 Nelson's Sparrow Ammodramus nelsoni Breeds May 15 to Sep 5 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Breeds May 1 to Jul 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 165 of 1631 Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator Breeds elsewhere This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10 to Sep 10 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Red-throated Loon Gavia stellata Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis Breeds elsewhere This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. Royal Tern Thalasseus maximus Breeds Apr 15 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. Ruddy Turnstone Arenarja ;nterpres aiorinella Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs} in the continental USA Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Semipal mated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos. fws .gov /ecp/s pec ies/9480
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 166 of 1631 White-winged Scoter Melanitta fusca Breeds elsewhere This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. Willet Tringa semipalmata Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 5 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 1Oto Aug 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BC() throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds. Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any actAve nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site. What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location? The Migratory Bird Resource List is COll]J?rised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern rBCCl and other species that may warrant special attention in yo~ pn;.tect locatfon. The migratory bird list generated for yaur project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network IAKNl. The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey. banding. and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identitled as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requ~ements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or deYelopmeot. Agalp, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the E-bird Explore Data Tool. What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location? The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKNl. This data is derived from a growing collection of survey. banding. and citizen sc ience datasets . Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link. How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 167 of 1631 To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds gu ide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the t imeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area. What are the levels of concern for migratory birds? Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern :
- 1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BC() that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
- 2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
- 3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics. Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage. Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird-tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring. What if I have eagles on my list? If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur. Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probabil ity of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probabil ity of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 168 of 1631 confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page. Facilities National Wildlife Refuge lands Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns. THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION. Fish hatcheries THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION. Wetlands in tbe National Wetlands Inventory Impacts to NWI wetlands c1nd other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District. WETLAND INFORMATION IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or for very large projects that intersect many wetland areas. Try again, or visit the NWI map to view wetlands at this location. Data limitations The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 169 of 1631 The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems. Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site. Data exclusions Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery. Data precautions Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or p~uct'$ ofthis inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietal)' }w.i$dictions that may affect such activities.
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 170 of 1631 VaFWIS Search Report Compiled on 10/9/2018, 10:18:05 AM Known or likely to occur within a 3 mile radius around point 37,10,00.7 -76,41,11.5 in 093 Isle of Wight County, 095 James City County, 181 Surry County, 700 Newport News City, VA
\'ie" Ma p of Site Locati on 624 Known or Likely Species ordered by Status Concern for Conservation (displaying first 40) (40 species with Status* or Tier l ** or Tier 11 ** )
80\ 'A Common Scientific Sta tu s* Tier ** Confirmed Database(s) Code Nam e Na me Turtle. Lepidochelys 030074 FESE la Kem 12's BOVA kempii ridle\ sea WoodQecker. Picoides 040228 FESE la red- BOVA borealis cockaded Sturgeon. Acipenser 010032 FESE lb Ye. B0VA,TEWaters,Habitat,Spp0bs,HU6 Atlantic oxyrinchus Turtle. Dermochelys 030075 FESE Ic leatherback BOVA coriacea sea Turtle. 030071 FTST Ia loggerhead Caretta caretta BOVA sea Calidris canutus 040144 FTST la Knot red BOVA,HU6 rufa Bat. no11hern Myotis 050022 FTST la BOVA long-eared septentrionalis PIO\ er. Charadrius 040120 FTST Ila .. BOVA QIQ111g melodus Sunfish. Enneacanthus 010347 SE la BOVA black banded chaetodon Turtle. Deirochelys 030064 SE la eastern reticularia BOVA chicken reticularia Laterallus 040110 SE Ia Rail. black . . . BOVA,HU6 Jama1cens1s Bat. little Myotis 050020 SE Ia BOVA bro\\ n lucifugus Bat. Corynorhinus Rafinesgue's 050034 SE Ia rafinesquii BOVA,HU6 eastern big-macrotis eared
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 171 of 1631 050027 SE Ia Bat. tri- Perimyotis BOVA colored subflavus Salamander. Amby stoma 020052 SE Ila BOVA eastern tiger tigrinum Rattlesnake. Crotalus 030013 SE Ila Potential BOVA,Habitat,HU6 canebrake horridus Falcon . Falco 040096 ST Ia Yes BOVA,BBA,Spp0bs,HU6 peregrine peregrmus Shrike. Lanius 040293 ST Ia BOVA loggerhead ludovicianus Sga1TO\\, Ammodramus 040379 ST Ia HU6 Henslow's henslowii Salamander. Ambystoma 020044 ST Ila Potential BOVA,Habitat,HU6 Mabee's mabeei Treefrog. 020002 ST Ila Hyla gratiosa BOVA,HU6 barking Shrike. Lanius 040292 ST migrant ludovicianus BOVA Joggerhe.:id mtgrans TeIT.:tpin. northern Malaclemys 030067 cc Ila diamond- terrapin terrapin Pokntial BOVA,Habitat,HU6 backed Tunlt>. Clemmys 030063 cc Illa spotted guttata Yes B0VA,Spp0bs,HU6 Shiner. Notropis 010077 Ia Potential BOVA,Habitat
-bridle
- bifrenatus Plegadis 040040 Ia Ibis. gloss, HU6 falcinellus lsopod. Caecidotea 070131 le BOVA Phreatic phreatica Anaxyrus 020063 Ila Toad. oak Potential BOVA,Habitat,HU6 quercicus Duck.
040052 Ila Amt>rican Anas rubripes Pc)tential BOVA,BBA,HU6 black Egret. 040033 Ila Egretta thula Potential BOVA,BBA snow,* Heron. little Egretta caerulea 040029 Ila BOVA blue caerulea Night-heron. Nyctanassa 040036 Ila ,ellow- violacea BOVA crowned violacea Skimmer. 040192 Ila Rynchops niger BOVA black Tern. 040181 Ila Sterna hirundo Potential BOVA,BBA,HU6 common
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 172 of 1631 040320 Ila Warbler. Setophaga BOVA,HU6 cerulean cerulea Woodcock. 040 140 Ila Scolopax minor BOVA,HU6 American Cuckoo. Coeeyzus 040203 lib BOVA black-hilled erythropthalm us 040 105 lib Rail. kinu Rallus elegans BOVA Warbler. Limnothlypis 040304 Ile BOVA,HU6 S\\ ainson's swainsonii Ski1212er. Problema 100003 Ile HU6 rare bulenta To view All 624 species View 624
- FE=Federal Endangered; FT=Federal Threatened; SE=State Endangered; ST=State Threatened; FP=Federal Proposed; FC=Federal Candidate; CC=Collection Concern
- l=V A Wildlife Action Plan - Tier I - Critical Conservation Need; II=V A Wildlife Action Plan - Tier II -
Very High Conservation Need; III=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier III - High Conservation Need; IV=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier IV - Moderate Conservation Need Virginia Widlife Action Plan Conservation Opportunity Ranking: a - On the ground management strategies/actions exist and can be feasibly implemented.; b - On the ground actions or research needs have been identified but cannot feasibly be implemented at this time.; c - No on the ground actions or research needs have been identified or all identified conservation opportunities have been exhausted. View Map of All Ouen Results from All Observation Tables Bat Colonies or Hibernaeula: Not Known View Map of All Anadromous Fish Use Streams ( 3 records) Anadromous Fish l 'se Streams
@]
Anadromous Fish Species Stream Reach Stream Name Different Highest Highest ID Status p Species TE
- Tier **
lc41 IILawnes creek llconfirmed 2 II Yes EJ I lc92 Lower Chi creek II.James Ri\ er I okes
!confirmed llconfinned 3
6 IV IV I~ II Yes I Impediments to Fish Passage NIA View Map of All Ouen Results Colonial Water Bird Survey ( 5 records) Colony_Name 1n Latest Date 1 Colonial Water Bird Survey N Species Ill
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 173 of 1631 Different Highest Highest
,~
N View Species Obs TE
- Tier ** Map Southside. Hog Island.
I O I May 4 201311 1 Surn II IHog Island I I D Apr 28 20031 1 II I~
~
Apr 28 2003 IHog Island 2 1 ID IHog Island WMA I O I Jun 11993 I 1 Yes I IHOG ISLAND REFUGE II 6 II Jun 1 1991 11 2 II Yes I Displayed 5 Colonial Water Bird Survey Threatened and Endangered Waters ( 15 Reaches)
\'iew Map of All Threatened and Endan!!:ered Waters T&E Waters Species Highest View Stream Name Map TE
- BOVA Code, Status *, Tier ** , Common & Scientific Name James River
{0154595) FESE !010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River {01 55813) FESE !010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River {0160401 ) FESE !010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0162815} FESE 1010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River {0163971 } FESE 8 1 FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River {0164393) FESE Ell FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0168836} FESE 1010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0172182} FESE !010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0173836) FESE 1010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0175258) FESE !010032 I FESE IG Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0175357) FESE 1010032 I II FESE IG lr--11 Sturgeon, Atlantic II Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 174 of 1631 James River (0180351} FESE t:JI ltJ FESE Sturge?n, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0181134} FESE 1010032 I IG FESE Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes James River (0183195} FESE 1010032 I IG FESE Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus Yes To view All 15 Threatened and Endangered Waters records View 15 Managed Trout Streams NIA Bald Eagle Concentration Areas and Roosts are present. \'iew Map of Bald Eagle Concentration Areas and Roosts ( 9 records)
~ I~
Observation
\Authority II Type !comments D Year DI Bryan Watts (Center for Conservation Biology) I Roost Count 54 I~
28 112009 Jeannette Parker (VDGIF) II Roost Count 25 II Yes I 29 112009 Jeannette Parker (VDGIF) II Roost Count 32 II Yes I 32 112009 Jeannette Parker (VDGIF) II Roost Count 5 II Yes I II Jeannette Parker (VDGIF) I Roost I I EJI 33 112009 Count 3 Yes B Center for Conservation Biology at Summer the College of William and Eagle_use EJB Concentration 2006 _ 20071 MaryNirginia Commonwealth High Area University B Center for Conservation Biology at Summer 2006 _ 2007 the Coll~g~ ~f William and Eagle_use Concentration MaryN1rgmia Commonwealth Moderate Area EJI University B Center for Conservation Biology at Winter the College of William and Eagle_use EJB Concentration 2006 _ 20071 MaryNirginia Commonwealth Low Area University B Center for Conservation Biology at Winter 2006 _ 2007 the Coll~g~ ~f William and Eagle_use Concentration MaryNlfgmia Commonwealth Moderate Area University View Map of All Ouerv Results Bald Eagle Nests ( 25 records) Bald Eagle Nests II __J
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 175 of 1631 L::JIN Obsll Latest Date II DGIF Nest Status IIView Mapl l1woso2II 2 May 15 2005 HISTORIC II Yes
!W0802 I 8 Apr 18 2011 Unknown II Yes IW960 1 I 2 Apr 15 1996 HISTORIC Yes lsuo101 II 2 May 1 2001 HISTORIC Yes lsuo201 II 10 Mar 9 2008 UNKNOWN Yes lsuo,oJII 2 May 1 2002 HISTORIC Yes lsuo301 JI 2 May 1 2003 HISTORIC Yes lsu03osll 2 May 1 2003 HISTORIC Yes lsuo4o 111 13 Apr 16 2010 HISTORIC Yes lsuo402II 15 Apr 18 2011 Unknown Yes lsuo403JI 15 Apr182011 UNKNOWN I Yes lsuoso1 II 14 Apr 18 2011 Unknown II Yes lsuos0311 12 Mar 2 2011 UNKNOWN Yes lsuo701 JJ 10 Apr 18 2011 Unknown Yes lsuo901 II 6 I Apr 18 2011 Unknown Yes lsu1001 JI 4 JI Apr 18 2011 Unknown Yes lsu1101 11 211 Apr 18 2011 Unknown Yes lsu110211 2 JI Apr 18 2011 Unknown Yes lsus101 II 6 I May 8 1986 HISTORIC Yes lsu900,J 1 Jan 1 1990 HISTORIC Yes lsu9101 I 1 Jan 1 1991 HISTORIC Yes Jsu9,01 I 2 Jan 1 1993 HISTORIC -Yes Jsu9202I 1 Jan 1 1992 HISTORIC Yes lsu96o411 19 II Mar9 2008 UNKNOWN Yes I lsu9701 II 9 JJ Apr 24 2000 HISTORIC Yes I Displayed 25 Bald Eagle Nests
\"ie\\ Man of All Ouen Results Species Observations ( 178 records - displaying first 97 ,
Species Obserrntions 97 Observations with Threatened or Endangered species ) N Species Date View obsID class Observer Different Highest Highest Observed * ** Map Species TE Tier Feb 10 IUSFWS 1998 Jan 13 1998
- =======: I~~~
lusFWS
- =======:
, ~ ~ , Yes I I~~~
Jan 13 1998 iusFWS
- =======:
lrmll I I IYes
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 176 of 1631 LJLJIJan 12 199811 163146 llsppObs II Nov 5 19971iusFWS 163144 llsppObs IINov 5 199711usFWS 163145 llsppObs II Nov 5 199711usFWS 163 IO I llsppObs IINov 4 19971iusFWS I 63102 1Spp0bs Nov 4 1997//usFWS I 63103 /sppObs II Nov 4 199711USFWS I 1631 os lisppObs II Nov 4 199711usFWS I 163071 l sppObs II Nov 4 1997 1 usFWS I 163099 llsppObs IINov 4 19971iusFWS 163097 llsppObs II Nov 4 1997llusFWS 163100 /lsppObs/l Nov 4 I 997 11USFWS 163109 llsppObs II Nov 4 199711usFWS 63142 /sppObs "Nov 3 199711USFWS 63133 /sppObs "Nov 2 1997/IUSFWS 163 132 llsppObs II Nov 2 199711usFWS 163 13 I llsppObs II Nov 1 1997 /l usFWS 163129 l sppObs IINov 1 199711usFWS 163130 llsppObs IINov 1 199711usFWS Oct 31 163091 /lsppObs I 1997 /usFWS Oct 30 163086 llsppObs 1 1997 iusFWS Oct3 0 63090 isppObs I 1997 iusFWS Oct 30 63035 lsppObs I 1997 lusFWS II II II I
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 177 of 1631 163137 IISppObs II Oct 3011USFWS 1 1997 I 163139 llsppObs 1 Oct 30 IUSFWS 1997 1 I 163085 llsppObs I Oct 29 IUSFWS 1997 1 I 163087 llsppObs I Oct 29 IUSFWS 1997 1 I Oct29 163089 l sppObs I 1997 JusFWS 1 I Oct29 163092 l sppObs 1 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct29 163088 llsppObs 1 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct28 163032 1\sppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct28 163033 llsppObs 1 1997 lusFWS 0 Oct 28 16303 I \lsppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct 27 163028 1\sppObs I 1997 JusFWS 1 I Oct27 163025 llsppObs I 1997 \usFWS 1 I Oct 27 163027 \lsppObs I 1997 JusFWS 1 I Oct26 163084 l sppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct26 163026 llsppObs 1 1997 lusFWS 1 I 163019 \\sppObs I Oct 26 IUSFWS 1997 I 1 I 163020 llsppObs I Oct 26 IUSFWS 1997 10 163024 ilsppObs I Oct 26 IUSFWS 1997 1 I Oct26 163022 JJsppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct26 163023 llsppObsI 1997 lusFWS 1 I 163021 IJsppObs I Oct 26 IUSFWS 1997 1 I Oct 25 163082 \lsppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct 25 163081 llsppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I II II II II II I
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 178 of 1631
'SppObs II Oct 2511USFWS 1 1997 I isppObs I Oct 25 IUSFWS 1 1997 I lsppObs I Oct 25 IUSFWS 1 1997 I lsppObs I Oct 24 IUSFWS 1 1997 I isppObs I Oct 23 IUSFWS 1 1997 I Oct 23 63059 lsppObs I 1997 iusFWS 1 I
Oct 23 lusFWS lsppObs I 1997 1 I Oct 22 lsppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct22 isppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I Oct22 iusFWS JsppObs I 1997 1 I Oct22 JsppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I isppObs I Oct 22 IUSFWS 1 1997 I isppObs I Oct 22 IUSFWS 1 1997 I Oct22 iusFWS 63052 isppObs I 1997 1 I Oct 22 isppObs I 1997 iusFWS 1 I lsppObs I Oct 22 IUSFWS 1 1997 I Oct 21 isppObs I 1997 iusFWS 1 I Oct21 isppObs I iusFWS 1 1997 I lsppObs I Oct 21 IUSFWS 1 1997 I lsppObs I Oct 21 IUSFWS 1 1997 I isppObs I Oct 2111USFWS 1997 1 I Oct20 isppObs I 1997 iusFWS 1 I Oct20 lsppObs I 1997 lusFWS 1 I II II II I I
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 179 of 1631 163069 \\SppObs II Oct 201 \USFWS 1997 163070 l sppObs I Oct 20 jusFWS 1997 163046 llsppObs 1 Oct 12 IUSFWS 1997 1632 I 7 llsppObs I Oct 11 jusFWS 1997 163045 llsppObs 1 Oct 10 \usFWS 1997 163044 llsppObs II Oct 7 l 99711usFWS 163056 llsppObs II Oct 6 l 99711usFWS 163055 llsppObs II Oct 6 l 997ll usFWS 163065 llsppObs II Oct 4 l 99711usFWS 163066 llsppObs II Oct 4 l 9971iusFWS 163064 llsppObs II Oct 4 l 99711usFWS 163063 llsppObs II Oct 3 l 99711usFWS 163062 llsppObs II Oct 3 l 9971iusFWS 16306 I l sppObs II Oct 2 l 99711usFWS Sep 29 163058 llsppObs 1 1997 lusFWS Sep 29 16300 I llsppObs I 1997 lusFWS Sep28 162997 llsppObs 1 1997 lusFWS Sep24 162986 llsppObs 1 1997 jusFWS Jul 18 1997 162995 llsppObs 1 lusFWS 162988 l sppObs II 1~ 1 9~21jusFws May 19 162998 llsppObs 1 1997 jusFWS Feb 15 jusFWS 62990 lsppObs I 1997 May 13 608471 lsppObs I 2010 IBryan; Watts II I I I
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 180 of 1631 LJ ISppObsl May2l CenterforConservation 2009 Biology, College of William LJLJTLJLJ Yes and Mary - VCU J29732 JJsppObs Jl= JJan
= l =
19=0o==lJ;,=J M=it=ch=el=l,=J.=C=.= = = ===nJJ== =1===:JJ SS JJ III JJ Yes J Displayed 97 Species Observations Selected 178 Observations View all 178 Species Observations Habitat Predicted for Aquatic W AP Tier I & II Species ( 2 Reaches) View Mao Combined Reaches from Below of Habitat Predicted for WAP Tier I & II Agua tic S[!ecies Tier Species Highest View Stream Name Map TE
- BOVA Code, Status *, Tier** , Common & Scientific Name James River 81 IG FESE Sturgeon, Atlantic Acipenser oxyrinchus 1010011 IDG Yes (20802061) Notropis Shiner, bridle bifrenatus James River Sturgeon, Acipenser 010032 FESE lb Yes (20802061) Atlantic oxyrinchus Habitat Predicted for Terrestrial WAP Tier I & II Species ( 4 Species )
\'iew Map of Combined Terrestrial Habitat Predicted for 4 WAP Tier I & II Species Listed Below ordered by Status Concern for Conservation BOVA View Status* Tier** Common Name Scientific Name Code Map 030013 SE Ila Rattlesnake. canebrake Crotalus horridus Yes 020044 ST Ila Salamander. Mabee's Ambystoma mabeei Yes Terra12in. northern diam ond - Malaclemys terrapin 030067 cc Ila backed terrapin Yes 020063 Ila Toad. oak Anaxyrus quercicus Yes View Map of All Quen* Results Virginia Breeding Bird Atlas Blocks ( 7 records) Virginia Breeding Bird Atlas Blocks Breeding Bird Atlas Species BBA ID Atlas Quadrangle Block Name ** View Map Different Species Highest TE
- Highest Tier J57052 JJ sacons Castle. NE 2 Yes J57051 JJ sacons Castle, NW 27 III Yes 157064 II Hog Island, CE 56 II li ves J57063 JJ Hog Island, CW 76 II JJ Yes 157062 II Hog Island. NE 105 II II Yes J57066 JJ Hog Island. SE 64 ST I JJYes II II II II II I
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 181 of 1631 1157065 JJ Hog lsland, SW II 80 II II III J!Yes II Public Holdings: ( 2 names) Name I Agency IILeveII Hog Island Wildlife Management Area JvaDGlF ID I Chippokes Plantation State Park II VA Dept. of Conservation and Recreation II State I summary ofBOVA S1pec1es A ssoc1a . te d WI*th Cf 1 1es an dC oun f1es o fth e C ommon wealth of Virginia: IFIPS Code!iCity and County Name Different Speciesl lmghest TE Highest Tier 1093 I Isle of Wight 42111 FESE I 1095 !!James Cit\ 42011 FESE I l1s 1 l! su1-r\* 44511 FESE I 1100 l!New12ort News Cit\ 41611 FESE I USGS 7.5' Quadrangles: Bacons Castle Hog Island USGS NRCS Watersheds in Virginia: NIA USGS National 6th Order Watersheds Summary of Wildlife Action Plan Tier I, II, III, and IV sipec1es: IHU6 Codel l USGS 6th Order Hydrologic Unit l!mfferent SpeciesllHighest TEI IHighest Tier l1u3 l!James Ri\'er-Lower Chi1212okes Creek ssll FESE II I JL35 j.James River-Skiffes Creek 98 11 FESE II I JL36 jLawnes Creek ss ll FTSE II I !JL37 IIJames Ri\'er-Morrisons Creek 9s ll FESE II I Compiled on 10/9/2018. JO: 18:06 AM 1938432.0 repor1=a ll search Type"" R di st= 482 7 poi= 37.10.00.7 . 76.41.11.5 Pixe1Size=64: Anad romous=0.033256: BBA =0.088079: BECA R=0.040319: Bats=0.017709: Buffer=0.215834: County=0.11791: HU6=0.154228: lmped iments=0.019176: ln ir-0.315292: PublicLand s::Q.058024: Quad=-0.09954 7: SppObs=0.4 71526: TEWaters=0.058631: TierReaches=0 .091 656: TierTerrestrial=0.1 71 83: Tota1=2.074833: Trad..ing_BOV A=0.204959: Trout=0.029068: huva=0.0 8492 8
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 182 of 1631 Appendix D Engineering Calculations of Through-Screen Velocity
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 183 of 1631 Dominion Energy Inc. I Surry Power Station 1-)~ Revision* o Issue Date: 11/2/2018 Through-Screen Velocity for Existing Traveling Water Screens Originator: Spencer Nush, EIT 10/31/2018 Reviewer: Wade Cope, PE 11/1/2018 Approver: Revision No. Revised by: Approved by: Description 0 - - - I I I Calculation Summary: Estimated Throu h-Screen Veloci Units Unit 1 Unit2 Estimated Through-Screen Velocity at Mean Low Water fps 3.15 3.15 Estimated Through-Screen Velocity at Mean Sea Level fps 2.99 2.99 1 of 4
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 184 of 1631 Dominion Energy Inc. I Suriy Power Station 1-)~ Revision 0 Issue Date: 11/212018 Through-Screen Velocity for Existing Traveling Water Screens System
Description:
Surry Power Station is a two-unit nuclear-fueled power station located on the James River in Surry County, VA. The James River acts as a cooling water source for the nuclear power plant. Calculation
Purpose:
Calculate the design through-screen velocity at Dominion's Surry Power Station cooling water intake structure. Calculation Objectives:
- 1. Identify the screen physical parameters, and design intake flow rate.
- 2. Calculate the fraction of the screen open for water flow.
- 3. Calculate the design through-screen velocity under typical low water elevation/flow conditions, as well as normal and high water elevations/flow conditions.
Calculation Methodology: Formula 1 V :Q / (WD
- OA *TW* K)
Units:fps where: a = flow rate in gallons per minute (gpm) V = through-screen velocity in feet per second (fps) WD = wetted screen depth in feet (ft) OA = proportion of screen open area to total screen area TW = nominal screen basket width (ft) K = 396 for through-flow screen or 740 for dual-flow screen Formula 2 OA: (W
- L) / ((W + D) * (L + d))
Units: unitless where: d = horizontal (shute) wire diameter in inches (in) D = vertical (warp) wire diameter (in) W = width of mesh opening (in) L = vertical length of mesh opening (in) Formula 3 EOA= pc
- oA Units: unitless where:
EOA = proportion of effective open area PC = screen percent clean (%) Formula 4 V.., = Q / (WD
- EOA *TW* K)
Units: fps where: Ven = effective through-screen velocity 2 of 4
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 185 of 1631 Dominion Energy Inc. I Surry Power Station 1-)~ Revision 0 Issue Date: 1112/2018 Through-Screen Velocity for Existing Traveling Water Screens Design Inputs: Unit 1 Unit 2 Units References Number of screens 4 4 [1] Plant datum MSL MSL [2] Elevation at bottom of intake -25.25 -25.25 feet [2] Mean Low Water -1.3 *1.3 feet [2] Mean Sea Level 0.0 0.0 feet [2] Screen basket width 14 14 feet (1] Mesh size (L) 0.125 0.125 inch [1] Mesh size (W) 0.500 0.500 inch (1] Wire gauge type W&M W&M Assumption 6 Vertical wire gauge number 14 14 aauae Assumption 8 Vertical wire diameter 0.08 0.08 inch Assumption 8 Horizontal wire gauge number 14 14 aauae Assumption 8 Horizontal wire diameter 0.08 0.08 inch Assumption 8 Screen percent clogged 0% 0% % Assumption 7 Number of circulating water pumps 4 4 [1] Circulating water pumps Name Plate Rating 220,000 220,000 aom [1] Assumptions:
- 1. Water elevation inside screen house is same as in the source waterbody immediately outside the trash racks.
- 2. Intakes have not been modified since dates of references used.
- 3. All screens function similarly.
- 4. Flow rates are pump design maximum and are most conservative.
- 5. The constant in Formulae 1 and 4 include units conversion (gpm to cfs) and other screen factors.
- 6. Gauge type is Washburn and Moen or Steel Wire.
- 7. Screens are completely free of clogging, unless specified otherwise.
- 8. Vertical and horizontal wire gauge number are assumed to be 14 gauge.
- 9. It is assumed that the spray wash system draws water from the circulating water pumps.
References:
[1] HOR. 2018. Surry Power Station 2015-2017 Entrainment Characterization Study Report [2] Virginia Power North Carolina Power. 2001. Arrgt Intake Structure Surry Power Station - Unit 1. Drawing No. 11448-FM-55B. Revision 9. 20 Jul 2001 . [3] Virginia Power North Carolina Power. 1999. Intake Structure Trash Rack, Seal Plate & Details Surry Power Station. Unit 1. Drawing No. 11448-FC-9K. Revision 6. 3 Mar 1999. 3 of 4
Serial No. 20-298 Enclosure 2, Page 186 of 1631 1-)~ Dominion Energy Inc. I Surry Power Station Through-Screen Velocity for Existing Traveling Water Screens Revision Issue Date* 0 11/212018 Calculations:
- 1. Screen Physical Parameters and Design Intake Flow Rate Given: Unit 1 Unit 2 Units O,o1a1 = 880,000 880,000 gpm Q= 220,000 220,000 a om/screen D= 0 .08 0.08 in d= 0 .08 0.08 in L= 0.125 0.125 in W= 0.500 0.500 in WD= 24.0 24.0 ft K= 396 396 TW= 14.0 14.0 ft PC= 100% 100%
- 2. Proportion of Effective Open Screen Area to Total Screen Area Formulae Used:
Formulae 3 and 4 Given: Screen parameters as above Calculate: Screen Unit 1 Unit 2 OA = (W
- L) / ((W + D) * (L + d)) = 0.526 0.526 EOA= PC* OA = 53% 53%
Calculations: cont.
- 3. Design Through-screen Velocity Formulae Used:
Formula 4 Given: Screen parameters as above and calculated screen open area proportion Calculate: Ve11= Q/(WD
- EOA *TW
- K) =
4 of4}}